Bernie Sanders has a
few words about the media criticism of Dr. Ben Carson-specifically the inconsistencies in various stories he has shared over the years:
Democratic presidential candidate Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) said he didn’t think reporting on what Republican presidential candidate Dr. Ben Carson stated years ago was fair game.
NBC “Meet The Press” host Chuck Todd asked Sanders what he thought about “the Ben Carson stuff.”
“Because you have seen some people leak out stuff you wrote 30 and 40 years ago,” Todd continued. “Is this fair game?”
“No,” Sanders replied. “And look, I listened to the interviews with Dr. Carson. And it’s interesting. But you know what, Chuck? The American people want to know why the middle class of this country is disappearing.”
“I think it might be a better idea, I know it’s a crazy idea, but maybe we focus on the issues impacting the American people and what candidates are saying rather than just spending so much time exploring their lives of 30 or 40 years ago,” Sanders continued. “And I think the reason that so many people are turned off to the political process has a lot to do with the fact that we’re not talking about the real issues impacting real people.”
He’s basically saying there are more important things to discuss than whether or not Carson’s story of his rags-to-riches, bootstrapping, come-to-Jesus [bullshit] story is accurate or truthful. What are his actual plans to run this country? How would he tackle the economy? What are his views on foreign policy? How is he going to tackle income inequality? These are questions that need asking. Questions that resonate with many people quite a bit more than “did he or didn’t he tell the truth about his past in his biography”.
I both agree and disagree with Sanders. More the former than the latter though.
I think the deceptions, the mis-truths, the half-truths, and the ever-shifting-can’t-keep-his-story-straight-from-one-retelling-to-the-other hurts him. It hurts him because his image is becoming tarnished. And he has spent quite some time deliberately constructing a public image of himself. It is this image that has caused many people to support him. There are people out there who want to see a President Carson (I’ll have chills down my spine for at least another 30 years entertaining *that* thought). Many of these people are unconcerned with his politics (many of them are happy he’s never been a politician). These are the people who think he’s a straight-shooter. A person who tells it like it is. They think of him as an honest man…a break from politicians as usual. And they think this-at least some of them do-because of his bootstrapping story and how he found Jesus. These are people who believe things like:
-Ben Carson was able to make a success of himself, so racism can’t be all that bad, and all those other black people who are complaining that they have it bad can’t really, bc ‘Hey look! A black guy is successful’ (bc some black people being successful somehow translates to all black people being able to overcome systemic racism and a deck stacked in favor of white people and in disfavor of People of Color).
-Ben Carson is the story of a wayward young man who, but for finding Jesus might have been a poor, lost soul. By turning away from his life of violence and anger, and turning to Jesus, Ben Carson is a living testament to the power of Christ.
-Because he found Christ and he’s so open and honest with his faith, he’s clearly a man of integrity and honesty, unlike those *other* politicians. Such qualities are what we need in a president.
The beliefs mentioned above illustrate how some of his supporters view him. They believe these things and think of Carson as a good person due to the image of himself that he has cultivated through his talks and his books. He has created (perhaps ‘fabricated’ would be more appropriate) this image that has won the hearts and minds of many people across the nation. So there is value in calling him out on the discrepancies in the tales he’s told. If those myths can be shattered by shining a light on the inconsistencies in his stories, that may result in Dr. Carson having less support. And even where such shattering of myths may not happen, shining a light might begin the process of people viewing Dr. Carson’s past and his character in a decent light.
For all that, however, there are many other subjects that can and should be tackled regarding Dr. Carson’s beliefs and political positions. Yes, much of his appeal to the conservative crowd stems from the above (also, IMO, there’s an element of ‘Ben Carson is a black guy that I like and embrace, so I can’t be a racist fuckstain’ for many conservative voters and certainly among the rank and file GOP shitstains) and speaks to his character to an extent, but for some people-those who are more concerned with how a potential candidate will govern the country should they win the presidency-it’s disconnected from what they want to know about a President. Beyond his appeal, what is he about? While I see many of his supporters defending his character and his religious beliefs, I don’t often see them talking about issues that affect people, or that reveal his opinions about segments of the USAmerican population.
He has argued that the Affordable Care Act is comparable to slavery. Slavery-or in puke inducing parlance ‘the peculiar institution’-treated human beings like objects. Like property to be bought, traded, sold, or cast aside at will. People who were slaves weren’t accorded rights as human beings. To compare such treatment to an [admittedly not the best] health insurance statute that has given millions of people access to health insurance where they once had none? A truly honest man, a man of true integrity would NEVER make such a comparison. Where are their comments then? Why are they not excoriating him for his opposition to something that greatly benefits millions of people? Curiously, they fall silent.
