In case you missed it last week, Dr. Ben Carson, Director of Pediatric Neurosurgery at Johns Hopkins University Hospital, made headlines at the National Prayer Breakfast speaking just feet away from President Obama. Dr. Carson’s words struck a chord with many Americans as he lamented the damage done by political correctness and offered simple non-government solutions to challenges such as providing access to health care to all Americans.

In case you missed it, here is Dr. Carson’s entire speech:

Now, as for 2016, his 27 minute platform has launched some discussion in the political world and National Journal reports on the possibilities:

If conservatives are looking for a political outsider with an inspiring rags-to-riches story and who could effectively challenge President Obama’s policies on health care and taxes while also quoting Scripture and criticizing political correctness, look no further than Ben Carson.

Carson, raised by a single mother in a poverty-stricken home, who went on to become a top Johns Hopkins neurosurgeon, gave a nearly 30-minute speech at the National Prayer Breakfast last week that indirectly criticized many of the policies promulgated by President Obama — all while the president sat just to his side.

A YouTube video of Carson’s speech has since racked up more than 1 million views. A Wall Street Journal editorial ran under the headline “Ben Carson for President.” Carson told Sean Hannity on Fox News, “If the Lord grabbed me by the collar and made me do it, I would. It’s not my intention.” Hannity replied, “I would vote for you in a heartbeat.”

In particular, Carson’s views on some of Obama’s most hard-fought-for policies –- health care and income tax levels — have caused many on the right to talk about his political prospects. On health care, Carson said every child born in the U.S. should receive a medical savings account, which could receive pretax contributions.

Dr. Carson’s 27 minute speech may have simply brought to light the fact that many Americans feel neither side adequately represents their views and isn’t ready to tackle real problems facing the country. Is Dr. Carson a real political outsider that has a true shot at much higher office in 2016?


  1. It would be a brilliant move, especially if Ben Carson’s running mate was Marco Rubio; Rand Paul; or Kimberly Guilfoyle….

  2. I LOVED his speech! And, I love his life story! However, that doesn’t mean I’m jumping on the ‘for president’ band-wagon. Just stop for a second. Our candidates need to be vetted thoroughly before propping them up as though they could run and win. The GOP has not been good at providing candidates thus far… McCain, Romney – need I say more?! We’ve had plenty of other examples of candidates who won on a conservative platform and then as soon as they’re in office, the truth comes out and they turn out to be RINO’s… and the evidence was there before they campaigned but because the GOP backed them, they won and we were screwed!

    • Sierr19: The GOP has always been the owner/manager party, and so it has always been very organized and staid. It has been dogma that the number two candidate becomes the presidential candidate the next time. So Romney was knighted after losing to McCain, McCain was knighted after losing to Bush43, Bush41 was knighted after losing to Reagan, and Reagan was knighted after losing to Ford.

      You EARN the nomination by standing in line.

      You can jump the line by stumping all over the country, as Nixon did. Four years after saying “You won’t have Dick Nixon to kick around anymore,” he became the unavoidable candidate, since he had so many chits to collect.

      Likewise, Bob Dole got the nomination as a sort of “lifetime achievement award.”

      2012 was unique, in that although the knighted candidate was maneuvered into the nomination, it had the appearance of the kind of chaos Democrats have almost every time. That’s why the establishment rammed through rules to stifle the grassroots. It’s going to be even harder for an upstart to challenge the GOP elite. It just ain’t-a-gonna-happen.

    • In this enlightened(?) time I can see no reason to believe we can not. Though to make that Presidency more successful we would also need to elect more and ever more of politicians of darker skin color. The do- nothing congress we now have is a result of trying to make the President appear unsuccessful adn only because of intolerance.

    • Why not? We are supposed to be a color blind nation. Despite the Congress of No this President has accomplished remarkable things for We the People.

      • Bom: As Billy and I have been discussing, we’re not as enlightened as we wish we were. In 2008, Hillary should have won, but American was not ready for a female president (even though it’s normal abroad–Margaret Thatcher, Golda Meir, Indira Ghandi, Benazir Bhutto, etc.). However, I do think we could elect a woman next time. And Hillary is currently the most popular politician in America, so it’s “hers to lose.”

