2016 Presidential Horse Race

[kmoose]

I figured as much as I stated earlier. He is remarkably brilliant and extremely knowledgeable and presents very strong factually supported videos. But, then you remain willfully ignorant because you don't want to listen. Willful ignorance is addressed in the videos. Those videos are incredibly full of everything you would ever want to know about why this post is completely wrong. You can lead a horse to water.....

There is so much wrong here that you could just self correct your self by watching those videos. Literally every word you wrote here is addressed and shown to be incorrect in those videos. Oh well....

I didn't say that I wouldn't ever watch them. I just said that I am not going to waste my entire afternoon, today, watching them.

There is so much wrong with the sheeple that follow every word that these socialists preach, and allow themselves to be hypnotized into thinking that corporations are somehow to blame for the predicament that we have voted ourselves into. If you just listen to me, I address every fallacy there is in political thinking. But you can choose to remain a mindless drone..........

 

[Cackalacky]

I didn't say that I wouldn't ever watch them. I just said that I am not going to waste my entire afternoon, today, watching them.

Yet you made that entire previous post....smh.

There is so much wrong with the sheeple that follow every word that these socialists preach, and allow themselves to be hypnotized into thinking that corporations are somehow to blame for the predicament that we have voted ourselves into. If you just listen to me, I address every fallacy there is in political thinking. But you can choose to remain a mindless drone..........

I am hardly a mindless drone when it comes to politics though which is why I take people who deny reality seriously especially if they want to make policies that affect me. I appreciate the personal insult though.

I think the Republican platform is no platform at all and they have zero policies that are intended to improve things on many accounts and as perceived from various perspectives. I strongly feel none of the republican candidates are worth anything and offer zilch. I pay attention very much, I just do not see or hear anything worthy of my vote.

I think you can find from previous posts that I don't like politicians at all and that on the grand scheme I fall in line with a more federalist position similar to Whiskeyjack's, except I think there is a stronger moral high ground in taking care of people within society than leaving them on their own. Obviously there are competing plans to be debated. I don''t think you will find me as one of the socialist "sheeple" though. lol.

 

[kmoose]

I am hardly a mindless drone when it comes to politics though which is why I take people who deny reality seriously especially if they want to make policies that affect me. I appreciate the personal insult though.

You reap what you sow. I'm not a horse you led to water, or willfully ignorant, either. I appreciate your observations, though.

You deny the reality that no society can, nor should it, be set up so that everyone is equal. Necessity is the mother of invention, after all. If everyone is guaranteed a certain level of comfort, then the need to stand out from the crowd in order to advance is diminished, and so, therefore, creativity is stifled. But that has nothing to do with Ben Carson's views on Creationism. I don't think Carson is unwilling to accept Science. He IS a doctor, after all. And medicine is very scientific, in case you missed that little tidbit. I think Carson's faith is stronger than mine, and (apparently) certainly stronger than yours. He believes in the story of Creation from the Bible. So what? That doesn't mean he is going to start praying over kids with cancer, in the belief that God will cure them and that they don't need modern medicine.

 

[MJ12666]

The first series of questions asked of Hillary was whether or not she changes positions depending on who she is talking to. The moderator did not like her answer and pressed her for a better one. And she answered again.

The first question for the GOP candidates was "what is your biggest weakness?" That is sch a softball question that interviewers don't even ask it anymore.

Sanders first question was about how he hopes to win given that he is a socialist. It is not like CNN came out of the gate lobbing softballs. The candidates answered the questions -- they didn't cry foul because the questions were not fair. Bernie explained how he proposed to pay for his plans. Perhaps you did not like his answers and would have preferred him to chastise the moderator for the ignorance of the question instead of giving an answer. I prefer an actual answer during a debate and not a rant about how the media is unfair. Also, correcting a statement that is false and not believing a plan will work are two really different things.

Sorry for not responding sooner, but I needed to work in order to help fund our welfare programs.

I am not going to argue the difficulty of the questions but you need to admit that the tone of the moderators was significantly different. For example, if BS was asked the socialist question at the recent Republican debate it would have been:

"Bernie, Argentina and Venezuela have socialist governments along the lines of your socialist philosophy. Under these policies both countries have double digit unemployment, hyper inflation, rolling blackouts, and food and gas rationing. The deceased former president of Venezuela even had to go to Cuba to seek medical treatment that he could not get in Venezuela. How in the world do you expect to convince the American people to vote for you and your socialist programs if they will drive the US economy deeper in the gutter than it already is? I think you have a better chance of beaming yourself off this stage to Caracas then getting these policies past congress!"

