Well, yeah, but the soundness of the mental processes of the candidates is always a central issue and never irrelevant.
By contrast, the media showed no such zeal to expose Barack Obama’s associations and alliances with a whole series of people who expressed their hatred of America in words and/or deeds. Here was something relevant to his suitability to become president. But the media saw no evil, heard no evil and spoke no evil.And that was wrong, not something to somehow balance by not looking into Ben Carson's suitability as President. Even if it is true that Obama's ties to radical left-wingers were more relevant than Carson's kooky pyramid theory, I want to hear about any strange notions Carson has propounded in his years as a public figure. Does he study the facts of the real world and process them accurately and make appropriate conclusions? If not, I don't want him making the decisions that will affect us all. I agree that Obama did not get fully tested and America took a leap of faith, but that doesn't establish that it should be leaps of faith from here on.
Posts
156 comments:
Did they speak Austrian while building it? Can we see them by riding on the intercontinental railroad?
How about ALL the candidates OF BOTH PARTIES get the same proctological examination? I'm thinking that Carson's view of the pyramids will seem minor when compared to everything else.
Now that's logic. Sowell complains that Carson's half truths preached in books written as Motivational ideals proclaiming that everyone can be Carson if they try harder and harder and stay as humble as Carson, is irrelevant to being President.
But it is relevant when men have to lie to come close to meeting those ideals. That is relevant to the LEADER style that we are electing to live under.
Using Obamaworship as a claim for equal treatment is a howl out to self pity of the oppressed conservatives who think that is all they need...self affirmation that their being half crazy is normalcy.
It'd be a nice sentiment....except they ONLY do to this to Republicans.
Spot on Professor. Thank you.
Sowell:
By contrast, the media showed no such zeal to expose Barack Obama’s associations and alliances with a whole series of people who expressed their hatred of America in words and/or deeds.
Althouse: "And that was wrong...."
Heh, and now she tells us:)
How can Dr. Carson possibly think that the pyramids were built to store grain? They were built as tombs. I know this because I read it in a book. If Dr. Carson would please read the same book, then he'd be as knowledgeable as I am.
Let's go find us an archeologist who has actually excavated a pyramid and elect him or her president, as pyramid knowledge is apparently the most important qualification for the presidency.
"Does he study the facts of the real world and process them accurately and make appropriate conclusions? If not, I don't want him making the decisions that will affect us all." I don't disagree, but I'm obliged to note that drawing the conclusion that someone rose from the dead is every bit as demented, yet it seems to be held by Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton and all the Republican candidates for the nomination. Only Bernie Sanders gets a passing grade.
I agree that Obama did not get fully tested and America took a leap of faith, but that doesn't establish that it should be leaps of faith from here on.
Your thesis would be orders of magnitude stronger if the news media, the agency through which we apply the testing that Obama somehow escaped, were not so immensely polarized against the Republican Party and conservatives generally.
Given the grossly unbalanced coverage of electoral politics in 2008, I must contest your characterization of Obama's victory as America's "leap of faith;" it was in fact a confidence trick, a snow-job. The current hostile coverage of Dr. Carson is seen by many as yet another MSM snow-job intended to benefit Hillary Clinton and the Democrats. That may be unfortunate, but that's one of the consequences of bad faith journalism.
Carson is not my guy, but politically if this is all his opponents and the DNC-MSM have on him they're losers.
Sanders believes in free will, another impossibility. So he flunks. The problem isn't questioning someone's beliefs. All of our beliefs are silly. The problem is that we never go far enough. David Hume is the only public person who could pass a test of rationality and evidence based thinking and he's way dead. But let's make fun of Carson for having bizarre beliefs, unlike all the others whose beliefs are bizarre.
Hillary Clnton flunked understanding human nature when she misjudged Assad and Putin. But give her a chance to be POTUS because she's a mainline Protestant.
The same people who question Carsons beliefs also criticize him for saying a Muslim shouldn't be POTUS. But the Koran and Islam is not only irrational, it is violently irrational.
"Does he study the facts of the real world and process them accurately and make appropriate conclusions?"
Well, he did poke around in the brains of kids and got them fixed up. There's probably very few other real world examples as radically objectively verifiable as this.
Common sense:
Opens kids head, pokes around, kid get better. He must be able to analyze, process, and respond to the real world!
Media sense:
Has differing opinion about how to respond to certain social or political issues that are complex and seemingly without apparent solutions. Also, would not put America's pyramids to the right use. He must have no connection with the real world!
Sherlock Holmes didn't know the earth revolved around the sun, but he was very capable at the tasks he focused on. If it mattered to a case, he's learn the facts, if it didn't matter, he wouldn't clutter it up. Maybe there's something to the sharply-focused, efficient intellect that gets unimportant trivia wrong.
Quaestor expands the thesis properly. The media will not then apply this entirely reasonable skepticism to his opponents, at least not Democratic opponents.
I'd have no issue with the Pyramids or most anything being fair game, if they showed a.) any interest on any subject across the board; and or b.) some even minor interest in the "mental processes" of any of Hillary's lies about landing in Bosnia while "under gun fire," the connection between the Clintons' personal wealth and the plain as day quid pro quo of favoritism to donor countries as SecState.
Carson was chief neurosurgeon at Johns Hopkins for 25 years, and an avowed Christian (he'll be asked to next explain and account for the "inaccuracies" in Genesis and "science," and why there are no dinosaurs in his/our beloved Scriptures. After all, he mentions the Bible in his biography, therefore "its fair game" according to Althouse's professed newly found standard about his mental state.
"Faith" beyond cult of personality means nothing to any of today's national journos. Is it fair to show the same ignorance to Carson as was shown Obama? Actually, yes. There cannot be an open season whenever there is a viable Republican, while a blind eye (at best) is continually and repeatedly turned on (or enabled) massively ethically compromised Democrats.
If "Audacity of Hope" and the other one, were written biography as story examples to give hope and dreams to youth, how is it that Carson's merit anything more?
Clinton on the other hand has spent those same 25 years as co-administrator of a sloppily investigated and never will be prosecuted possible RICO entity. You want a concern about "mental state" -where has your concern been since Clinton fell, hit her head and has been surrounded by handlers ever since.
Parity in coverage is all that is asked.
There is a 12% segment of the population that votes as a block. That comes into play. Being a conservative president is not that hard. The Republican Party is not the same cult of personality, a party that will follow the leader, however flawed, that the Democrat Party is. If we can nominate a guy who can split the black vote, and who will govern from conservative principles, it's a win, full stop, case closed. Any one of several dozen people would make fine conservative presidents, the real problem is getting one of them elected.
Does he study the facts of the real world and process them accurately and make appropriate conclusions?
As this applies to Ben Carson, I think you can answer that, "Yes." He was not just a neurosurgeon and not just a neurosurgeon who headed the department of neurosurgery at Johns Hopkins. He was an innovator. He developed techniques and did surgeries that others were afraid to do or had never done before. I heard him talk at a pediatrics conference once that was devoted to new innovations in pediatrics. He explained how he approached doing something new - "Ask what is the worst thing that can happen if I do it, what is the best thing? What is the worst thing that can happen if I don't do it, what is the best?" To be successful at what he did, he had to explore the possibilities and weight them against each other. He did this with his team, so he also has the ability to work well with others.
Maybe he didn't study ancient archeology, before writing something about pyramids, but so what? That really is a very minor point. A nit, if you will, for you all to pick. I would expect him to apply the same judgement he used in neurosurgery innovations to the presidency, not his knowledge of ancient Egyptian architecture and farming.
