DogofWar1 Posted November 6, 2015 Share Posted November 6, 2015 I think every person running for president should be immediately disqualified if it can be proven that he or she lied about something. Everyone okay with that? At this point, in this thread at least, it's less about the lie and more about TWA's ridiculous defense of it. Politicians lie. It happens, it's an issue, but it will fade, as most comparatively small lies do. Carson is officially a politician. Welcome to the team Carson. I'm just waiting for the other candidates to start chanting "one of us, one of us." The reason this is a big deal in the wider race is that it's a piece of melted and hardened cheese on the previously Teflon Ben. He's vulnerable. Now he's got to weather it. No more riding above the storm. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TradeTheBeal! Posted November 6, 2015 Share Posted November 6, 2015 I think every person running for president should be immediately disqualified if it can be proven that he or she lied about something. Everyone okay with that? Carson got disqualified? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twa Posted November 6, 2015 Share Posted November 6, 2015 At this point, in this thread at least, it's less about the lie and more about TWA's ridiculous defense of it. what defense? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
@DCGoldPants Posted November 6, 2015 Share Posted November 6, 2015 Still trying to open understand why he's trying to say he was juvenile delinquent when apparently he was a quiet but good kid. What's the point? The choosing to be gay, the pyramid grain storage, the lying about Westmoreland stuff. That's just crazy talk. Saying he was a young punk. Dont know why. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Redskins Diehard Posted November 6, 2015 Share Posted November 6, 2015 Carson went on to Yale. I suspect he was smart enough to know what he would need to get into West Point. Again, Casron wasn't offered a spot to West Point (or as he claims, a scholarship). Why? Because General Westmoreland simply couldn't just offer him one. You have to apply. Carson didn't. You have to have a letter of support (from a Senator or equivalent). Carson didn't. But keep spinning. you really don't understand the process like you think you do. No idea whether Carson was nominated or not. But if you'd like to know the nominating sources for something other than supporting your political team...here's a link http://www.west-point.org/academy/malo-wa/educators/noms.htmlI doubt anyone is really interested in that Edit: having someone like Westmoreland go to bat for you virtually assures an academically and medically qualified candidate gets a nomination. A letter from the football coach goes a long way as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twa Posted November 6, 2015 Share Posted November 6, 2015 or the draft process obviously. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Posted November 6, 2015 Share Posted November 6, 2015 Edit: having someone like Westmoreland go to bat for you virtually assures an academically and medically qualified candidate gets a nomination. A letter from the football coach goes a long way as well. Yerah, I suspect that there are very few things in the Army, which a person of Westmoreland's standing does not have considerable influence over. Whether it's one of his "enumerated powers" or not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
@DCGoldPants Posted November 7, 2015 Share Posted November 7, 2015 So, he's admitting he lied about this. So, what are we arguing about now? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Captain Wiggles Posted November 7, 2015 Share Posted November 7, 2015 Still trying to open understand why he's trying to say he was juvenile delinquent when apparently he was a quiet but good kid. What's the point? The choosing to be gay, the pyramid grain storage, the lying about Westmoreland stuff. That's just crazy talk. Saying he was a young punk. Dont know why. It plays well with the evangelicals. His faith is what saved him from living that kind of life. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Going Commando Posted November 7, 2015 Share Posted November 7, 2015 Still trying to open understand why he's trying to say he was juvenile delinquent when apparently he was a quiet but good kid. What's the point? The choosing to be gay, the pyramid grain storage, the lying about Westmoreland stuff. That's just crazy talk. Saying he was a young punk. Dont know why. For his redemption narrative--a major appeal to evangelicals. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twa Posted November 7, 2015 Share Posted November 7, 2015 So, he's admitting he lied about this. So, what are we arguing about now? Odd how that works http://www.dailywire.com/news/960/no-ben-carson-didnt-lie-about-west-point-its-ben-shapiro Politico needs better editors ....or morals Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Posted November 7, 2015 Share Posted November 7, 2015 Odd how that works http://www.dailywire.com/news/960/no-ben-carson-didnt-lie-about-west-point-its-ben-shapiro Politico needs better editors ....or morals Your bemoaning the lack of journalistic integrity might fly better if you weren't quoting a piece that try's to paint this as the evil media lynching Republicans. (Although I am starting to believe that this is a manufactured "scandal"). