• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Dr. Carson: Obamacare The Worst Thing That Has Happened Since Slavery

Nobody said that, you just made that assumption. Which makes you the racist for having that thought!

See, what was actually being said is that the Republicans keep picking crazy black men to show off. If you guys would pick a sane person they wouldn't be saying that. Of course, black or white, the GOP seems to have a lot of crazies in the primary every time.

Oh, I see. "They" are picked... they couldn't possibly be advocates of their own views and have earned a spot in the limelight. Racist.
 
Aren't all taxes "usurpation of labor" by your definition?

And, actually, if you want a smaller "usurpation of labor," you should support single-payer or some other form of universal health care. Virtually every country with such a system spends fewer tax dollars per person than we do. That's right, we actually spend more taxes on health care than Canada. And you still have to pay insurance premiums on top of that!

So if you hate taxes so much, let's reduce the need for them.

Or... how about we keep the government and collection of taxes completely out of the health insurance business. If the poor need health care, lets provide for that and leave the rest of the market alone.
 
An interesting observation that can be somewhat compared to today's situation. A lot of slaves didn't know any better and were content to have their master provide for them and make decisions for them. They accepted the terms and conditions by choice or force. A lot of slaves knew better and were anything but content to have his master provide and make decisions for him. They did not accept being forced to accept those terms and conditions and ran off or rebelled. In either case, the slave was oppressed and he was prevented from making decisions in his own best interest unless he freed himself from the shackles of forced behavior.

Along comes Obamadon'tcare. The government is not forced to mandate the terms and conditions of a persons health care but it did and now it's subjects are forced to accept them. Does that ring a bell? It should. But the very second someone objects to an increasingly all powerful government that forces it's subjects by mandates they are called "crazy", "stupid", "lunatics" and such by those in favor of people being forced to comply with it's mandates.

Dr. Carson hit the nail on the head with his remarks.

I wonder if slave masters used demeaning language to intimidate their slaves?
 
[/QUOTE]
One case does not a fanasty real. You have to show large numbers. You can't. Neither can he.
Gave you three incontrovertible cases...Grant has provided even more proof...how much more do you require? There will never be a sufficient amount as you have already imbibed of the sacred kool-aide...

I am not a miracle worker nor an eye doctor... So I certainly cannot make the blind see. First of all you have to open your eyes, then you have to actually want to see. You fulfill none of those requirements...so I would recommend the eye doctor, as I am pretty sure you do not go for the miracles thing...but then again, the boob did get reelected.

BTW, this isn't a consensus thing either, one is either a racist, or one exhibits racist tendencies, or one doesn't, this isn't an election or a popularity contest.
 
You'd trust a Community Organizer" though, huh?

How does his biography compare with Obama's? Or Hillary's for that matter. Ben Carson - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The Left will start demonizing everyone just in case one of them might be a Presidential candidates. That's why you get stuck with a jackass like Barrack Obama.

Nice rant.
 
Gave you three incontrovertible cases...Grant has provided even more proof...how much more do you require? There will never be a sufficient amount as you have already imbibed of the sacred kool-aide...

I am not a miracle worker nor an eye doctor... So I certainly cannot make the blind see. First of all you have to open your eyes, then you have to actually want to see. You fulfill none of those requirements...so I would recommend the eye doctor, as I am pretty sure you do not go for the miracles thing...but then again, the boob did get reelected.

BTW, this isn't a consensus thing either, one is either a racist, or one exhibits racist tendencies, or one doesn't, this isn't an election or a popularity contest.

Three? Say you got 10 or even 20. That would not be enough. You have to show something much larger.


btw, we moved from Obama to there being reverse racism. You gave nothing at all on Obama that holds up.
 
Oh, I see. "They" are picked...

Actually, yes. That's how elections and primaries work. You "pick" a candidate to represent you. Obama was picked. So was Romney. So was McCain. So is everybody who makes it beyond the whole "research committee" phase. They are picked by voters. By the looks of it and how sacred Mr Carson's Gospel seems to be to Republicans this early in the race, some Republicans are already picking him to represent their views - crazy as they may be.

That said: He is the GOPs new Alan Keyes.

He is their minority representation in a race that will be led by the usual White-Christian-Anglo-Saxon faces. Palin, Cruz and even Rubio. By 2016, nobody on the right will remember Carson as anything other than that black dude they "would" have voted for if it wasn't for all the other white people who joined the race (and if their largest voting block - white males - had allowed it).

He'll then join the ranks of Keyes (R), Cain(R), Jackson(D), Sharpton(D) - all lazy attempts by white party leader to present a reasonable black voice. However, as we all know none of them will even come reach the kneecaps of electability that was presented by Obama.

The last electable black people before Obama? Douglass(R), Taylor(R)) and Chrisholm(D).
 
Last edited:
Actually, yes. That's how elections and primaries work. You "pick" a candidate to represent you. Obama was picked. So was Romney. So was McCain. So is everybody who makes it beyond the whole "research committee" phase. They are picked by voters. By the looks of it and how sacred Mr Carson's Gospel seems to be to Republicans this early in the race, some Republicans are already picking him to represent their views - crazy as they may be.

