Ben Carson Says Muslims Should Be Disqualified From Presidency

[B. Kidd]

Is this a 'teaching moment'? (to borrow a favorite phrase from the propagandist liberal biased media).

Is this a "triumphant snark moment" for you Junior ? ....you are certainly establishing your "moron asshole" bonafides

You mad, bro'?

 

[TyroneSlothrop]

Is this a 'teaching moment'? (to borrow a favorite phrase from the propagandist liberal biased media).

Is this a "triumphant snark moment" for you Junior ? ....you are certainly establishing your "moron asshole" bonafides

You mad, bro'?

No I am OK are you...?....

 

[sealybobo]

I've been saying it, the GOP is truly ******* insane.
Ben Carson Says Muslims Should Be Disqualified From Presidency

A supporter at a Donald Trump created quite a stir on Thursday when, among other incendiary remarks, he falsely claimed President Obama was a Muslim.

But the comment raises an interesting question: What if it were true? Why should it matter if Obama was a Muslim?

On Meet The Press, Chuck Todd posed that exact question to Ben Carson, the retired neurosurgeon who is closely trailing Trump in the polls. Carson said he would not support a Muslim president and that only candidates with a faith “consistent with the Constitution” should be President.

CHUCK TODD: Let me wrap this up by finally dealing with what’s been going on, Donald Trump, and a deal with a questioner that claimed that the president was Muslim. Let me ask you the question this way. Should a President’s faith matter? Should your faith matter to voters?

BEN CARSON: Well, I guess it depends on what that faith is. If it’s inconsistent with the values and principles of America, then of course it should matter. But if it fits within the realm of America and consistent with the constitution, no problem.

TODD: So do you believe that Islam is consistent with the constitution?

CARSON: No, I don’t, I do not.

TODD: So you–

CARSON: I would not advocate that we put a Muslim in charge of this nation. I absolutely would not agree with that.

In other words, it's plain common sense. Muslims view America as the enemy. They despise everything American stands for. Only the insane would vote for a Muslim.

That all depends on the Muslim. Just like not all Christians are crazy, just the real ones.

 

[B. Kidd]

BKidd apparently sets the moral standards here .....LOL

I don't pretend to know everything........like elitist progressives do.

Go figure?

Fk you ....you tried to "moral shame" me fat chance

Is 'moral shaming' a micro-aggression? Can I be arrested for that, yet?

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

Why is it a faith that surrounds a child molester that widely accepts barbarian violence against humanity is "protected" while the religion based around a generous person who speaks of love & forgiveness is soundly repudiated by liberal hypocrites & hacks?

 

[NYcarbineer]

Why is it a faith that surrounds a child molester that widely accepts barbarian violence against humanity is "protected" while the religion based around a generous person who speaks of love & forgiveness is soundly repudiated by liberal hypocrites & hacks?

Are you referring to Josh Duggar?

 

[sealybobo]

I've been saying it, the GOP is truly ******* insane.
Ben Carson Says Muslims Should Be Disqualified From Presidency

A supporter at a Donald Trump created quite a stir on Thursday when, among other incendiary remarks, he falsely claimed President Obama was a Muslim.

But the comment raises an interesting question: What if it were true? Why should it matter if Obama was a Muslim?

On Meet The Press, Chuck Todd posed that exact question to Ben Carson, the retired neurosurgeon who is closely trailing Trump in the polls. Carson said he would not support a Muslim president and that only candidates with a faith “consistent with the Constitution” should be President.

CHUCK TODD: Let me wrap this up by finally dealing with what’s been going on, Donald Trump, and a deal with a questioner that claimed that the president was Muslim. Let me ask you the question this way. Should a President’s faith matter? Should your faith matter to voters?

BEN CARSON: Well, I guess it depends on what that faith is. If it’s inconsistent with the values and principles of America, then of course it should matter. But if it fits within the realm of America and consistent with the constitution, no problem.

TODD: So do you believe that Islam is consistent with the constitution?

CARSON: No, I don’t, I do not.

