One of the very popular and used by a huge amount of conservatives is Obamas lack of experience. I had that issue as well when he ran. I still have that opinion though I understand your point. Also agree with with general sentiment of the where has it got us but in a general sense of government as a whole

.

I get your point but I am talking about a different kind of experience.  Obama regardless of actual time holding office was and is a political insider.  Look at the team and supporters around him.  He was given a free pass to the White House by those in power and not by a grass roots effort from the masses. The latter of which is what I am seeing from those supporting Carson.  

---

Original Season Ticket Holder - Retired  1995 - 2020


At some point you just have to let go of what you thought should happen and live in what is happening.
 

But what is your beef with him?  Should not a man that overcame so much to be where he is be heard?  Excuse me if I am wrong and it was not you, but two of you 3 have in a sense called him a kook.  To me, this is the kind of story we need to hear more of.  A man overcoming what he has is clearly a person that needs to be championed.  He has a blue print to success.

When did I say that he shouldn't be heard? Please show me where I said that his story was not worth telling, or that he should not be looked up to by minority children--hell, ALL children--everywhere as an example of what they can become.

 

That said, when a guy with zero experience runs for President and has bright ideas like "bomb America", I reserve the right to call him crazy. When he stands onstage spouting off about the evils of abortion then writes scientific papers about studies he's conducted using fetal tissue (you know, the stuff that extremists are trying to bury Planned Parenthood over), I reserve the right to express the opinion that he's far from fit to be President. When he espouses further unconstitutional views that can't be discussed because of the CoC, I absolutely reserve the right to say that he is not the person I want leading my America. It doesn't mean that I respect his accomplishments any less, it just means that if we're looking for Cincinnatus, I don't think that he's our guy.

---

When did I say that he shouldn't be heard? Please show me where I said that his story was not worth telling, or that he should not be looked up to by minority children--hell, ALL children--everywhere as an example of what they can become.

 

That said, when a guy with zero experience runs for President and has bright ideas like "bomb America"
, I reserve the right to call him crazy. When he stands onstage spouting off about the evils of abortion then writes scientific papers about studies he's conducted using fetal tissue (you know, the stuff that extremists are trying to bury Planned Parenthood over), I reserve the right to express the opinion that he's far from fit to be President. When he espouses further unconstitutional views that can't be discussed because of the CoC, I absolutely reserve the right to say that he is not the person I want leading my America. It doesn't mean that I respect his accomplishments any less, it just means that if we're looking for Cincinnatus, I don't think that he's our guy.

Allow me to clarify my take on the above in blue.  From everything I have read about Ben Carson I cannot fathom him stating anything close to what you are espousing here.  Clearly coming from a man that has spent his entire life supporting the sanctity of life a comment such as killing innocent illegal immigrants should be questioned by even the most staunch opposition.  

 

Second of all, again how much research did you do regarding his studies concerning fetal tissue?  Here: http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-...-research/  

 

I do realize that the line he is treading is very thin, however condoning an abortion and not utilizing what is a legal procedure to further advance science must be a very difficult decision for a Christian man of science.  I can only imagine his moral dilemma.  To me personally the fact that he chose to possibly advance science over moral convictions is a man willing to compromise for the greater good.  Isn't that what we are looking for?

 

Now let us take this one step further.  You object to his stance against Planned Parenthood.  Again a thin line but the fact that Planned Parenthood is wiling to profit from human fetuses does not strike you as wrong?  Everyone of us posting on this board were once just that, human fetuses.  The decision to abort an unplanned pregnancy has to be hard enough but to then learn later that your potential offspring was sold off to the highest bidder???  

 

In regards to your first response, how would you go about championing someone like Ben Carson for all that he has accomplished?  Clearly his beliefs are a huge part of what got him to where he is.  So I have to ask how do propose to let his path to success be seen while disregarding the moral fiber that got him where he is?