Actually this is a pretty good question. I wish I could be a moderator at the next Democratic debate.

 

[GoIrish41]

He's going to be like John Larroquette's character on The Brink -- the ambassador who believes he is Gods chosen to lead the world to the rapture.

Seriously, if anyone hasn't seen that show, it is brilliant.

 

[MJ12666]

Yeah, putting someone who believes that the end of times is imminent and desirable in a position where they could actually bring about the end of times is a little bit concerning. That being said, for the most part I don't really care about what someone believes, but I do care a lot if they're willing to ignore an overwhelming scientific consensus on an issue of global import.

May I suggest you read the following, it probably will not change your mind but you should not be so closed minded as to not consider alternative views.

newsbusters.org/.../press-ignoring-news-global-warming...

www.wsj.com/.../the-unsettling-anti-science-certitud.

 

[Cackalacky]

You reap what you sow. I'm not a horse you led to water, or willfully ignorant, either. I appreciate your observations, though.

You deny the reality that no society can, nor should it, be set up so that everyone is equal. Necessity is the mother of invention, after all. If everyone is guaranteed a certain level of comfort, then the need to stand out from the crowd in order to advance is diminished, and so, therefore, creativity is stifled. But that has nothing to do with Ben Carson's views on Creationism. I don't think Carson is unwilling to accept Science. He IS a doctor, after all. And medicine is very scientific, in case you missed that little tidbit. I think Carson's faith is stronger than mine, and (apparently) certainly stronger than yours. He believes in the story of Creation from the Bible. So what? That doesn't mean he is going to start praying over kids with cancer, in the belief that God will cure them and that they don't need modern medicine.

Reap what I sow???? You made and continue to make a series of factually incorrect statements. I provided you a source, several in fact, with information to correct your inaccuracies. I dont want you claiming things that are demonstrably false. I am trying to help you. That's fine... whatever.

This last part .... Jesus.... forget it...

 

[kmoose]

Reap what I sow???? You made and continue to make a series of factually incorrect statements. I provided you a source, several in fact, with information to correct your inaccuracies. I dont want you claiming things that are demonstrably false. I am trying to help you. That's fine... whatever.

This last part .... Jesus.... forget it...

Yes............ reap what you sow. You shouldn't complain about people getting sarcastic with you, when they do so in response to your sarcasm.

Your concern for me is noted, and truly illustrated by your last part.

 

[Cackalacky]

Yes............ reap what you sow. You shouldn't complain about people getting sarcastic with you, when they do so in response to your sarcasm.

Your concern for me is noted, and truly illustrated by your last part.

I am not being sarcastic. I was being honest. I understand it sounds bad but it is what it is. I did give you plenty if information. Hopefully you check it out.

As to the last part its clear you have no interest in reasonable dialogue. I gave you plenty of info to work off of. You said you weren't gonna waste your time today. Fine... check it out when you can. My points follow from the availability of that info and it will correct your factually incorrect statements if you choose to view it.. There is no point in going around in circles if you are not gonna use that info.

 

[kmoose]

I am not being sarcastic. I was being honest. I understand it sounds bad but it is what it is. I did give you plenty if information. Hopefully you check it out.

As to the last part its clear you have no interest in reasonable dialogue. I gave you plenty of info to work off of. You said you weren't gonna waste your time today. Fine... check it out when you can. My pointsnfollow from the availability of that info. There is no point in going around in circles if you are not gonna use that info.

Will the videos explain to me how something that contains a "missing link" is unequivocally fact?

I don't need to define unequivocal here, do I? Because there certainly appears to be room for doubt about a "fact" with a missing link? What I WILL stipulate as fact is that we developed from apes. But it is not "an unequivocal fact" that apes evolved from some other prehistoric species. Hence the "missing link".

As to "the last part"..... you said you were concerned about him because he refused to accept scientific facts. All I said was that, just because his faith in Genesis (the book in the Bible, not Phil Collins, Peter Gabriel, Mike Rutherford, et al) is so strong that he chooses that explanation over some "missing link", that doesn't mean that he will automatically ignore ALL scientific evidence, in favor of his faith........