Question: Do you know how our Republic's electoral system works?

Because you seem to be yelling out racism just for ****s and giggles.

sure, primary votes is exactly what you were talking about. If I were you I'd be backtracking too. Since I've been posting on this forum for about a month or so I've been accused of discrimination many times because of my traditional view of marriage. Just thought I'd make sport of you to show how easy it is. A little more care in what you say about black conservatives may be the answer...
 
sure, primary votes is exactly what you were talking about. If I were you I'd be backtracking too.

As I didn't even make the "picking" statement, I'm not backtracking. I clarified his statement for you. I said Republicans get behind a black man. You do understand what "get behind" means right?

Since I've been posting on this forum for about a month or so I've been accused of discrimination many times because of my traditional view of marriage.

Maybe because you sound, act, and present yourself as a bigot. :shrug:

ust thought I'd make sport of you to show how easy it is.

Considering you've never heard the expression "get behind someone" - do you understand the expression "delusions of grandeur"?

A little more care in what you say about black conservatives may be the answer...

They're picked by Republicans. The ones picked in the last 10 years seem to be downright crazy.

Lolz?

 
Three? Say you got 10 or even 20. That would not be enough. You have to show something much larger.


btw, we moved from Obama to there being reverse racism. You gave nothing at all on Obama that holds up.
So all there is left to ask, which color of kool-aide do you prefer?
 
I can accept your analogy from the perspective of someone who is held in bondage wanting to break free -vs- those who just settle for forced servitude. But again, this is why I'd much rather have had the CLASS Act over what we have now.

But I'd never suggest that a slave "knew better". Fear and ignorance ruled them, not knowledge. Thus, the risks for freedom for some was too great just as was the odds of gaining said freedom. Therefore, "staying put" was preferable to any alternative including death.

So you think something is better than Obamadon'tcare but you go along with it because ...the government knows better than you?

Lot of slaves knew better, that's why they ran off.
 
As I didn't even make the "picking" statement, I'm not backtracking. I clarified his statement for you. I said Republicans get behind a black man. You do understand what "get behind" means right?



Maybe because you sound, act, and present yourself as a bigot. :shrug:



Considering you've never heard the expression "get behind someone" - do you understand the expression "delusions of grandeur"?



They're picked by Republicans. The ones picked in the last 10 years seem to be downright crazy.

Lolz?



Anyone at all can click back a couple of times and see where you wrote "picked", so now instead of just making sport of your racist (although probably unintentional) remarks, I can now make sport of your dishonesty too! And no, It doesn't take delusions of grandeur, it is in fact quite easy to restate what you have clearly written in your own words.
 
Actually, yes. That's how elections and primaries work. You "pick" a candidate to represent you. Obama was picked. So was Romney. So was McCain. So is everybody who makes it beyond the whole "research committee" phase. They are picked by voters.

Not by voters in the Democrat Party. Clinton got more votes than Obama in the 2008 primaries. it was close but she did have more people vote for her.
 

No matter what one thinks of the ACA, and it has shortcomings and potential risks (some of which won't be known until concrete empirical data becomes available), the suggestion that it is the "worst thing" to impact the nation since slavery is historically illiterate. Dr. Carson's rhetoric only demonstrates anew the reality that superior performance in one field does not necessarily equate to superior performance in another field. He is a talented and successful neurosurgeon. One can't say the same with respect to his role in the political arena.
 
Nice try, but being a brain surgeon isn't a free ticket to expertise in every other department. Listening to his hyperbole on healthcare with the tag line "He's a brain surgeon!" sounds a little too similar to those anti-flu vitamin C tablets sold in supermarkets that have the words "invented by a school teacher!" written on the box. It sounds kind of credible for a second until you realize it means nothing.

By your own system of judgement, by what merit or expertise are you able to legitimately call bull**** on Dr. Carson's statements on Obamacare and slavery? Unless you are an expert in both, I don't see how your remarks meet your own evaluation standards.

Well, unless you are an expert in bull****. In that case, I'd concede the topic.
 
No matter what one thinks of the ACA, and it has shortcomings and potential risks (some of which won't be known until concrete empirical data becomes available), the suggestion that it is the "worst thing" to impact the nation since slavery is historically illiterate. Dr. Carson's rhetoric only demonstrates anew the reality that superior performance in one field does not necessarily equate to superior performance in another field. He is a talented and successful neurosurgeon. One can't say the same with respect to his role in the political arena.

Please elaborate.
 
He's definitely a smart guy. The right wing rage machine is big money. A couple of "Liberals are the devil and destroy the world" books and he'll make more than he ever made as a neurosurgeon. Not to mention maybe a Fox news show or a radio station.
 
Please elaborate.

His assessment ignores a number of things that have been far worse: WWI, WWII, the Great Depression, etc. All of those events either led to substantial loss of American lives and/or significant sacrifice/hardship. The ACA does not begin to compare in terms of the economic and social impact of those events. To ignore such consequential historical events and their impact on the U.S. amounts to historical illiteracy, as one is not discussing minor footnotes or ambiguous nuance over which there is a lot of disagreement.
 
Back
Top Bottom