Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
We Should Talk About Ben Carson
Having given Bernie Sanders and his supporters a lot of guff — and to to show that I’m more than just a partisan hack — I feel it’s necessary to point out to our side that we have the potential to once again demonstrate the truth behind the Republican Party’s unofficial motto There’s Nothing We Can’t Screw Up™.
The case in point is that of newly-minted Republican frontrunner Dr. Ben Carson. Carson is a fine and admirable man — perhaps unique in all the world for his skill with a scalpel — and, having read his book, the irrepressible nature of his optimism can’t be denied. But he’s nonetheless the flavor of the month for Republican Primary voters. Keep in mind that at this point four years ago, Herman Cain was the frontrunner and Newt Gingrich was about to spike. Anybody could develop some sort of alternate history fan-fiction about how things would have gone had either of these men remained the Republican front-runner, but both were, in the end, deeply flawed candidates for a variety of reasons. Dr. Carson is no different.
Carson’s story is uplifting and uniquely American, but those qualities do not grant you the judgment, cunning, and credibility to either seize or occupy the highest office in the land. Should he become the Republican nominee we would most likely be treated to a passel of strange stories which would surely disqualify Gentle Ben from holding high office. Here’s the latest example:
Ben Carson stood by his long-held belief about ancient pyramids in Egypt, that they were used to store grain, rather than to inter pharaohs. Asked about this Wednesday, Carson told CBS News, “It’s still my belief, yes.”
The subject came up when Buzzfeed published a 1998 commencement speech delivered by Carson at Andrews University, a college founded by Seventh-day Adventists.
“My own personal theory is that Joseph built the pyramids to store grain,” Carson said. “Now all the archeologists think that they were made for the pharaohs’ graves. But, you know, it would have to be something awfully big if you stop and think about it. And I don’t think it’d just disappear over the course of time to store that much grain.”
As an isolated incident, I think this could be forgiven — a simple misunderstanding which wouldn’t be disqualifying in and of itself — but the trouble is that once you start to yank on this thread, the sweater begins to unravel to the point where you’re likely to end up standing naked holding a thousand yards of wool in your hands.
Who knew that jail was one of the leading causes of homosexuality? I guess the rest of America will have the opportunity to learn this lesson as well… in the form of 30-second ads shown over and over and over again.
Given that we have an embarrassment of riches in terms of candidates this cycle — and a strong chance of reclaiming the White House — the only thing preventing us from doing so would be nominating a candidate whose beliefs put him in a place that is incompatible with the body politic. As such, I place Carson’s chances of winning the White House at about the same as I would that the Pyramids were ancient power stations.
Image Credit: “Ben Carson” by Gage Skidmore. Licensed under CC BY-SA 3.0 via Wikimedia Commons.
Published in Politics
Guys, it doesn’t matter how nice or smart he is or how much we like him. He has gone on television and said the pyramids were built by Joseph. He said people go into prison and come out gay. You cannot say stuff like that!! Try to see him through the eyes of voters who aren’t us. He will never win. This election, more than any other in our history, requires that we choose more carefully than this.
I suspect that Carson would be a good president. I believe he is sincere and informed by principles I generally share, and that those principles would ultimately lead him to adopting policies I support. I have two issues with him, however.
First, I believe he is overly impressed by intellect. Like a lot of very smart people, he thinks we can solve any problem if we just get enough very smart people working on it. But intellect isn’t wisdom, and I think this is a naivety he shares with the Left.
Second, Carson doesn’t appear to have spent a great deal of time thinking about about many of the issues he’s being asked to opine on. As I said above, I believe his principles will ultimately lead him to adopt sound policies, but applying principles to complex problems often takes time and reflection. He appears to just now be putting in that time and working things through. This leads to the type of missteps and backtracks we are witnessing.
My bottom line is that Carson could be a great president, someday, but that he needs a lot of seasoning. And while I suspect he would do an admirable job if he were elected now, I’m not willing to vote on the basis of a suspicion when there are other reasonable options.
As to his theories on pyramids, I simply don’t care unless he’s talking about spending my tax dollars on them.
Majestyk, this is uncomfortably insulting. Tone it down, please.
And, comparing Robert McR.’s or Dr. Ben Carson’s statements to Alec Baldwin or History Channel bilge is unwarranted overreaching.
I don’t think Dr. Carson confuses intelligence with wisdom. I suspect that leading a group of titan egos in Johns Hopkins neurosurgery would give him the chops to make those distinctions.
I wish I could find the exact quote that went a long way toward confirming my suspicions of Carson in this regard. It was a pivotal moment in my consideration of him. He reminded me of Obama at that moment (except that Obama is enamored of his own intellect, whereas Carson, more humble, places too much faith in intellect in general). And to be clear, I’m not exactly saying he confuses intellect with wisdom, just that his comments make me concerned that he values intellect much more than is warranted.