 

[Cackalacky]

Will the videos explain to me how something that contains a "missing link" is unequivocally fact?

I don't need to define unequivocal here, do I? Because there certainly appears to be room for doubt about a "fact" with a missing link? What I WILL stipulate as fact is that we developed from apes. But it is not "an unequivocal fact" that apes evolved from some other prehistoric species. Hence the "missing link".

As to "the last part"..... you said you were concerned about him because he refused to accept scientific facts. All I said was that, just because his faith in Genesis (the book in the Bible, not Phil Collins, Peter Gabriel, Mike Rutherford, et al) is so strong that he chooses that explanation over some "missing link", that doesn't mean that he will automatically ignore ALL scientific evidence, in favor of his faith........

Yes it does. Very emphatically even. And with lots of strong evidence. Again....for the last time watch the videos...otherwise you continue to state blatantly false statements. And your sarcasm is boring.

 

[kmoose]

Yes it does. Very emphatically even. And with lots of strong evidence. Again....for the last time watch the videos...otherwise you continue to state blatantly false statements. And your sarcasm is boring.

And yet, you keep reading and responding to it. I will watch the videos. But does your silence on Ben Carson not necessarily ignoring ALL science mean that you agree?

 

[Cackalacky]

And yet, you keep reading and responding to it. I will watch the videos. But does your silence on Ben Carson not necessarily ignoring ALL science mean that you agree?

So are you trolling me then because I am being quite honest in everything so far.

Quite the opposite actually. It's funny really... doctors don't have much learning in the realm of evolutionary biology. Pre med and medical programs do not require any evolutionary biology classes, maybe one semester if at all. They should but they don't typically so the fact he is a neurosurgeon lends very little justification to his "non-belief" in facts that contradict his dogma. His statements about his non belief and his justifications presented on his own tell much more than the fact he could fix brains.

 

[kmoose]

So are you trolling me then because I am being quite honest in everything so far.

Quite the opposite actually. It's funny really... doctors don't have much learning in the realm of evolutionary biology. Pre med and medical programs do not require any evolutionary biology classes, maybe one semester if at all. They should but they don't typically so the fact he is a neurosurgeon lends very little justification to his "non-belief" in facts that contradict his dogma. His statements about his non belief and his justifications presented on his own tell much more than the fact he could fix brains.

No, I was not trolling you. But you still haven't addressed the assertion that his belief in Creation is not necessarily going to lead him to abandon ALL science in favor of his religion. And, evolutionary biology is not the only science in the world. Medical training is very heavy on science.

 

[Polish Leppy 22]

Let's have a debate moderator ask this question to the only 2 Dems in the race and the top 3 Republicans as of now: if not for government how would you have accumulated your wealth and power?

Hillary: Oh gash, my husband.

Sanders: I once made a 30 minute documentary about a socialist hero of mine. Does that count? (true story)


Carson: I would go back to being a neursosurgeon.

Trump: I would continue running my empire.

Rubio: I have my JD so I'll go practice law.

 

[Cackalacky]

No, I was not trolling you. But you still haven't addressed the assertion that his belief in Creation is not necessarily going to lead him to abandon ALL science in favor of his religion. And, evolutionary biology is not the only science in the world. Medical training is very heavy on science.

No one said he would abandon all science????? He denies evolution which is supported by EVERY facet of science that has to do with biology and biochemistry and geology. He chooses to do so because of his dogma. He quite clearly dismisses paleontology, and other disciplines because it does not conform to his dogma. That is irrational at a minimum. I don't need to say any more. Watch the videos. It's all in there.

 

[Buster Bluth]

Let's have a debate moderator ask this question to the only 2 Dems in the race and the top 3 Republicans as of now: if not for government how would you have accumulated your wealth and power?

Hillary: Oh gash, my husband.

Sanders: I once made a 30 minute documentary about a socialist hero of mine. Does that count? (true story)


Carson: I would go back to being a neursosurgeon.

Trump: I would continue running my empire.

Rubio: I have my JD so I'll go practice law.

Clinton's JD from Yale has disintegrated or something?

Your stupid measurement of the candidates is a failure.

 

[pkt77242]

Let's have a debate moderator ask this question to the only 2 Dems in the race and the top 3 Republicans as of now: if not for government how would you have accumulated your wealth and power?

