Pages

Friday, November 6, 2015

Ben Carson Calls Those Who Say He Didn't Stab His Friend are on a Witch Hunt

Interesting description of a witch hunt. To say there's no proof that you threw a rock at someone or stabbed a guy named Bob that you later admit is a fake name, or almost hitting his mother with a hammer is considered by his manager, Armstrong Williams, a witch hunt.

Normally this would be considered exculpatory evidence. Trump is all over this.

"With Ben Carson wanting to hit his mother on head with a hammer, stabb a friend and Pyramids built for grain storage - don't people get it?"

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump

And this guy is leading-basically tied with Trump-for the GOP lead. I think it's utterly appropriate for where the party is today.

The craziest guy in the room is the leader. I'm almost tempted to become a Ben Carson Democrat. LOL.

Of course I'm still a Trump man. But it's' becoming impossible to deny that the GOP isn't bat shit crazy from the top down.
If this were false how do you explain Carson's appeal?

Here's one for Tom Brown. Ben says he'll believe in evolution when you show him the fossils.

http://gawker.com/ben-carson-i-will-believe-in-evolution-when-they-show-1740908238

I want to say that Ben is the most way out candidate ever but this doesn't seem strong enough.

I mean it's fascinating to me: why would he want people to believe he was so violent?

"Nine different people who knew Carson during his formative years have come forward. They all say that his youth was nothing like he’s claiming, and that the incidents he’s describing can’t possibly have happened because they’d have known. In the words of his former classmate Gerald Ware, the stabbing incident in particular “would have been all over the whole school.” So has Carson made up these stories because he thinks they make him look more Presidential? Is he suffering from hallucinations?"

"That's the question-why make such stories up. I mean I don't know about you, but the fact that someone took a hammer to his mother and stabbed his best friend would make me far less willing to support him than for more."

But remember, he didn't make up these stories to run for President-they were in his book he wrote years ago. It's part of his weird theory of personal redemption through God.

It seems he made all this up to sell books.
Republicans your leader in the Presidential primary.

72 comments:

  1. Mike, in this case, I hope Trump eviscerates him on this. That might make us both happy... to humiliate the "because ...uh... Jesus!" wing of the party's choice, and eliminate him as a threat to the very existence of the Republic. And in the process, put Trump back in his rightful place: at the top of the heap (which also happens to be about 9 points beneath Hillary in Trump's case). Lol.

    And there was this too from CNN today (Carson complaining about the scrutiny he's receiving):

    "The vetting that you all did with President Obama doesn't even come close, doesn't even come close to what you guys are trying to do in my case, and you're just going to keep going back, 'He said this 12 years ago' -- it is just garbage," Carson said. "Give me a break."

    Hahaha.... oh REALLY.... the reporter should have shot back "Has anybody asked to see your birth certificate?"
    http://www.cnn.com/2015/11/06/politics/ben-carson-responds-violent-past-new-day/

    I saw something on Mother Jones yesterday that claimed Carson's appeal was easy to explain (as you know I'm as baffled as Chris Matthews on this point)
    http://www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2015/11/theres-no-secret-ben-carsons-success

    So dog whistles, faith, and conspiracy theories. Brain rot basically. Ahhh!

    Go Trump, Go Trump, Go Trump!!!

    ReplyDelete
  2. Mike, do you know who James Randi is? The ex-magician and famous debunker of fakers like Uri Geller and Peter Popoff? Randi has been in the paranormal investigation business now for decades. He famously offers $1 million to anyone who can demonstrate some paranormal ability through the James Randi Educational Foundation (JREF).

    Of course he's been one of my heroes now for decades (I think my 1st subscription to the Skeptical Inquirer was when I was 18 years old).

    But famously, he staged a couple of sting operations that embarrassed the "forces of darkness" (i.e. fakers) on a GRAND scale: one was "Carlos" ... in which he trained up a confederate to fake being a "channeler" and made a phony press kit for him, and sent him off to Australia to wow the Australians (who were gripped with channeling mania at the time). This guy got on all the Oprah like shows there and was a big splash.... and then he went on their equivalent of 60 minutes and revealed that he was completely faking everything... leaving the Australian media and public with massive amounts of well deserved egg on their faces.

