Carson Has Faith in Donald Trump

There was a rather stark contrast between two key endorsements in the GOP race. No, not Fiorina and Carson: as interesting as that comparison may be as an indicator of people taking sides. It’s Christie vs. Carson. Both being Trump-endorsers, of course.

What's fascinating is how different Christie and Carson's performances on the debate are when compared to their respective endorsement press conferences. Christie may be a brawler who's swinging took him out of the race and crippled Marco Rubio, but he is an effective and efficient presence on the debate stage. Understandable as a former prosecutor.

Carson, on the debate stage ... It's hard not to think of Bad Lip Reading's hilarious dubbing of the first GOP debate and Carson specifically. But that's Ben Carson, literally plumbing his own depths as he considers in near-monastic reflection the questions thrown at him. His jokes were kind ... and lame. His viewpoint distinct and authentic. And his numbers have been trailing off for months.

But Dr. Ben Carson was, by his standards, positively crisp and confident at the press conference in Florida. He gave a 30K foot view of why he chose to endorse Donald Trump. And he handled the media reasonably well. Of course, the media is already onto his God-sent-my-buddy-a-dream-about-Trump story and he will be ridiculed by liberals and others. But Carson's point about siding with Trump to stop Hillary and defend SCOTUS from a series of Democrat liberal Sumpreme Court Justice appointments, is a pragmatic argument. That is, if you believe that Trump is the best bet to beat Hillary.

There was none of the bull-horn stuff and discomfort of Christie's endorsement of The Donald. And there was a small but evident display of Carson's political maturity: he savaged Ted Cruz with Christian kindness, stating that he had forgiven him. Never to forget for the rest of his life what Ted's team did in Iowa. When you go in for the kill sotto voce, you're ready for Washington.

Go in for the kill, not make the kill. Ted Cruz is far more predator than prey and there's still a few living souls who await the neat stacking as official carcasses; as Frank Underwood would put it. And it may be Ben who gets stacked and not Ted.

But if Trump wins the nomination, and then surprises his detractors in the general election - it seems Democrats are taking his electability far more seriously than many Republicans - then Carson will not only survive his stacking, but be a possible Cabinet member in a Trump presidency. Or, his running mate.

Posted by Keeley at March 11, 2016 3:04 PM
Comment #403450

More tellingly, Carson reveals what clinched his endorsement here:

I needed to know that he could listen to other people, that he could change his opinions, and that some of the more outlandish things that he’s said, that he didn’t really believe those things,” Carson said.

In other words, Trump is lying when he talks to Americans. His true beliefs are kept under wraps, to be revealed as a big surprise next January. Can we really trust Trump?

Posted by: Warren Porter at March 12, 2016 7:59 PM
Comment #403456

Another windmill, Warren Porter?

Let me educate you on the specifics of what you’re attempting to talk about.

Trump, out of the blue, was asked about visas. He stated his belief, out of the blue, in response. He then educated himself on the subject in more depth and decided to modify his stance. An admirable thing to do, but an easy thing to do for a normal person.

Let’s compare that to your blind, unyielding, devotion to a compulsive liar and perhaps an outright criminal, Hillbilly.

Why the double standard, Warren Porter? You have a lot of nerve calling someone a liar.

Posted by: Weary Willie at March 12, 2016 9:49 PM
Comment #403458

Hillary Clinton doesn’t lie about her policy positions like Trump does. The only thing she ever lied about was her trip to Bosnia.

Posted by: Warren Porter at March 12, 2016 10:24 PM
Comment #403459


‘There are none so blind as those who will not see. The most deluded people are those who choose to ignore what they already know’.

Posted by: Weary Willie at March 12, 2016 10:27 PM
Comment #403473
‘There are none so blind as those who will not see. The most deluded people are those who choose to ignore what they already know’.

Fits you like a T.

Posted by: Warren Porter at March 13, 2016 12:17 PM
Comment #403475

She lied about her stance on gay marriage.
She lied about her support for NAFTA.
She lied about her communications with Chris Stephens.
She lied about not have the funding for security in Benghazi.
She lied about her husband’s affairs.

Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton are in a bar. Donald leans over, and with a smile on his face, says, “The media are really tearing you apart for that scandal.”
Hillary: “You mean my lying about Benghazi?”
Trump: “No, the other one.”
Hillary: “You mean the massive voter fraud?”
Trump: “No, the other one.”
Hillary: “You mean the military not getting their votes counted?”
Trump: “No, the other one.”
Hillary: “Using my secret private server with classified material to hide my activities?”
Trump: “No, the other one.”
Hillary: “The NSA monitoring our phone calls, emails and everything else?”
Trump: “No, the other one.”

Hillary: “Using the Clinton Foundation as a cover for tax evasion, hiring cronies,and taking bribes from foreign countries?
Trump: “No, the other one.”
Hillary: “You mean the drones being operated in our own country without the benefit of the law?”
Trump: “No, the other one.”
Hillary: “Giving 123 Technologies $300 Million, and right afterward it declared bankruptcy and was sold to the Chinese?”
Trump: “No, the other one.”
Hillary: “You mean arming the Muslim Brotherhood and hiring them in the White House?”
Trump: “No, the other one.”
Hillary: “Whitewater, Watergate committee, Vince Foster, commodity deals?”
Trump: “No the other one:”
Hillary: “The IRS targeting conservatives?”
Trump: “No the other one:”
Hillary: “Turning Libya into chaos?”
Trump: “No the other one:”
Hillary: “Trashing Mubarak, one of our few Muslim friends?”
Trump: “No the other one:”
Hillary: “Turning our backs on Israel?”
Trump: “No the other one:”
Hillary: “The joke Iran Nuke deal? ”
Trump: “No the other one:”
Hillary: “Leaving Iraq in chaos? ”
Trump: “No, the other one.”
Hillary: “The DOJ spying on the press?”
Trump: “No, the other one.”
Hillary: “You mean HHS Secretary Sibelius shaking down health insurance executives?”
Trump: “No, the other one.”
Hillary: “Giving our cronies in SOLYNDRA $500 MILLION DOLLARS and 3 months later they declared bankruptcy and then the Chinese bought it?”
Trump: “No, the other one.”
Hillary: “The NSA monitoring citizens’ ?”
Trump: “No, the other one.”
Hillary: “The State Department interfering with an Inspector General investigation on departmental sexual misconduct?”
Trump: “No, the other one.”
Hillary: “Me, The IRS, Clapper and Holder all lying to Congress?”
Trump: “No, the other one.”
Hillary: “Threats to all of Bill’s former mistresses to keep them quiet”
Trump: “No, the other one.”
Hillary: “I give up! … Oh wait, I think I’ve got it! When I stole the White House furniture, silverware and china when Bill left Office?”
Trump: “THAT’S IT! I almost forgot about that one”.

Posted by: Weary Willie at March 13, 2016 12:44 PM
Comment #403477

You are going have to better than copying pasting from conservative chain emails.

Posted by: Warren Porter at March 13, 2016 1:02 PM
Comment #403479

Actually, using the same criteria, I would like WW to name one presidential candidate who is not a liar. It would save us all a lot of time. Instead of repeating the charge ‘liar’ over and over again every time someone changes a position over the years. We could just use the word ‘honest’ for that one person, and assume everyone else lies.

So go for it, WW. Here’s your chance to do better than a cut and paste. Name that person!!!

Posted by: phx8 at March 13, 2016 1:26 PM
Comment #403483

It’s a sad state of affairs when we have to challenge each other to find an honest person in our political system.

What is really the problem is that Democratics stand behind their liars and support them and excuse them while at the same time chastising and harassing and demonizing their political opponents for the same, whether it’s true or not.

Posted by: Weary Willie at March 13, 2016 3:13 PM
Comment #403484

I can only speak for myself, but my chastisement of Republican liars is mostly in order to better contextualize HRC. I will gladly agree to stop hammering Cruz and Trump for their lies if Watchblog’s conservatives promise to stop calling HRC a liar.

Posted by: Warren Porter at March 13, 2016 4:13 PM
Comment #403491

When Hillbilly quits lying I will quit calling her a liar.

Are you saying you have to call Republicans liars to make Hillbilly look good to you?

That’s sad, and it shows how far in the tank you are to protect your precious party.