        I’m not saying it’s a good thing. I’m just saying I don’t think the U.S. would elect two black presidents back-to-back.

        • I seem to be taking up much time on here and apologize. One reason it SEEMS that he has increased spending is that under the previous administration the cost of ill conceived, false pretense, lied into WARS was hidden but this administration has brought them outinto light of day. You can search and see what has actually been spent. May I remind you the PResident does not spend nor appropriate CONGRESS does that!

    • Why not? You sir, are one of the reasons why Dems call us Racist. What possible difference does his skin/race make?

      • Yeah,yeah,yeah. We have reached the mountain top. Right. Apparently, you either don’t hear/see the continuing veiled racist attacks on Obama, or you don’t know the difference.

        Ideally, yeah, the country that elected 43 white men (mostly old and rich) is going to suddenly be color-blind. The only reason a woman and a Black man had a chance in 2008 is that Bush had so effectively fired up the opposition, while at the same time, alienating both the right and center-right of his own party.

        I’m old enough to remember the furor over JFK being Catholic, for crying out loud. And even this time around, religion was behind part of the lack of support for Romney.

        Sure, it shouldn’t matter, and the GOP wants desperately not to be the old-white-man party (with notable tokens). But I don’t see a black GOP candidate unless (a) they think they’ll lose anyway, or (b) Obama alienates his base, somehow.

        • The only actual racists that leave no doubt is Obama and his wife! The Main Media will never allow a black republican to run! why do you think Condi Rice hasn’t even thought about it?

            • Billy – I can only assume you are talking about the Iraqi invasion. I’ve already had this discussion with Goethe. Saddam had nuclear capability as early as 1988 with a failed nuclear test and had Chemical before that and had used it on his neighbors. Given the long range alert Saddam had of pending UN inspections, I could have even gotten rid of any WMD remains. Only ignorant populace who thrives on MSM would believe that Saddam was harmless and wouldn’t cut a US throat in a heartbeat. If Rice was guilty of any mis-judgement is a stronger belief in “state terrorism” vs “stateless terrorism”. Which the terrorism didn’t become stateless until we invaded Afghanistan. She also thot, and rightfully, that Saddam could regain his WMD (both types) and was begging to use them on the US. It is such B.S. that people can’t simply read the history and see the truth. It’s like Benghazi where we were warned and on the spot live and could have saved all lives, instead the libs bring up all the other attacks including the hostage ones to protect an impeachable POTUS / CinC. I agree we shouldn’t have put Boots on the ground, We should have made the area of the Taliban flat, black, and glow in the dark and left the middle east totally, and told everyone, leave us alone or you will meet your 72 virgins or maker long before you planned.

            • Well, behind all the propaganda is a simple truth — one of the core drivers for toppling Saddam is actually the euro currency.

              He darred to challenge the almighty petrodollar. All wars are fought for the same reason, money.

          • She hasn’t ran because she is not a fool. She knows people will remember how she worked to get us into that illegal war based on her lies and innuendo as well as lies of others! Because of that how many have lost their lives or lives of loved ones?

            • Bom: I think Condi is pretty smart. She knew that there was no way a Republican could possibly win in 2008, and she knew that the country would not survive two black presidential candidates. Add her gender on top of that, and she knew the time was not right. Now, she knows the country won’t elect another black person after eight years of a black president. So I think she knows she’s out of luck. She’s 58. The earliest she could run would make her 64 or 68, and that’s the upper limit of presidential prospects.

              And, again, I’m not saying the way things “should be,” I’m just saying that’s the way we are.

            • Bom – Far, Far less lies and deception than Obama, and she followed orders, but more independently, than Clinton. Less lies than the beloved liberal media laid on Bush and his administration. Sorry that rhetoric is mostly B.S. And I would take Bush back the impeachable traitor we have in office now!

            • Bom – No i am actually close to be a slightly conservative Libertarian and actually wish another party would start and maybe call it the Constitution Party – leave personal freedoms alone focus on minimal government but carry a big stick such that “don’t tread on me” will mean exactly that. And stay the hell out of other countries ideologies. I voted for Bush because he was the lesser of evils and constitutional minded had he ever done anything impeachable the liberal media would have forced it. And No, most Republicans are not that dis-satisfied with Bush just want to move on – but when Libs recall all their B.S. i have no problem telling someone to go back and study the real history and not the media history bias.

