Skip to comments.CARSON: When government looks more like foe than friend [The Continuing Education of Ben Carson, MD]
Posted on 04/23/2014 5:43:11 AM PDT by sitetestEdited on 04/23/2014 5:45:01 AM PDT by Admin Moderator. [history]
The Bundy case in Nevada provides many insights into the state of our nation with respect to the relationship between the people and the government.
The Bundys appear to be honorable American citizens without adequate legal counsel to help resolve a federal land issue about which they disagree with the Bureau of Land Management. Without question, they violated some of the innumerable laws and regulations that continue to entangle every aspect of American life.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtontimes.com ...
I didn’t see this otherwise posted. My apologies if it’s a repeat.
Too many words?
I agree, especially after having been disappointed in his recent foray into the “vote GOPe meme” some feel we have to do, even if the GOPe RINOs are the lesser of two evils.
I am encouraged by the basic thought of this article and it’s fundamental clarity.
"The senator readily referred to the Bundys and their supporters as domestic terrorists, but the current administration is reticent about applying the same term to Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan, who admitted slaughtering more than a dozen people in 2009 at Fort Hood in Texas. What does this tell us about our government and its perceptions and alignments?"
Bundy = Domestic Terrorist
Hasan = Workplace Violence
Yes, I'd originally included in the excerpt Dr. Carson's strongest language concerning the Second Amendment, in that, part of its original purpose was to prevent the imposition of tyranny by the government, itself, but I guess I excerpted too much of the article.
I encourage folks to read the whole thing at the Wash Times in spite of their annoying audio ads that start up upon loading the page.
Yes, Dr Carson, there IS a reason that The People need the means to resist government tyranny,
and a reason the founders made sure to enshrine that ability in the second amendment.
“We must be reasonable and willing to engage in conversation about how to limit the availability of dangerous weapons to criminals and very violent or insane people.”
He needs to explain how he plans to do that since criminals don’t follow existing laws, new laws can only effect law abiding citizens.
Sorry Ben, you still have a gungrabber mindset.
I think he makes it up as he goes along, whatever he thinks the public will fall for.
It’s good to see he clarified his statement on the 2nd and limited it to criminals and mentally unstable, as it should be, by pointing to people instead of guns.
Yes. It was only a short while ago that he was calling for gun registration and a ban on a “assault weapons”, or so I recall.
I didn’t read that one, but there was another talking about relenting to GOPe RINOism and voting for them anyway so they could ‘tackle’ the economy - meanwhile letting things like entitlements, amnesty (implied) and other economy-contributing factors alone for later. It was really just a plea for “one more time folks - go along get along - don’t rock the GOPe boat) It really honked me off as I recall.
“Sorry Ben, you still have a gungrabber mindset.”
Time will tell.
But this editorial suggests his views have changed.
That's why I added my own comment about “continuing” education, not about “completed” education.
Carson lost me by defending the thug Trayvon Martin.
So.... He held these views all along, but just pretended to be in favor of some gun control in order to get the initial intention of his target audience?
That's not my view. I think now that he's out of the cocoon of Johns Hopkins Hospital and in a world where extreme systemic complexity and regulation of action and behavior [especially as forced on us by the government] don't work as well as they did in the rarefied air at Johns Hopkins, he's learning new things.
I could care less what the rules of Baltimore are, I can’t believe people think they must impose the way they think on others who live 1000s of miles away.
I personally don’t feel I need to impose laws on the people of Baltimore thousands of miles away, perhaps others feel differently.
Not sure I understand your intention.
Are you saying, “If Baltimore needs gun control, that's okay by me, let them figure out what they need for themselves.”?
Or are you saying something different?
I’m saying it’s Constitutional for people to govern themselves and their states. That’s the 10th Amendment.
When Dr. Carson made his remarks he said he wasn’t talking about Ranchers. He was talking about areas in his own city.
I myself don’t care to impose my views on people thousands of miles away. But to each their own.
I've never met Dr. Carson personally. I have worked and met with on many occasions one of his proteges, who performed the pediatric neurosurgery on my son. For the past six years, I have had the privilege to watch Hopkins up close, and personal, to see how they operate.
As someone with a graduate degree in management, I find Hopkins’ systems absolutely fascinating, as well as exemplary. The skill and coordination that went into my son's surgery was beyond my imagining. Their other systems are also impressive. They handle thousands of individuals daily, from checking folks in, to getting them tests and MRIs and things, to scheduling surgeries, making sure they happen, to getting folks needed nursing care in-patient, to making sure they have the right prescriptions, and on and on. They complete these thousands of tasks daily, all fraught with potential for mistakes and errors, efficiently and effectively, in a timely way, usually without a second glance, and often with a note of courtesy and personal kindness.
Living in that world for several decades, someone might get the idea that everyone who attempts to set up large, complex systems does as good a job as Hopkins.
As those of us who live daily in the real world, we know that the government at any level never meets such standards. In part for this reason, the government that governs best is the government that governs least.
I think that perhaps this may be part of Dr. Carson's continuing education.
Have his views really changed, or is he just trying to say what he thinks people want to hear?
How does he get from wanting to ban assault weapons to thinking they are needed to defend against government in a matter of a couple weeks?
I’ve been around long enough to know that isn’t how it works in real life, a 180 deg change doesn’t happen that fast.
The 10th can’t be used to overrule the 2nd.