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twa Posted November 7, 2015 Share Posted November 7, 2015 try this one http://thefederalist.com/2015/11/06/politico-admits-fabricating-a-hit-piece-on-ben-carson/#.Vj0_0zQmMeo.twitter There were at least five major problems with the story: The headline was completely false The subhed was also completely false The opening paragraph was false false false The substance of the piece was missing key exonerating information The article demonstrated confusion about service academy admissions and benefits But other than that, A+++ work, Kyle Cheney and Politico. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Posted November 7, 2015 Share Posted November 7, 2015 So, back to the pyramid story? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DogofWar1 Posted November 7, 2015 Share Posted November 7, 2015 Anyone else watching the forum? I guess not. They seem to be going back and forth between definitive policy discussions and some more lighthearted stuff. Emphasis on how to win in the south. Sidebar: The candidates are now shaking hands with people in the gallery while still standing on the stage. O'Malley has the best knees, he was straight squatting. Bernie was doing the full waist bend. Hillary seemingly was somewhere in the middle. So O'Malley seems like the best Redskins QB option. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
visionary Posted November 7, 2015 Share Posted November 7, 2015 http://www.wsj.com/articles/ben-carsons-past-faces-deeper-questions-1446861864 Ben Carson’s Past Faces Deeper Questions The day after Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. was killed in 1968, Ben Carson’s black classmates unleashed their anger and grief on white students who were a minority at Detroit’s Southwestern High. Mr. Carson, then a junior with a key to a biology lab where he worked part time, told The Wall Street Journal last month that he protected a few white students from the attacks by hiding them there. http://www.politico.com/story/2015/11/ben-carson-2016-campaign-rivals-215615#ixzz3qluCvo00 GOP rivals wary of going after a wounded Ben Carson Ben Carson’s ride to the pinnacle of Republican politics has been relatively smooth — until questions this week about his rise from the streets of Detroit to prominence as a world-renowned neurosurgeon — but his Republican rivals, save Donald Trump, are holding back on attacks over his biography. “God Almighty, I pray to God my candidate doesn’t do it,” said a senior strategist to one Republican campaign, who like most operatives interviewed declined to publicly challenge a candidate with such high favorability ratings. Numerous 2016 operatives said their candidates would be hands-off when it comes to questioning Carson’s resume and his claims of having received a “full scholarship” to West Point when he never applied or was admitted to the military academy. “All a candidate would be doing is engendering ill will among people who like Ben Carson,” a top operative for a second campaign said. “That’s why I’m not on the record right now.” The exception to the hands-off policy is Trump, who spent Friday afternoon retweeting disparaging comments about Carson and links to the West Point report. "WOW, one of many lies by Ben Carson! Big story," he wrote in one tweet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AsburySkinsFan Posted November 7, 2015 Share Posted November 7, 2015 I think every person running for president should be immediately disqualified if it can be proven that he or she lied about something. Everyone okay with that? For years I've said that candidates for office should be sworn under oath the same way witnesses in a trial are, and with the same threat of perjury if they don't tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth. I'd seriously support that as a constitutional amendment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
88Comrade2000 Posted November 7, 2015 Author Share Posted November 7, 2015 I hope this scenario that Karl Rove writes about, happens. http://www.wsj.com/article_email/the-path-to-a-wild-gop-convention-1446682656-lMyQjAxMTE1MzA4NTEwNzU0Wj I would love for this thing to go to the convention. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twa Posted November 7, 2015 Share Posted November 7, 2015 Well Rove ain't been on spot lately.....but it might be fun, pretty sure it will settle out before the,but it has been a ODD ONE Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chipwhich Posted November 7, 2015 Share Posted November 7, 2015 For years I've said that candidates for office should be sworn under oath the same way witnesses in a trial are, and with the same threat of perjury if they don't tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth. I'd seriously support that as a constitutional amendment. What good is that if the voters don't believe the truth anyways. That is laughable. It's my truth versus your truth. Maybe we can let Judge Judy decide. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AsburySkinsFan Posted November 7, 2015 Share Posted November 7, 2015 What good is that if the voters don't believe the truth anyways. That is laughable. It's my truth versus your truth. Maybe we can let Judge Judy decide. That's so true. It's funny really, because for years Christians wholly rejected the idea of relative truth in the church, but it seems that as a society we've embraced relative truth nearly absolutely. People "need" their ideas about God to be solid and unmovable, but with everything else it's all relative. But, not even the good well thought out, in depth thinking relativity, more like "I don't like that so it can't be true" relativity. Oh wait, no my whole premise is wrong. We haven't embraced relativism, we've embraced self reinforcing denial. It isn't a change in philosophy it's a change in a clinical diagnosis. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