            • I was not taken in by any media. I watched all the cons and the buildup to war! I listened to the yellow cake and the lies about meetings of Iraq officials with Al Quaida. I also watched while thousands died at our hands on this illegal war based on lies. After all this you still admire Bush? How can you?

            • Bom – I watched all of it as well. It was not an illegal war (either one) – more good ol’ lib re-write – Iraq Sanctioned by the UN and approved by House 297 to 133 & Senate 77 to 23. I agree we should have never have put boots on the ground in either country – War by remote, three countries flat, black, and glow in the dark – Never again have to worry about ANY country attacking us again!!!! Afghanistan was harboring Taliban, later to become formally al Qaeda, and Saddam was an inhumane animal whose soul had gone totally astray and threatened us constantly since Bush 1 kicked his butt for going into Kuwait. Go read the actual history or talk with Vets who lived in the sand over there about the war and native conditions (specifically Sh’ia).

            • Good thing King George didn’t have the bomb or America might still be glowing in the dark. Or was he a bad guy too?

            • I very much dislike the flat ground talk. We can’t kill them all and to talk like that is crazy. Like I tell kids we and they have to learn to get along.
              I come from very different background. My husband (deceased) was 3/4 Anishinabe (Chippewa)and his relatives talk still about the old days. His mom was sent away to ‘Indian School’ at 4-5, first in Oklahoma then the Dakots, where they were supposed to learn how to be white, not allowed to speak their own language, home only for short time in summer.
              She never became white, a strong woman who resisted but lost her language.
              So flat ground is a terrible thing. Perhaps we simply have to butt out of their business? Saddam by all reports was an evil person but did that give us the right to kill him or so many more than he did? I answer with resounding NO!

            • Yeah but one of out Great White Fathers (Bush) said, “What we say goes”. I myself tend to go along with your thoughts and leave them people alone unless you want to do business with them. They got oil and we got guns. (to trade for oil, not to try and just take it)

            • Flat ground speech is not a friendly sort of speech. As if we have the right to make others live the way we think is right is nonsense.

            • Aw Billy – two different scenarios, you know that. We wanted away from Ol’ George not take his country – and if he would have had the bomb, you would still be part of Mexico, and Chicago and New Orleans would still be part of France. Plus the illegals in TX, CO, & CA would be legal and we would be the illegals.

            • I think King George had a lot more right to the land than did our George but he was able to muster up a bunch of rednecks to do the fighting for him so he didn’t have to fork over any of his money in the way of taxes to King George. As for the dumb rednecks who fought and died for George, well they never had to pay any taxes because the didn’t have anything. Like all wars, money.

              Hey wasn’t George W an officer in the King’s army? What do they call those guys who turn coat and fight on the other side? Maybe he resigned his commission first.

            • Billy: The way I understand it, Washington commanded troops of the Virginia militia, but was never offered a position in the British army.

            • George Washington served as an officer in the British Army during the French and Indian Wars from 1752 to 1758. Never received a commission though.

            • Billy: But I don’t think he was actually IN the British Army. I think they just commanded the militia to fight. It’s like today’s “well regulated militia,” the National Guard. The Prez can send ’em halfway around the world, but that doesn’t mean they joined the army.

            • Not exactly Billy – the English came of their own accord, their own money, partnerships with English companies and Crown officials and the British Army came over bearing arms and to take over the Colonies. King George had no more initial claim to East Coast America than did the colonists. But they did have to Arms to control the people. George W was in the state militia not the regular British Army. And actually the “rednecks” were militia supplying their own arms and they had to pay taxes on their land and their products. That’s why we had no income tax for 137 years.

              Billy, is there a reason you and Goethe want to make most Americans and all Republicans bad people?? I started to sign off once but came back. I’m uncomfortable defending my heritage to other Americans. It was easier discussing American policy in Australia, Japan, and Nam than on this blog.