 

Finally as for Cincinnatus, that is a huge burden to place on any mans shoulders, but if you step back and look at the big picture maybe perhaps it is not so far fetched.

---

Original Season Ticket Holder - Retired  1995 - 2020


At some point you just have to let go of what you thought should happen and live in what is happening.
 

I get your point but I am talking about a different kind of experience. Obama regardless of actual time holding office was and is a political insider. Look at the team and supporters around him. He was given a free pass to the White House by those in power and not by a grass roots effort from the masses. The latter of which is what I am seeing from those supporting Carson.

From that perspective sure I totally get it and I like it also. We can agree in that. I think being an outsider isn't exclusive of having experience though.

---

From that perspective sure I totally get it and I like it also. We can agree in that. I think being an outsider isn't exclusive of having experience though.

So where do you draw the line?  Leadership?  He has plenty of it.  Overcoming adversity?  A black neurosurgeon with dyslexia has seen plenty of that.  Look I could go on but to me the only reason to oppose him would be for his faith based perspective.  The same ones that our forefathers used to found this country.  As a disillusioned Catholic I have to admit those ideals and principals before politics got in the way got us pretty far.

---

Original Season Ticket Holder - Retired  1995 - 2020


At some point you just have to let go of what you thought should happen and live in what is happening.
 

So where do you draw the line?  Leadership?  He has plenty of it.  Overcoming adversity?  A black neurosurgeon with dyslexia has seen plenty of that.  Look I could go on but to me the only reason to oppose him would be for his faith based perspective.  The same ones that our forefathers used to found this country.  As a disillusioned Catholic I have to admit those ideals and principals before politics got in the way got us pretty far.

Or... we can dislike his positions?  


I don't care how much adversity he's overcome.  Or what leadership experience he has.  I care where he stands on the issues, and those are the things I don't like about him.  Plenty of terrible leaders overcame adversity and had plenty of leadership, and even many had faith based perspectives.  Those, imo, aren't things that make great leaders great.


Leadership isn't a bad quality.  It's a good one to have.  But it doesn't mean it'll make one a great leader.  Those things aren't simply enough.  At least not for me.

---

I was wrong about Trent Baalke. 

I'm not going to bother typing a response, because Matt Smith here nailed it.

---

Everything about drones makes me uneasy, when we're talking about using them in a weaponized form on US soil I get really uneasy.

---

Its an explosion for tge purpose od demolition. C4 tnt or drone whats the point?

---

"Illegal" immigrants are the loyalty oath/flag burner/tax pledge cause celebre of this year's conservative mob.  It's hilarious to watch, actually.

 

 

 

That's all I have in this thread, except to say it's in the running for cleverest topic title of the year.

---

No, not at all.  This can lead to a whole discussion regarding The Patriot Act that is best done in a new thread so we don't hijack this one.

 

I disagree, the Patriot Act was created to "protect us".  We lost our freedom in exchange for so called "protection".  Just as you mentioned earlier.

 

I'm sorry to tell you this jagi, but you have 2 contradictory points of view that you need to reconcile.  

 

 

 

<div>
Ask those very people if they are willing to give up an area for national security and see what they say.


 

</div>
 

See?  This is the same arguement the patriot act supporters use...  Lose freedom, get security.

---

I disagree, the Patriot Act was created to "protect us".  We lost our freedom in exchange for so called "protection".  Just as you mentioned earlier.

 

I'm sorry to tell you this jagi, but you have 2 contradictory points of view that you need to reconcile.  

 

 

<div> 
 
 

See?  This is the same arguement the patriot act supporters use...  Lose freedom, get security.

</div>

 

Two very different topics.  The Patriot Act and asking land owners to give up a portion of their land to deal with immigration is not the same thing.

---

There are 10 kinds of people in this world.  Those who understand binary and those who don't.

"Illegal" immigrants are the loyalty oath/flag burner/tax pledge cause celebre of this year's conservative mob.  It's hilarious to watch, actually.