Posted by: Weary Willie at March 13, 2016 5:26 PM
Comment #403492

Hillary Clinton is a person. All persons lie from time to time. Conservatives have hung a few examples of false statements to brand HRC a liar, which I don’t think is accurate. It only makes sense to call someone a politician a liar if the lies are particularly frequent or egregious. Neither of these are the case for HRC.

Again, we return to phx8’s question. Which politician do you think is not a liar?

Posted by: Warren Porter at March 13, 2016 5:32 PM
Comment #403495

That question is irrelevant.

What is relevant is the blind support of a liar and the willful ignorance of the fact when it comes to Democratics.

Posted by: Weary Willie at March 13, 2016 10:39 PM
Comment #403498

Gee, you’re throwing around phrases like “blind support” and “willful ignorance,” yet you will not name one honest presidential candidate. Either party. It seems to me that if you are willing to cast terrible aspersions upon the characters of people like Hillary Clinton, you should be willing to say nice things about other people. Unless, of course, you live in a world of liars, in which case, it sucks to be you.

Posted by: phx8 at March 13, 2016 11:19 PM
Comment #403499

What you’re doing is forcing me into a corner so you can attack my answer.

I think the question is irrelevant. What difference does it make if there is an honest politician in D.C. to you? If I mention a Republican you would condemn the answer out of hand, without proof, as viciously as possible.

The point is it doesn’t matter if he’s honest or a liar to Democratics any more. It’s more important to have the Democratic label in front of their name, more important to have a seat filled with an Democratic ass whether it lies or not. You people don’t care if they are honest or liars.

That makes your question irrelevant.

Posted by: Weary Willie at March 13, 2016 11:37 PM
Comment #403500

I think phx8’s point has been demonstrated. You only whine about HRC because she has a D after her name.

Posted by: Warren Porter at March 13, 2016 11:53 PM
Comment #403502

She may be the next Santa Clause of the United States. That’s a big reason why we should point out her faults. Cruz, Rubio, perhaps even Trump are not going to get elected.

It’s bad enough your party supported a unknown liar twice. It shows what your party is made of when you support and elect a liar who is known to all as a liar. Being elected president is probably the only thing that will keep her out of jail.

Posted by: Weary Willie at March 14, 2016 7:12 AM
Comment #403503

What does it say about the Republican Party that the current front runner is many times more a liar than anyone in the Democratic Party?

Posted by: Warren Porter at March 14, 2016 9:27 AM
Comment #403504

Are you really so blinded by your partisanship?

There are politicians who are basically good, honest people. In my mind, Hillary Clinton, Sanders, and Kasich all fit the mold. Huckabee strikes me as a decent person as long as he stays off the topic of Israel or fundamentalist causes. All of the politicians I have named have ‘evolved’ on issues over time, including gay marriage and trade deals. None of them are perfect. But in general they show compassion and seem to value it over partisanship. When called on inaccuracies or mistakes, they are not afraid to admit it. Again, Hillary Clinton, Sanders, and Kasich all fall into that category.

Being a politician means compromising with opposition. It means representing everyone in a district or state or even the country, even if compromise means contradicting their own personal convictions. It is not the same as being an ideologue.

Sometimes a politician will take an extreme position as a negotiating posture. It is a little like bluffing in poker.

Having said that, there are politicians who lie with abandon. They say things that are factually untrue, and they know it. When called on it, they deny it. Trump and Cruz fit that mold. They strike me as being genuinely awful people.

Posted by: phx8 at March 14, 2016 10:14 AM
Comment #403506

Part of the reason I file HRC in the “honest politician” category is that when she does lie, she is absolutely terrible at it. You can tell her conscience is at work. On the other hand, Trump and Cruz never display the same humility.

Posted by: Warren Porter at March 14, 2016 11:03 AM
Comment #403510
You people don’t care if they are honest or liars.

Sure we do Weary. Your problem is we don’t buy into the propaganda you fall for. You use myth misinformation half truths and outright lies to try to convince us Hillary is somehow more of a liar than anyone else. You go back years and years to nitpick each word she has said. Which is fine if that is the way you want to play the game.

But then you refuse to follow the same standard with other candidates. You also need to understand your own team is calling Ted out as lying Ted. He has earned a reputation amongst his own team as a liar. Not an exaggerator, not someone who changes positions years down the road, not someone who over spoke or misspoke, but a liar.