            • George Washington served as an officer in the British Army during the French and Indian Wars from 1752 to 1758.

            • “Real History” as recorded by the news media of the time. Only the winners get to write the History books.

            • Never learned anything new by being in complete agreement. I switch hats even with myself when looking at just about any issue. Try to understand just where the other side is coming from. Easiest way is to take their side for a minute or two.

            • Billy: It would be good if you did that, but you don’t “see just where they’re coming from.” That would mean you are supporting someone. Instead, you work way too hard to look for ways to tear apart what everybody says, on both sides, whether or not legitimately, which is neither open minded, nor helpful.

              I appreciate your humor, but I do get annoyed at the constant kibitzing and nitpicking, when others are working to express their beliefs and feelings honestly.

            • That may be true to some degree but most of what is posted is opinion and opinion is subject to change. On the other hand facts are set in stone and when you argue facts one of you is wrong. Oh I do remember your elephant story and I never call anyone an idiot for their opinion or not seeing a fact in the same manner as I.

            • Billy: But my complaint is that we are trying to have a discussion of issues. People have gone to some effort to outline what they’re trying to say, hoping to get a discussion going, and you take pot-shots, often picking some small detail to ridicule. And after that, the main discussion is derailed.

            • Billy: It’s about logic. Someone tries to build an argument and you’ve often picked one small detail to go off on, and then people forget the original argument. And of course, if a specific thread has been slammed, the person on the other side of the issue often feels that the issue is dead.

              I’m just asking you to try to make positive arguments on either side of an issue, and not take as many cheap shots.

            • Billy: Fer Sher. He’s the only reason BOTH a woman AND a Black man had a chance at this stage in our history.

  3. I disagree with Goethe. Color is not the issue. I would vote for Dr. Carson if he were purple or blue. Dr. Carson is the only person that has stood up to our alleged president, and in a Reaganesque manner, gave a message that needed to be said. It is ashame that between now and November of 2016 that Dr. Carson could not be the Speaker of the House. Boehner is totally in over his head and lacks the Churchill leadership qualities needed in times of crises. The only thing he seems capable of doing is to silence any potential real Republican leaders that might do some good. He has made sure that the secondary leadership under him know how to lick his shoes the same way that he licks Obamas.

            • Sorry you have to read your post right above mine where you state Obama is doing the best he can with what he has to work with. The obstructions can be dealt with by using the veto power. Like FDR used it over 600 times to get what he wanted. Not that I liked FDR as too many good Americans dies under his regime.

            • Bom:

              Billy is saying that of the three or four bills that finally did get through that do-nothing congress, that he should have played his own obstructionist game.

    • I would hope that you would find out as much as you can about him and not go voting on basis of one speech.
      I would want to know who else he has taken oaths to on policy matters as well as what memberships he has. I will never again vote for anyone that has taken an oath to do a job but holds another oath regarding same job far more valuable. I believe since We the People pay the salary We the People and our welfare certainly should come first!

  4. I could go along with Hillary Clinton as she is a very articulate, intelligent person but as far as the President we now have THINK how much he could accomplish IF he had a bi-partisan Congress that was willing to improve the well being of the entire citizenry of the country and not just the few.

    • But she lost to a black politician from Chicago and all she had to do was nothing. Who the hell ever heard of Obama before she got in front of national TV and gave him a stage.

      • Billy: Hillary had nothing going for her in 2008. Most people just knew her as the woman who was humiliated by Monica Lewinski, and did nothing about it. She was relatively new to the senate, and getting that seat seemed like celebrity carpetbagging. She was a woman, and Americans were not ready to vote for a woman for president. But most important of all, I think, was general disgust at the thought of having a Bush-Clinton-Bush-Clinton series of presidencies. How banana republic can you get?

        But that is all changed now. America is opening up to gay marriage,to women in combat,and such. She now has distance from Lewinski. But most of all, she has shown how tough she can be. As noted, in polls, she is not just the most respected woman politician–she’s the most respected politician.

        You think so two-dimensionally in such matters.

        • Hard to argue with success but a black politician from Chicago when you know what it was like when the Clintons were in the White House. Come on now ere knew we were getting Bill back.