I would rate him far more qualified than the so-called constitutional scholar we have in the office today. And more qualified than the Donald.
And that was wrong, not something to somehow balance by not looking into Ben Carson's suitability as President.
Using Obamaworship as a claim for equal treatment is a howl out to self pity of the oppressed conservatives who think that is all they need...self affirmation that their being half crazy is normalcy.
These comments misunderstand the goal. The goal is not to ensure Carson gets a pass, that's never going to happen. The goal is to delegitimize the media and destroy their influence on politics.
Althouse: "And that was wrong...."
Heh, and now she tells us:)
And she'll tell us again in 2023, 7 years after she helps make Hillary! president.
And that was wrong, not something to somehow balance by not looking into Ben Carson's suitability as President.
While it’s true that you cannot correct a wrong by perpetuating it, you also can’t correct it by only holding one side to the standard you say that you want all sides to have to follow. Which is why it immensely important to point the double-standard repeatedly and consistently. The rules of civil society that make it possible for 300 plus million people to mostly get along and live peacefully with each other really only work when we generally believe that they’re being applied even-handedly for the most part. When we get to a critical mass of people who think that the game is rigged and they’re being played for suckers, that’s when things start to break down. So I’d say if the concern is making sure that political candidates for office are being vetted properly, it’s essential that the ones doing the “vetting” are seen as doing it honestly and not just trying to tip the scales for their favorite candidates or party.
"Well, yeah, but the soundness of the mental processes of the candidates is always a central issue and never irrelevant."
its not an insane argument. He said that the tombs are hermeutically sealed and there would be no need to have them be that way for corpses. but to store grain, that would be a greater requirement. He also cites the bible which said Joseph stored a lot of grain during the famine (in a hermeutically sealed place).
He also said "Its my personal theory".
That may be the wrong conclusion, but he at least prefaces it with it being his personal theory AND backs it up with a logical argument.
Why must archaeologists be accepted as if what they say is gospel? Archaeology is theory. They find some pots and pans and theorize. Not all archaeologists come to the same conclusion. Even if 99.99999% of archaeologists come to one conclusion and he comes to a different one, he is allowed to disagree. And if he does, so what? He has a different view on the pyramids than you do. SO?
Wonder if the media will expend the same resources to report on the IRS ordered amendments of the last ten years of the Clinton Foundation tax returns? I believe the returns are due the 15th of this month.
Considering that it has come to light about other statements Dr. Carson was supposed to have made that that was not exactly what he had said, and what he did say was reasonable with a little leeway for conversational use of the language, I would think the first thing to do, if you are worried about his mental state, should be to ask exactly what did he say, and under what circumstances.
I was able to listen to 15 minutes of Carson press conference where the reporters badgered him endlessly over what happened 50 years ago. Half of their questions didn't even make sense or were thinly veiled attempts at calling him a liar.
Carson asked why any of this was relevant and of course never got an intelligent reply.
The perceived danger of a Carson presidency, of course, is having a highly esteemed pediatric surgeon weigh in on the abortion debate.
Anything else so far is really fluff and distraction.
And they can't ask him about abortion, because he's a highly esteemed pediatric surgeon who knows brain development better than just about anyone else in the world.
So, they ask him about pyramids.
"If we can nominate a guy who can split the black vote, and who will govern from conservative principles, it's a win, full stop, case closed"
Carson WILL NOT split the black the vote. This has been tried in senate and Gov. races. Black folks aren't stupid. They aren't going to vote for a Republican just because he's black. Carson might win 15% of the black vote instead of 5% - that's not going to win anything.
"the soundness of the mental processes of the candidates is always a central issue and never irrelevant"
You're so sweet to think about soundness of mental processes and everything, and consider it "never irrelevant." Then again, Progs couldn't care less, except if it can be used to attack the other guy..
Of course, in these postmodern times, anything goes anyway. You'll find this hard to believe, as you profess to care about facts of the real world and sound reasoning and all, but these days even "finding" SSM in the Fourteenth Amendment, in substantive due process no less, does not call into question anyone's "soundness of the mental processes."
Not that I would vote for the doctor, but: There was more grain in the pyramids than SSM in the Fourteenth.
I agree. Well said & we do need to examine Carson further. We already have someone that harps on old worn out European colonial whines with its accompanying reverse racism. We don't need another crazy in the White House.
Althouse said, "...Carson's kooky pyramid theory..."
Why is it kooky?
This is not a trick question.
While Carson is a nice guy and seem intelligent, I see no evidence that he's presidential material. He can't even hold his own in a debate. That he's leading the Polls shows one of two things (1) Republicans aren't paying attention and like to vote for the black guy (2) Republicans are stupid.
I'll go with (2)
Has Dr. Carson ever worn fresnel lenses?
Are there still 57 states?
"pyramid knowledge is apparently the most important qualification for the presidency."
Yes and Global Warming will submerge London and New York City. Aside from the attractiveness of the latter prediction, these are as crazy as pyramids as grain stores. The present generation of leftist politicians is determined to prosecute anyone who disagrees in public with this religious dogma.
Carson also supports Amnesty, TPP, and statehood for PR. Outside of the social issues and a desire for fiscal sanity its hard to find any real Conservative beliefs.
A black Jimmy Carter?
Dr. Carson is a black who fled the liberal plantation and therefore must be lynched.
"He can't even hold his own in a debate." As long as the opponents are C minus reporters, he does pretty well. He's not my candidate but this stuff is really building a huge wind at his back. The Democrats are in a panic about the black vote.
Jake Tapper is the only MSM reporter who even tries to be balanced (not that he always succeeds). The rest are sycophants who do not want jeopardize a potential position in a Democrat administration they helped facilitate.
When you're reduced to responding with, "Well, what about the other guy??!!" then you really have no response.
The question of whether Obama was not vetted sufficiently (he wasn't) is not an answer to Carson's goofy views.
From all accounts, Carson's a brilliant neurosurgeon; but that means almost nothing about his viability as a public servant. After all, Krugman is (supposedly) a brilliant economist and no supporter of Carson's believes that he is qualified to operate a lemonade stand.
The correct response to any media outlet that is thumping Carson, but which ignored the relevant and obvious issues with Obama is, "Fuck you very much."
Dr. Carson, what is your perspective on abortion in case of medical need:
A few years ago, I was consulted by a woman who was 33 weeks pregnant with a baby who had been diagnosed by ultrasound to have hydrocephalus or water on the brain. She was on her way to Kansas at the recommendation of her local obstetrician to have an abortion, as Kansas was the only state that would allow a baby to be aborted that was perfectly viable outside the womb without life support. I discussed with her in great detail the implications of having a baby with hydrocephalus, and I discussed with her the many options that were available. In the end, she decided to complete the pregnancy, and we were able to place a shunt in the baby after it was born to divert excess fluid away from the brain. Although the baby had some developmental delays, she continues to thrive today.
Ann, I'm curious, as a law professor do you ever have occasion to test out your ideas and opinions in an equally real world way? That's not an insult, at all, not a you!, a law professor!, more of a suggestion that Carson's abilities on real world analysis and response has been tested significantly more than those who are questioning his ability to process the real world.
Which means the trouble really is that it's not the real world that people are concerned about. It's what they want the world to be according to their subjective ideals.
15% of the black vote going Republican will doom the Democrat. National politics are different than those of a given state. The math is the math. Putting your argument is ALL CAPS does not strengthen it.
"But it is relevant when men have to lie to come close to meeting those ideals. That is relevant to the LEADER style that we are electing to live under.