TODD: So you–

CARSON: I would not advocate that we put a Muslim in charge of this nation. I absolutely would not agree with that.

They were talking about this on the radio today. Of course one day a Muslim could run and even win, just not today. I would love for one to run in the GOP primaries though. See how big that tent really is.

How is the GOP going to win without immigrants, poor people, atheists, Muslims, Hispanics, gays. Don't the GOP see what they're doing to themselves?

 

[B. Kidd]

Why is it a faith that surrounds a child molester that widely accepts barbarian violence against humanity is "protected" while the religion based around a generous person who speaks of love & forgiveness is soundly repudiated by liberal hypocrites & hacks?

Tyranny knows no bounds.

Just ask 'Tyrone Sloprop'.

 

[sealybobo]

Why is it a faith that surrounds a child molester that widely accepts barbarian violence against humanity is "protected" while the religion based around a generous person who speaks of love & forgiveness is soundly repudiated by liberal hypocrites & hacks?

Because this is one of the wedge issues the rich use to divide us.

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

Why is it a faith that surrounds a child molester that widely accepts barbarian violence against humanity is "protected" while the religion based around a generous person who speaks of love & forgiveness is soundly repudiated by liberal hypocrites & hacks?

Tyranny knows no bounds.

Just ask 'Tyrone Sloprop'.

I don't need to ask anyone. I'm as free in this great country as I've ever been if you leave out Obamacare

 

[sealybobo]

The GOP know they're in trouble and they are doubling down on crazy.

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

Why is it a faith that surrounds a child molester that widely accepts barbarian violence against humanity is "protected" while the religion based around a generous person who speaks of love & forgiveness is soundly repudiated by liberal hypocrites & hacks?

Because this is one of the wedge issues the rich use to divide us.

The only ones I see using this issue are the dumbfucks on this board. In the real world I never encounter these asinine arguments.
You spew it. Own it chump

 

[B. Kidd]

Is this a 'teaching moment'? (to borrow a favorite phrase from the propagandist liberal biased media).

Is this a "triumphant snark moment" for you Junior ? ....you are certainly establishing your "moron asshole" bonafides

You mad, bro'?

No I am OK are you...?....

I'm fine. I just love taking you secular-progressives down to the mat...........

 

[sealybobo]

The GOP are trying to make dems defend Muslim rights. Screw that. I say Islam should be legal but we shouldn't let any more in.

 

[Kondor3]

Carson's remarks are relatively unimportant...

The American People will not elect a Muslim for President at any time in the foreseeable future...

9-11 took care of that...

Once again --- the argument cannot be made without employing a Composition Fallacy. Religions didn't fly planes into buildings --- terrorists did that. Now if you wanna reword that to say The American People will not elect a terrorist for President at any time in the foreseeable future, you've got a no-brainer.

Doesn't matter.

Muslims killed 3,000 innocent Americans on 9-11.

And damned-near every terrorist action of the past 15 years have been Islamist in nature.

It is a Warrior Religion, not a so-called Religion of Peace.

And, after years of well-intentioned harping about The Actions of the Few not representing the Actions of the Many, well...

When we've seen scores upon scores of Actions of the Few over the course of a very few years, well...

At some point, people start adding-up the Atypicals, until, finally, under a staggering load, they concede a new Typical...

Which is what has happened in America, to a very large extent...

Like it or not... protest against it or not... try to rationalize your way around it or not... it's the New Reality, for America, in the 21st Century...

Which is why what Carson says about it doesn't really matter very much...

Americans, themselves, will reject a Muslim candidate for President...

Today... tomorrow... a century from now.

 

[B. Kidd]

Why is it a faith that surrounds a child molester that widely accepts barbarian violence against humanity is "protected" while the religion based around a generous person who speaks of love & forgiveness is soundly repudiated by liberal hypocrites & hacks?

Because this is one of the wedge issues the rich use to divide us.

Specifically, identify who the 'rich' are.

 

[Pogo]

Why is it a faith that surrounds a child molester that widely accepts barbarian violence against humanity is "protected" while the religion based around a generous person who speaks of love & forgiveness is soundly repudiated by liberal hypocrites & hacks?