    He did something similar with "Project Alpha" in which he found two young teenage boys who were amateur magicians... and talked them into infiltrating this major study some scientists were doing on paranormal powers... well these two ended up being the two the project selected as the real thing, and they did extensive testing on them. The weird thing was that the researchers would call Randi for advice, so he'd honestly tell them things to look out for, but the boys figured a way around each of the "controls" the scientists put on them. In the end the boys revealed to the press that they had faked it all and again... massive amounts of well deserved egg was splattered in the faces of those who'd fallen for it.

    The Ben Carson fan base seems ripe for such a sting! Imagine if Ben actually is a Randi confederate... at any day now he's going to call a press conference and reveal that he's been faking the whole time and he did it just to see how far people would suppress any kind of critical thinking skills to back an obviously insane candidate, just because he shares their own irrational prejudices.

    Now I don't expect that to happen... the the soils seems fertile for such a "sting" operation to be played on this slice of the electorate.

    ReplyDelete
  3. But I'm torn. I'm not sure I want Carson to fall a cliff just yet. It might even be in Donald's interests to not have him disappear too quickly-that would leave him the sole focus of attacks on outsiders.

    Trump is my guy but Ben is great for further muddying the waters.

    So I don't know I want him to fall all the way yet. Though I am happy to see the new Iowa poll with Trump leading again.

    My principle right now is 'Anyone but Rubio for the nomination' but failing that, hopefully it takes as long as possible for him to lock it up. Preferably next July.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Tom, let me preface this by saying you're my best reader. LOL You leave me all these great comments.

    I don't want to alienate you by quibbling here. LOL.

    But I don't think there's any hope that the GOPers are going to be brought to their senses. You think they will suddenly become more rational.

    I don't. They need to be defeated and marginalized not converted.

    Let me ask you this. Why do you think the GOP has gotten so crazy in recent years? I would argue that's because its' driven out the moderate and centrists types that used to make it more reasonable.

    The party gets more crazy because the noncrazies are being driven out-not that people are becoming more nuts but the nuts are becoming more dominant as the non-nuts are leaving.

    I will have more to say about this later, but Michael Lind always one of my favorite writers reflects my thinking here with new piece today at Politico.

    He argues what I have-the GOP is cracking up. Despite their success at the state and House level.

    http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2015/11/days-of-desperation-213329

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Mike, thanks for the link. I'll check it out. I don't think we can assume the GOP is getting smaller (there's no question they're getting crazier) until we see hard evidence: them losing the argument at the state and local level, and people like Ben Carson polling at the top of the GOP ticket, but losing to Hillary by 40 points nationally.

      That's when I'll be convinced.

      I think the GOP is very successful in making the country as a whole more right wing. Assume the Democrats don't change... and the GOP gets 20% more right wing over 5 years. They end up pulling the low information middle over to be 10% more right wing. The GOP isn't satisfied because they see the middle (the "liberal" media in particular) as being 10% more liberal, because it's 10% more liberal compared to where it used to be in relation to them. You, me and Paul Krugman say "WTF!... You're clearly 10% more right wing now!"

      Now forget about political parties altogether for a minute. I assert (without proof) that the saner and more rational (that is rationing beliefs to the evidence) the country is, the better off we all are. Humiliation has a role to play in accomplishing that. I read somewhere that a comic book writer had a big role to play in deflating some of the power and influence of the Klan by exposing some of their silly secret symbols and rituals. It's funny, all I typed in Google was "How superman" and it filled in for me "defeated the KKK" ... Lol:
      http://mentalfloss.com/article/23157/how-superman-defeated-ku-klux-klan

      I'm not giving up on anybody: they are the victims of a brain virus and childhood indoctrination. This is something that can be undone. We HAVE to do it, or we could end up like ISIS eventually.

      We just can't ignore craziness! It's may not go away on it's own peacefully, it very well may get worse and worse until something tragic happens.

      Part of the danger is the low information set. They always eyeball where the middle is and assume that's sane. They are the ones that could unwittingly let a Ben Carson get his finger on the button.

      Delete
    2. The sane folks have left the party-up in the Northeast, etc. Right now the GOP is taking over all the old Dixicrats in the South.

      Until recently even Kim Davis was a Democrat.

      I argue trying to convert anyone is a Quixotic mission and the wrong one. Victory not conversion.

      Delete
    3. You can't compare state and local politics to nationally. At the national Presidential level they are in bad shape. I don't know what you call hard evidence.

      I don't see any hard evidence that we can convert someone like Kim Davis or Ben Carson and save them from themselves.

