As promised, more words.
I haven’t done very much about the political season of late. I’ve been watching it in utter dismay. I am astounded at the circus antics of those who would style themselves as America’s saviors. It’s just possible their intent is to save us from them.
Ben Carson melted down recently, bellowing that Obama didn’t get treated this way. His memory, like everything else, is deficient. But to be fair, Obama gave the sharks less to attack. He behaved like a serious-minded person, offered content, policy ideas, and a grasp of reality that did not lend itself to easy assault unless those mounting the assault intended to do so on the basis of his politics.
So they made shit up. He was born in Kenya. He’s a Muslim. He’s a communist. A variety of lesser things. With an evident lack of ability to attack him on the grounds of political position, they concocted ephemeral bullshit and hoped some of it would stick—as they have continued to do.
Carson has apparently opted to make things up for himself instead of letting others do it for him, and complains when he gets attacked for it. From my perspective, that he has now become the front-runner for the GOP nomination suggests the media has gone easy on him till now, otherwise how could he have reached this point? When they failed to attack him and focused instead on his chief rival, Donald, he started shoveling out more nonsense to attract the detractors and gain some traction.
As a campaign strategy it may have worked too well.
Really, there are only a couple of things he has said which should have eliminated him from serious consideration long before now.
His comparison of Obamacare to slavery.
No, he did not say slavery was the best thing that ever happened to black people, that was a comment from a satirical website. But he did suggest Obamacare was akin to slavery because “in a way, it is slavery, because it is making all of us subservient to the government.”
By that thinking, traffic laws make us all slaves.
One might put this down to the hyperbole of political campaigning, and I’m willing to concede that. In this case, I don’t care, because it is an abuse of language and an insult to morality. “In a way” nothing is like slavery except slavery, and we need to step back from this kind of comparison. It’s as bad as labeling any policy you don’t like fascism just because you don’t like it. Or comparing someone to Hitler simply because you disagree with him. It bends the meanings of those words so out of shape as to render them meaningless.
Besides, the longer the ACA (Affordable Care Act, not “Obamacare”—this was a law written by congress, not the president, so use the correct labels, please) stands, the more actual citizens like it. This is not a guess, this is born out by surveys. Oh, and the gargantuan economic meltdown attributed to it hasn’t happened.
It also shows a blatant insensitivity for history, but Carson isn’t the only one who indulges in that.
No, “Obamacare” is not like slavery and by saying that he exhibits a willingness to indulge the basest sort of demagoguery. And for a doctor to take that line bothers me, since it also shows a disconnect with the realities of his profession. Now, had he then said “We should go to single payer” then I might listen closer and give him a bit more consideration.
The other thing is this whole magilla about evolution. He said: “I personally believe that this theory that Darwin came up with was something that was encouraged by the adversary.”
The adversary being Satan.
If you believe in that sort of thing, I can’t argue with you. It’s bullshit, but belief is one of those non-negotiable things that thrives on disagreement. The more people tell you you’re wrong, the more noble it is to dig in and believe. So there is no profit in trying to argue about it.
But that non-negotiable part is worrisome in someone who wants to lead a powerful nation and might be called upon to compromise over fundamental disconnects in ideology in order to preserve, like, the world. One of the things Obama is continually criticized on by people who think adherence to immovable ideologies is noble is his seeming willingness to compromise. It is seen as weak, poor leadership, etc. It happens to be one of the things I like about him and in that job the ability to listen and accept sometimes uncomfortable differences in pursuit of mutuality and peace is a talent I suspect Ben Carson, if he means this stuff, lacks.
He has made similarly idiotic statements about the Big Bang.
Now, he’s a brain surgeon, which is suppose to be, in certain contexts, code for “really smart.” I’m not seeing the smart. He keeps making shit up to gain some kind of street cred among the Party faithful. That whole thing about being confronted in a fast food restaurant? True or not, he said of the encounter “Guy comes in, put the gun in my ribs. And I just said, ‘I believe that you want the guy behind the counter.'” I’m having a hard time seeing how this is any indication of presumed bravery. He just admitted to telling a robber not to hold him up but hold somebody else up. Point the gun at the minimum wage worker behind the counter. Aim that thing at someone else.
He’s a doctor. What happened to “Above all, do no harm”? Why not, “This is between you and me, let’s go out to the parking lot” and get the assailant away from others who might be hurt?
I get it, this is supposed to be his Clint Eastwood moment. But think about it. He was figuratively and, if he is to be believed, literally stepping behind someone else in the face of personal harm.
Then, we have his recent problems over—wait for it—the pyramids of Giza.
“My own personal theory is that Joseph built the pyramids to store grain. Now all the archaeologists think that they were made for the pharaohs’ graves. But, you know, it would have to be something awfully big — when you stop and think about it, and I don’t think it’d just disappear over the course of time — to store that much grain.”
To be fair, he said that in 1998, it is not part of his current campaign strategy to undermine archaeology. But still, it makes one wonder if he has ever read a book outside of his course studies in medical school. There’s a term for this kind of thing: pseudoscience.
Now he’s bellyaching about media scrutiny. What did he expect? He’s running for president. There is one school of thought that suggests that personal beliefs should be off-limits in considerations of who should serve in that office. As far as it goes, I accept that. But when one opens one’s mouth and reveals it to the world, it kind of stops being only a personal belief, it becomes part of what you want the public to perceive, and an indication of what you think is important for the public to make a choice.
Now we come to the West Point thing. He claims to have been offered a full scholarship. What does that mean?
Here are the admissions requirements . Note, one of the requirements is a nomination from a senator, a representative, or a president. He would have had to apply. A “recommendation” from a general would not have been enough.
As for his attitude toward the Black Lives Matter movement, well, it may be a question of style, but it seems perverse. “I hate political correctness” has become akin to those who claim to hate feminism but without actually understanding what it means.
But he has supporters. More, it seems, than Trump, which may not be saying much.
There is a deep admiration in this country for so-called plain-speaking, especially when it seems to be in service to challenging the establishment. But such speech ought first and foremost be linked to intelligence and a bit of knowledge about what windmills you think you’re charging. The flush of shocked cheering at the presumed independence of someone like Ben Carson should give way to a reasoned apprehension that he also seems to be independent of actual reason in too many areas. On top of his Party consistent adherence to the standard issue GOP platform, this causes me some amusement and a bit of nervousness that people who would vote for him could be so stump gullible.
And the clown car rolls on.