Hillary: Oh gash, my husband.

Sanders: I once made a 30 minute documentary about a socialist hero of mine. Does that count? (true story)


Carson: I would go back to being a neursosurgeon.

Trump: I would continue running my empire.

Rubio: I have my JD so I'll go practice law.

You do realize that Hillary has a JD from Yale, right?

ETA: Damn Buster beat me.

 

[Booslum31]

I voted my ass off today.

 

[Buster Bluth]

You do realize that Hillary has a JD from Yale, right?

ETA: Damn Buster beat me.

And Bernie taught at multiple schools, including Harvard, for a bit between being Mayor of Burlington and Representative.

 

[IrishJayhawk]

Let's have a debate moderator ask this question to the only 2 Dems in the race and the top 3 Republicans as of now: if not for government how would you have accumulated your wealth and power?

Hillary: Oh gash, my husband.

Sanders: I once made a 30 minute documentary about a socialist hero of mine. Does that count? (true story)


Carson: I would go back to being a neursosurgeon.

Trump: I would continue running my empire.

Rubio: I have my JD so I'll go practice law.

You're really bad at this.

 

[Polish Leppy 22]

Give her credit for the JD. When is the last time she worked in a firm? 1979. And JD aside, she is Bill Clinton's wife. She wouldn't have to work, unless it's another cushy job on the board of Wal Mart, which most liberals loathe.

 

[Polish Leppy 22]

And Bernie taught at multiple schools, including Harvard, for a bit between being Mayor of Burlington and Representative.

Hahahaha where and what was he teaching? This should be impressive given his education never went beyond a BS in Political Science.

 

[pkt77242]

Give her credit for the JD. When is the last time she worked in a firm? 1979. And JD aside, she is Bill Clinton's wife. She wouldn't have to work, unless it's another cushy job on the board of Wal Mart, which most liberals loathe.

I don't think that Rubio has ever worked for a law firm.

 

[pkt77242]

Hey bud, not aware of the Christian Post website, may be a good one for all I know. And like you said, his statements were pretty clear from all I have seen. I think part of the issue here is why would Carson say Satan did anything? For someone like Carson who is part of the Christian community to suggest that there is a spiritual force of evil and it is a personal one, i.e. Satan, the Devil, the Enemy, and that evil being influenced someone to do something, is not at all out of the norm with the basic tenants of Christianity (obviously I recognize you and others may strongly disagree with the reality of spiritual evil). A large part of it comes back to ones worldview. So let me briefly share a portion of the Christian worldview, as it relates to Carson's comments.

A vast majority of all humanity through all recorded history has and does believe in a supreme spiritual being of good, or a god of some sort or another. And many of those people who make up the majority of humanity also believe in some sort or another of spiritual evil. A large segment of the Christian population worldwide believes there is a personal spiritual being known as Satan, the Devil who usurped the place of God in this world through the decision of humanity to do the exact thing God said not to do, which in affect means he was no longer their God, but Satan became their god bringing sin, death and evil of all sorts into this world through humanity. This is at least part of the Christian doctrine of the Fall of humanity. A fall from a place of reigning with God on this earth as he originally intended. So for Christians today worldwide and Christians throughout recorded history, many have understood Satan as the enemy of all of humanity, especially the enemy of Christians. He tempts, deceives, and influences everyone including Christians, unless they yield themselves to the graces of God, regularly trusting and depending on God as their God. Which is the way we were originally meant to live with God, in dependence upon him as God, instead of being "gods" of our own lives, which ironically only leads one to a place where Satan is their god.

So, Ben Carson would acknowledge that Satan has influenced him to act, think, say or do things that are not in line with the character of the God of the Christian Bible. This would not absolve him or anyone else from their cooperation with Satan. However, it also does not negate Satan's responsibility in seeking the ruin of others.

I say all that to say, him suggesting in whatever form he did that Satan influenced Charles Darwin to posit the theory of evolution is not all that bizarre or weird as you and others here have suggested. In fact, in the statements you linked of Dr. Carson he himself explains why it would sound like nonsense to those who do not believe in a god or in spiritual evil.

"Well you wouldn't understand it, no one would understand it unless they believe that there were forces of good and forces of evil. If you don't believe that, then that would be a nonsensical statement to you." (Ben Carson on his statements of evolution being a product of Satan's influence).

