32 votes

I Will NEVER Support Ben Carson For President!

He is WEAK on 2ndA.

This is the Daily Paul. It should be instinctive and automatic to FULLY VET ALL candidates who may be considered!

GRRRRRR.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

He also believes in forced

"tithing" to the government.

I'd rather have a bottle in front o' me than a frontal lobotomy
www.tattoosbypaul.com
www.bijoustudio-atx.com

I shake my head to think that

I shake my head to think that there are still people that believe that any decent candidate (and I do not believe that is Ben Carson) will EVER have hope in winning the presidency! The game is rigged!! Ron Paul got through as a candidate, but it will NEVER happen again. I say this not for others to give up hope, but to be realistic. America and liberty will never be saved from Washington! The people must be educated and that is where it begins.

I wish you were wrong,

but all you had to do was follow Ron Paul's candidacy through the primaries to understand that we no longer have elections in America.

Amen agree with you

They are playing fantasy presidential elections. Those guys are bought and paid for with Rothschild Federal reserve counterfiet debt issue/false debt money, created in unlimited unaccountable amounts, digitized right out of thin air as a debt to your children and grand children making them into false debt slaves.

Rigged is a nice word. Cheating, lieing, vote count violations. All in all its a fools puppet show. A process of puppet treason put into our faces every 4 years. or 2 if you like to add the criminal puppet congress elections.

sovereign

Herman Cain without

the baggage. He's against the 2nd Amendment, a pro-warmonger, and the worst, he's a Zionist. I will never vote for a Zionist, period! Zionism, is not just about supporting Israel, it's about a whole brainwashed mindset that is apostacy to Christ, and is willing to trade Liberty for Totalitarianism, believing the Muslims are coming to destroy us. Believers in Zionism have been a greater threat to our Freedoms, than those who believe in Marxism, as they believe they are 'do gooders'. The Marxists have similarities, but they have been trained for years through our Marxist controlled school system, and are usually proclaimed atheists, rather than Zionists who proclaim to be Christian. The deception of being a (false) Christian, far outweighs being a known atheist.

another diff

Cane liked pizza and the Doc prob thinks it not healthy.

sovereign

Not to make an issue of this

But can you inform me what facts led you to hold these views:

"He's against the 2nd Amendment".
"a pro-warmonger".
"he's a Zionist"."and is willing to trade Liberty for Totalitarianism".

"Hell is empty, and all the devils are here" (Shakespeare)
RP 2012~ Intellectual Revolution.

I will not vote for Chris Christie, this

man is no friend of the Constitution or Liberty.

NO VOTE for Christie 2016

kind people rock

Ben Carson is Herman Cain

Used once again to split and divide the non-establishment RNC vote so that Chris Christie or Jeb Bush much like Romney can defeat the Pauls.

Casino

Not to detract in any way from the integrity of Carson's political philosophy [or Cain's for that matter], but you are sharp to see the reality of the parties' dealing candidates like cards.

In the end the house always wins.

Agree with your sentiment on vetting

I agree with your sentiment on vetting, unfortunately this community seems very weak on this when it comes to the son of a certain Congressman.

Yeah, you're right. A lot of

Yeah, you're right. A lot of people seem to be just grouping him with the establishment without vetting him to realize he's a liberty candidate!

Freedom in our lifetime! - fiol.us

Oh Grow up.

^

“My attitude toward progress has passed from antagonism to boredom. I have long ceased to argue with people who prefer Thursday to Wednesday because it is Thursday.” - G.K. Chesterton

BUMP!!!!

High 5!Thank You again!

I won't either. My only

I won't either. My only choice right now is Judge Nap with Rand in second.

.

.

~Good Night, And Good Luck~

Is he running?

What I find hard to understand is why people cling to this notion that voting is going to make a difference, let alone solve anything.
Would you vote for Michelle Obama, because good chance that is what your likely to get.
While your deciding between the lobster morney and filet mignon, they are dishing up the blue plate special.

What about Rand, do you really believe that he's likely to receive the GOP nomination..not in your lifetime, and has the GOP even got the slighest credability, it's a decaying relic, propped up to support the one party rule.
The only thing that is likely to make waves is someone out of left field in a 3rd party run, like JV or Judge Nap, and even then it would be more educational than practical.

People like Ron Paul, Rand, Judge Nap, JV and AJ etc., and yes, Ben Carson, like them or otherwise, get this corrupted excuse for a constitutional gov'mnt into the public arena, and that's all that's likely to happen. The rest is up to you, and everyone that gives a damn.

"Hell is empty, and all the devils are here" (Shakespeare)
RP 2012~ Intellectual Revolution.

I wont vote for him

simply because he was shoved down our throats by Fox News and A.M neo-con talk radio...whenever that happens, my spidey senses start tingling...

"I am Troll fighter, number one"

-Ernest

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LxWb-ViejPg

I think the establishment game plan

will include stacking the republican primary roster as full as they can; 1) it will limit the speaking time during debates of whoever the liberty candidate is and 2) it makes election & vote manipulation easier by diluting the results as much as possible. The more establishment insiders on the playing field, the easier it will be for them to play their games.

Ron Swanson

And I think he still believes we should pay taxes to the Crown,

Oh my bad the government.

Why do you think that?

Why do you think that?

Dr.Carson has said in at least one or more speeches that

people should have to "tithe" to the federal government. I think that's essentially a 10% flat tax.