      Delete
    4. I agree that victory is the short term solution, but not the long term. I assert that the GOP's swing toward crazy... pulling the middle along with it, can be undone in the long term.

      Delete
    5. Who are these low information types that you believe are convertable? What is going to make them become more informed?

      Who are these folks that would agree with you or me if only they heard our arguments?

      Politics is about firing up the base not proselytizing for new converts.

      Delete
    6. I think victory is the whole solution. I don't think that there are all these Republicans that used to be sane but suddently went nuts.

      They were always nuts. But the more moderate, and sane types left the party.

      The GOP base is totally different than the one that elected Reagan and Bush I.

      That stilil had a lot of the old Yankee Northern and North Eastern GOP.

      This GOP is now much more Southern and rural. The Solid South which was solidly Dixie Democrat for two centuries is now becoming Solidly Republican

      The GOP is headed for a shcism. It will be much less a party and just a group of factions in the future.

      A party that can still be a regional power in many places but not a national Presidential party.

      If you want evidence of this just look at the Presidential elections since 1992. Only once has the GOP won the popular national vote

      Delete
    7. I agree the Yankee North was always more realistic, however, I suspect that on top of losing them the GOP crazies have grown crazier due to the proliferation of more avenues of mass media: radio shows and the internet primarily. Now those are double edged swords, since they also allow the outside word to penetrate the cult compounds, however, simultaneous, they allow people to build their own custom self imposed compounds of craziness.

      Just in my personal experience, the number of lunatic conspiracy theory nuts I know and encounter now is much larger than when I was younger. Not a scientific poll by any means I realize.

      Delete
    8. "Who are these low information types that you believe are convertable?"

      The press for one. They always seem to draw false equivalences between left and right. The Republicans have gotten a lot of mileage out of that. If the press is trying to pain Ben Carson as the right mirror image of Bernie Sanders, that in itself is nuts!

      If the absolutely true message that Carson is a lunatic while Sanders is not, the press will be forced to stop drawing that simplistic analogy. That will help to arrest the movement of the pendulum.

      As for low information voters... I know lots of them! You don't? Many people I know hate politics. They still might vote, but they don't want to let any of this information in their brains right now. They tend to right off both right and left as being equally distasteful. My tenant is one for example. She has zero interest in any news stories... she'd rather watch TV shows about witches.

      Delete
    9. ... yet she have never missed an election! She starts paying attention the day before. She probably spends an hour total figuring out how to vote, and then that's it. She doesn't let that information in her brain again until the next election.

      Delete
    10. I know low information voters but don't care about them. It comes down to a fight between partisans of each party. That's where elections are decided. The undecideds and the independents are over-hyped.

      Again, what do you propose to do about them?

      Delete
    11. On the press, Krugman-and I for tha tmatter-have flagged that for a long time.

      I agree with that. But I don't agree that I want to see the GOP nominate an establishment candidate.

      Trump is my first choice, but if not him I would prefer Carson to Rubio.

      I maintain Carson loses a landslide to Clinton. To convince me otherwise talk about the history and dynamics of Presidential elections not state elections or gerrymandered House district elections that aren't comparable

      Delete
  5. You aren't going to convince the Jesus crowd to stop believing in Jesus. The key is to defeat them not the Quixotic hope they'll stop being the Jesus crowd.

    By the way, I don't think Carson's wild stories of childhood violence will hurt him. Morning Joe tweeted this story about Obama speaking of a 'composite' girlfriend in his autobiography.

    http://www.politico.com/blogs/media/2012/05/obama-new-york-girlfriend-was-composite-122272

    The Carson folks will just dismiss this.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I think you're right. Carson (as cult leader) can do no wrong in their eyes. It's EVERYBODY else that needs to see it. The low information types... if they start to feel that "Carson is crazy" then perhaps the next poll won't show Hillary in a dead heat with him.

      Delete
    2. And as far as Jesus goes, I'm not giving up on that either. Scandinavia largely dumped gods and goddesses and demons and fairies. We can too.

      Delete
    3. I will go back to what I said before-that poll is meaningless and I certainly am losing know time worrying about it

      Delete
  6. In the long term of course, Carson's fall should help Trump. You would assume that he would get a sizable portion of it. But i don't know I want to see that yet.