Are you referring to Josh Duggar?

Ooh, that's a good one. I wrote down "Ted Nugent".

 

[B. Kidd]

Carson's remarks are relatively unimportant...

The American People will not elect a Muslim for President at any time in the foreseeable future...

9-11 took care of that...

Once again --- the argument cannot be made without employing a Composition Fallacy. Religions didn't fly planes into buildings --- terrorists did that. Now if you wanna reword that to say The American People will not elect a terrorist for President at any time in the foreseeable future, you've got a no-brainer.

Doesn't matter.

Muslims killed 3,000 innocent Americans on 9-11.

And damned-near every terrorist action of the past 15 years have been Islamist in nature.

It is a Warrior Religion, not a so-called Religion of Peace.

And, after years of constant nagging about The Actions of the Few not representing the Actions of the Many, well...

When we've seen scores upon scores of Actions of the Few over the course of a very few years, well...

At some point, people start adding-up the Atypicals, until, finally, under a staggering load, they concede a new Typical...

Which is what has happened in America, to a very large extent...

Like it or not... protest against it or not... try to rationalize your way around it or not... it's the New Reality, for America, in the 21st Century...

Don't forget.......the vast majority of so-called moderate Muslims danced in the street when the twin towers fell.

 

[Pogo]

Carson's remarks are relatively unimportant...

The American People will not elect a Muslim for President at any time in the foreseeable future...

9-11 took care of that...

Once again --- the argument cannot be made without employing a Composition Fallacy. Religions didn't fly planes into buildings --- terrorists did that. Now if you wanna reword that to say The American People will not elect a terrorist for President at any time in the foreseeable future, you've got a no-brainer.

Doesn't matter.

Muslims killed 3,000 innocent Americans on 9-11.

And damned-near every terrorist action of the past 15 years have been Islamist in nature.

It is a Warrior Religion, not a so-called Religion of Peace.

And, after years of constant nagging about The Actions of the Few not representing the Actions of the Many, well...

When we've seen scores upon scores of Actions of the Few over the course of a very few years, well...

At some point, people start adding-up the Atypicals, until, finally, under a staggering load, they concede a new Typical...

Which is what has happened in America, to a very large extent...

Like it or not... protest against it or not... try to rationalize your way around it or not... it's the New Reality, for America, in the 21st Century...

See what I mean?
I keep noting this point cannot be made without employing a Composition Fallacy, and y'all keep confirming it by doing exactly that. With a bonus track strawman on this one.


Eric Rudolph, Scott Roeder, Matt Goldsby, Jimmy Simmons, Kathy Simmons, Kaye Wiggins, Reverend Paul Jennings Hill, John Salvi, Martin Uphoff, Patricia Hughes, Jeremy Dunahoe, Paul Ross Evans, Bobby Joe Rogers, Francis Grady and the rest of that lot bombed, shot and arsoned people to death. Shall we round up and jail Christians, lock them up for investigation, declare Christians can't be Presidential candidates on that basis? It's the same logic.

Again it's impossible -- literally, impossible -- to make this bullshit argument that some religion flew planes into buildings, blew people up, committed murder etc without employing a Composition Fallacy. Can't be done. And that makes the entire argument fallacious.

And continuing to make that argument for one while completely looking the other way on the other makes that approach a stinking hypocrisy.

 

[sealybobo]

Why is it a faith that surrounds a child molester that widely accepts barbarian violence against humanity is "protected" while the religion based around a generous person who speaks of love & forgiveness is soundly repudiated by liberal hypocrites & hacks?

Because this is one of the wedge issues the rich use to divide us.

The only ones I see using this issue are the dumbfucks on this board. In the real world I never encounter these asinine arguments.
You spew it. Own it chump

I think this issue is going to be the reason Ben carson drops out. That's OK because he was never really in it.

Think of the GOP candidates as actors in a play. What lines did Ben carson get to say about black people. You people are so dumb. Lol