Using Obamaworship as a claim for equal treatment is a howl out to self pity of the oppressed conservatives who think that is all they need...self affirmation that their being half crazy is normalcy."
No it,s not. It's pointing out a double standard that is CONSTANTLY applied by the media to one party. Claim of equal treatment is why the Dean of Missouri just had to step down. The fact that the media claims to be unbiased, suggests they are in fact unbiased. So why should we not hold them to that standard?
as to the media. They did their hatchet job. You continue to say he lied. (about extremely trivial stuff). And you and the media are being proven to be wrong.
They think he lied about a hoax at college, the guy who did the hoax came forward and said he remembers doing the hoax. They think he lied about trying to stab someone, two people come forward and remember the incident.
They say he lied about receiving a scholarship from the military he said he was offered one and turned it down. You keep trying to dig up dirt, and it only shows the media has really shoddy investigative departments.
The more the dig, on the more obscure charges, the more the media looks like hacks.
Funny how the concept of "disparate impact" goes out the window the instant that it benefits the Left.
"but that means almost nothing about his viability as a public servant."
I disagree. It may not mean everything and it isn't a perfect correlation, but the abilities of a neurosurgeon certainly mean something about his viability.
First, it's pretty clear that no job really is equivalent to President of the United States. The President can never know everything and often can't know what needs to be known in a changing world. The President's job is to have good advisers, compile a lot of information, and make decisions based on the data.
A pediatric neurosurgeon has had to read massive amounts of research, have a prodigious ability to remember and recall, apply the knowledge in specific ways for the specific issue at hand, and do so for often very long sustained stretches of time.
Carson's ability to learn and respond to gathered information is quite verified. He can make quick decisions that affect real lives of the most vulnerable, trusting his hands in situations where there isn't a lot of room to blame others. He's been given 3am calls for emergency moments, and has kept a clear head and is able to innovate and make a learned case for his practices.
Now, give him a big pile of documents about Russia, or China, or a domestic issue... I suspect he's supremely able to read, digest, and integrate those into a cogent and effective response.
Would he be a great President? I don't know. But the ability to learn and respond is certainly a relevant, maybe the key relevant, trait for a President.
Carson's mental state was sufficient to allow him to practice as a very successful neurosurgeon; George Bush's mental state was sufficient to allow him to pilot a century series jet fighter, and to serve as governor of Texas. Obama's mental state was sufficient to allow him to practice as a third rate community organizer.
Excellent, Paddy O. In addition, Carson was one of the first to successfully treat hydrocephalus with shunts in utero. It was an innovation that saved many babies from the abortionist's knife. And it prevented the neurological complications that occurred if performed after delivery.
"15% of the black vote going Republican will doom the Democrat."
That's what this is about and nothing else. Again, he's not my candidate but I do enjoy watching the left go crazy about his chances.
I agree that Obama did not get fully tested and America took a leap of faith, but that doesn't establish that it should be leaps of faith from here on.
No, we shouldn't make the same mistake twice. That doesn't mean those of us who saw the mistake coming the first time shouldn't remind the "hopeful leapers" that they screwed up. In a better world with enough repetitions good sense would prevail over their cognitive dissonance.
"And that was wrong, not something to somehow balance by not looking into Ben Carson's suitability as President. Even if it is true that Obama's ties to radical left-wingers were more relevant than Carson's kooky pyramid theory, I want to hear about any strange notions Carson has propounded in his years as a public figure."
...
"Obama did not get fully tested and America took a leap of faith, but that doesn't establish that it should be leaps of faith from here on."
These things are purportedly said by an intelligent person. This is on the same intellectual level with the "free stuff" paradigm of ideas. Althouse is basically saying she wants to vote for the guy that makes her feel good without guilt for what is obviously going to happen. Those icky republicans need to be vetted please ignore my past stupidity! It is quite possible she is going to use this same vapid crap to justify a vote for Hillary.
Women should be ashamed of how they are tearing this country apart right now like little marionettes on the strings of the very wealthy. This is embarrassingly stupid and gives pause to support for the 19th amendment.
A bit off topic, but if Dr. Carson was to win the nomination, there is a range of plausible people he might choose for a vice-presidential candidate and also cabinet officers and major agency heads.
Hillary!???
Well, yeah, but the soundness of the mental processes of the candidates is always a central issue and never irrelevant.
Yeah, it is.
But what does a kooky but harmless belief about ancient Egyptian architecture have to actually do with that?
I mean, I'm a libertarian Atheist, and I think this is a complete waste of time and energy; tell me what's wrong with Carson's policy ideas, rather than Othering him over "zomg some people have weird beliefs around religion".
(Also, I find it amusing that so many of my left-leaning friends think it's completely crazy to think the Pyramids were grain silos, rather than merely wrong.
It's merely wrong because, well, they did store some grain, for the afterlife-use of the mummified Pharoah. It's real easy to go from "the Pyramids stored some grain" to "the Pyramids were grain silos"; it's a mistake, but it's not a crazy mistake.
But, hey.
He's a Republican and a Christian so it's cray-cray, right?)
The questions may be irrelevant to any decisions he makes as president (unless we have an upcoming grain shortage and one of the proposals on his desk is to build pyramids for storage). But they are useful in social signaling--hearing how literally he takes the Bible sends the message to the secular humanist core of the Democrats that "this isn't our kind of guy"--never mind his medical career, his background in inner cities or the fact that he's a wealthy man living on the East Coast. This reminds the leftists that for all practical purposes, this guy is Mike Huckabee.
Similarly, Obama talking about the price of arugula--clearly this isn't some good ole boy who hunts and displays the flag and listens to George Jones. He's a coastal elitist who shops at Whole Foods! Not one of us!
I don't really care about the signaling, because none of that will affect my life if he becomes president. Far more important is what he plans to do and how he plans to do it. The question that should be on every voter's mind is "what do I want accomplished--or prevented--and who among my choices is most likely to get it done?" Beyond that, his religious views or dietary habits mean squat.
Now that's logic. Sowell complains that Carson's half truths preached in books written as Motivational
Trad, you want a half-truth?
"All men are created equal"
How's that grab you?
Has the press asked WHY the Democrats all believe in global warming so fervently when the evidence isn't backing them up very well?
I wonder because they are basing major aspects of their policies on it. I don't see a lot of pyramid theory in Republican policies.
Why isn't Hillary asked about Obama's plan to spike energy rates immensely for a negligible change in carbon output? Why isn't she asked about activists on campus getting professors removed for thoughtcrime? Why isn't she asked to differentiate "sanctuary cities" from the Confederacy, since they advocate identical positions in terms of federal government oversight?
I call bullshit here: Carson is a black man; Bush was a rich white boy.
You have different standards in your evaluation of the two candidates.
She also voted for the Jug Eared Jesus we have in the WH right now. She has few problems voting for woefully unqualified black folks.
Folks i think you just got conned by the jersey princess. Just something a short , probably insecure girl learned about control from her mother.
I don't get why the poor vote Democrat when the party loathes the poor.
Women should be ashamed of how they are tearing this country apart right now like little marionettes on the strings of the very wealthy. This is embarrassingly stupid and gives pause to support for the 19th amendment.
One problem: Look at the winners elected in the 19th Century. A collection of inept buffoons unmatched.
In at least one of the Civilization video games, the Pyramids wonder provided the benefit of a granary in every city. Maybe he's a gamer.