    ReplyDelete
  7. To say it again: Rubio, Craz, Carson, Trump: one of these men will be the nominee

    ReplyDelete
  8. Ben Carson: pathological liar?:
    http://onpolitics.usatoday.com/2015/11/06/carson-slams-cnn-for-questions-about-his-youth/

    That story is going to be tough for him to brush under the rug, even amongst his base supporters. I think. I hope!

    Here's the worst possible outcome: he gets down on his knees and begs Jesus for forgiveness, and then he announces that Jesus forgave him!!!! Oh joy oh joy!!! He found redemption in Jesus yet again!!! Carson now wears the armor of the Lord!

    If that works, I'll be very disappointed in my fellow man.

    I listed some of Randi's successes above, but then there's the case of Uri Geller, whom, even after being exposed multiple times, continued to make a living as a con artist.

    Then there was the case of Peter Popoff... who after being exposed on Johnny Carson's show by Randi as a total fake, causing him to be immediately driven into bankruptcy, has now made a comeback selling Jesus water to cure all your ailments.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It's already obvious that Carson is pathological liar. How much more proof is needed?

      Delete
  9. Regarding kicking the crazy legs out from under bad arguments:

    Here's a good example: consider these two examples of arguments against letting gay couples adopt children:

    1. The children raised in such a household end up with problems X, Y and Z.

    2. because Jesus

    The 1st argument makes empirical claims that can be examined. It meets the minimum requirements for a sane policy argument, and should be included at the "adult table." Now if the evidence indicates it's wrong, then we toss it out.

    The 2nd argument is beyond the realm of reason. To attack it takes more time. It will take the undermining of the concept that "because Jesus" is a good argument. Undermining that argument is both possible and worthwhile IMO.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Is your hope to literally convince people to stop being religious? Because America is a religious country.

    Garry Wills is worth reading on this.

    http://www.amazon.com/Bare-Ruined-Choirs-Prophecy-Religion/dp/0809148196/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1446830623&sr=8-1&keywords=garry+wills+bare+ruined+choirs

    I do think that religious belief is an important lever for many people.

    Now if you're discussing policy most people who understand policy debates would understand that argument 2 is a specious one.

    But what is your hope here? Do you believe that there are lots of people who would think 2 is a compelling argument and that somehow they can be made to see this is wrong?

    How would you go about doing this? See you can mock religious people all day and that's fine with me as I agree with you.

    But how does that make religious people stop believing?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Scandinavia used to be very religious too.

      No, I don't think mocking religious people is the right approach. Mocking crazy religious beliefs has a role to play (long term), but maybe not the biggest role. Teaching people how to think critically is probably the biggest weapon we have. Critical thinking and faith are incompatible. And I don't personally think that anything I do is going to have much impact.

      But what is Ben's argument? It's basically "because you know I love Jesus." That's it, isn't it? He believes the same fundamentalist theology and the same conspiracy theories his base does, and he lets them know. That appears to be a huge part of his appeal.

      The thing underlying belief in conspiracy theories and underlying religious belief is the same thing in my opinion: lack of critical thinking skills and lack of an attitude that you should be GLAD to change your mind when the evidence says so. If you changed your mind due to evidence it means you learned something... not that your "doctrine" was humiliated. Both conspiracy theories and religion are designed to be impervious to evidence. Both embody the opposite of "Feynman integrity."

      Don't get me wrong: this isn't going to happen over night, and I'm happy with any baby steps in the right direction. So I wouldn't say that destroying religion is the main goal... but moving away from fundamentalist thinking is a good intermediate goal. Making room for doubt. Undermining (even if just a little) faith. It's not a 2016 campaign strategy to promote the skills and values of critical thinking. That should be a long term goal of all people who would like to see those skills and values proliferate though.

      Delete
  11. I just see setting ourselves the agenda of convincing Ben Carson supporters that he's crazy is kind of a not so useful one.

    I don't think you can reach such folks.

    Now many people who do believe in God would agree that Carson is crazy. But it seems to me that what offends you about Carson is just religiousity in general.

    For me this is sidetracking. Let's just get a Democrat in the White House. The argument over the existence of God won't be settled here one way or the other.

    Ben Carson is fun as a bellwether of how far down the rabbit hole the GOP has gone

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I agree that Carson supporters cannot be converted... except by Carson himself. Now he's admitted he's a liar. That might do it.

      "Ben Carson is fun as a bellwether of how far down the rabbit hole the GOP has gone"

      I think it's more sad than fun. However I'll be agreeing with you as soon as I see that the average of 10 national polls puts Carson 20 points behind the generic Democrat. Then it will be hillarious!!! Not before.