            • Okay, a vote for Hillary would be a vote to put her husband back in the White House. Times were good when Bill was running thing. Now you mat argue he set up the bubble but just the facts, times were good. Why debate anyone running and give them name recognition when Hilliary had a monopoly on that. As far as experience goes, she was bringing Bill who was a little ahead of Obama along those lines.

              Lip service is easy to come by in the political world and we all saw the Clinton’s surplus turned into a big deficit when the people listened to Bush. I think she should have just taken a long vacation and said if you want things as they were you have the chance.

            • Billy: I don’t think most people felt that way. The Clinton haters had done a good job on him. That’s why Gore never mentioned him, and didn’t let him campaign. He even picked that pompous idiot, Lieberman to run with him. Lieberman was the main holier-than-thou who apparently had a blow job fetish.

              I think it was really the effectiveness of Hillary as Secretary of State that helped to resurrect Bill. And I don’t think people think of Bill when they think of Hillary anymore. She’s tough and independent. If she were elected, she’d be her own boss.

              Nope. She needed to prove herself. She has earned her bona fides. NOW she can take that vacation.

            • Sam: No.

              Just like McChrystal wasn’t his own boss. Or McAurthur, for that matter. We all work for somebody, and that somebody has a right and responsibility to chart direction.

              But the way you assert yourself is to put in so much energy that you come up with ideas and solutions before anyone else can.

              I think it’s clear that there were few points of disagreement. I don’t think she quit out of any disagreement. I think that (a) she was exhausted, and (b) she’s done that job already. Hillary is not the kind of person who sticks with one office. That’s why I think she would probably not want a seat on the Supreme Court.

              She is the most respected public figure in the country–of either sex or party. That’s saying something.

            • I would think Benghazi would forever come back to bite her in the a44 but just look at the dismal track record the two birds that ran for prez last time around was. Between the two of them they got a whole lot of votes and money to run. So, the worse you treat them the better they like you thus Benghazi might just become a big plus for Hillary.

            • Billy:

              I don’t think Benghazi is going to have any lasting legs. If she had gone there with a gun and shot the place up, yeah, she’d be in trouble. But this was only one of a long list of attacks on American outposts around the world. None of the other attacks got any serious coverage. I still cannot understand why this one became such a flap. I don’t see Benghazi as a major incident. They couldn’t get any traction hanging it on Obama, so they turned to Hillary. I can’t imagine that four years from now anyone will think Benghazi was any different from any of the other 20 attacks we’ve suffered over the years.

            • Goethe Behr: I agree with you and wonder why this one is so inflaming when many many others barely got a mention? I and others believe it is simply another attempt to make our elected President appear to be weak – I think the witch hunt fails and backfires.
              Attacks to US Embassies, facilities etc. during Bush years. First of course we had 911 which was terrible but since that time there have been others and many during the Bush administration as well.

              June 14, 2002, U.S. consulate in Karachi, Pakistan
              Suicide bomber kills 12 and injures 51.

              February 20, 2003, international diplomatic compound in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia
              Truck bomb kills 17.

              February 28, 2003, U.S. consulate in Karachi, Pakistan
              Gunmen on motorcycles killed two consulate guards.

              July 30, 2004, U.S. embassy in Taskkent, Uzbekistan
              Suicide bomber kills two.

              December 6, 2004, U.S. consulate in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia
              Militants stormed and occupied perimeter wall. Five killed, 10 wounded.

              March 2, 2006, U.S. consulate in Karachi, Pakistan
              Suicide car bomber killed four, including a U.S. diplomate directly targeted by the assailants.

              September 12, 2006, U.S. embassy in Damascus, Syria
              Gunmen attacked embassy with grenades, automatic weapons, and a car bomb (though second truck bomb failed to detonate). One killed and 13 wounded.

              January 12, 2007, U.S. embassy in Athens, Greece
              A rocket-propelled grenade was fired at the embassy building. No one was injured.

              July 9, 2008, U.S. consulate in Istanbul, Turkey
              Armed men attacked consulate with pistols and shotguns. Three policemen killed.

              March 18, 2008, U.S. embassy in Sana’a, Yemen
              Mortar attack misses embassy, hits nearby girls’ school instead.