But, yes, I have to (mostly) agree with mccullough. Everyone has bizarre beliefs for the essential reason that it is more or less impossible to function without coming up with some fundamental meaning of life for which there are no "rational" answers. Mind you that there is a correct answer but there is no way to prove it. Such is life. Of course, we then pile on lots of other bizarre stuff for various reasons. Some of the bizarre stuff is even true.
My concern is the bizarre beliefs that impact me. Unless Dr. Carson is planning to bomb the Nile out of fear of Pyramid power or planning on mass censorship to enforce his view, I don't really care other than any future appearances on Jeopardy! (As we all know, the answer is "Jeff.")
As to a bizarre belief that does impact me, how about the assumption that Hillary would make a good President when her political career so far is a mix of failures, irrelevance, and corruption? Unless her election is going to unleash her dormant mutant powers and save the world, not seeing much to go with there.
I don't get why the poor vote Democrat when the party loathes the poor.
If you realize that the Democrats are like Lotso the bear in Toy Story 3, it all makes sense.
sydney said...
In addition, Carson was one of the first to successfully treat hydrocephalus with shunts in utero. It was an innovation that saved many babies from the abortionist's knife. And it prevented the neurological complications that occurred if performed after delivery.
"High morbidity and mortality rates, however, marked these early attempts at treatment, and outcomes were generally worse than in those in whom shunting procedures were performed in the neonatal and infant periods. Currently, there is a defacto moratorium on fetal surgery to treat hydrocephalus, as the issues of patient selection and surgical procedure remain in question."
Is there conclusive proof that the pyramids were never used to store grain? If not, dogmatically pronouncing Dr. Carson personal view as "kooky" is irrational.
"I agree that Obama did not get fully tested and America took a leap of faith..."
Althouse probably thought of using the word vetted instead of tested... but the fear of being, even by implication, associated with birthers kept her from using a good and proper word.
#ConcernedStudent1950 ;)
This blog is basically a fan dance. Who doesn't love a fan dance?
"I don't get why the poor vote Democrat when the party loathes the poor."
The poor are too stupid to realize the dems loath them.
" A collection of inept buffoons unmatched."
Yeah, that guy Lincoln probably had funny ideas about pyramids, too.
The poor in Kentucky didn't vote for democrat governor and now they are going to lose their health care through Obamacare....too bad.
Also, the media is coastal and they hate flyover grossie pube states.
You are just not fab...and your generally fat and poorly dressed.
tits and muscles.
I am second to no one in my scorn for those who think the pyramids might have been used to store grain and are willing to come out and say so publicly.
That said, if having half-assed and ignorant ideas about things which can easily be looked up and understood by anyone were a disqualification for the Presidency--then what human WOULD be qualified?
Certainly not our hostess. I love her but basic science, math, and formal logic are not her strong suits. They're certainly not Obama's either, which is the candidate she supported in 2008, as I recall, and his trouble with these items was remarked upon then in this forum.
I'd gladly vote for Ben Carson; I'd vote for a lot less than Ben Carson if the alternative is Hillary Clinton, who believe some pretty dumb things herself and doesn't bother to check them out.
Wait a minute...
Is Althouse slamming two prominent blacks in one post?
And they say Obama has been a good for nothing president ;)
A woman who has spent most of her life within a bubble of jurisprudence, wants someone who can come up with real life answers. How could she even be remotely equipped to make such an evaluation? She voted for Obama. The evidence of her ability to make sound choices is wanting. Sometimes we ought to know enough about ourselves that maybe we shouldn't vote.
This thread is evidence of why one should always vote Republican. Do you want the media to do their job? Vote Republican. They will do their job. Don't bother asking them to treat Democrats the same. They won't. Just vote Republican. Then the media will suddenly remember how to properly do their job.
the soundness of the mental processes of the candidates is always a central issue
I can't imagine you questioning "the soundness of the mental processes" of a head of a prestigious neurosurgery department if he were white.
Does he study the facts of the real world and process them accurately and make appropriate conclusions?
The facts of the real world are that political partisans and ideologues tend to exaggerate the virtues of their allies and the failings of their opponents, and that an overwhelming majority of the press has been known to make claims later proven to be false about the virtues of progressive Democrats and the failings of conservative Republicans. The accurate way to process these facts is to realize that an overwhelming majority of the press are political partisans and ideologues who support progressive Democrats. The appropriate conclusion to draw is that press reports about either progressive Democrats or conservative Republicans should be considered to have at best an incidental relation to the truth.
We don't want the press to ignore the faults of conservative Republicans. We want the public to ignore the press. They're liars.
In modern pyramids, seed corn is used to feed the population.
Not saying I disagree, but could someone cite me to an objective study demonstrating the media bias everyone takes as a given? I have no doubt the vast majority of the press vote democrat but that doesn't prove bias in reporting.
There is apparently a long tradition behind the pyramiid-grain theory.
This was apparently said by some Christian theologians in the Middle Ages and Carson may believe this is Seventh Day Adventist doctrine (if somebody important in the history of Seventh Day Adventism said it)
Someone professional by one of the pyramids or something like that says he gets asked about by some visitor every day.
mtrobertslaw said...11/10/15, 12:15 PM
Is there conclusive proof that the pyramids were never used to store grain? If not, dogmatically pronouncing Dr. Carson personal view as "kooky" is irrational.
Donald trumo seems to have given the best answer about that - they are not hollow, and there's no reason to believe this in the first place, not in the Bible, and not outside of the Bible.
The only reason to believe this is that you have heard both about pyramids and about Joseph.
Rumpletweezer said...
How about ALL the candidates OF BOTH PARTIES get the same proctological examination? I'm thinking that Carson's view of the pyramids will seem minor when compared to everything else.
Now that's just crazy talk! Hillary's lies to the families of the Americans killed in Libya pale in significance to anything Dr. Carson wrote in a book 20 years ago! Doubleplusungood thoughtcrime! To the camps with you! You will love Big Brother!
Carson was referring to sealed chamber areas within the pyramids. Now someone says such areas don't exist?
More likely this is about Carson expressing a theory related to his faith. And therefore must be entirely dismissed by secularists, Even when they don't know what they are talking about, secularists must never yield any ground to religion.
Thus even acknowledging the existence of sealed pyramid chambers must be branded as a kooky idea.
Ann Althouse said..And that was wrong
No it wasn't, not from the perspective of getting elected. He was elected, you voted for him! It wasn't wrong, it helped him to win. The only measure is "does doing X help me win the election," as anyone in the Media will tell you.
Well, yeah, but the soundness of the mental processes of the candidates is always a central issue and never irrelevant.
No again. It's not like no one brought up the kooky things candidate Obama's pastor said, the kooky beliefs he listened to (and presumably accepted) for two decades--we did bring it up, loudly, but were dismissed as racists and ignoramuses! We were told these kooky beliefs were legitimate because they're part of "black liberation theology;" exactly what that is was, conveniently, pretty ill-defined, but without going too much more into it any concerns about candidate Obama's education, associations, long-held beliefs/positions, etc--the very things that have bearing on one's mental processes--were pushed aside and dismissed. He was buddies with a domestic terrorist, he was ok with that, but the Media wasn't interested in pursuing that story and certainly didn't allow anyone to draw any conclusions from that relationship. Same-same with his relationships with some pretty slimy Chicago characters (Rezco et al). Candidate Obama's autobiography frames his joining his church in terms of his doing so for political benefit, but anyone who questioned the sincerity of his professed beliefs was roundly criticized for daring to do so. [He really got to have it both ways to a remarkable degree, when you think about it--he defended the depth and sincerity of his religious belief by pointing to his long membership in & attendance to the church, and when he needed to distance himself from Wright he quickly dismissed himself from that association by denouncing what he presumably was listening to all those years and claiming no one should conclude he actually endorsed those lessons. Impressive, really, what a Leftist can get away with.]
