How is questioning his statements yellow journalism? Even if he proves everything he has stated the facts clearly don't line up with his statements. Should the press just blindly believe everything a candidate states? It has already been shown that his statements that he had no involvement with the nutritional company where incorrect and his statement that he spoke with General Westmoreland at the event where incorrect.

We're not talking about claiming he was a Muslim and born in a foreign country here w/o ANY facts at all.

How come Spence and Nebe have not made a big deal out of hillary when her lips during one of her campaign statements stated she never signed 'Sensitive Information Nondisclosure Agreement'' when she did sign her 2nd day in office and the agreement came out with her signature last week.....where is the socialist communist left liberal democratic news media on this.....well tell me Nebe and Spence .....:)

How many US Presidents have released their college transcripts?

Why do you want to see them?

I can explain it this way...

when Jim insults someone on the left...it's hate

when Paul insults someone on the right...it's because they deserved it...

mainly because we were told how smart and transparent Obama is and we're still looking for any evidence of either

I swore this off but I can't take it anymore... Nobody pays for tuition to West Point !!! If he got in it would've been free. I don't think we have any doubt he would've got in. Nor do we have any doubt that he would've been recruited. Therefore he would've had a free ride .. Crawl back in to your Prius
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

and when Scott correct someone's spelling, it is him acting like a 13 year old girl.

Prius - good one.

But the term "full scholarship" is an inaccurate description, experts told us. The phrase typically refers to a college providing financial aid to allow a candidate to attend a college free of charge, but that doesn’t really apply to West Point’s across-the-board zero-tuition policy, said Antonio Buehler, a West Point alumnus who founded the admissions coaching service Abrome.

"No such scholarship is named, every cadet is treated the same and there is an eight-year military commitment after graduation. Hence, not free," Buehler said.

The proper terminology is "appointment," said Vu Tran, a graduate of the United States Air Force Academy who runs the Denver-based admissions consulting firm Service Academy Coach. But because that’s not apparent from the get-go, Tran says he can’t fault Carson for using the term loosely, albeit incorrectly.

"I can definitely see where parents and students who are beginning the process can misconstrue it to be a scholarship," he said. "But for those who have gone through the admission process and through the nomination process, they would never call it a scholarship."

Carson’s use of the words "full scholarship" is even more inaccurate if he’s describing his own experience, experts agreed. Tran told us it’s conceivable a ROTC commander or even a general would encourage a student to apply to West Point, touting the free tuition, but noted that anyone familiar with the process understands that that’s contingent upon nomination and acceptance.

"(Carson) would not have been ‘offered’ the opportunity to attend West Point at no cost, like all other cadets, until he applied and received an appointment, which he never did," Buehler said.

If your dislike for the man is based on him lying about being offered a scholarship ( free ride )
And let's face it you and Spence seem to have a certain glee over this potential problem for a successful black man , then your ridicule is baseless . Are you surprised to find out that nobody pays to go to West Point ? I'm pretty sure you are
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Of course, it's all race, right?

Carson is running on his personal narrative and character. Being a brain surgeon doesn't provide a lot of direct executive experience. I am not saying he is not qualified, but at best, he has been loose with facts on this narrative.



**Caveat added to every post I make on this election: And yes Jim, Hillary lied about the sniper file to conflate things as well. Yes she probably knew Bill was having affair. Her story sucks as well. It bothers me that all around these are the best we have to offer.

I don't think he has a chance for even the Repub. nomination. I don't know why pointng out his numerous misstaments (lies?) he has made means I "dislike" him. His own campaign has now stated that his autobiography wasn't correct as far as the scholarship (free ride) is concerned. His color makes no difference to me.

I know people who went to WP and they never referred to it as having a "scholarship".

I don't think his use of the words "full scholarship" is a big deal, it's just semantics. The more serious issue is a candidate who's running on honesty seems to have made a lot of stuff up.

Woa

http://gawker.com/watch-young-ben-ca...r-a-1741070701

"I have done that prob. 4 -5 times in total "

Oh, I see. So what's the maximum number of times you can use hate speech, but still congratulate yourself on not being a hater?

