Skip to main content

Should Ben Carson end up being the Republican candidate for the Presidency, what percent of blacks will vote for him just because he's black? I think at least 50% maybe more, which in my opinion would means this many people don't have a clue what the candidate stands for. Like Republican Colin Powell it would be a color thing, and this time he would switch back to the Republican candidate.

Original Post

Replies sorted oldest to newest

Not many. He will be called an "uncle tom", an "oreo", and all sorts of other names the lefties, with the milk of human kindness flowing through them, can come up with. It's absolutely NOT about color/race, and the lie that people as a whole didn't vote for obama because of race is the worse kind of propaganda. Playing the race card was a nasty tactic played out by the left, and it worked, and they continue to divide the country by race, income, religion, and every other way possible. The democrats are racist snakes in the grass, and imo, traitors.

Put Adolph Hitler and Idi Amin in an election.  If Hitler is on the Dem ticket, Hitler wins.  If they are both on the same ticket, Amin will win.

Makes no difference in the race if the man has an "R" after his name. Carson will have as much of uphill battle as the next guy.  I admire Carson and would vote for him, but just because of his race it will not assure a victory.  It is sad in this country, but far too many on the "Dem" side of the coin vote based on how they are told to vote, not by actually evaluating the candidates. I think to a greater extent those who vote opposite the Democrats tend to be a little more suspicious and will actually look at the platform.  They are more informed and if they don't like the platform of the candidate, they just don't show up to vote.

 

Originally Posted by teyates:

Put Adolph Hitler and Idi Amin in an election.  If Hitler is on the Dem ticket, Hitler wins.  If they are both on the same ticket, Amin will win.

Makes no difference in the race if the man has an "R" after his name. Carson will have as much of uphill battle as the next guy.  I admire Carson and would vote for him, but just because of his race it will not assure a victory.  It is sad in this country, but far too many on the "Dem" side of the coin vote based on how they are told to vote, not by actually evaluating the candidates. I think to a greater extent those who vote opposite the Democrats tend to be a little more suspicious and will actually look at the platform.  They are more informed and if they don't like the platform of the candidate, they just don't show up to vote.

 

____

If your instincts about those non-Democrats who just stay home are correct, then you can expect a lot of stay-at-homers this time around, given all the bilge discharged by the ultra-rightists who brand every Republican candidate a RINO if he/she does not line up 110% with the ultra right agenda. 

 

Originally Posted by Contendahh:

Its not a color thing with B. Carson; its a LACK of EXPERIENCE THING. No tyros in the Oval Office, puh-LEEZE!

Seriously???? You would question Carson's "lack of experience" based on the experience and lack of performance of the past elected POTUS?  A man who never served a full term in Congress?  A man who was never a governor, nor head of any real institution?  A man whose only claim to real fame was that he was a "law professor" and a community activist?  pot meet kettle.

And unfortunately on the previous point I will agree.  I think the ultra conservatives will fail to go out and vote based on some asinine concept they have where they think there may be a spotless candidate out there who fills all their needs.  Unfortunately there are none.  I saw a guy last week who is a staunch CoC member who told me he "liked what Trump had to say" but could not vote for him because "He heard he owned a casino"....really?  Again, no party has a trademark on intelligence.

Originally Posted by teyates:
Originally Posted by Contendahh:

Its not a color thing with B. Carson; its a LACK of EXPERIENCE THING. No tyros in the Oval Office, puh-LEEZE!

Seriously???? You would question Carson's "lack of experience" based on the experience and lack of performance of the past elected POTUS?  A man who never served a full term in Congress?  A man who was never a governor, nor head of any real institution?  A man whose only claim to real fame was that he was a "law professor" and a community activist?  pot meet kettle.

And unfortunately on the previous point I will agree.  I think the ultra conservatives will fail to go out and vote based on some asinine concept they have where they think there may be a spotless candidate out there who fills all their needs.  Unfortunately there are none.  I saw a guy last week who is a staunch CoC member who told me he "liked what Trump had to say" but could not vote for him because "He heard he owned a casino"....really?  Again, no party has a trademark on intelligence.