      You fundamentally have more confidence in the general electorate than I do. I think the electorate doesn't deserve our confidence.

      Delete
    2. Based on the demographics and previous Presidential election patterns it is not wildeyed optimism to believe that Hillary will beat Carson handidly.


      The general election polls don't mean anything. It's not just me who believes it but Nate Silver, Greg Sargent, anyone who knows anything about poll analysis.

      If you insist that these polls do mean something then there's not much I can say in response.

      For a poll to be meaningful it has to have the basic attributes to suggest it's at all representative and scientific. Those polls don't.

      My saying this is not because I don't want to question my assumptions. It's an established fact of the political scientists

      You were talking about calling out the media's false framing of issues.

      This is an area you should-their treating these general election polls right now as meaning anything.

      By the way the one phrase you'v'e been using 'I take people at their word'-that's something Sumner always says.

      That seems to me to overlook the possibility that people sometimes lie.



      Delete
    3. The polls may not mean much, but at this point that's all we've got to go on. I fully expect to be changing my mind and more evidence comes in. However, right now that's all I've got.

      You could be right and the polls are WAY underestimating Carson's support! He might actually beat Hillary by 20 points if the election were held today.

      So one or two data points and the assurance that the polls can't be trusted is not exactly comforting.

      I take people at their word until we find that they are proven liars. It looks like that might be the case with Ben now. However, I take his supporters at their word.

      I suspect that the media's false framing of issues affects people's opinions. That's why it's important. Where does my tenant go to find information on ballot initiatives in the hour she spends on it? Probably not Mother Jones and probably not Red State... she probably sees what comes up in Google News on it.

      Delete
  12. Let's look at it this way Tom. I give you a room full of religious fanatics that love Ben Carson.

    You walk in the room. What do you say to them?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Mike, I've tried to explain, that's a LONG term project (converting Carson voters). I agree that in terms of the 2016 election, they're a lost cause. But long term I'm not giving up on them.

      In the near term I'd feel much better if everybody outside the core Carson supporters realized what a nut he was.

      But now that you ask it, if I had the opportunity to talk to a room full of Carson supporters... I'd punt, because I'm totally unqualified. However, that sounds like a PERFECT job for one of these two guys:
      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_Boghossian
      https://www.youtube.com/user/magnabosco210/videos

      And they wouldn't try to talk them out of voting for Ben. They wouldn't argue facts with them. But both have shown they can talk to the faithful (whatever that faith is in: gods or conspiracies), and introduce a wee bit of doubt. The second one just does it with strangers on the street in about 5 minutes. They do it by questioning how people come to know things.

      That first crack of doubt in the otherwise impenetrable bubble of delusion is sometimes all it takes to lead to much bigger changes later on.

      Now in light of the news about Ben's admitted West Point fabrication, perhaps I'd feel qualified to gently (not mockingly) bring up the idea "Do you think that's the only thing he's been less than honest about?"

      Just introduce a crack of doubt if possible. That's about all I personally could ever hope to do.

      Delete
  13. Your response sounds right to me. The answer is there isn't much you can do. I do agree this new lie about his West Point attendance is big.

    Surely you get that I never denied that he's' a pathological liar.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Hopefully this will put Trump back on top. LOL

    ReplyDelete
  15. Here's the big picture way I see it: fundamentalist conspiracy theory believing Carson supporters are deluded in much the same way that Bernie Madoff investors were deluded. They are victims. They deserve respect, but their beliefs don't deserve any respect. They're going to be angry at the messenger when the messenger tells them that Bernie/Carson is a fraud. They won't want to hear it. It's going to be difficult to convince them, but they will benefit from the illusion being shattered... even if in the near term they'd rather cling to the illusion. Because you're asking them to go from pleasant illusion to unpleasant reality. However, the sooner they do that the better the chance is they'll avoid an even more unpleasant reality later on: in the case of Carson supporters, if not for themselves, then for their children and grandchildren. The way it is now, the deluded are asking their descendants to pay the price so they can maintain their delusions.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I don't entirely agree that a religious fundamentalist is a victim quite in the way a victor of a financial ponzi scheme is.

      Belief and faith are different. I see the analog but wouldn't take it too far.

      My sense is more that such folks have to be marginalized. At some point they die off and maybe their kids know better. But I don't think you can reach everyone.

