Posted on 10/25/2015 11:43:48 AM PDT by PROCON
On the October 25 airing of Meet the Press, Republican presidential hopeful Ben Carson stressed the important role an armed citizenry plays in preventing tyranny, saying, the government finds it “much more difficult to dominate people who are armed.”
That statement came after host Chuck Todd revisited Carson’s past comments about how he believes European Jews could have limited the scope of the Holocaust had they been armed. It was October 8 when Carson said, “I think the likelihood of Hitler being able to accomplish his goals would have been greatly diminished if the people had been armed. I’m telling you there is a reason these dictatorial people take the guns first.”
Todd asked, “So you believe, if the Jewish citizenry were armed during the ’40s that they would have been able to stop the Holocaust?”
(Excerpt) Read more at breitbart.com ...
Bullshit
“Great article. Of course the Trump sycophants will soon dive into the thread and express their grave concern”
If he can’t take critism from Trump now how could he be expected to hold his own against Hillary and her media dogs? Trump, unlike most weak kneed Republicans has what it takes to go on the offense.
LOL
No, between your personal attacks, your asinine claim about semi automatics and your use of the word ‘Bullshit’ after a post involving your Godliness, all while refusing to actually address the issues I raised that set you off AGAIN, I’d say you devolved yet another thread into chaos as you always do.
Good Norm.
When we can, we should agree with each other, and not be shy about mentioning it.
Of course they are. That's why I always say when the revolution starts, the liberal, lamestream media simply must be the first casualties otherwise the truth of the revolution would never see the light of day.
Carson has some serious issues with doublespeak. His stuff with Sharpton and now the crap about white people not understanding the struggle.
I have to wonder just how much evolution people are willing to ignore. Considering he’s nine-nicing with Sharpton (and lets face it, what logic is there in attaching yourself to Sharpton in any way shape or form?), has he ‘evolved’ at all or is this just another black power thing coming out?
The man has way too many serious issues to be taken as a possible for president. I have to believe there’s a hell of a lot of white guilt and self loathing behind his popularity because he sucks mightily on a lot of big issues.
Can you two take this rank bickering to private messages instead of trashing a thread?
HiTech RedNeck, seems Norm has repeatedly asked you to leave him alone. Yes, your rhetoric seems pointlessly argumentative to the point of stalking.
Believe me. I wish he would either take it to freepmail or just go away completely. But I can’t stop him and I am not about to be browbeat by him without response.
And I am sincerely sorry that people have to get dragged into his delusions. And he does this regularly.
Carson doesn’t cut the mustard for me.
I do think he has come problems with policies and wonder if he has some problems with racial undertones.
That Sharpton thing is troubling, because he was simply identifying with him in a political sense. Trump was identifying with him in a business sense, to achieve a goal.
I take your criticism of any attachment to him in stride, because I can understand the point. It’s valid. I’m not convinced Trump was wrong to use him to get Don King on board his enterprise efforts. He had to do what he could to keep his business profitable and people employed.
Some folks won’t see it that way. I think it is reality.
I can understand it from a business standpoint. I don’t agree with the logic of it because it invariably leads to longer term issues (such as having it become a campaign issue later or helping to create a monster), but I do see the point of it short term from a financial standpoint.
With Carson though, I cannot for the life of me understand the upside for any association that doesn’t involve the word ‘pander’.
If he’s going for the ‘unity’ thing it makes no sense as Sharp is as polarizing a figure that has ever trod earth.
If he’s going for a black vote thing, he’s black and does not need token black people to sell him to the black population. Which would be wrong regardless of color.
He sure isn’t going to make conservatives or even people on the right side of moderate warm and fuzzy and people on the left side of it and lower hate him regardless as he is the thing they hate. A successful minority off the plantation.
Sharpton immediately brings the specter of violence, BLM/Occupy and reparation shakedown cons to any campaign. The only possible market that caters to is populated by Dindu “Nuffin” Gibdsmedat, who can’t vote anyway due to felony convictions.
Which doesn’t leave a lot of options for a rational explanation.
I’d like to know if he’d sign a National CCW reciprocity bill or repeal of NFA 34 or GCA 68 if they landed on his desk as president. The former is a possibility, the latter two are unlikely of course, but more of a theoretical question.
Seems like early on he was a bit weak/confused about gun rights, someone whispered in his ear and now he’s talking like a hardcore 2A activist.
I like Ben. And Don. And Ted. And...
Nobody else.
Does it really mean “stand firm and pat on whatever bullshit you like because you are the one who gets to state what’s right or wrong, true or false, external facts and references be damned.”?
Please confirm or re-define, thanks!
ReREal? Depends how you want to define it. I ‘created’ the idea so to speak, although I doub’t very much I’m the first to do so. I more or less coelesced the idea into a short blurb. But it’s real in the sense that it is a practical solution to the problem.
Existential Cage Theory - An Idea Whose Time Has Come
1: Get a cage
2: put the liberal in the cage
3: weld the door shut
4: walk away.
Think of it as “Scared Straight” for kids of the modern age. You take the caged liberals and line them along the road so people can see the animals that attempted to strip them of their rights and human dignity, while destroying their country.
It is morally acceptable because liberals pushed hard for the idea that starvation was a euphoric way to die. See the grave of Terri Schivo for proof.
It is also acceptable to them as an environmental solution to catastrophic climate change because they tell us the planet has a fever and we must depopulate to ensure continuity of the species.
Thus, with their blessing, I present Existential Cage Theory.
I liked the first definition better. Im gunna use that. Thanks
But that’s not what it is so it makes little sense to use an improper definition.
If you think about it, your thoughts on the overall merits actually align with Conservatism. It your business enterprise needs an influx of cash and all things being legal, it's wise to take measures to remain solvent.
Trump's interests, the interests of his employees, the interest of his suppliers and affiliated companies, the interests of the community, and the interests of all taxing agencies are being looked out for by his tenacity.
Is it reasoned to wish Sharpton were not involved? We agree there, no.
Overall, I think people would understand him being involved with Sharpton. You and I can make sense of it. I think the public could too.
If he got challenged on it, he could simply say, "Look, it was at a time when my casino needed more hard currency to remain solvent. What I asked Sharpton to do was legel. My options were to possibly have to shut down my hotel casino or remain solvent. I think I made the right choice. I'm sure my employees agreed. I'm sure the community did." I think most folks would see his point.
As for Carson, you're right on target there too > IMO.
It's unseemly for a political affiliation between the two. Beyond that, it demonstrates a tone deafness to the likes of Sharpton and all the dynamics surrounding him.
If you're going to become affiliated with a creature like Sharpton, I think Jessie Jackson would be the more respectable of the two, and probably has more political clout.
Sharpton is a disgusting little guy. Well, they obviously both are. I think you understand my point of view on it.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.