• 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!

Ben Carson: Liberals Don’t Like Me Because They’re ‘Racist’ (AUDIO)

what's the deal with the republicans having this constant stream of celebrity personalities that crash and burn after 6 months? It almost seems like there is a new flavor every month

Now that's an interesting question!

My take (and it's biased of course) is that the rightwing media feeds conservative politicians who say more and more outrageous things and take extremist views. It doesn't praise the Jon Huntsmans of the world.

So rational statesmenlike politicians in the GOP (like Huntsman) are ignored (or even attacked), and there is an incentive for GOP politicians to become more outrageous and offensive (as it attracts attention, funding, and talkshow gigs), until finally, they go over the line and the general public takes notice and rejects them.

I think that's one element of what's happening to the GOP. What do you think? It's a fascinating phenomenon.
 
Yeah, it takes a lot of eloquence to compare gays to pedophiles and then pretend the issue is "redefining" marriage.
He didn't. He mentioned the two groups in the same sentence. You're the one making the comparison.
 
He didn't. He mentioned the two groups in the same sentence. You're the one making the comparison.

I wonder why he'd mention those particular groups in the same sentence. It couldn't be to compare them or anything

I mean there are so many bestiality groups out there trying to redefine marriage, right?

Another pitiful defense by the tea party league. Try to be honest.

Oh and I love how now it's my fault he mentioned bestiality -- this is such classic tea party memery. It's almost wonderful!
 
Ben Carson: Liberals Don't Like Me Because They're 'Racist' (AUDIO) | TPM LiveWire

Honestly, how can anyone take this man seriously? Sure there are racists on the left. Certainly more than their fair share on the right as well.

When you make inane comments like this man has, and you put yourself out there as he has, expecting not to be criticized on one's position is rather short sighted. Playing the race card just looks shallow.

The guy may well be educated. But he certainly looks stupid.
Dr. Carson is an exceptional surgeon and his life story is beyond inspiring. My mother has, since I can remember, used him as an example of the kind of person people should aspire to be. She would not only tell me about him as a kid, but she consistently used him as an example of excellence when teaching her elementary school students. Because those are the memories I associate him with, I find his new political "persona" to be troubling.

At this point, his political comments seem to be as weak and delusional as most of the most vocal conservatives out there. Instead of taking personal responsibility for his comments about homosexuality among other things, he's playing the victim and saying that people are just "trying to get rid of him" and have no doubt that he has a lot of "yes men" around him confirming his delusional thoughts. Moreover, he grossly overestimates the "threat" that he poses to liberals. Assuming that he means that he poses a threat because he is a black man critical of liberalism, he makes the same mistake with that assumption that many conservatives make: he assumes that black liberals will become conservatives just because black conservatives exist. I find it odd that he would make that mistake of thinking that black liberals are so superficial given how insulting to black people that assumption is.

Bottom line: As a surgeon and man, I'll always respect him. As a pundit, he sounds like every other clueless conservative. /shrug
 
Because...you...care...right? SUUUUUUURE you do. The site is LITTERED with your concern..well..no...actually...the only time you can be bothered to show how down you are is when it involves a CONSERVATIVE black person. Its ok...its just 'you'.

Vance, you really are getting weak. Your argument is vapid. But hey, not at all surprising since you don't even have the stones to admit you're a righty.
 
what's the deal with the republicans having this constant stream of celebrity personalities that crash and burn after 6 months? It almost seems like there is a new flavor every month

You are kidding, I hope?

Ben Carson - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Carson is a member of the American Academy of Achievement, and the Horatio Alger Association of Distinguished Americans. In 2008, the White House awarded Benjamin Carson the Presidential Medal of Freedom, the nation's highest civilian honor.[5] As an internationally renowned physician, Carson has authored over 100 neurosurgical publications, along with three best-selling books, and has been awarded 38 honorary doctorate degrees and dozens of national merit citations.[6]

The man was world renowned and well respected... until the day he dared challenge the sacred agenda. Now he's "the flavor of the month".:roll:
 
It sounds like you're hoping that Conservatives will be courting you for your vote, but you're confusing Conservatives with the establishment Republican leadership. We don't have a "cause."