              September 17, 2008, U.S. embassy in Sana’a, Yemen
              Militants dressed as policemen attacked the embassy with RPGs, rifles, grenades and car bombs. Six Yemeni soldiers and seven civilians were killed. Sixteen more were injured.

              So did those attacks (and the 9/11 ones, for that matter) happen because of “perceived American weakness” ? or whatever Graham wants to argue—that our country’s diplomatic missions were targeted because George Bush’s America was perceived as weak?

            • Because this one is very similar to Uncle Douglas being in the penthouse of the Manila Hilton with a “do not disturb” sign on the door for about the same number of hrs that Benghazi was sending the SOS. I take it Hillary had the same sign hung out as Macarthur did. In case of attack, “do not disturb”. Then there was the Pueblo sending the signal for days but no one on the other end of the string.

            • Bom: It’s just not a “new thing” to have locals attack our outposts in distant lands. Let’s go back 30 years:

              1983, April–Our embassy in Beiruit bombed, kills more than 60
              1983, October–Beiruit bomb at Marine barracks kills 241
              1983, December–Our embassy in Kuwait bombed, kills 2, injures 20
              1987, June–Our embassy in Italy bombed

              1990, June–Our embassy in Tel Aviv bombed

              1998, August–Our embassies in Kenyua, Tanzania bombs kill more than 60, 1,000 injured

              2002, June–Our consulate in Karachi attacked, 10 killed, 51 injured
              2003, February–Diplomatic compound in Saudi Arabia bombed, 17 killed
              2003, February–Ourconsulate in Karachi, Pakistan attacked, 2 killed
              2004, July–Our embassy in Ubekistan bombed, 2 killed, 9 injured
              2004, September–Our consulate in Saudi Arabia bombed, 8 killed
              2006, March 2–Ourconsulate in Karachi, Pakistan bombed, 4 killed
              2006, September–Our embassy in Syria, 1 killed, several injured
              2007, January–Our embassy in Athens bombed
              2008, February–Our embassy in Serbia attacked, set afire
              2008, March 18–Our embassy threatened, mortar misses Sana’a, Yemen
              2008, September–Our embassy in Yemen bombed, 16 killed

              The truth is that if we’re going to try to manipulate countries all over the globe, we are going to put people at risk, and there’s no way to protect all of our people, everywhere, all the time.

            • Goethe – How many of those POTUS / CinC watched live and told the the military to “stand down” as it was happening. This one is different because of communications and the whole administration was aware of it immediately – went on for several hours – could have saved all four lives.

            • Sam:

              You know, when you irrationally hate someone, you can believe whatever you want to believe. Let’s say, for the sake of argument, that the president was sitting back in his easy chair, sipping an sweetened ice tea, watching the three-camera production of the events in real time, with back lighting and 3D on Comcast, as if it were any other drama. But let’s look at the facts (what a concept):

              There were four deaths. Two deaths were the guys–standing on a roof–firing into a crowd–out in the open. What good were they really doing? You know what would have saved their lives? Obeying orders.

              The point is that you claim that Obama, personally, told them to stand down.
              And even if that is true, the fact is, if they had done so, they would be alive today.

              The other two deaths were due to smoke inhalation from a defective “safe room” that was not safe. There’s no way anyone could have saved them from bad construction and design.

              It really is time to admit that this was a sad episode, and no amount of saying, “if only” is going to bring them back. And continuing to blather about it is just an excuse to obstruct other issues.

              The real problem is our xenophobic fetish for forcing the rest of the world to do exactly what we dictate, all the time. It puts our people in danger everywhere, and there is no way we can defend all our people, everywhere, all the time.

            • Hey I can understand not getting to Hillary with a leak in the roof or some plant dying but an attack going on for 7 hrs? ? ? Then the follow up goes like Bush telling 7 different stories about what he was doing on 9/11. The game plan always seems the same, cover up. Hillary could not have saved one life had she been notifies the minute it started but she sure as hell could have shown some form of leadership and the fact that she wasn’t even notified …………….. yet another dismal failure for sure.