Jim Geraghty has an interesting take on Carson’s Pyramid Problem over at NRO:
A Gallup poll found that 73% of Americans believe in at least one of the following: ESP, haunted houses, ghosts, telepathy, clairvoyance, astrology, mental communication with the dead, witches, reincarnation, or channeling.
If that poll is in any way reflective of reality, Dr. Carson might be better received if he theorized the pyramids were built by flying saucers with tractor beams.
Haha probably true
He said maybe the pyramids were built by Joseph, and he believes that they were. Without investigating the claim any further, I can easily see where it came from. The Pyramids date from near the time of Joseph, and their dating is far from certain. It might be possible that they were originally constructed as granaries and converted to subsequent use as mausoleums. I doubt it, for a number of reasons, but it is not such an outrageous thing for a layperson to adopt as a plausible theory.
It requires, of course, that you believe that Joseph was a real person, and that Genesis is true. That is the core of the matter.
So, just what is it about this theory of his that is so difficult that it makes him un-electable?
Just to follow up on my previous post, I can’t find the quote I mentioned, but here is a comment Carson made during the first debate. Speaking about presidential qualifications, he said, “the thing that is probably most important is having a brain, and to be able to figure things out.”
That’s not too damning in and of itself, and I realize that his lack of experience somewhat forces him to promote himself in this way, but I remember thinking that’s not the most important thing. That, and similar comments, got me paying attention to this aspect of Carson, and the accumulative effect has raised a red flag for me.
Well, isn’t there some kernal of truth there? Don’t some guys go in straight and come out, well, not gay, but bisexual? It is far from a general rule, but there are enough anecdotes to be able to offer that up as an argument against the “born that way” mantra of the pro-homosexual lobby.
I think in this instance Dr. Carson is only guilty of being clumsy when he made his statement. In an honest public debate, there should be room for some nuance.
The core of this issue is the way the lamestream media have become advocates for all things homosexual. I would rather fight them with a fearless but unassuming candidate, than cower from them in fear by electing a RINO to be our standard- bearer.
I know you’re a Young Earth Creationist, but you have to try to see that most people don’t have that view. To the vast majority of voters in a general election (and that’s who we have to worry about and attract), Carson’s Biblical musings just sound screwball. I’m not saying they are, just being real here. A candidate for president can’t go around saying stuff like that, it sounds beyond the fringe to most people. As to homosexuality, leave it ALONE. It’s a loser. We can’t talk about it, especially not the way he does. I’ve had a lot of gay friends, and the ones I know are so dyed-in-the-wool that I’m quite sure they were indeed born that way and couldn’t change it any more than they could change their height.
Over a quarter of GOP voters share my YEC views, and so do at least a quarter of Democrat voters. Even if none of the normally-GOP-voting Atheists will vote for him, we might be able to peel off enough black YEC women to make up the difference. Dr. Carson’s religion is not nearly so “beyond the fringe” as you think.
Dr. Carson’s theories about the pyramids are not so far-fetched if you believe there is any truth to the Genesis account of Joseph. So, do you want to make an attempt to discredit Genesis a campaign issue? You, progressive journalist, are a shill for the party that boos G-d, so you can go there if you want. But I would prefer to leave that topic for a robust debate at Sunday School, and return our discussions to a consideration of important issues that affect American lives. On matters of policy, Dr. Carson is much better grounded than your candidate, who thinks that there is never going to be an end to our ability to print money and run up debts, and exhibits a deliberate ignorance of basic economics, and is uninterested in what Dr. Carson has to say about federal programs that have built-in incentives to self-destructive behaviors that hurt American families.
We know who built the pyramids and when MJ – it wasn’t Joseph and wasn’t in that time period. There’s also no evidence of the biblical account of Genesis or Exodus in regards to the captivity or the wandering either.
Unless Carson has some insight into the hearts of homosexuals and knows that they’re lying about “choosing to be gay” that position is also well beyond the pale. We kind of have to take their words for it and there’s no reason to suspect a conspiracy.
The point is this: these things represent (by your admission) views that stand outside of even Republican primary voters, so why even invite this trouble? It’s unnecessary.
Actually, I do not agree with you on either of these statements. Yes, I have seen both written in textbooks, but when I followed the footnotes and citations, they lead to the learned opinions of archaeologists who can be accurately described as anti-Christian or anti-Jewish partisans who are stretching their findings into matters of conjecture in order to discredit the Biblical accounts. There is quite a bit of overreach on this topic.
Have you ever read the archaeological journals on the topic of Biblical archaeology, or for that matter read “Biblical Archaeology” magazine? You should look there sometime, and read the letters to the editors and the peer-review comments. The entire field is fraught with quarreling and bickering, in a way that strikes this engineer as downright unprofessional.
I don’t agree with this either. I do think Dr. Carson is overstating the “homosexuality is a choice” position, but I also dis-believe the “born that way” position. I think there is plenty enough evidence to say, “It’s complicated.”