Or a purpose.
 
Using two groups in the same sentence is not comparing them.

True, but that is not what Carson did.

He equivocated them by claiming they held the same goal, "Changing the definition of marriage". By doing so, he lumped them together despite the only thing they have in common is their regards to sexuality.

Now, I'll concede that he may not have meant that.
 
White Liberals are about as racist as it gets

The minute a black man steps off the liberal plantation he's targeted and attacked

I guess that would explain your racism as it appears you claim you are very liberal.
 
Let's not. I have no interest in a right wing fish wrap's opinion. But thanks anyway.

No, lets. I insist.

A Modern Timeline of Liberals Claiming That Opposition to Obama = Racism
Matt Welch|Jun. 8, 2012 6:55 pm

08/23/08: Jacob Weisberg, Slate: "Racism is the only reason Obama might lose."

08/07/09: Paul Krugman, New York Times: "[T]he driving force behind the town hall mobs is probably the same cultural and racial anxiety that's behind the 'birther' movement, which denies Mr. Obama's citizenship."

09/13/09: Jimmy Carter, MSNBC: "I think an overwhelming portion of the intensely demonstrated animosity toward President Barack Obama is based on the fact that he is a black man[.]"

01/19/10: Keith Olbermann, MSNBC: "[T]he Tea Party movement [is] perhaps the saddest collection of people who don't want to admit why they really hate since the racists of the South in the sixties insisted they were really just concerned about states' rights....n Scott Brown we have an irresponsible, homophobic, racist, reactionary, ex-nude model, teabagging supporter of violence against woman and against politicians with whom he disagrees."

03/27/10: Frank Rich, New York Times: "How curious that a mob fond of likening President Obama to Hitler knows so little about history that it doesn't recognize its own small-scale mimicry of Kristallnacht....The conjunction of a black president and a female speaker of the House — topped off by a wise Latina on the Supreme Court and a powerful gay Congressional committee chairman — would sow fears of disenfranchisement among a dwindling and threatened minority in the country no matter what policies were in play."

10/19/10: The National Association for the Advancement of Colored People: "Tea Party ranks [are] permeated with concerns about race and national identity....Tea Party organizations have given platforms to anti-Semites, racists, and bigots. Further, hard-core white nationalists have been attracted to these protests, looking for potential recruits and hoping to push these (white) protesters towards a more self-conscious and ideological white supremacy."

01/25/11: State Rep. Jim Moran (D-Virgina), Al-Hurra: "[GOP success in mid-term elections] happened for the same reason the Civil War happened in the United States. It happened because the Southern states, the slaveholding states, didn’t want to see a president who was opposed to slavery. In this case, I believe, a lot of people in the United States don’t want to be governed by an African-American, particularly one who is liberal, who wants to spend money and who wants to reach out to include everyone in our society."

08/22/11: Rep. Andre Carson (D-Indiana): "Some of these folks in Congress would love to see us as second-class citizens. Some of them in Congress right now of this tea party movement would love to see you and me...hanging on a tree."

03/27/12: Dahlia Lithwick, Slate: "And now we know the [Supreme] court is worried about freedom: the freedom to live like it's 1804."

06/04/12: Katrina vanden Heuvel, The Washington Post: "By attacking labor unions, flooding Wisconsin with outside cash and trying to cleanse the electorate of people who don't look, earn or think like him, [Wisconsin Gov. Scott] Walker has taken aim at more than a single campaign cycle or a series of policies; his real targets are the pillars of American progressivism itself."

06/08/12: Cassandra Jackson, Huffington Post: "[T]he war on affordable health care is a war on Blacks and Latinos."