The same law applies to WY and MD.
Actually, I sort of expected Dr. Carson's to evolve, and not so much from a desire to become politically-viable as from knowing whence he came (a huge, successful, university hospital system known for its excellence).
He has a long-running experience of large, bureaucratic, planned-out organizations that manage to attempt and succeed at great things on a daily basis. I'm sure that he had the technocrat’s optimism, initially, that all men are of good will, and if one merely does what one needs to “fix the system” through the application of technology and the science of management, all will be well.
I believe that it is likely that reality is disabusing him of this notion. Not all men are of good will, especially among those who wish to rule us in government. Not all men are intelligent enough to actually create, develop, or adjust large systems to make them work correctly. Especially in government (see: healthcare.gov). Because he actually is as smart as they say he is, he's become a quick learner.
Anyway, that's my story, and I'm stickin’ to it. ;-)
In Maryland you are required to have a permit for a handgun, in Wyoming, you aren’t. So the laws are different.
In Maryland, Texas too, Carry Permits are required, in Wyoming they aren’t. The laws are already different.
I’ve read only posts 1-28 on this thread and find in them comments for and against Carson which on FR would be expected but the weight of the comments seems to be against him.
I just have a couple observations:
1. Hillary might indeed run and IF SHE DOES she might win. Think of that long and hard, not dismissively.
2. Carson can likely win, experts claim, 20-50% of the black vote guaranteeing him victory.
So, fellow freepers, would you rather have Hillary in the Whitehouse with BJC down the hall or Dr. Ben Carson?
Let me presume to answer for nearly all Freepers! No, the answer is so painfully obvious I shouldn’t have to.
For myself, I prefer Cruz most of all, then Palin and I sure like Gowdy.
But, I’m beginning to believe Carson MAY BE our ACE IN THE HOLE cuz the dims start out on Election Day with 45%, or thereabouts, of the dumbed down room temperature American Electorate heading to their polling place to vote several times for Hillary or some other dim! Indeed, “at this point, what difference does it make”, one dim is as bad as another! “ We MUST defeat them in 14 & 16 to save this country!
Laws can be different, but there are limits what a state can do. MD can require a permit for a handgun, but they can’t outlaw them.
Please Freepmail to get on or off this list
Permits to carry is a form of gun control and gun grabbing as well though. Some people won’t get those permits.
Thank you, now! That was very good information.
What does he expect the ‘rebels” of 1775 to have done without their arms? Blacks would not have been enslaved if they had the appropriate arms.
Take them to court, others have and won.
How would it help us to have the Feds, which is Chock Full O’ Nuts, deciding who is sane enough to own a weapon?
Because he said nothing about the Feds to begin with.
That's what I think the problem is, people aren't really aware of what he said. All he spoke about is people governing themselves. State and local.
I have no problem with Carson running as vice-pres with Cruz, Palin, or Gowdy but replacing Obozo who has been very successful at destroying our country with another black guy we really know little about, I don’t think it is very wise.
Why would we want any member of any bureaucracy, from school to John Hopkins that is all he has known, running our government, be they black, white or purple? We have tried this once and look where we are now.
I’m not for gun control of any sort, all I’m doing is giving Dr. Carson the benefit of the doubt. I also believe State and Local Governments should have the rights to govern themselves. They already regulate a lot of this and have for a long time. I sure wouldn’t want the State, City of New York telling me what I can and can not have.
In the end, the Constitution should be the guide.
These articles highlight the kerfuffle with Carson pretty well.
Encouraging indeed. He talks about the importance of a well-armed citizenry.
And I just love this part:
It is quite interesting to see, though, that the same bureaucrats refuse to enforce some of our federal border-protection laws and other domestic policies with which they disagree. Perhaps Mr. Reids time could be better spent explaining why it is acceptable for the federal government to pick and choose which laws it wishes to enforce.
I encourage folks to read the whole thing....
I did and encourage others to do so as well. Great piece. Thanks for posting it.
(I just hit pause for their stupid video ads.)
People can and do learn, you know?
Ronald Reagan was once a Democrat.
Because he would be light years better than Hillary.
I sure agree with your “another black guy” thought. I have had the same thought. But, if the choice were Hillary or Carson, come on! I bet u would agree with me on that point.
YES, it’s possible Cruz or Palin could win, but this post IS NOT about WHO CAN win. Rather this post seeks to refine the argument down to the simple question of “Hey Freepers, if you had a choice of Hillary in the Oval Office or Carson, who would you choose?!
I bet 99% of Freepers would choose Carson. The experts say 17% of the black vote Guarantees Carson wins mathematically, hard to just dismiss that fact (the experts “opinion”).
A very insightful post....thanks. I agree about Dr. Carson but believe he would be better as vice president. We have a big mess to clean up after Obozo and need a strong leader to get that started. I don’t see one rising to the top yet. We have a little time. I like Cruz and Palin but prefer a governor like Mike Pence but he hasn’t made any noise about running.
I won’t vote for anyone but a conservative. I’ve been burned too many times.
With only that choice I would go with Carson.
It was all about the Feds from start to finish. I reread the entire article and no mention is made of state or local duties, only the Federal government is mentioned.
Did I say the feds? I’m just glad he clarified his stance and will support our 2nd Amd. rights. Currently it is up to the states...at least so far. And cities...and I meant ‘we’ if it needs to be clarified.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.