"it is to get under your skin"

You are failing to get under my skin, believe me. That I point out your glaring hypocrisy, doesn't mean you are under my skin. I point out the obvious hypocrisy, then forget about it.

"Has there ever been anyone else in recent times here who hurls insults like you?"

Sure. I would argue you do. Clearly Obama does ("Republicans gotta stop just hatin all the time"). I only do it, to people who have clearly demonstrated hatred for my side. I don't do fake nice. If someone uses sufficiently insulting, and clearly dishonest, language to describe my side, they have forfeited the right to expect any respect from me. Hilary claims that my side framed her husband to make it look like he was cheating. She claims that my side is waging war on women (funny, since Ted Kennedy has the only confirmed kill in that war). If I describe her as a c*nt, it's because in my opinion, she deserves no better that that from me. If you disagree, good for you. But if you use the term teabagger, you can't claim to a holier-than-thou attitude, because we are exactly alike in this regard. When you feel sufficiently provoked, you use hateful, insulting language. Just like me. Try making that wrong.


"But the term "full scholarship" is an inaccurate description"

Funny. Carson has posted a West Point recruiting poster from that time, aimed at black students, that promises "scholarships". The word "scholarship" is on the poster. And if Carson relies on West Point's poster, he is a liar. Makes perfect sense!

"But Westmorland could not and would not have offered him a scholarship"

How do you know what he "would" do? How could you possibly know that?

"questioning his statements yellow journalism?"

POLITICO claimed that the Carson camp admitted to fabricating the scholarship thing. Carson's camp never made that statement to POLITICO, and POLITICO admitted THEY were lyong when they removed that claim from the headline, but of course offered no apology.

What is the proof that he "lied" about the scholarship or his violent tendencies? No proof, just suggestion.

How about instead of questioning his violent tendencies, we ask if someone with those tendencies is fit to be POTUS? You don't have to invent lies to discredit the man, there's enough truth to do that. But that's not enough for minorities or women who are a threat to liberals.

I don't either. It is a minor detail. It was even in some WP publications as someone pointed out earlier.

"corrects" :hihi:

Here's why - because when the press got ahold of Bush's transcript and McCain's transcript, the left used that information to attack those candidates. I'm not saying there isn't validity in looking at the college grades of a presidential candidate, it's not unfair to do that. But if you're going to use bad grades as a club to beat them with,m then you should at least ASK for Obama's transcripts too. At the same time the press said "OK" when Obama refused to release his grades, th esame press folks were attacking McCain for his grades.

Tell me that's not hypocrritical.

And one of these days, can you just grow a pair and tell me why Carson's honesty is more imjportant than Hilary's? I am answering your question exactly as you asked it. How about showing me the same courtesty?

When did she say she never signed it?

Have they found a single piece of information she mishandled?

I don't post nearly the amount of times you do and aren't nearly as insulting but if you think I am, so be it. So keep referring to Hillary as a c*nt and the FCOTUS and our Pres as a POS. That says more about you than anything I can ever write.

Can't imagine who you're going to vote for ;)
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

OK, everyone thinks Carson is a liar because he used the word "scholarship", and that doesn't apply to the military academies.

Here is a poster that Dr Carson put on his website. It is a West Point recruiting poster.

In the lower right-hand corner, highlighted in yellow, West Point explicitly says it offers "scholarships".

So if Carson uses the word that's on the West Point recruiting poster for Christs' sake, he i ssomehow lying? That's the textbook definition of yellow journalism.

Considering Jim's a devout Catholic I always assume the "C" stood for Christian?

"Of course, it's all race, right?"

If he wasn't black, the left wouldn't be this hellbent on destroying him. Ask Clarence Thomas how much Democrats like black people.

"Being a brain surgeon doesn't provide a lot of direct executive experience"

How about being chief of a department at John
's Hopkins? How about being of the Board Of Directors of Costco?

Hilary has executive experience, and she sucked at it. So is failing as an executive, suprerior to someone with less executive experience? By what logic is a proven failure superior to an outsider?