s0crates Posted November 7, 2015 Share Posted November 7, 2015 That's so true. It's funny really, because for years Christians wholly rejected the idea of relative truth in the church, but it seems that as a society we've embraced relative truth nearly absolutely. People "need" their ideas about God to be solid and unmovable, but with everything else it's all relative. But, not even the good well thought out, in depth thinking relativity, more like "I don't like that so it can't be true" relativity. I like what Alan Bloom says about this: Alan Bloom on Relativism and Education THE CLOSING OF THE AMERICAN MIND (NEW YORK: SIMON & SCHUSTER, 1987), 25-26 There is only one thing a professor can be absolutely certain of: almost every student entering the university believes, or says he believes, that truth is relative. If this belief is put to the test, one can count on the student’s reaction: they will be uncomprehending. That anyone should regard the proposition as not self-evident astonishes them, as though he were calling into question 2+2=4. These are things you don’t think about… That it is a moral issue for students is revealed by the character of their response when challenged — a combination of disbelief and indignation: “Are you an absolutist?,” the only alternative they know, uttered in the same tone as… “Do you really believe in witches?” This latter leads into the indignation, for someone who believes in witches might well be a witch-hunter or a Salem judge. The danger they have been taught to fear from absolutism is not error but intolerance. Relativism is necessary to openness; and this is the virtue, the only virtue, which all primary education for more than fifty years has dedicated itself to inculcating. Openness — and the relativism that makes it the only plausible stance in the face of various claims to truth and various ways of life and kinds of human beings — is the great insight of our times… The study of history and of culture teaches that all the world was mad in the past; men always thought they were right, and that led to wars, persecutions, slavery, xenophobia, racism, and chauvinism. The point is not to correct the mistakes and really be right; rather it is not to think you are right at all. I think Bloom hits the nail on the head here. I feel it necessary to start all my philosophy classes with a critique of relativism. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
@DCGoldPants Posted November 7, 2015 Share Posted November 7, 2015 Fair or not. People go over the histories of all these candidates and try to pick them apart. Right now it's Carson's turn. We already know Rubio lied about when his family left Cuba. There are plenty of lies to go around for Clinton and Bush and Cruz. That's just how it goes....and how they handle it I guess. Ben Carson’s Past Faces Deeper Questions http://www.wsj.com/article_email/ben-carsons-past-faces-deeper-questions-1446861864-lMyQjAxMTI1NTAxNzgwMTcxWj Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AsburySkinsFan Posted November 7, 2015 Share Posted November 7, 2015 Fair or not. People go over the histories of all these candidates and try to pick them apart. Right now it's Carson's turn. We already know Rubio lied about when his family left Cuba. There are plenty of lies to go around for Clinton and Bush and Cruz. That's just how it goes....and how they handle it I guess. Ben Carson’s Past Faces Deeper Questions http://www.wsj.com/article_email/ben-carsons-past-faces-deeper-questions-1446861864-lMyQjAxMTI1NTAxNzgwMTcxWj I think it's funny that Carson is doing the whole "Wah wah wah, why are you picking on me libral media" approach. Pretending that Obama's and Hillary's respective pasts haven't been disected to down to their subatomic anatomy. So I guess we're supposed to just forget the whole birth certificate BS and Obama's true Muslim identity. Or Hillary's involvement in Whitewater where the Clintons were involved in a murder conspiracy. Honest question: Do these politicians think that no one remembers back more than 2 weeks or do they just not give a ****? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
@DCGoldPants Posted November 7, 2015 Share Posted November 7, 2015 I think it's funny that Carson is doing the whole "Wah wah wah, why are you picking on me libral media" approach. Pretending that Obama's and Hillary's respective pasts haven't been disected to down to their subatomic anatomy. So I guess we're supposed to just forget the whole birth certificate BS and Obama's true Muslim identity. Or Hillary's involvement in Whitewater where the Clintons were involved in a murder conspiracy. Honest question: Do these politicians think that no one remembers back more than 2 weeks or do they just not give a ****? They KNOW their supporters don't care. This focuses the anger elsewhere. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.