Your point is that two wrongs don't make a right. Sowell's point is that the fact Carson is subjected to scrutiny that Obama never was (and in fact calls for such scrutiny were supposedly evidence of racism!) demonstrates that the Media doesn't actually care about the answers, they just care about using the questions/scrutiny to harm Carson.
The fact that you yourself, in this case (and I guess not in the case of candidate Obama??) care about the answers does not rebut Sowell's overall point.
I can't imagine you questioning "the soundness of the mental processes" of a head of a prestigious neurosurgery department if he were white.
Bingo !
Blacks just can't possibly be smart enough to get to be a medical studentneurosurgeonchiefofdepartment at Johns Hopkins without white leftist help.
You are just not fab...and your generally fat and poorly dressed.
You're also not really gay and living in Boston with an Indian "husband."
All in all, good fun, but the mask slipped once ...
But honestly, I'm about at the "eh, fuck it" point. I don't plan to vote for Dr. Carson and if other people don't vote for Dr. Carson because they think he holds kooky beliefs, fine. It's interesting to me that some kooky beliefs are called kooky while others are either overlooked or taken as evidence of the holder's deep spirituality/emotional intelligence/empathy/etc, but I'm old enough not to expect logic to rule my fellow citizens nor for the world to be fair. I think the nation would be better off if people relied less on emotionalism when making decisions, especially decisions about for whom to vote, but I realize that's probably a lost cause as I 1. don't know how to convince people they should have that POV and 2. don't think I could win over the "feelings" POV even if I did. I don't like the reasons people have for voting the way they vote (candidate X is a mean guy, the commercial said his policies aren't fair to group Y...plus he put a dog on top of a car!) but I don't have to--their vote counts the same as mine, and there are more of them.
I think Hillary Clinton has about a 71% chance to be the next President.
"And that was wrong, not something to somehow balance by not looking into Ben Carson's suitability as President"
The issue is treating left and right candidates approximately the same. If that means not looking as closely into Dr Carson's background as you would like, particularly on items that have no bearing on the current issues, then so be it.
@Cog:Carson was referring to sealed chamber areas within the pyramids. Now someone says such areas don't exist?
The pyramids are almost entirely solid rock and could never have been used as grain silos. They have no inner structure to support other than relatively tiny voids. It is extraordinarily difficult to get anything in and out of them, if you've ever watched the History Channel or even youtube you can see this.
The idea that they were used to store grain is from the Biblical story of Joseph storing surplus grain to get Egypt through a famine--and the Bible never mentions the pyramids anyway. But you can't weasel your way out by saying that maybe Dr Carson meant a bushel of wheat is stashed in there among the other grave goods, because that's not what "grain silo" means.
People rarely keep corpses, statues, and models of boats inside grain silos, nor do they elaborately decorate their interiors, nor is the storage area a tiny fraction of the volume of the silo. I won't go out on a limb and say that no one has never put a boat in a silo, but the pyramids were built as tombs. Why they felt the need to build such huge tombs in an interesting question, and the pyramids may have had some other social function, perhaps as public-works projects. But they could not have been storage for grain that people meant to eat, and that's what a "grain silo" does.
How about Hillary's seances to summon Eleanor Roosevelt? Can we bring that up?
It would feel more like a real critique if they could find something to attack in the points he's making rather than in superficial word choice.
He wrote about how he chose to go into medicine rather than the military. So they attack as "lies" his one-sentence characterization of the fact that he could have chosen a military career.
He writes about how we need to invest in the future, and makes reference to the Biblical story of Joseph's interpretation of Pharoah's dreams. In passing, he shows that he doesn't realize that the pyramids were tombs. So clearly, that discredits the whole idea.
Re: Double standard and Two-wrongs-don't-make-a-right...
Forget Obama.
Let's see Hillary Clinton subjected to the same standard. She's a presidential candidate right now.
" Steve Uhr said...
Not saying I disagree, but could someone cite me to an objective study demonstrating the media bias everyone takes as a given? I have no doubt the vast majority of the press vote democrat but that doesn't prove bias in reporting. "
How would you design an objective study of subjective bias in the media?
Remember that the hypothesis that you are trying to falsify is: The Media is unbiased left-vs-right, they are just biased in favor of facts and truth. Conservatives are usually wrong. Also stupid and bigoted. Pointing that out isn't biased.
We should. Along with her conspiracy theories about "the vast right wing" and her attempts to silence victims of her husband's serial sexual harassment.
This'll teach you ungrateful Negroes to stay on the Plantation and be loyal to your betters!
I'd like to see Hillary handle anything like the press conferences that Carson dealing with. I really wonder about her mental state. She bobs her head like an early Parkinson's patient and her "blood clot" has never been explained. So far she has about as much "vetting" as the last year of Wilson's term.
Yeah, that guy Lincoln probably had funny ideas about pyramids, too.
In my defense, they had Van Buren. Harrison/Tyler. Pierce. Buchanan. Grant. Fillmore.
Just some real sub-Obama level talents.
I'd like to see Hillary handle anything like the press conferences that Carson dealing with
Have we ever had journalists caught collaborating to "Get" somebody in a press conference the way the press tried to "get" Romney right after the Benghazi attacks?
Note: they went to him for comment. Not Obama. Who was President.
The facts of the real world are that hostile foreign intelligence services attempt to gain access to classified information that is communicated among American government officials, and the American government has responded to that reality by creating communication protocols that offer more security than a web server in a dude's loft apartment somewhere in Colorado. Did Hillary study those facts, process them accurately, and make appropriate conclusions?
I really wonder about her mental state.
Doc, what are the chances we get to watch her drop dead? Stroke or such, obviously, not Parkinson's?
1) Tit for tat is necessary. You cannot keep on giggling over omissions of Dem accountability while maintaining it for Republicans. Well...You can but then you lose any façade of objectivity. Do you have any notion of keeping the Dems honest?
2) "Well, yeah, but the soundness of the mental processes of the candidates is always a central issue and never irrelevant." Tea...China? At worst he had some wrong information (conflated store-cities with pyramids, or grew up with a flawed piece of SDA lore in his head, or whatever). Like you did about "rigmarole." What should we glean from that about your mental state, if any?
Whitesplaining the real issue to Thomas Sowell.
rcocean: "Carson WILL NOT split the black the vote... Black folks aren't stupid...."
Each person is a vote, you liberal, arrogant, self-superior jerk. How dare you treat an entire people as some puppet on a string for you and your fellow bilkers of the government tit to manipulate, play with and treat as predictable robots?
How racist and condescending, you prick. Just because a people vote en banc over a 50 plus year period for the same party that takes them for granted, has done little but to propagate policies that have decimated their communities and their family structure, and consistently bought them with government hand-outs that have left those who have fallen for the Democratic party's quadrennial lies, you consider yourself their spokesperson and dare to speak on their collective behalf.
Obama has so polarized the country and demonized the Reagan Democrat, it is highly doubtful any Democratic candidate can ever rely on approximately 40% white vote of the past.
Maybe this will be the year enough individuals see the benefit in considering doing something different than what has made them be taken for granted by the progressive swine like yourself, and leverage a Republican candidate that represents the best of all of the people in this country so liberal politicians will begin to feel as if they need to make some kind of an effort to earn a vote, instead of just assuming it will be there as it has been these past decades.