 

 

 

That's all I have in this thread, except to say it's in the running for cleverest topic title of the year.

 

Interesting that you said that.  I was just thinking about this earlier today.  Dr. Carson said that he's open to using drone technology along the boarder, but as reported by many in the media, he's supposedly specifically calling for drone strikes
.  That's not what he said and it's not being reported correctly.

 

Consider this headline.

 

Carson calls for drone strikes on border 'caves'

 

What does that headline say?  What image does it represent?  Is it true?  What did he specifically say?

 

 

"There are caves that they utilize. Those caves can be eliminated. There are a number of possibilities -- that could be one of them," Carson told CNN's Jim Acosta Sunday on "State of the Union."

 

So what he said was that the use of drones in order to eliminate caves used by illegals is one of a number of possibilities.  He did not in fact "call for drone strikes".

 

This illustrates how the media can subtly suggest something, and people believe it as "fact".  Say someone just browsed the headlines.  They would see that headline and come to the conclusion that Dr. Carson is calling for drone strikes on the border, when in fact, that is false.

 

Here's another example.  Back in the 2008 campaign Sarah Palin made a comment that Russia can be seen from Alaska.  Saturday Night Live did a skit where Tina Fey parodies Sarah Palin and says that "she can see Russia from her house".  That clip was played over and over to the point where people believed that Sarah Palin really did say that.

---

There are 10 kinds of people in this world.  Those who understand binary and those who don't.

What does that headline say?  What image does it represent?  Is it true?  What did he specifically say?

A quote attributed to Carson:

 

"You look at some of these caves and things out there one drone strike, boom, and they'd gone."

 

That kind of seems like he's endorsing the use of drones to destroy caves near the border.

---

A quote attributed to Carson:

 

"You look at some of these caves and things out there one drone strike, boom, and they'd gone."

 

That kind of seems like he's endorsing the use of drones to destroy caves near the border.

 

However, take the whole thing in context and what is he really saying?  When he was asked about using drones, he said that their use is a possibility, and he gave an example of how they could be used.

 

Again, he's not calling for drone strikes, he's giving an example of how they could potentially be used.

---

There are 10 kinds of people in this world.  Those who understand binary and those who don't.

However, take the whole thing in context and what is he really saying?  When he was asked about using drones, he said that their use is a possibility, and he gave an example of how they could be used.

 

Again, he's not calling for drone strikes, he's giving an example of how they could potentially be used.

I don't think it's much of a stretch to come to the conclusion some of did here based on the quote you are replying. 

 

One of the options they could potentially be used for is making caves go boom. Even the potential is off limits to me.

---

Its an explosion. Tnt semtext smart bomb c4. whats the pc way to blow stuff up?

---

Its an explosion. Tnt semtext smart bomb c4. whats the pc way to blow stuff up?

It's not about political correctness. It's about not crossing a line of having drones firing rockets on American soil. I cannot tell if you don't understand the point we have in opposition or are itching to see something blow up. Why be so obtuse?

---

Everything about drones makes me uneasy, when we're talking about using them in a weaponized form on US soil I get really uneasy.

We don't need drones to blow (stuff) up.

 

The dude in your avatar proves that.

 

 

Actually, if we're going to blow some caves up on the border, I nominate Eric to handle the entire operation.  No Drones Allowed!!

---

Interesting that you said that.  I was just thinking about this earlier today.  Dr. Carson said that he's open to using drone technology along the boarder, but as reported by many in the media, he's supposedly specifically calling for drone strikes
.  That's not what he said and it's not being reported correctly.

 

Consider this headline.

 

Carson calls for drone strikes on border 'caves'

 

What does that headline say?  What image does it represent?  Is it true?  What did he specifically say?

 

 

Actually, JIB, there's an internet meme (xzibit-yo-dawg) that boudreau was referencing.  Some of the better ones really make me chuckle.

 

And this thread title may be one of the better ones.

---