I'd rather have a bottle in front o' me than a frontal lobotomy
www.tattoosbypaul.com
www.bijoustudio-atx.com

I've heard those speeches...

and yes, he's reminiscent of Steve Forbes in that his main emphasis is in the term "flat". His second emphasis is in "10%" implying a vast reduction from current rates. His third emphasis is that humans have dealt with such arrangements for thousands of years, [my personal emphasis from here on out] and that through the ages most governing entities have wisely determined that 10% is about as high a tax as can be sanely engaged without damaging the tax base itself.

None of this implies that Carson is particularly pro-tax or that he wishes to support the "Crown". Ron Paul certainly supports the eradication of many taxes, but he too has proposed targets of 10% throughout his career in real attempts to lower current rates.

It is easy, and mysteriously tempting to falsely claim that someone supports taxation when he or she is actually attempting to lessen it. Rand Paul has been such a target of false claim. He clearly started with the notion we should cease all foreign aid, saw he was getting nowhere with such a proposal, then honed in on proposing that we should at least cease aid to those nations being unfriendly toward us. At that point he was falsely pegged to support foreign aid to those who are friendly.

A similar dynamic is being played out here with false claims of Carson's threat to the Second Amendment.

Well I'm not doctor011...

But I will speculate that they are aware of the per-revolutionary Compacts that were forged (and are still operational today) during the colonization of North America.

This has interesting links...

http://politicalvelcraft.org/2012/02/08/americans-pay-a-perc...

..and this is just a simple page for the source that tells of the Queen of England can alter our Social Security policy...

http://www.civil-liberties.com/books/thequeen.htm

"In the REAL world, It takes more than one despot to have tyranny." -Anonymous

~Good Night, And Good Luck~

"But I will speculate that they..."

"But I will speculate that they..."

To whom are you referring by "they"?
[Edit: Oh I see, you're probably referring to doctor011]

And what does any of this have to do with Ben Carson?

Interesting stuff though. Thanks for the links.

I wouldn't vote for him either

here's the vid where he speaks nonsense

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I2PVv-VnXD4

Thanks for posting what the OP sorely lacked.

Personally, I find Carson not weak, but quite strong and sane on the Second Amendment. He supportively regurgitated it unabashedly. If you found him weak or nonsensical in his answers to Glenn's follow-up questions, you are opining in a realm beyond the Second Amendment. The Second Amendment suggests more, but at the heart of popular notion in question is that the federal government shall not infringe upon a person's right to bear arms. Some hardcore Second Amendment enthusiasts interpret it to imply that the federal government will aid in protecting the right of a person within the U.S. to bear arms anywhere in the U.S. thus potentially clashing with any other jurisdictional structure. Pay close attention. Carson doesn't even deny that [not that he reveals evidence that he supports that hardcore notion]. He employs the proper tact of throwing the determination of what are suitable "arms" into parochial means. Sure, it's not a perfect tact, but it seems to be the best humanity has come up with through the ages. It's utterly Jeffersonian. Weapons of protection have changed through the ages, and hey, why do you suppose militias were mentioned in the amendment? It wasn't a willy-nilly proposition. Side arms are certainly arms. Are bazookas also arms? If I'm allowed to carry a pistol but not a bazooka, am I still being allowed to bear arms? If your next door neighbor placed land mines in his yard, would you not feel the urge to consult with the other neighbors on your street and perhaps together approach him about removing the mines. I would. I have children and dogs. I also enjoy the neighborhood deer and fox.

landmines, bazookas And all

landmines, bazookas And all that other crap you bring up is just that. CRAP! Pure nonsense. You sound like a good anti gun Clinton/Obama loving leftist.

"good" doesn't belong in a sentence with those other words

I'm no foe to Second Amendment fans and activists. I was raised by a father who taught me to shoot everything from twenty two caliber to 12 gauge. I used to frequent two bars in Stanley, Idaho and one in Prescott, Arizona in which the clientele freely walked in and out with open-carried side arms, good venues, good people, good times. I had a childhood friend blow his arms off while playing with dynamite, good friend, bad times. I had an adult friend who used dynamite to blow up an asshole's military-issue six-wheeler, good times. We choose our venues. If we don't like the rules there we go someplace else. Our home venues are different. That's where WE make the rules, and if strangers don't like our rules they best move along. I don't give a damn if you have fully automatic weapons stockpiled in your basement, but if you tote them to my local playground I'm going to approach you to ask, "Dude, what's up?" I don't care if you store a modicum of dynamite in your garage, but I'll take you down if I see you playing with it at my public park. I'll do the same if I discover your even transporting it willy-nilly in the trunk of your car as I'm not the only person I know to space out now 'n then and rear-end a bumper or two.

I'm not a leftist. I also ain't no green-toothed commie-pinko-fag hater from a Charlie Daniels song. I have a brain, a mind of my own, and the good sense to actually understand what Ben Carson is saying. SOME Second Amendment zealots only understand one particular style of language/rhetoric. It goes like this, "I'm a gonna stick muh aay kay fortee sevun up that lefteest-commee's arseehole!" Such zealots, upon hearing language that doesn't fit or falls short of such style, resort to thinking that they are in the presence of an enemy or at least dealing with someone who doesn't support the Second Amendment. Listen to Carson again. He doesn't disprove of semi-automatic or even fully-automatic weapons. He does disprove of federal jurisdiction of the matter. He suggests local determination of such matters, people like me seeing a carbine at the playground and telling its owner, "Wow, that's a classic! but how about taking it to the range? It's just down the road. Are you new in town? I'll go with you. I'd love a crack at that thing!"