Losing 10% of the major racial constituencies yet in this country will be enough for a Republican to be viable this year, unless the Stupid Party does what it does best and concedes the national debate format to the Presidential Commission of which both Carter and Clinton are board members (no conflict of interest there) and manages to treat blocks of people like you obviously do, instead of the individuals and individual voters we all are.
Meanwhile the media overlooks the fact that at Hillary Clinton rallies, the faithful gather 'round her podium and chant “Ph’nglui mglw’nafh Cthulhu R’lyeh wgah’nagl fhtagn.”
Carson's POTUS run is just a scheme to sucker gullible Christians into following him and to eventually send him money. A more elaborate version of miracle tree bark cures. No bigger sucker and easier mark for redemption tales than evangelical Christians.
"Each person is a vote, you liberal, arrogant, self-superior jerk."
"..." = intellectually dishonest
"Carson's POTUS run is just a scheme to sucker gullible Christians into following him and to eventually send him money. A more elaborate version of miracle tree bark cures. No bigger sucker and easier mark for redemption tales than evangelical Christians."
You are quite the mind reader, gm.
No bigger sucker and easier mark for redemption tales than evangelical Christians.
Vice President John Edwards says what?
Does he study the facts of the real world and process them accurately and make appropriate conclusions?
What if he believes that Jesus rose from the dead and walked on water? Doesn't that defy what we know about the "real world" more than the pyramid-grain theory?
I guess my earlier "disparate impact" comment needs explanation.
As I understand its application in practice, "disparate impact" theory says that if a policy produces unequal outcomes between racial groups, even if the policy is objectively race neutral, the impact must be rectified. And it doesnt matter one whit if this is accomplished by raising up those who are worse off, or tearing down those who are better off, as long as the inequality is resolved.
Yet somehow, when Republican and Democrat treatment by the media, rather than racial groups, is the context, then suddenly we're back to two wrongs dont make a right! Bullshit. You dont get to have it both ways. If the only way to resolve the disparate impact on conservatives is to go as easy on them as you do on Democrats, so be it. We'd prefer you go equally hard on both, but it has become obvious that THAT will never ever ever happen. Until *that* changes, then yes, equal kid gloves for both sides is the only resolution. That or admit the entire disparate impact edifice is bullshit you never believed in the first place, it just enshrines those prejudices that YOU prefer.
John Edwards was a presidential candidate. He talked about channeling dead children in his closing arguments, which is a bit strange. He decided to have an extramarital affair with Rielle Hunter, who I think we can all agree is a certified kook. Wikipedia: John Edwards extramarital affair In love with a kook = a bit of a kook oneself, no? I mean, he hired her to document his campaign, so he's endorsing her kookiness at least a bit right there.
Anyway he had a kid with this kooky lady, and of course lied about it and in fact used his terminally-ill wife to lie about it, too. Even at that time he had to know the truth of this whole sordid situation would come out, so the choice to lie (and to lie in that particularly despicable manner) have to reflect on the "soundness of [his] mental processes," no?
Now, think back, think way back...was that an angle that the press pursued? Not that they pursued the story much at all, mind you. But even in stories talking about what a jerk Edwards was I don't recall many mentions of the fact that his actions and decisions showed that his mental processes were unsound. That's weird, you know, since that's "always a central issue."
"Does he study the facts of the real world and process them accurately and make appropriate conclusions?"
If he does . . .you know he definitely isn't a "liberal."
Step 1: Do not vet Candidate A, and do not allow criticism of him
Step 2: Vet and heavily criticize Candidate B
Step 3: When Candidate B complains about the vetting, point out how lack of vetting of A was a bad precedent
Step 4:Do not vet Candidate C, call people who complain about lack of vetting C hypocrites, because they complained about vetting of Candidate B
Not that they pursued the story much at all, mind you
Not at all even though it was true. But just a few months later the NYT published unfounded assertions of an affair by John McCain. Suddenly they found sexual affairs relevant, just as they've suddenly found misstatements in print by black presidential candidates relevant.
Whatever could the connection be?
No, the press did not put Obama under a microscope. No, that does not excuse Carson.
But what say you about kooky Clinton (Channeling Elanor, Vast Right Wing Conspiracy - that proved true, Sniper fire, Named after Sir Edmund Hillary, etc.)? Sure they have been reported. But the volume and tone in main line press was entirely different. Several of those go past pyramid for food storage for me.
As others have said it isn't two wrongs don't make a right. It is, how about a level playing field starting NOW.
No bigger sucker and easier mark for redemption tales
...
this was the moment when we began to provide care for the sick and good jobs to the jobless; this was the moment when the rise of the oceans began to slow and our planet began to heal; this was the moment when we ended a war and secured our nation and restored our image as the last, best hope on Earth
Immediately following that speech, America had 60 consecutive months with a higher unemployment rate than in Nov 2008. That rate has since dropped to 5% (vs 6.8% in Nov 2008, and a high of 10% during the Obama presidency), while labor force participation rate has dropped from 65.9 to 62.4. The war hasn't ended due to the refusal of America's enemies to accept Obama's surrender, and ask Doctors Without Borders about our image.
We might give Carson a pass on his pyramid theory and other nonsense, considering that we all know people who practice the prayer nonsense and who believe in god and his bible that talks about unicorns, giants, devils and ghosts, talking snakes and donkeys, water turning into wine, wine into blood and bread into flesh.
Furthermore, it would be nice for a Seventh Day Adventist to have as president a champion for the elimination of Sunday Blue Laws and other Baptist nonsense.
What is wrong with Carson's theory.
Fruit grown in Eastern Washington State in stored air tight concrete block houses filled with nitrogen. That's why you can still buy apples in February.
The last I heard in biblical times locusts were a major problem. A midwestern US grain silo doesn't give a lot of protection.
And I still have not seen anyone giving an exact quotation of what Dr. Carson said.
Has anyone asked Hillary! to publicly state whether she believes in the tales of the loaves and fishes, turning water into wine, etc.?
The proper response from Carson et al is, "Have you asked Hillary about sniper fire? Being named after Sir Edmund Hillary? Have you asked her about the rapist she defended? No? I'll be happy to answer you once you've applied the same standards to your own party."
@Harrywr2:What is wrong with Carson's theory.
Fruit grown in Eastern Washington State in stored air tight concrete block houses filled with nitrogen. That's why you can still buy apples in February.
There is nowhere inside a pyramid to store much of anything.
A CA facility in Eastern Washington has a ceiling held up by modern beams using modern building techniques, and has a large interior storage volume, and it also has giant bay doors for people to get fruit in and out.
An Egyptian pyramid is essentially a solid pile of rock with a few tiny cavities which are filled with dead people and their stuff, and the entrance to it was not only carefully sealed but carefully hidden.
The last I heard in biblical times locusts were a major problem. A midwestern US grain silo doesn't give a lot of protection.
Locusts eat the crop in the fields, not in the granary. The Egyptians stored grain in pits, not in pyramids.
@eric:Have you asked her about the rapist she defended?
I've always found this attack on Hillary to be lame. Even werewolves are entitled to legal counsel which has to zealously defend them.
Is thinking the pyramids stored grain any stupider than saying there are 57 states? What does the latter reveal about the thinker?
@Bill Crawford:Is thinking the pyramids stored grain any stupider than saying there are 57 states?
I should say so, since one can be explained by misspeaking when tired and the other really can't.
Granted that Obama believes any number of equally silly things, as does any progressive, but "57 states" doesn't rise to the "pyramid silo" level.