This happens when one realizes they cannot run on their record nor their promises anymore. That is the problem repubs have this time out. Kansas, Wisconsin, Louisiana have been led by repubs into the fiscal toilet.The repub led Congress has done nothing right. You hear the repub candidates tell us they want to take the country back to make it great again.

So it seems you want to go back, as they promise, but what they fail to say is they have had control of the overwhelming majority of state governments as well as both the HoR and the Senate. Just who are they trying to take it back from and why? Both Bernie and Hillary want to take the country forward not back so you guys have to resort to Trumptactics to confuse the voters. You seem to back these manipulations of truth so why in the hell are you accusing us of not caring about honesty or lies?

Posted by: j2t2 at March 14, 2016 12:28 PM
Comment #403511

IMHO Carson is right when he endorses Trump for the repub presidential candidate. He is the best of the bunch, the one that would do the less amount of damage to the country. In fact an argument could be made that Trump could strengthen the country by following through on his promises. If of course he doesn’t kill it first. Trump is less of an ideologue,than Cruz or Rubio, who IMHO will learn fast should he be put to the test of leadership. The other two…. oh man scary.

Now we can look at a sizable portion of the Trump followers, the many who are now interested in the political arena for the first time, and see the comparisons between the people of Germany of the 20’s and the Tea Party and the newly political of today. Yes he made it easy to see but this nationalism has been growing for some time.

But IMHO the only reason this phenomena has risen to the surface now is because Trump is a much more charismatic leader than Cruz but given the opportunity Cruz would do more harm as leader than the Donald. Trump is a goof. Cruz is serious about world domination, it being a long time goal and all.

So even Carson is right once in a while and this is one of those times.

Posted by: j2t2 at March 14, 2016 12:46 PM
Comment #403529

It is difficult to look at Trump, Cruz, and Rubio and tell who would be a bigger disaster.

Who would be most likely to send 20,000 or more American soldiers into Iraq and Syria? And what are the chances they would actually pay for it? I think we all know the answer to that.

Cruz and Rubio have repeatedly stated their intent to tear up the Iran nuclear non-proliferation agreement on their fist day. That deal was negotiated with our allies and our partners sharing common interests: Russia, China, Britain, France, and Germany. We would be tearing up our relations with them too. And that’s just the jumping off point. Rubio would trash improved relations with Cuba. That would be nasty and pointless, but in the larger scheme of things it wouldn’t make much difference, other than to make us look bad for re-implementing a policy that has failed for decades. Trump would do better in terms of international relations- or maybe not. Netanyahu cancelled Trump’s visit to Israel over the banning all Muslims from the US statement. 500,000 Brits signed a petition and forced Parliament to debate banning Trump. His threats against Mexico, China, and others could spark a trade war. The dollar would collapse on his first day in office. It is such an ugly prospect. I really don’t like to think about it.

Repealing Obamacare would crash the stock market, with the health care stocks leading the nose dive. Insurance companies have hired a lot of people over the past four years, so lay-offs would quickly follow, along with a fast rise in health care costs.

All three propose similar economic agendas, and this is not our first rodeo. Implementing those agendas would result in the usual ballooning deficits and debt. But that would take a while. All three would almost certainly tank the economy in short order, so any of their longer term agendas might be pointless to even consider.

Relations with Congress would be non-existent for Cruz. Trump would have no support from anyone. Rubio might do better. Maybe.

Fortunately, the chances of any of them winning are very slim. But if there was a real chance, there would be a financial exodus by October.

Posted by: phx8 at March 14, 2016 4:46 PM
Comment #403557

Good point phx8 I sure can’t stick up for any of them, their outdated polices or ideologies. IMHO Trump is a lot of talk and should he become the bully on the bully pulpit I think he would calm down. The other two are ideologues especially Cruz and they worry me more than Trump. Any of them would be a major step down for the country, but then that is the goal isn’t it making government small.

Posted by: j2t2 at March 15, 2016 12:36 PM
Comment #410541

Regardless of whether it is a SBA ensured credit or a customary secured bank advance, the answer is obligation pardoning, not obligation adjustment. Credit change is another trap the banks need to play on you to concentrate more cash than your business can manage. Be more quick witted than the banks. Say, “Much appreciated, however forget about it.”

Posted by: payday loans at November 27, 2016 12:19 PM
Post a comment