So for me the roots of opposition to his statement that Satan influenced the theory of evolution starts with a basic worldview difference between Christians (and people of faith in general) and materialists or people who do not believe in a god, or spiritual evil. Regardless of the content of the theory of evolution, some would call him irrational and crazy regardless because he believes there is an evil spiritual being bent on humanities ruin and who seeks to usurp the place of God.

Just my thoughts. I know this does not address the theory of evolution specifically, but that could be a lengthy conversation (and maybe not one best suited for this thread). I will be glad to talk more about that later. Got to go visit a 96 year old women who just got put in a nursing home and needs someone to be present with her. Below is one of the articles some quoted, which I shared the Carson quote above from.

Read more at Ben Carson Says Darwin's Theory of Evolution Influenced by 'Forces of Evil,' But Believes in Micro Evolution

I guess that my problem with that is that Carson's worldview is directly contradicted by a fact (Evolution is a fact), and instead of incorporating that fact into his worldview, he claims that the Devil is to blame, thus he doesn't have to change his worldview. That doesn't not hit me as behavior that I would want from someone who would be President (I believe that the ability to change ones opinion to fit the facts, not attack the facts to fit ones opinion is important for leadership positions). In fact it reminds me of how my 3 year old would respond. Again, he literally is attacking Evolution as work of the Devil because it doesn't fit his worldview. Not because the information is wrong but because it doesn't match up with the Bible. So instead of confronting the fact that he needs to adjust his worldview, he attacks evolution (and Darwin as well). Can you understand why that might bother people?


This isn't meant as an attack on you (I hope it didn't come off as harsh) and I really wouldn't care what Carson believes if he wasn't running for President (I could care if Joe Schmo down the street wants to believe in the Devil, or that the world is 6000 years old, etc.).

 

[Buster Bluth]

Give her credit for the JD. When is the last time she worked in a firm? 1979.

Clinton was a practicing lawyer until she became First Lady. She was damn good at it by all accounts.

And JD aside, she is Bill Clinton's wife.

"Well other than her profession, she has a spouse."

She wouldn't have to work, unless it's another cushy job on the board of Wal Mart, which most liberals loathe.

Yeah, they do. A decent harbinger of the damage the Clintons would do to liberalism in the coming decades. She was raised a Republican and acted like it.

Hahahaha where and what was he teaching? This should be impressive given his education never went beyond a BS in Political Science.

Did you miss the part where I said Harvard? Also he has a BA, not a BS. Google is your friend.

 

[kmoose]

Clinton was a practicing lawyer until she became First Lady. She was damn good at it by all accounts.

Well, maybe not ALL accounts:

Whitewater scandal – This was the fraudulent land scheme, masterminded by Hillary and key witness Jim McDougal (who also mysteriously died in prison), while Hillary was a partner of the Rose Law Firm – also the firm of Vince Foster and Webster Hubbell, who later moved to D.C. with the Clintons to infest the White House Counsel's office with their "legal expertise." Hubbell was later indicted, tried and convicted for tax fraud. Foster turned up dead in Fort Marcy Park, as he was a material witness for then independent counsel Ken Starr's Whitewater criminal investigation.

 

[phgreek]

Well, maybe not ALL accounts:

Details shmetails...were those even real people, and whitewater, wasn't that the start of the vast right wing conspiracy? And its old news anyway. Crazy conservatives...sheesh.

 

[RDU Irish]

No one said he would abandon all science????? He denies evolution which is supported by EVERY facet of science that has to do with biology and biochemistry and geology. He chooses to do so because of his dogma. He quite clearly dismisses paleontology, and other disciplines because it does not conform to his dogma. That is irrational at a minimum. I don't need to say any more. Watch the videos. It's all in there.

What percentage of voters do you think understand WTF you are talking about? You have valid concerns, I just don't think that more than half of the STEM trained population would A) care, or B) look into. And that segment of the population is miniscule. Most people voting can't make correct change! So while I appreciate your passion for this litmus test YOU are applying, I wonder how you think this issue translates to the, like, totally huge portion of, like, the people in the, like, country, that like, can't walk and totally, like, chew gum.

 

[RDU Irish]

And Rubio has just as much business being president as Obama. Zero relevant experience. "Senator! We need your 1/100th opinion on these pressing matters!"

But hey, polished look - check. Minority - check. Very well spoken - check. Sure sign him up.