Posted on 05/03/2015 5:45:56 PM PDT by GIdget2004
Ben Carson, retired neurosurgeon turned conservative star, has confirmed that he will seek the Republican presidential nomination in 2016.
Carson, who has never run for public office, is expected to be the only high-profile African-American to enter the GOP’s presidential primary as he tries to parlay his success as an author and speaker into a competitive campaign against established politicians.
“I’m willing to be part of the equation and therefore, I’m announcing my candidacy for president of the United States of America,” he said in an interview aired Sunday night by Ohio’s WKRC television station.
He is set to make a more formal announcement during a speech from his native Detroit on Monday.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
Well we are right. The only cost is your cred.
Yup. this ran its course. We three are the only ones here so let him bark at the moon (bat in the mirror)
It is one of those unfortunate aspects of being in this life that we must exercise reason in dealing with one another. Part of that entails self-discipline. In fact, without the exercise of self-discipline there is no liberty. Absolutely there are reasonable limits to liberty. Why you raise the issue of a death penalty for offending Muslims at this point is beyond me. But you are woefully uninformed and misguided if you think the Second Amendment grants carte blanche ownership and usage of firearms.
Well, well. I guess you learn something new every day. i wasn’t aware of that quote. Thanks Norm.
So now I guess I get to express my surprise that someone who is advocating the de facto elimination of the Right to Keep and Bear Arms for the vast majority of the population is running as a “conservative.” Where? In Britain? Germany?
I guess it never occurred to his worshippers that the vast bulk of Americans live in populated areas and that the vast majority of firearms, particularly hanguns, are semiautomatics. There just aren’t thst many of us that carry revolvers anymore or limit our rifles to bolt actions or pumps.
He’s a RINO AKA Liberal. That makes it OK because it’s ‘reasonable’ when one of those do it. Ask fester. He;s a fan if infringing on liberty.
I have three make or break criteria: infanticide and RKBA and possession of a spine. Few candidates meet even my abysmally low standards on all three. Dr. Carson clearly fails on RKBA. Don’t see much point to look at hiim any further.
Pfft. Losing cred with you on this point is but gain. LOL.
Bedrock principles:
Killing babies is wrong.
Taking the means of self defense away from people is wrong.
Being a coward is wrong.
Why is it so difficult to find candidates who uphold those very basic principles?
A successful candidate for me will be pro-life, pro-2nd amendment, Anti-illegal immigration, for smaller government, and against socialized medicine.
That's about as 'perfect' as I require.
/johnny
BUT...LESSER EVIL!!!!!!!!
” A successful candidate for me will be pro-life, pro-2nd amendment, Anti-illegal immigration, for smaller government, and against socialized medicine.”
Same for me across the board. Too many here consider this asking for perfection, when all we are asking for is the minimum for a real(conservative) leader.
When you consider how devolved the average ‘conservative’ is today, it must seem like perfection.
Yeah, no kidding.
Also note that those who say we demand “perfection” are the liberal(Establishment) FReepers.
Or worse.
Well at least they have a place to call home.
And adding to the number as well.
It’s a lesser evil.
Maybe in your lifetime you have not encountered this little thing called the "benefit of the doubt." A better way to make your point: Dr. Carson has said some troubling things in regard to the right to bear arms in an urban environment. While he purports himself to be in favor of the Second Amendment, he has advocated limitations that may deprive urban dwellers of access to the best means for self-defense, whether it be semi-automatic weapons or otherwise. For this reason I do not think he is as strong a candidate as Ted Cruz when it comes to this issue.
-------
It is important, and only fair, to let a person articulate ideas more than once and arrive at the better formulations. It is better to treat a walk-back statement as a good thing than as a gotcha thing. It doesn't matter whether your dealing with someone you agree with or disagree with.
For example, I am not going to hold you to the words of your post indefinitely, because, unless one is wholly static or a stone, it is part of life to grow and mature. There is absolutely *nothing* wrong with flip-flops when they addend to greater understanding, whether within or without.
In all fairness, you cannot truly assert that Ben Carson believe cities do not need a Second Amendment. He is not so dense as to believe the Second Amendment does not hold sway in every corner of the USA. He has clearly iterated what he believes to be reasonable strictures, and has since walked those back. Apparently you are a perfect judge of his motives. I am not.
Although neither of us may end up supporting Dr. Carson in some way, I would encourage you to hear him out fairly on all the issues. Life is easier when one does not assume a hidden agenda with everything a man says or does.
Best to you in your fight for truth, justice, and the American way, Norm. You've been a delightful joust despite the rancor that has attended to us both. Give it a year or so and I'll jump your case on something else.
All he can run on is his rapidly changing or flip-flopping rhetoric.
Rhetoric doesn't do it for me.
That's why I send money to the Cruz campaign this early in the cycle.
I'm putting my money where my mouth is. I know who I want to vote for, unlike many here on FR that will be satisfied with whoever the GOP-E or media picks for a candidate.
/johnny
I have absolutely no problem with your stance on this and find myself in the same boat. I haven’t seen enough of Carson to assess how much he has “flip-flopped” on this or that. He did walk back his Second Amendment language, as Norm observed. He is by no means a hard core, hard-nosed conservative. At the same time, I don’t see him as a shiftless panderer seeking power. He does have a record of making use of his God-given abilities to help others. Does that mean anything in view of the self-aggrandizing pigs who currently feed at the public trough?
/johnny
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.