So too do they fall silent when he talks with such disdain about LGBT people. I’m an out and proud gay man and I find many of the statements Dr. Carson has made about gay people to be at once ignorant and contemptible. There is no evidence that people go into prison and come out gay. The association of prison with gay people is a subtle one. But it’s one that brings to mind a negative association. After all, many people do not view former prisoners as good people. If you think people can be turned gay by going to prison…and you think prisoners are not good people…? It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to figure out where that thought process leads. No, he hasn’t said this outright, but the implications are there, and I fucking DESPISE those implications. But perhaps he doesn’t feel that way. Perhaps I’m reading too much into his comments. While I don’t think so, I’ll entertain the notion for a moment. But only long enough to mention he’s also drawn a parallel between gay people and bestiality (as well as pedophilia). Last I checked, pedophilia is regarded as vile and reprehensible by most people (including myself), while bestiality is regarded as repulsive and disgusting. To associate gay people with either of those is to draw parallels between gay people and people who engage in morally contemptible actions. So no, I don’t think I’m wrong when I say that the implications of Dr. Carson’s comments are vile. And they illuminate how he perceives millions of USAmericans.
And then there are his comments about abortion. Barring certain circumstances-ones that he deigns important enough (so generous the man is)-were the power his, he would make abortion illegal. If you’re an individual who can become pregnant, a hypothetical President Carson would like to prevent you from having the choice of whether to continue that pregnancy or terminating it. He would rob these individuals of the very option of making decisions regarding their reproductive anatomy. Leaving aside the fact that this is an example of the government interfering in the lives of citizens (which Republicans continue to say shouldn’t happen-except when they approve of it)–making abortion illegal, and forcing someone to remain pregnant against their wishes is not too far removed from enslaving that person for the period of a pregnancy. Seems to me that if something were to be compared to slavery, it would be robbing individuals of their right to choose–not the ACA. After all, if pregnancy termination procedures became illegal, then those who have an abortion could be penalized under the law. They would effectively be forced by the government to do with their bodies not what *they* wish, but what the *government* wishes. T’would be the return of the ‘peculiar institution’, after a fashion. Here again, we see yet another segment of the population that Dr. Carson displays antipathy toward.
But while we know his [loathsome] positions on those social and human rights issues, what about his political beliefs. How does he feel about the economic situation in the United States? In the first GOP debate, he said:
We need a significantly changed taxation system. And the one that I’ve advocated is based on tithing, because I think God is a pretty fair guy. And He said, you know, if you give me a tithe, it doesn’t matter how much you make. If you’ve had a bumper crop, you don’t owe Me triple tithes. And if you’ve had no crops at all, you don’t owe Me no tithes. So, there must be something inherently fair about that. And that’s why I’ve advocated a proportional tax system. You make $10 billion, you pay a billion. You make $10, you pay one. And everybody gets treated the same way. And you get rid of the deductions, you get rid of all the loopholes.
Now, I’m no economist, but the idea of basing our economy on a religious idea like tithing seems a little off to me. First and foremost, we shouldn’t be looking to a religious document to craft public policy for a secular nation. But even if it were a good idea to use the Bible to decide a system of taxation, it’s still an idea with
flaws:
But would a tax system based on tithes really be easy to administer? I certainly don’t mean to defend our current tax system, on which almost anything would be an improvement. However, the idea that tithing is simple is at best misguided. Assuming for the moment that the rate is set at 10 percent, the question is 10 percent of what? Let’s start with agricultural tithing. The Bible requires farmers to tithe 10 percent of (1) the produce (2) of the fields (3) of Israel. At first glance, this seems straightforward, but religious scholars have struggled with questions about all three of these terms. What constitutes a field? Is a courtyard a field for purposes of the tithe? How about a root cellar, if your onions start to sprout? What constitutes produce? Is hemp produce subject to the tithe? Finally, what constitutes Israel? The borders changed both in ancient and modern times. And what should one do with a tree that grows in Jordan but shoots a branch over Israeli airspace? Entire sections of the Mishnah and Talmud are devoted to trying to flesh out this simple command.
The problem becomes significantly more complex when dealing with nonagricultural tithing. In determining how much to give, people need to determine their income. Should they be allowed to deduct meals? Should they include gifts in income? If they purchase an asset, may they deduct the cost immediately, must they wait until they sell the asset, or should they be allowed to depreciate the cost over time? What about money earned overseas or in corporate form? Defining income raises a host of difficult questions that can significantly complicate any tax system, regardless of the rate structure.
Not to put too fine a point on it, but while Carson’s tax plan may be divinely inspired, the devil is in the details.
What about his ideas on
foreign policy? I dare you to make sense of the mess at the link. The environment? He doesn’t know what
climate change even *is*. He thinks it would be a good idea to transform the Department of Education into an investigatory body to monitor
political bias at universities. More of Dr. Carson’s ridiculous and poorly thought out political beliefs can be found
here.
My point with all of the above is to note that there are host of issues that affect the citizens of this country in a direct way. These issues-ranging from gun control to abortion to climate change to civil rights to economic reforms-are more pressing for a great many USAmericans than whether or not Ben Carson told the truth about receiving a scholarship to West Point. So I do agree with Bernie Sanders in that these issues should receive a good deal of focus in the media. But where I disagree with Sanders is that criticizing the inaccuracies and inconsistencies in Carson’s stories from 30 or 40 years ago, while not crucial, is important. Those stories directly speak to his character and are the reason many people support him. The light shining on those stories and the resultant questions raised by those stories may help in whittling away that support.
Carson is even more alarming if most of the untruths he tells about his past are not straightforward lies, but fantasies he’s told himself so often he’s come to believe them.