      Delete
    2. I agree that belief and faith can be different. It's possible belief is based on evidence. It depends on the situation.

      I've been a life long anti-fundamentalist, as I've explained many times. However, my thinking has been changed somewhat (to be even less tolerant of faith) in recent years by people like Peter Boghossian, David Silverman, Jerry Coyne and Sean Carroll. If you get a chance, this is a pretty good talk of Boghossian's that gets right to the core of the issue:
      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WIaPXtZpzBw

      That other link I gave you above is from a person putting these ideas into practice, talking to strangers, literally on the street.

      Delete
    3. I downloaded Boghossian's app on my cell phone: "Atheos"... I guess I'm a beta tester. I played with it a bit, but I'm not sure I can maintain interest in it. It's basically supposed to be practice in using the Socratic method to talk to the faithful... without debating them, without discussing facts with them and without trying to ridicule them.

      I've mostly used Boghossian's methods on macro blogs! Lol... my standard question now is "What evidence would convince you that you're wrong about that?" The way people answer that question can be pretty interesting. Cochrane got kind of angry with me for it.

      BTW, Jason Smith provided the best and most comprehensive and most concrete answer to that question that I've ever personally encountered on a macro blog. And I'll have to give credit where it's due: of those who've responded, Sumner probably gave the 2nd best answer so far.

      Delete
  16. So it seems we agree on a lot. One difference is you are much more worried about Ben Carson than I am. His rise doesn't shock me like you-maybe I had a less elevated understanding of my countrymen than you did coming in.

    I would like Trump to get back on top. But I wouldn't like to see Ben fall just to enable the establishment to get back on top.

    ReplyDelete
  17. Just tell me the truth Tom: you're not getting vexed with me right? LOL.

    I worry. You seem to like a good discussion but a lot of people I've noticed get very angry at you once you disagree with them.

    I've lost friends on Twitter for disagreeing with them on one issue-like the trade deal for instance. LOL

    I'm happy to continue the discussion but don't want to feel like I'm vexing my fair-haried boy himself! LOL.

    I love all the comments.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Not at all Mike! We have great discussions. And if you end up changing my mind on something, I'm all for it.

      Delete
    2. Cool. Nothing about you makes me think there'd be a problem. But previous experiences I've had people sometimes have gotten peevish. LOL

      They don't seem to like being shown they may be dead wrong.

      Delete
    3. Mike, as I've said many times the last few days, I sincerely hope you prove me wrong! I do tend to be a pessimist, so I hope your more optimistic outlook proves to be correct.

      Delete
  18. Off topic Tom I see our old buddy Sumner is predicting a rate increase for December.

    http://www.themoneyillusion.com/?p=31257

    ReplyDelete
  19. Rate rise: yeah, I saw that. Also, Jason Smith is wondering if we're no longer safe from a recession:
    http://informationtransfereconomics.blogspot.com/2015/11/are-we-no-longer-safe-from-recession.html

    ReplyDelete
  20. I think the thing for me is that Carson shows me that the GOP as a party is just not ripe for rule.

    Even Bush Sr. in his new book admitted that after the Gulf War he kind of felt like packing it in. Americans voted him out in 1992 and it seems on some level he himself agreed with them.

    This goes back to me theory that the modern GOP is not a party of rule but of opposition.

    ReplyDelete
  21. The fact that such an obvious charlatan could lead their polls even for a day says it all

    ReplyDelete
  22. This is tangentially related to the above... I saw Jason make an interesting comment the other day:

    "To say an individual human learns therefore an aggregate of humans learns is the fallacy of composition."

    This makes perfect sense in the context he was describing, but I wondered (in a comment there) what implication this might have... say for teaching people critical thinking skills.

    Anyway, here's the thread (starting with Jason's comment):
    http://informationtransfereconomics.blogspot.com/2015/11/statistical-mechanics-of-ants.html?showComment=1446742188957#c1289412741405591157

    ReplyDelete
  23. BTW, yesterday I was trying to mockingly paraphrase Carson on this (on your title here), but I erased it because I didn't know which "to" to use: "to" or "too":

    "I did TOO try to stab my best friend! Stop slandering me by saying I didn't try to commit murder!"

    The absurdity of the situation is jaw dropping... who would have ever thought that would be something a front runner for the GOP nomination for president would ever be saying?

    ReplyDelete
  24. I know. Actually this morning on Morning Joe they were discussing it and even they-Very Serious Pundits-that they are and Joe is a big time Republican couldn't help but laugh over the framing.