And now, full circle, comes today's other installment, from our old friend Charles P. Pierce in Esquire magazine:

In so many ways, the path [Barack Obama] has to walk to re-election is similar to the path he has had to walk through his life. It was hard not to notice the subtext present in all those earnest warnings about hurting the fee-fees of our financial titans. The president was stepping out of his place. The president was being uppity again.

This is also the case with what is perhaps the most noxious idea out there: that Barack Obama "failed" in his promise to "bring the country together," and that he is now — Glorioski! — campaigning like he wants to be president all over again. He is engaging in politics. Mother of mercy, I swear David Brooks is just going to break down and go all to pieces on PBS some evening over the president's betrayal of his role as the country's anodyne black man and, of course, his upcoming role as black martyr to incivility and discord. It is his duty, dammit, to be all the things that people like Brooks wanted him to be so that he could lose, nobly, and then the country could go back to its rightful owners.

Still no convincing explanation for how the racist Teabagging Republicans could have fallen so hard for Herman Cain, but I think the most salient point is one noted by (gasp!) David Brooks: Barack Obama is consistently much more popular than his policies. Mitt Romney has been consistently less popular than his. That's a mighty odd way for a country to express its racism.

Two bits from me from the racially contentious late summer of 2009: "The Race War That Isn't," and "Are Tea Parties Racist?"


I even saved you a click so you didn't have to strain yourself.
 
Wow. Ben Carson offers some disparaging commentary about Obamacare and suddenly he's the left's new public enemy #1. Whod'a saw that one coming?:roll:

He's black, he's articulate, and he tells it like it is. He scares you. Plain and simple.

Oh here we go again. Please, run him for POTUS. Please. And while you're at it, why not put Sarah on the ticket. I'm shaking in my boots here.

You righties are like the Black Knight. (no pun here)
 
No, lets. I insist.



I even saved you a click so you didn't have to strain yourself.

Meanwhile Carson compared gays to pedophiles and pretended he was defending marriage. Then he pretended he didn't make the comparison. Then you did too.

Oh the disingenuous arguments of conservatives. Words mean nothing to them.
 
I guess that would explain your racism as it appears you claim you are very liberal.

Nah I'm merely leading by example and showing lilly white racist liberals like you that it's ok for Black people to have views that differ from your own

Ummm yes he did. Try reading the OP

Nope

You're engaging in emotional reasoning and racism. Shame on you.
 
The man was world renowned and well respected...

You left off Bible Thumper. Once you cross the line into politics and begin to assume it's ok to inflict your religious views on others, you are open to criticism. He's reaping what he has sown.
 
Irony.

“a well-established, fundamental pillar of society and no group, be they gays, be they NAMBLA, be they people who believe in bestiality — it doesn’t matter what they are. They don’t get to change the definition.”

Ummm yes he did. Try reading the OP

If you think this sentence is a comparison then you need to work on your reading comprehension.
 
True, but that is not what Carson did.

He equivocated them by claiming they held the same goal, "Changing the definition of marriage". By doing so, he lumped them together despite the only thing they have in common is their regards to sexuality.

Now, I'll concede that he may not have meant that.

The man is clearly very intelligent. He obviously knew precisely what he was saying.
 
The man is clearly very intelligent. He obviously knew precisely what he was saying.

And you're clearly not, because you don't understand what he was saying.
 
Meanwhile Carson compared gays to pedophiles and pretended he was defending marriage. Then he pretending he didn't make the comparison. Then you did too.

Oh the disingenuous arguments of conservatives.

I think you're forgetting the context of the comparison and his main point, that he doesn't think that anyone has the right to change the definition of marriage. I think his other examples were poor, but it would've made no difference if he said whether it be "homosexuals, polygamists, polyamorists, or what have you." His point was he doesn't think anyone should change the definition of marriage, regardless, including homosexuals. I may disagree with him over that point, but let's not twist it into something else.
 
I am smart enough to realize he's playing your ass. Hook, line and sinker.

Sort of how your liberal Congressmen and women have been playing you all along? ;)
 
Back
Top Bottom