_____

"Lack of performance?" That is just your opinion. 

 

As to experience, Obama at least held political office at both state and federal levels. You conveniently neglected to note that Obama worked for a prestigious law firm. Carson is a good hand with a scalpel but has utterly no political experience. As smart as he might be, he would become the prey and pliant tool of the GOP old guard in Washington.  The man is constitutionally illiterate. Here is his absurd solution for Supreme Court decisions that might conflict with prevailing political sentiment:

 

"In that interview, Dr. Carson proposed his own solution to these errant judges—Congress should simply fire any judge in the federal system whose rulings on the constitutionality of a particular law, or lack thereof, disagree with the majority view of whomever happens to be in control of Congress."

 

Yes, he actually said that!

 

http://www.forbes.com/sites/ri...te-the-constitution/

 

Has this man not heard about the thing called "SEPARATION of POWERS," FOR PITY'S SAKE??!!

Yes, "lack of performance" and it is my opinion that conditions in this country are worse today than they were when he went into office. We have cops being gunned down on the street without provocation and townships being burned because of racial unrest that has been propogated and ignored by the current administration.

I might have worked at garage when I was a teenage, but it don't make me an Indy car driver.  Obama's resume was buffed up more than any college intern who ever applied for a job. His state and federal services are frought with things that I am sure he is not only ashamed of, but has probably done his best to suppress. At this point and time I am not sure if Biden could not have done a better job, and lets face it, he has about as much sense as a stubborn goat.

Originally Posted by Contendahh:

Its not a color thing with B. Carson; its a LACK of EXPERIENCE THING. No tyros in the Oval Office, puh-LEEZE!

No no no you have stated in the past only reason any white person can be against Obama is they are racist.  You can't deny it!  If you do not support B. Carson you are simply a racist!

Originally Posted by Contendahh:

Its not a color thing with B. Carson; its a LACK of EXPERIENCE THING. No tyros in the Oval Office, puh-LEEZE!


LOL, contendah is so racist that he actually believes the above jibberish is rational.  The fact of the matter being Obama's complete lack of experience is only rivaled by his love for tyranny, oh the irony.

Originally Posted by HIFLYER2:
Originally Posted by Contendahh:

Its not a color thing with B. Carson; its a LACK of EXPERIENCE THING. No tyros in the Oval Office, puh-LEEZE!

No no no you have stated in the past only reason any white person can be against Obama is they are racist.  You can't deny it!  If you do not support B. Carson you are simply a racist!

_____
 Here's a deal you can't refuse, HIFLYER.  You get to work with the SEARCH feature of this site and you find where I have ever said what you claim I have said and I will go away and never come back on here, PROVIDED that if you fail to do so, you will go away and never come back. Deal?

While we are questioning experience, how about considering judgment and accomplishments in the person of the Democrat front runner -- Hillary.

 

Despite holding a number of positions, she has no record of major accomplishments. As First Lady, she sponsored healthcare proposed legislation.  The proposal was so odious, both houses of congress controlled by the Democrats refused to bring to either floor.  As senator, her record matched Obama's -- lot of nothing.  As secretary of state, all of her policies failed, or worse, caused  greater problems.

 

As to judgment, there is her email and server.  She lied about having only one phone. Just the first of many such lies that are now emerging.  Like Bill, she is carefully parsing her statements. Says she never received nor sent information marked classified on her private server.  Yet, classified information is being found amongst the pile of emails released. Some by State may have been classified later. If so, why did she allow the original documents to be kept on the server, knowing the danger.  Other documents from outside State, were already classified. At least a couple, were classified Top Secret by their very existence.  Yet, no identifying classification headings -- no department has the right to declassify another department's documents.  Someone stripped the classification markings from the documents before sending to Hillary. Who and under whose orders is the question.  Bureaucrats are risk averse.  Two of the TS documents contained satellite photos. Because of the extremely resolution none are to be shown to the public so adversaries won't know how clearly the US can see their opponents.  Hillary would know this from briefings on how to handle classified materiel.  Knowing this, she continued to allow the documents to exist in an unprotected server. 