            • Goethe Behr, you are a wise man. What is behind this irrational hatred of our President Obama and the obstructionistics? It has to be more than the fact he is a democrat or a black man? What would cause a McConnell to say right after he was elected that his main purpose was to make sure he was a one term president? Why would they vote against everything he proposes even to bills they have been for previously?
              I simply do not understand the hate.

            • Bom: It goes back a long way. When I was a kid, I said something against the president, and my parents scolded me. That was the president, and even though he belonged to the other party, he deserved my respect, ex officio. Even up to Ike and JFK, there was general honor.

              I guess hatred began with LBJ, due to Vietnam. It carried on with Nixon. Ford was seen as a goofy interim, so they cut him some slack. Carter wasn’t hated, but he wasn’t respected. Reagan was “the teflon president–nobody said much against him. Poppy Bush was hated by the far right, just because he was not Reagan. Clinton was not really hated, but Bush43 was. The hatred for Obama is just a reaction to the hatred for Bush43. Perhaps that insanity will have run its course, and the next president will be treated with some respect on both sides.

              There is no reason to hatred.

            • Oh I don’t think there is any more hatred there than there is between two football teams. The name of the game is to win.

            • Billy:

              I totally disagree with your equating political hatred with sports hatred. The big difference is that in politics, it’s personal. People may hate a team, but you won’t hear them hating a coach or player.

              However, in politics, it’s visceral. Haters want to see the politician DEAD. It’s ultimate hatred. You don’t see that in any other facet of life. It’s a form of mental illness.

            • I think it was Nixon who said something like, “Ive seen bitter enemies become intimate bed partners when it comes to bring in the votes.”

            • Billy:

              Yeah, but that’s not what we’re talking about.

              When it comes to politics, there ARE no “friends.” (Just as there are NO “friends” among other countries.) People are after what they want, and rightly so. So when Nixon was talking about “intimate bed partners,” he was really talking about FATAL INSTINCT.

              But becoming temporary “enemies” or “pals” when self-interests align is not the same as the visceral, insane hatred we saw for Bush, and now Obama. That’s pathological.

            • Are we talking about individuals within the party or Joe Redneck ? Either way it’s all about “what’s in it for me”

            • Billy:

              No, and that’s the point. People do NOT vote for “what’s in it for me.” As you said in your other post, most vote for the party their family has always voted for. That’s why so many people yell and scream about one idea, and then vote for someone who espouses the exact opposite.

              You are assuming that people care, or look into platforms, and as you said in your other post, they do NOT. You’re arguing both sides of this issue.

              The idea that people vote for giveaway programs is just an excuse to explain why Romney was such a lousy candidate.

            • I can only speak for myself, give me food stamps and a free cell phone and you got my vote as what did the other guy do for me. Now if I’m union, I do what I’m told. If I got a small business I’m GOP. My dad never voted in his life nor did any of my relatives older than me. They all were small business people.

            • Billy – I’m amazed that your older rels don’t vote!!! It is one of the few untouched freedoms left – I mean even dead people vote, illegal immigrants vote – Why wouldn’t your family vote??

            • You put it much more eloquetly then I do but we see it the same. In politics it is much more than a game when lives and living can be at stake. A sports game is just that a game forgotten soon after it is over and perhaps has serious aspecs only for those who play or bet.

            • Fooled me as I find the voters have a very short memory in politics. Most vote based on the guys last name or party with no knowledge of the individual’s platform.

          • Billy Malone, There certainly is hatred or something and it is bringing this country down as a result of it. Ridiculous to compare this countries politics as a game and GOP will NOT win by trying to play it as such! \The consequesnce can be very serious.

            • Hey the GOP looked bad after Nixon but they bounced back. Last election wasn’t exactly
              a landslide either way and look what the GOP put up (a proven loser)

  5. I did and seems many other had also. I do not give my vote blindly and I am not registered to any party. I do look into who is pleading for my vote as do many others.