Jimbino
-why such hate about what others may do in the privacy of their own thoughts, prayers, homes or house of worship?
No one cares what you do on Sunday, or any other day, provided you do it at home or at least do not get in a car, shitfaced, wallowing in your own private and pathetic misery and plow into a group of people; and then bitch about how the government should cover everything, and your deductible and co-pays are bullshit.
People like you shit all over Christians, who by and large, do not exist as they do in your warped, judgmental head. I hope you find some happiness in your world where no one comes near your level of perfection and it just pisses you off to no end.
I'd say the "unconvincing arguments" tag applies in more than one way to this post...
Gabriel said...
@eric:Have you asked her about the rapist she defended?
I've always found this attack on Hillary to be lame. Even werewolves are entitled to legal counsel which has to zealously defend them.
It's not if you hold her to the standards of her supporters. And the criticism isn't that she defended him, it was her gloating that she destroyed the woman.
@Rick:And the criticism isn't that she defended him, it was her gloating that she destroyed the woman.
Gloating is pretty unseemly, regardless of whether the accused rapist was guilty or innocent. But if that rapist was innocent, then she did right to "destroy" the accuser. And she did right to defend the rapist regardless of his guilt.
if you hold her to the standards of her supporters
I dare say there would be some "gloating" going on if Emma Sulkowicz or "Jackie" from UVa publicly recanted their rape accusations.
"Blogger garage mahal said...
Carson's POTUS run is just a scheme to sucker gullible Christians into following him"
Garage, when did you get back from Missouri ?
Don't tell me you missed the rally !
Gabriel said...
And she did right to defend the rapist regardless of his guilt.
Not according to Hillary certain supporters which is the point of the criticism.
"Doc, what are the chances we get to watch her drop dead? Stroke or such, obviously, not Parkinson's?"
Well, if she takes an early dirt nap, I hope it is before the election. Actually, the day before the election would be the most amusing.
I dunno what the chances are. If she is a drunk, it could happen any time. If Parkinson's it will show in the general election debates, which would be almost as funny as the day before the election.
Reciting Clinton talking points on the controversy, O’Donnell declared: “...her campaign says this was a joke. No one took him seriously. Meaning he wasn't actually threatening to strangle Fiorina. That it was sort of a, you know, a punch line that he was delivering.”
This is how the media handles Hillary when she is in trouble. Is this how they handled Donald Trump? Not really.
And Gabriel, Hillary was laughing and gloating that everyone knew the man was guilty of rape and she got him off Scott free.
But, that didn't happen 50 years ago, so why talk about it?
Blogger Gabriel said...
@eric:Have you asked her about the rapist she defended?
I've always found this attack on Hillary to be lame. Even werewolves are entitled to legal counsel which has to zealously defend them.
I agree. The problem isn't that she defended him. The problem is she was laughing and gloating about him being a rapist and being found not guilty. At least have some respect for the victim.
For reference
http://m.nydailynews.com/news/politics/young-hillary-clinton-heard-laughing-discussing-defense-accused-child-rapist-newly-discovered-audio-tapes-article-1.1832009
Here is a quote from a weblog on "Could Joseph and Imhotep be the same person." (Notice that the Stepped Pyramid was built OVER a grain storage area.) You don't suppose this is what Carson was referring to.
"The first pyramid to be built was the Stepped Pyramid of Djoser (Netjerikhet) which is part of a complex in Saqqara Egypt that appears to be a grain storage and distribution center. The Step Pyramid itself was built on top of a shaft that was originally used as a grain silo but then converted into a tomb for the Pharaoh. The Step Pyramid is really a series of Mastabas, made from solid limestone blocks, stacked up on top of one another. The Step Pyramid was used to bury Netjerikhet’s 3 wives and 11 daughters and Netjerikhet’s sarcophagus was placed on a platform in the shaft beneath the Stepped Pyramid.
"The Step Pyramid was designed by Imhotep who may well be the Joseph of the Bible. Joseph and Imhotep have many similarities but have not been thought to be one in the same person because of discrepancies between the estimated dates of their existence."
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/04/25/keith-olbermanns-idea-for_n_98557.html
Here's one leftist's position on the unacceptability of violent imagery against women. Can't wait to see the same reaction.
There really seems to be only one interpretation here, and the only point of debate is on whether it's okay or not. I'm going to cut that one short: It's not. To the fellow (male) journo I wrote to about this yesterday, who waved it off as just some colorful film-noir imagery, I say: can you IMAGINE if someone had said that about Obama? That he should be taken somewhere and dealt with, so that he wouldn't come back? Can you imagine if some right-winger had talked about getting Obama out of the race "the old-fashioned way?" If that last one makes you cringe, it should, because it evokes a history of violence against black people in this country that is raw and real. Well, frankly, the same goes for women — many of whom have been taken somewhere private, and never returned.
I can already hear the outcry of those who can't believe I'd equate the gender card with the race card. Well, too bad. They're both issues, they're both factors, and in the first presidential campaign where both a woman and an African-American have a real shot at the nomination, they're both all too germane.
And that was wrong, not something to somehow balance by not looking into Ben Carson's suitability as President. Even if it is true that Obama's ties to radical left-wingers were more relevant than Carson's kooky pyramid theory, I want to hear about any strange notions Carson has propounded in his years as a public figure. Does he study the facts of the real world and process them accurately and make appropriate conclusions? If not, I don't want him making the decisions that will affect us all. I agree that Obama did not get fully tested and America took a leap of faith, but that doesn't establish that it should be leaps of faith from here on.
Althouse.
If it wasn't for 2008 I'd take this advice, but you have to take responsibility for your actions.
I warned you in 2008.
but hey.
"It's about time we had a black president."
Althouse: "Does he study the facts of the real world and process them accurately and make appropriate conclusions?"
When religion makes a factual claim about the real world that is later proven false by evidence, that puts religionists into a quandary.
This is why it's important for religions never to depend on revelations being factually true. They have to hedge their bets.
During the Middle Ages, Martin Luther opposed the Copernican heliocentric model. But he was careful never to say "If the Sun doesn't revolve around the Earth, then Christianity must be false."
Those Christians in the Middle Ages who asserted that the Pyramids were the granaries of Joseph's time were since proven wrong by archaeologists--especially after they became able to decipher hieroglyphics. But nothing in Christianity depends on that theory being true.
So Dr. Carson (AND his supporters) should stop doubling down on an archaeological falsehood and just say, "We stand corrected."
(Why is it so hard for people to admit that these days?)
That thing about Imhotep and the step pyramid may well be where Carson got his story about grain storage. I have no idea how much evidence there is of this. I looked at few other Egyptology sites and there is some comment about how the shaft beneath the pyramid is square not rectangular.
It's probably no more far fetched or evidence of craziness than any other Christian belief and there are lots of people who still believe them, especially attendees at black churches. This whole thing may blow up in the left's face.
@sinz52So Dr. Carson (AND his supporters) should stop doubling down on an archaeological falsehood and just say, "We stand corrected."
I know. I wouldn't support Ben Carson if he were straining at gnats and swallowing camels as hard as supporters of Joseph-built-the-pyramids-to-store-grain defenders like Luann Zieman above. I'd like to think he wouldn't, but the Jacob-and-Esau analogy he used for today's Israel-and-Palestine does not fill me with confidence.
But we're not electing an archaeologist. This is now Team Red vs Team Blue. They just can't acknowledge the point scored by Blue pointing out a stupid statement from Red. It has nothing to do with the basis of the assertion.