 

Hillary has no accomplishments and a record of extremely bad judgment. She certainly shouldn't be trusted with the presidency. 

 

Dr. Carson may have little political experience, but has a record of excellent judgment.  Besides, as a pediatric brain surgeon, he has a record of dealing with small, barely formed brains explicitly like the brains of Democrats. 

Originally Posted by direstraits:

While we are questioning experience, how about considering judgment and accomplishments in the person of the Democrat front runner -- Hillary.

 

Despite holding a number of positions, she has no record of major accomplishments. As First Lady, she sponsored healthcare proposed legislation.  The proposal was so odious, both houses of congress controlled by the Democrats refused to bring to either floor.  As senator, her record matched Obama's -- lot of nothing.  As secretary of state, all of her policies failed, or worse, caused  greater problems.

 

As to judgment, there is her email and server.  She lied about having only one phone. Just the first of many such lies that are now emerging.  Like Bill, she is carefully parsing her statements. Says she never received nor sent information marked classified on her private server.  Yet, classified information is being found amongst the pile of emails released. Some by State may have been classified later. If so, why did she allow the original documents to be kept on the server, knowing the danger.  Other documents from outside State, were already classified. At least a couple, were classified Top Secret by their very existence.  Yet, no identifying classification headings -- no department has the right to declassify another department's documents.  Someone stripped the classification markings from the documents before sending to Hillary. Who and under whose orders is the question.  Bureaucrats are risk averse.  Two of the TS documents contained satellite photos. Because of the extremely resolution none are to be shown to the public so adversaries won't know how clearly the US can see their opponents.  Hillary would know this from briefings on how to handle classified materiel.  Knowing this, she continued to allow the documents to exist in an unprotected server. 

 

Hillary has no accomplishments and a record of extremely bad judgment. She certainly shouldn't be trusted with the presidency. 

 

Dr. Carson may have little political experience, but has a record of excellent judgment.  Besides, as a pediatric brain surgeon, he has a record of dealing with small, barely formed brains explicitly like the brains of Democrats. 

For starters:

 

http://www.usnews.com/opinion/...speak-for-themselves

 

http://mic.com/articles/21829/...tary-of-state-tenure

Originally Posted by direstraits:

While we are questioning experience, how about considering judgment and accomplishments in the person of the Democrat front runner -- Hillary.

 

Despite holding a number of positions, she has no record of major accomplishments. As First Lady, she sponsored healthcare proposed legislation.  The proposal was so odious, both houses of congress controlled by the Democrats refused to bring to either floor.  As senator, her record matched Obama's -- lot of nothing.  As secretary of state, all of her policies failed, or worse, caused  greater problems.

 

As to judgment, there is her email and server.  She lied about having only one phone. Just the first of many such lies that are now emerging.  Like Bill, she is carefully parsing her statements. Says she never received nor sent information marked classified on her private server.  Yet, classified information is being found amongst the pile of emails released. Some by State may have been classified later. If so, why did she allow the original documents to be kept on the server, knowing the danger.  Other documents from outside State, were already classified. At least a couple, were classified Top Secret by their very existence.  Yet, no identifying classification headings -- no department has the right to declassify another department's documents.  Someone stripped the classification markings from the documents before sending to Hillary. Who and under whose orders is the question.  Bureaucrats are risk averse.  Two of the TS documents contained satellite photos. Because of the extremely resolution none are to be shown to the public so adversaries won't know how clearly the US can see their opponents.  Hillary would know this from briefings on how to handle classified materiel.  Knowing this, she continued to allow the documents to exist in an unprotected server. 

 

Hillary has no accomplishments and a record of extremely bad judgment. She certainly shouldn't be trusted with the presidency. 

 

Dr. Carson may have little political experience, but has a record of excellent judgment.  Besides, as a pediatric brain surgeon, he has a record of dealing with small, barely formed brains explicitly like the brains of Democrats. 

*************************

When bill humiliated her in front of the world she stood by, didn't rock the boat.