And I do see room to suspect a conspiracy. Have you not seen how researchers who came up with findings that did not support the “born that way” position were subjected to dishonest attacks on their integrity and their study methods? (Mark Regnerus being the most famous, but by no means the only case.)
If any social scientist dares to submit such findings for publication, they will find that there is hell to pay. I do not trust the field. Have you read Psychology Today on the topic? They are political partisans just as much as is the NewYorkTimes.
Why does any candidate get to have any views that differ from the GOP talking points issued by the RNC ? Different opinions are “unnecessary.”
I pretty much agree. I think it’s a little facile to say that homosexuality is a choice. It’s clearly not determined from birth (as leftists seem to believe), but that doesn’t make it a choice. I think that the homosexuality that occurs in prison is a different form of homosexuality than what occurs in the gay lifestyle. Carson is stretching the evidence too far in suggesting that prisoners engaging in homosexual behavior means that all homosexuality is a choice.
What Carson believes about sex is less crazy that what the left believes about sex (e.g. if you change the level of hormones and get some plastic surgery, you can change your sex). Majestyk is right that Carson won’t be judged the way Democrats are judged. On the other hand, Democrats are going to call Republicans crazy/evil/stupid/old no matter what (borrowing from Jim Geraghty there), so I’m not even sure that it matters.
When Carson calls evolution a satanic plot, that bugs me. I’d still vote for him over Hillary though.
Dr. Carson, “Why I Have the Experience to Be President,” Facebook:
I do like this guy. :)
Sorry, I missed the part where Carson says something objectionable.
The part I found objectionable was the “shut up” part that came after.
Not objectionable so much as ignorant.
Maj, its not worth it to engage with YECs.
Agree. I’m not certain he’d be a good President, but he’s refreshing in that he says what he believes and then doesn’t backtrack. (I’d say the same thing about Trump, except that I’d add four words: he says what he believes for now, and then doesn’t backtrack for now ).
And in spite of the horrified protestations that erupt after one of Ben’s Carsonisms, he continues to rise in the polls . . .
My favorite part of the essay you link to above is this:
Hard to fault that logic. He continues:
I don’t think it’s possible to enunciate the problem better, more simply, or more clearly, than that.
What relevance does the original use of the pyramids have to the domestic or foreign policy of the United States in 2015?
Sorry Carson has said nothing outlandish in the clip on gay marriage. Of course progressives will trash it, ridicule it incessantly, but trying to please progressive post modern man and its media echo chamber is what consistently destroys Republicans and makes progressive governance inevitable. Some of his religious beliefs are strange as most are, but frankly that simply does not bother me as much as tossing out the entire western religious tradition in the name of scientistic modernity. If we do not tap into the “bank and capital of nations and of ages” we start every generation from zero and put ourselves in the hands of charlatans who suffer from the fatal conceit. That’s not a mixed metaphor, but what is it?
All this speculation about pyramids, etc. is silly. He can’t win. And other posters are right — we don’t need these issues raised in the campaign! Gheesh. The media and Democrats would destroy him in the general election over this kind of studd, and he has not shown the qualities to fight back. That’s it folks. He seems to be a wonderful man. But not the candidate we need to beat Hillary. Move on.
It seems to me that Dr. Carson is much more in tune to the majority of what most of us really think than those that are trying to smear him are.
He isn’t my top choice but if he were to get the nomination, I’d be thrilled to vote for the man. There isn’t anything in these videos that disqualifies him with any more than a very small minority of folks who would not be voting for him anyway.
“….both [Cain and Gingrich] were, in the end, deeply flawed candidates for a variety of reasons.”
And we ended up with another deeply flawed candidate — Mitt Romney.
I keep hearing how deep the Republican field is. I don’t see it. Every candidate has major flaws. Every. Single. One.
Trump – Very liberal past; loud-mouth; insult-flinger; highly narcissistic; know-nothing. More of an entertainer than a leader.
Carson – Love the guy but has a lot of wacky views about a lot of things (see above).
Rubio – Supported amnesty for illegal immigrants.
Bush – Disqualifying last name; supports amnesty for illegal immigrants; supports Common Core; wimpy.
Fiorina – Horrible business record; lack of specific policy proposals.
Cristie – Bridgegate; Obama hugger.
Cruz – In my judgement, the best of the bunch. But he’s not likable. If he would just smile more and show a sense of humor…….
Paul – Much too isolationist.
Kasich – Expanded medicaid in OH; squishy on many conservative issues.
Huckabee – Wants to leave Social Security and Medicare entitlements alone; old news.
Santorum – Lost to Romney last time out; old news.
Jindal – Horrible response to Obama’s first State of the Union. That did him in right there.
That’s a great encapsulation. I think that Romney’s most obvious flaw was “not being Obama.”
Ronald Reagan Reincarnate couldn’t have beaten Obama in 08 or 12. The die was cast in that regard and I think Romney gets unnecessary criticism for failing to move the mountain. Nobody could.
The ol’ Rico double-post. :)