  6. Before you beat the drums for Doctor Ben Carson, read his biography. Quote “Despite his academic successes, Ben Carson still had a raging temper that translated into violent behavior. One time he tried to hit his mother with a hammer because she disagreed with his choice of clothes. Another time, he inflicted a major head injury on a classmate in a dispute over a locker. In a final incident, Ben nearly stabbed to death a friend after arguing over a choice of radio stations. The only thing that prevented a tragic occurrence was the knife blade broke on the friend’s belt buckle.” I assume the years have helped him to control these character flaws. Having said this, I agreed with several of his points…political correctness does need to go away. PC started in 2000 under another president. The dumbing down of our educational system (as he put it) is absolutely true. Started with No Child Left Behind. A National Prayer Breakfast should be a call for unity between all races and all faiths. The last real eruption at the Prayer Breakfast was when Senator Mark Hatfield, a fellow Republican, called the war in Vietnam a national sin and shame in front of Richard Nixon and Henry Kissinger.

  7. Tess brought up a real issue. Although I thoroughly enjoyed and agreed with Dr. Carson’s speech – If he threw his hat in the ring, leftist MSM Doberman’s would have him for breakfast. Gotta be a newbie with multi-billions behind them and if they can’t win the Media, do a Murdoch and buy ’em. If BHO even allows another election (doubtful), it will be whoever he endorses and the MSM elects.

    BTW – Google Carson on ABC / CBS / NBC and see what’s there.

  8. I find it hard to listen to a doctor who may be serious about health care reform as long as it doesn’t affect his or her pocket book. The problem with health care is what doctors and hospitals charge. Compound that with the amount of money insurance companies think they are entitled to.
    What’s wrong with Medicare for all. Wouldn’t it be nice when you get sick to see a doctor and not worry about how you are going to pay his enormous bill. And why should anyone get rich off of someone’s misery?

    • I don’t think the AMA is going to agree with you. Like any union the AMA wants its members to make more than members in any other union.

  9. Dr Ben Carson surely has forgotten that he and his family were recipients of free public health care in his childhood. He would not be worth millions of dollars if he had fulfilled only one of the Declaration of Geneva (Hippocrates)oath taken by physicians. Re:I will not permit considerations of age, disease or disability, creed, ethnic origin, gender, nationality, political affiliation, race, sexual orientation, social standing or any other factor to intervene between my duty and my patient. Since our constitution was not written on a biblical format,if Dr Carson believes in a flat tax of 10% he should simply say so. In the bible, there are no set percentages. Abraham gave the first tithe as a spontaneous thank you to God. In the New Testament you do not find any command, or even hint, that God is wanting 10% of your net income to go to your church. He wants you to give to others in material ways as you come upon their needs, as well as helping the poor and needy. And you’re right, Billy, the AMA will not agree with me.

  10. As long as it’s not Palin or any other vanilla dude, Ben Carson will be fine. However, If Dr. Carson calls himself a republican say goodbye to the latino and black votes, and he’s not gonna win without these groups.. They are majority democrat supporters now especially if Hillary runs.

    • Can you name one governor that comes close to Palin’s record? Stare with the 12 billion dollar surplus she left the state with.

  11. Have you heard of Rick Perry of Texas. A surplus in the Texas State Treasury and an 11.8 billion Rainy Day Fund. Sounds great but to what avail? Texas ranks dead last (51st) in people who have health insurance, 51st in percentage of adults that have a high school diploma, 49th in education, 6.1 % in unemployment. Texas does rank number 1 in lethal executions. Can Palin come close to this?

    • Just goes to show you what works and what doesn’t. Education and health insurance are a big waste of money but it sure brings in the votes.

      It depend on what the problem is on who you want to elect to solve it. If it’s a big debt and high unemployment, yeah Perry and Palin are at the top. If it’s education and health insurance, we got the right guy in there now. But when the dollar becomes worthless you get a whole new set of problems.

  12. I certainly hope so. The guy was awesome and seemed like exactly the sort of person we need right now leading us. I will be watching for him as the election season nears it’s 2 year warning mark.

  13. We see bigotry from the Republicans every day. So some of you the Republicans would run a black man. I don’t think so and I know the South well. I now live in Texas and it is a Democrat’s dream that the Republicans nominate Perry. The people that are behind those positives you mention won’t be able to talk for him and you remember the debates – that was just a taste.

    • For sure a Black man would have a much better chance on the Democrat’s ticket than on the GOP’s.

Comments are closed.