    It is a surreal moment and maybe really without precedent. LOL. It is just the funniest thing I've ever seen

    ReplyDelete
  25. I mean you can try to satirize things but this is a case of truth being stranger than any fiction you might try to come up with.

    ReplyDelete
  26. What a debate. 'I did so almost bash my mother's skull in with a hammer'

    'You did not'

    'Stop lying I did too try to do it and also threw a stone at someone when I was 7 and almost stabbed my best friend to death Damn you liberal media!'

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Too funny... if SNL doesn't satirize that, then they are missing a gold mine. All the late night hosts actually: John Stewart is probably missing his old job at the Daily show right now!... this is comedy gold!

      Delete
  27. Another tangential vid: the 1st 5 minutes or so of this Sean Carroll video is really good: he discusses exactly why we should feel confident to call out crazy when we see it (he uses the analogy of somebody claiming the moon is made of green cheese):
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X5Fel1VKEN8

    Like I say, I'm a huge fan of Carroll. He's like a Ben Carson to me... Lol... that is, I will give him every benefit of doubt before deciding he's wrong about something. And still I have a hard time accepting a couple of his opinions... so I don't: I withhold judgement. Of course I don't even understand about half his opinions, so that's another matter. And you know what? It is partly a personality thing... ...much like Carson supporters, I'm drawn to his personality. If he wanted to pull a Bernie Madoff like con on me, I'd probably be susceptible. Sometimes all we can do is be aware of our biases and limitations I guess.

    And this woman is the feminine counterpart to Carroll... I love this woman's personality. She reminds me of the character "Bones" (from the TV show):
    https://www.youtube.com/user/measureofdoubt/videos

    She runs one of the best podcasts out there IMO: Rationally Speaking:
    http://rationallyspeakingpodcast.org/

    Both Carroll and Galef answer emails BTW.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You love your Kardashians... and I'm a pushover for Galef... Lol!

      Delete
  28. Boy you guys are really going at it! Lots of interesting comments.

    I think we might be able to put a fork in ol' Ben...... he's done! Cant lie about West Point with the wing nuts, thats one area you gotta be 100% truthful.

    I really have mixed feelings about this whole clown show the GOP is putting on. While it gives the democrats an advantage in one way (by having the only sane candidate) the inevitability of losing again will likely drive the current crowd to doing some unspeakable things. These are people primarily motivated not so much by love for their guy but by HATRED for the opponent, and nothing raises a modern American conservatives ire like a Clinton. Clinton could win an election but she might have to travel in the Popes bubble everywhere . I would seriously worry about Oath Keepers types declaring open season on "libruls" . They are not gracious losers.

    I share Toms view that religious fundamentalism American style is the most dangerous ideology to our way of life. There were some good articles on Salon a while back talking about how that arose and..... surprise surprise, corporate America played a huge role!! Check out a guy named Kevin Kruse and his research into the subject.

    My only comment on this;

    "Off topic Tom I see our old buddy Sumner is predicting a rate increase for December."

    That Sumner, he's such a brave, outside the mainstream thinker!!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Hi Greg,

      Now Carson and his defenders are trying to argue that being "offered a full scholarship to West Point" is technically not claiming that you applied or were admitted to West Point. Which is interesting because there's no such thing as a "full scholarship" to West Point: you're either in (in which case you have all expenses paid) or you're not.

      Plus the way he handles having scrutiny turned on his stories seems classic liar-esque to me: get very angry at the person or organization questioning you! Indignantly angry! How DARE you question my sacred text. Hmmm... I wonder where he learned to deal with questions like that?

      Delete
    2. The best part is this guy has clearly been primarily concerned with selling his many books so far... and he apparently learned with his first books that embellishment is the key to setting fundamentalist hearts afflutter with [tall] tales of redemption though unquestioning faith.

      I can guarantee you right now there are journalists pouring trough every sentence in each of his books looking for the next big scoop on this guy.

      Delete
    3. Also, I love this headline:

      "Carson Lashes Out Over Questions About Violent Childhood"

      Did he use an actual lash??? Come to think of it, this whole kerfuffle will make for some interesting headlines:

      "Carson hammers his opponents!"

      "Carson disembowels the media's accusations!"

      Lol.