Those are her qualifications, and she feels that should put her in the office of president, and if the truth was known, she was promised things if she kept her mouth shut. I didn't have anything for her back then, but she didn't seen quite as disgusting as we're finding out she is. I might have gained a tad bit of respect for her if she had tossed his *** out, but it's clear she doesn't deserve any respect at all. Surely no one thinks he stopped cheating.  She's willing to be a door mat and let him walk all over her and cheat and make a fool of her for a political career. As for candidate yummy, I'd like to know more about his background, and the same goes for a couple of others.

Last edited by Bestworking
Originally Posted by Contendahh:
Originally Posted by direstraits:

While we are questioning experience, how about considering judgment and accomplishments in the person of the Democrat front runner -- Hillary.

 

Despite holding a number of positions, she has no record of major accomplishments. As First Lady, she sponsored healthcare proposed legislation.  The proposal was so odious, both houses of congress controlled by the Democrats refused to bring to either floor.  As senator, her record matched Obama's -- lot of nothing.  As secretary of state, all of her policies failed, or worse, caused  greater problems.

 

As to judgment, there is her email and server.  She lied about having only one phone. Just the first of many such lies that are now emerging.  Like Bill, she is carefully parsing her statements. Says she never received nor sent information marked classified on her private server.  Yet, classified information is being found amongst the pile of emails released. Some by State may have been classified later. If so, why did she allow the original documents to be kept on the server, knowing the danger.  Other documents from outside State, were already classified. At least a couple, were classified Top Secret by their very existence.  Yet, no identifying classification headings -- no department has the right to declassify another department's documents.  Someone stripped the classification markings from the documents before sending to Hillary. Who and under whose orders is the question.  Bureaucrats are risk averse.  Two of the TS documents contained satellite photos. Because of the extremely resolution none are to be shown to the public so adversaries won't know how clearly the US can see their opponents.  Hillary would know this from briefings on how to handle classified materiel.  Knowing this, she continued to allow the documents to exist in an unprotected server. 

 

Hillary has no accomplishments and a record of extremely bad judgment. She certainly shouldn't be trusted with the presidency. 

 

Dr. Carson may have little political experience, but has a record of excellent judgment.  Besides, as a pediatric brain surgeon, he has a record of dealing with small, barely formed brains explicitly like the brains of Democrats. 

For starters:

 

http://www.usnews.com/opinion/...speak-for-themselves

 

http://mic.com/articles/21829/...tary-of-state-tenure

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Experience equal to that of a neighborhood organizer for the first portion, a couple of minor bills sponsored in the senate and in State -- visiting countries isn't an accomplishment -- a tourist does that.

Originally Posted by direstraits:
Originally Posted by Contendahh:
Originally Posted by direstraits:

While we are questioning experience, how about considering judgment and accomplishments in the person of the Democrat front runner -- Hillary.

 

Despite holding a number of positions, she has no record of major accomplishments. As First Lady, she sponsored healthcare proposed legislation.  The proposal was so odious, both houses of congress controlled by the Democrats refused to bring to either floor.  As senator, her record matched Obama's -- lot of nothing.  As secretary of state, all of her policies failed, or worse, caused  greater problems.

 

As to judgment, there is her email and server.  She lied about having only one phone. Just the first of many such lies that are now emerging.  Like Bill, she is carefully parsing her statements. Says she never received nor sent information marked classified on her private server.  Yet, classified information is being found amongst the pile of emails released. Some by State may have been classified later. If so, why did she allow the original documents to be kept on the server, knowing the danger.  Other documents from outside State, were already classified. At least a couple, were classified Top Secret by their very existence.  Yet, no identifying classification headings -- no department has the right to declassify another department's documents.  Someone stripped the classification markings from the documents before sending to Hillary. Who and under whose orders is the question.  Bureaucrats are risk averse.  Two of the TS documents contained satellite photos. Because of the extremely resolution none are to be shown to the public so adversaries won't know how clearly the US can see their opponents.  Hillary would know this from briefings on how to handle classified materiel.  Knowing this, she continued to allow the documents to exist in an unprotected server. 

 

Hillary has no accomplishments and a record of extremely bad judgment. She certainly shouldn't be trusted with the presidency. 