The creationists are starting to come out of the woodwork now and hitch their broken-down wagon to this stupid controversy, so I'll get out before then.
@Michael K:That thing about Imhotep and the step pyramid may well be where Carson got his story about grain storage
Long predates that. People in the 19th century thought the mounds in the Midwest were built by Romans or Egyptians or lost tribes of Israel, and at least one influential Christian sect still holds that view.
Althouse: "And that was wrong,..."
On the contrary, the entire left said that to even question Obama was racist.
And those questioning Obama were then deemed "ugly" and out of bounds.
And goodness knows how many "correct thinking" folks were moved by such "ugly" questioning of his royal personage that they felt compelled to vote for him based on nothing more than a hope and a prayer.
garage: ".........."
I'm going to take that as an admission that, no, you have no intention of actually signing up for those night courses which would provide the training you would need to do the work you claimed you would like to get.
I can't say that I'm surprised in any way of course.
So Dr. Carson (AND his supporters) should stop doubling down on an archaeological falsehood and just say, "We stand corrected."
I don't think he was right about that point. But the issue isn't pyramids. It's what Ann noted above in her post, that this issue is being used to somehow suggest Carson isn't capable of understanding basic facts about the world.
A pediatric neurosurgeon who has operated on and saved some of the most difficult cases is being judge as incompetent because he got a fact about a pyramid wrong in an unfortunate analogy.
That's the craziness of this. People are coming out the woodwork, many of whom couldn't even name another pharaoh besides Tut and would have trouble finding Egypt on a map without googling it are mocking Carson for being dumb, claiming this somehow proves his inability to deal with real world situations. This, a man who has opened up skulls and repaired the very human brain itself. Or mocking him because he doesn't hold to evolution in terms of origins, this a man who has mastered medical science to save people from almost certain death and helped them find life. People who are themselves incapable of treating a minor wound are judging Carson because he doesn't fit into their ideological assumptions about the world.
Forget the pyramid issue, I'm defending Carson because the people who are using these issues to attack him are malicious fiends. Debate the topics, absolutely, disagree with positions, talk about key issues. But it is beyond absurd for journalists to think they have even any conception of how to criticize his actual intelligence and real-world applied knowledge of Ben Carson.
The media is giving him a poll test that they'll never let him pass, because eventually everyone has a topic that they don't know about. "Sorry, Mr Carson," the media is saying, "you're just not literate about ancient Egypt, we just can't let you try to be President." And all the little media followers are snickering at Dr. Carson's mistakes.
Ridiculous issue. Some Bible study class thing, and an idea on an interesting way to understand Scripture. Turns out to be wrong archaeologically? Fine.
No one cares. None of this shows anything about "Dr. Carson's ability to process data." I'm with Sherlock Holmes: "Now that you have told me, I will do my best to forget it. - If the Sun went around the Moon it would not make the least bit of difference to me."
"this issue is being used to somehow suggest Carson isn't capable of understanding basic facts about the world. "
Yes, this is atheist talk. Christians believe stuff atheists don't So what ?
Blogger LuAnn Zieman found what is probably the source,
Why were the Pyramids built? At this point what difference does it make?
It's both hilarious and frightening how some comments here just shrug about Carson's views on pyramids. He could say the earth is flat and some of you would think it's all just a matter of perspective and an innocuous view. It does matter if your candidate sometimes has some off-the-wall ideas. In this case Carson is an Evangelical, which is fine but it does inform his world view. A world view not shared by everyone. Are we allowed to criticize the good doctor or is that politically incorrect in the conservative world?
"He's the perfect candidate." "He'd be a better president than anyone since...." This is the talk you want to hear. Sorry. The media is not politically correct in this matter. Nor should you be. Question your candidates.
" Are we allowed to criticize the good doctor or is that politically incorrect in the conservative world? "
Yes but saying he is "crazy" because he believes something about the Bible is a bit off the main stream track. Did Jesus rise from the dead ? I don't know. Do you ?
views on pyramids ≠ the earth is flat
Are we allowed to criticize the good doctor? Sure. But we're allowed to criticize the criticisms if they're silly or disingenuous.
When a view on the use of the pyramids is being used to gauge Carson's ability to understand and apply real-world data, then it's a silly issue when he has spent his life dealing with significantly more complicated issues and tasks.
I'm sure that if Carson thought it important, he could become an expert on ancient Egyptian history. But then he'd be criticized for being out of touch. Criticism based on policy ideas or how his intelligence may or may not be useful in the office of President is quite valid. What does he think about current global issues or domestic problems? An analogy using faulty trivia does not really say anything about the man, but it says a lot about those who jump on it to dismiss him wholesale and deride those who might find him an intriguing candidate. I've honestly not decided who I'm going to support, and that might be the reason I'm especially frustrated by the deficient critiques that are out there.
There may be good reasons why I should vote for someone else, and why I should not vote for him, and I want to hear intelligent and relevant criticisms.
It's both hilarious and frightening how some comments here just shrug about Carson's views on pyramids.
I'm not shrugging, I'm just reserving judgement until I hear his thoughts on the Lighthouse of Alexandria and the Colossus of Rhodes.
Women should be ashamed of how they are tearing this country apart right now like little marionettes on the strings of the very wealthy. This is embarrassingly stupid and gives pause to support for the 19th amendment.
Way ahead of you there partner.........
I saw his video blast at the media. I loved it. He is correct that the media hold him to a different standard than the Magic Negro who they fawn over. Also, I have seen one too many high-tech lynchings in my day. Go Ben Carson.
#bc4dc16
I don't get why the poor vote Democrat when the party loathes the poor.
Because the poor don't give a shit as long as the Democrats keep giving them free stuff.
Is Althouse slamming two prominent blacks in one post?
Two prominent Conservative Blacks....that makes all the difference.
Althouse, I think you have joined the militant left with your comments on Carson. I am agnostic but I know that many people believe things that I doubt and they are not "kooks" or crazy,
Gotta chuckle at Gabriel who, before he started posting his ben Carson pyramid fact-checks, asserted that they were a "Public works project". LOL! Yeah, that's what it was. The Pharaoh and his kitchen cabinet were striving for some way to give jobs to all the poor Hebrews who were unemployed in Egypt at the time! Oh boy, well the one thing we know is that Gabriel is not a Jew.
If we could just get everyone to properly inflate their tires, we could save as much gas as we could get from offshore drilling.
“I remember landing under sniper fire,” Clinton said during a George Washington University campaign event on March 17, 2008. “There was supposed to be some kind of a greeting ceremony at the airport, but instead we just ran with our heads down to get into the vehicles to get to our base.” Clinton added that the feeling in the White House at the time of her visit was “if a place was too small, too poor, or too dangerous, the president couldn’t go, so send the First Lady.”
I want to talk about a 3 letter word: J-O-B-S!
"I am very optimistic about -- about Iraq. I mean, this could be one of the great achievements of this administration. You're going to see 90,000 American troops come marching home by the end of the summer. You're going to see a stable government in Iraq that is actually moving toward a representative government"
“Like with a cloth or something? I don't know how it works digitally.”
There is nowhere inside a pyramid to store much of anything.
professional website design company
I'm not shrugging, I'm just reserving judgement until I hear his thoughts on the Lighthouse of Alexandria and the Colossus of Rhodes.
I love a good comment in the morning.
Remember how nobody shrugged off Bill Ayers, who was only acquitted on charges of attempting to bomb a dance with soldiers and their sweethearts on a technicality? Everybody took that one seriously, that's for sure.
Not to mention masterminding a gang rape.
Post a Comment