      Delete
    4. I laugh at it because in a sane world he'd be denying reports of a violent childhood not denying reports that he wasn't violent

      Delete
    5. Now wait a minute Greg. To be clear I'm not a fan of religious fundamentalism. LOL. I probably know more about this than most as I was raised in the same faith as Ben Carson-Seventh Day Adventism.

      My only argument with Tom is I love what's happened to the GOP this year and I think it's the beginning of the end for the party at the national level.

      When a guy like Ben who's basically a total huckster and charlatan is the GOP primary leader you know this is not a party in any condition to win a Presidential election anytime soon.

      Delete
    6. Don't worry Mike, I have never sensed you to be simpatico with the fundies, I get why you see Carson as a positive and I partially agree. Making the GOP look ridiculous has its benefits but as I said above, another loss, especially to a Clinton, gives me pause as to how certain elements may react.

      My own dept, filled with people who have Masters degrees in science fields and MDs, has surprised me even at my most cynical. To hear some of the stuff that is circulating in their brains is a little.............disheartening to be honest.

      That was interesting to learn of your 7th Day roots. Thats quite a hardcore apocalyptic bunch. Im glad you escaped.

      Delete
    7. Hey Tom

      That indignance is becoming standard conservative fare in how to treat probing questions.

      In my comment above about Hillary needing a protective bubble if she wins it got me to thinking.... one thing we might see with the next conservative leader is no appearances in front of people, just TV appearances. No chance to ask questions, just one way edicts and messages. It would be just too dangerous to have our leader be in public..... all for our own good.

      Delete
    8. Believe it or not Greg, I became an atheist reading Nietzsche. I wasn't an Adventist at the time-I was never an SDAer in my adult life. But reading N got me to give up belief in God period.

      Your point about the people in your dept is in line with a point I've made to Tom. You don't need to know anything about reality so to speak to be an engineer or any kind of technician.

      If one Engineer is a Creationist and the other a Darwinist, I think that tells us nothing about who's the superior engineer.


      Delete
    9. Religious fanaticism is not as prevalent in my dept, there are a few, but what is almost universal is an "anyone but Hillary" mentality. They would virtually all prefer Trump/Carson regardless of the policies they might espouse. There seems to be NO evidence that could be presented to them that these conservative ideas are wrong or harmful, they just accept on faith that these ideas are better and the only reason they haven't worked the way they have been touted is because of obstruction by liberals, standard Faux News fare

      Delete
    10. Not to mention a constant chatter about firearms and numerous statements about wanting to either personally kill Obama/Hillary or watch someone else do it

      Delete
    11. Honestly Greg, in my experience there's no way to discuss things like this with such people.

      I guess being in Georgia as you are this is a very common refrain about Hillary.

      This has sort of been my point with Tom. For the true blue base there's no point.

      As passionate as I am about politics as you can see, in my own everyday life I don't go out of my way to discuss politics unless someone else brings it up,

      Even then, I usually don't get sucked in.

      Here on Long Island, NY, I've notice a trend: Jewish dentists hate Obama.

      When I was living in my parents basement I spent a lot of time at the library and this really annoying guy named Marty-happened to be yet another ex Jewish dentist-would always try to get me into a political discussion.

      He was a nut, he'd literally be spitting at pictures of Obama in the paper.

      Delete
  29. More details about Carson's twisted tall tale:

    "In Carson’s 1990 best-selling autobiography “Gifted Hands: The Ben Carson Story,” the famed neurosurgeon tells of being offered a scholarship to West Point as a high school senior sometime after having dinner with the U.S. Army’s chief of staff, General William Westmoreland, on Memorial Day 1969.

    But Westmoreland’s personal schedule shows the general was not in Detroit on Memorial Day or during the days preceding and following the holiday. His schedule says he was in and around Washington, D.C., that weekend, according to Army archives The Detroit News reviewed Friday."

    http://www.detroitnews.com/story/news/politics/2015/11/06/carsons-westmoreland-story-match-records/75328960/

    ReplyDelete
  30. You can't beat Breitbart comments for insanity:

    "Allen Dulles, Henry Luce, and Buckley are all Jesuit trained. Also,. Knight of Malta Ted Kennedy, is the one who pushed the 1965 immigration to sends millions of Roman Catholics into this nation via the southern border and by boat. The Vatican controls the UN and EU and has controlled America since the Civil War ended since they are the ones that started the war. The Vatican is actively destroying all non Catholic, Christan nations. That's why the Jesuits were formed and the Dominicans before them."

    ReplyDelete