 

Dr. Carson may have little political experience, but has a record of excellent judgment.  Besides, as a pediatric brain surgeon, he has a record of dealing with small, barely formed brains explicitly like the brains of Democrats. 

For starters:

 

http://www.usnews.com/opinion/...speak-for-themselves

 

http://mic.com/articles/21829/...tary-of-state-tenure

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Experience equal to that of a neighborhood organizer for the first portion, a couple of minor bills sponsored in the senate and in State -- visiting countries isn't an accomplishment -- a tourist does that.

_____

Commenting very selectively concerning only a limited number of items of accomplishment, and irrationally diminishing those as well, is your lame attempt to deny the lady's strong record of accomplishment.

 

Originally Posted by Contendahh:
Originally Posted by HIFLYER2:
Originally Posted by Contendahh:

Its not a color thing with B. Carson; its a LACK of EXPERIENCE THING. No tyros in the Oval Office, puh-LEEZE!

No no no you have stated in the past only reason any white person can be against Obama is they are racist.  You can't deny it!  If you do not support B. Carson you are simply a racist!

_____
 Here's a deal you can't refuse, HIFLYER.  You get to work with the SEARCH feature of this site and you find where I have ever said what you claim I have said and I will go away and never come back on here, PROVIDED that if you fail to do so, you will go away and never come back. Deal?

Better things to do but everyone on this site knows your views on the subject so just go on acting like you never said that or something very close. 

Getting back to Carson, yes he doesn't have much in the way of political or governmental experience, but then again no single person has enough experience to be president. That is why since the beginning of the republic the president has had his cabinet and other advisers to aid him. Like the political neophyte Eisenhower, Carson could be a good president.

Originally Posted by Stanky:

Getting back to Carson, yes he doesn't have much in the way of political or governmental experience, but then again no single person has enough experience to be president. That is why since the beginning of the republic the president has had his cabinet and other advisers to aid him. Like the political neophyte Eisenhower, Carson could be a good president.

Carson supports obumer care and we would be stuck with every illegal

felon thug in this country now. My two biggest concerns with him.

Originally Posted by Jack Flash:
Originally Posted by Stanky:

Getting back to Carson, yes he doesn't have much in the way of political or governmental experience, but then again no single person has enough experience to be president. That is why since the beginning of the republic the president has had his cabinet and other advisers to aid him. Like the political neophyte Eisenhower, Carson could be a good president.

Carson supports obumer care and we would be stuck with every illegal

felon thug in this country now. My two biggest concerns with him.

____________________________________________________

Ben Carson: Obamacare worst thing to happen to the U.S. since slavery

- The Washington Times - Friday, October 11, 2013
 

Dr. Ben Carson didn’t mince words: Obamacare is “the worst thing that has happened in this nation since slavery.”

 

Dr. Carson made the declaration about President Obama’s sweeping health care mandate Friday during a speech at the Values Voter Summit.

 

“It is slavery because it aims to make all of us subservient to the government,” he said. “It was never about health care. It was about control.”

 

http://www.washingtontimes.com...worst-thing-slavery/

 

Carson supports Obamacare?

Originally Posted by HIFLYER2:
Originally Posted by Contendahh:
Originally Posted by HIFLYER2:
Originally Posted by Contendahh:

Its not a color thing with B. Carson; its a LACK of EXPERIENCE THING. No tyros in the Oval Office, puh-LEEZE!

No no no you have stated in the past only reason any white person can be against Obama is they are racist.  You can't deny it!  If you do not support B. Carson you are simply a racist!

_____
 Here's a deal you can't refuse, HIFLYER.  You get to work with the SEARCH feature of this site and you find where I have ever said what you claim I have said and I will go away and never come back on here, PROVIDED that if you fail to do so, you will go away and never come back. Deal?

Better things to do but everyone on this site knows your views on the subject so just go on acting like you never said that or something very close. 

____

Now everyone sees that you, you big faker, just can't produce the goods so you are punting evasively.  I made you a pretty darn good proposal, but you knew you would lose if you followed through.  All bluff and no substance--that's you, LOWFLYER! Pitiful and weak!

Add Reply

Post

Untitled Document
×
×
×
×
Link copied to your clipboard.
×