"at best[/B], he has been loose with facts on this narrative. "

Agreed. And Hilary, on the other hand, is a PROVEN liar, which cannot be denied. There is video evidence that debunks her bragging about coming under sniper fire. So I ask again, by what logic is an irrefutabke liar morally superior to someone who is "loose" with some facts?

You know what else I am? Someone who answers your questions, and admits the many times you have a point.

One simple, fair, pertinent question. And you won't go near it. Because you can';t, because that question shows pure hypocrisy.

No, I ignore it because we've covered the subject before...it's old news.

It really has nothing to do with the use of the word. It is that he has stated he talked to Westmoreland - who was not even at the event and thus would not have offered him a "scholarship". Most importantly there is a process to get into WP. A congressman/senator would have had to nominate him, then there are many other requirements he would have had to be tested for (weight, eye sight, fitness, height, academic achievement, etc.). You won't get admitted until you qualify/pass all those things. None of that took place.

This is not yellow journalism - it is good journalism.

this is from the DailyKos..no right wing rag

"We do know, from the Politico article, that General Westmoreland visited Detroit in February of that year.

There are, however, several reports of an event in February of that year, similar to the one Carson described. Then, Westmoreland was the featured guest at a 1,500-person banquet to celebrate Medal of Honor recipient Dwight Johnson. The event drew prominent guests, including the governor at the time, the mayor of Detroit, the president of Ford Motor Company and nine previous Medal of Honor awardees, according to an Associated Press account of the event.

Carson, a leader of the city’s ROTC program at the time, may have been among the invited guests at the $10-a-plate event.

Dr. Carson could very well have met with General Westmoreland during either Sunday, May 25th, 1969 or during February 1969."


..regarding the "stabbing story" that was made up, Carson's Mom, Sonya, who is apparently also a liar confirmed the story back 1997 in a Parade Magazine interview on May 11, 1997 while watching the play depicting the his story in his book with the author of the article...

beyond the Manna dismissal that he made, I'm trying to figure out who is actually fabricating what here....

Not Carson, and not for the reasons in this thread. I disagree pretty strongly with his positions on social issues, foreign policy and climate.

If it is Hillary vs... I don't know what I'll do yet. Sorry Nebe, we won't be feeling the Bern on election day :hidin:

The Detroit news:

Carlisle, Pa. — Republican presidential candidate Ben Carson’s published account of having dinner with a top commander in the Vietnam War after marching in a Memorial Day parade in 1969 as a high school ROTC cadet in Detroit does not match historical records.

In Carson’s 1990 best-selling autobiography, “Gifted Hands: The Ben Carson Story,” the 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, Gen. 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.

Carson’s compelling life story of escaping poverty in Detroit to become a world-renowned pediatric neurosurgeon is facing increased scrutiny as new polls show him at the top of the GOP presidential candidate field. It also comes a few days before Tuesday’s Republican presidential debate in Milwaukee.

Carson acknowledged Friday he never sought admission to West Point and was informally offered a scholarship that he later didn’t pursue.

“I interpreted it as an offer,” Carson said Friday night during a televised press conference from Palm Beach Gardens, Florida. “... I never said I received a full scholarship.”

In his autobiography, which was the basis of a movie about Carson’s life, Carson wrote that the dinner with Westmoreland took place after he “marched at the head of the Memorial Day parade.”

“I felt so proud, my chest bursting with ribbons and braids of every kind,” said Carson, who was a top ROTC cadet at Detroit’s former Southwestern High School.

Westmoreland’s Memorial Day schedule on May 30, 1969, indicates he was in Washington. The schedule says Westmoreland had a morning meeting with national security adviser Henry Kissinger, laid a wreath at an 11 a.m. memorial service in Arlington National Cemetery and had a 5 p.m. “boat ride on the Potomac.”

The Detroit News on Friday reviewed Westmoreland’s schedule for the dates in question among his official papers housed at the U.S. Army Heritage and Education Center in Carlisle, Pa.

The Army records and Detroit News archival records show Westmoreland was in Detroit on Feb. 18, 1969, for a dinner honoring a Vietnam War veteran. The banquet was for Congressional Medal of Honor winner Dwight Johnson, a Detroit African-American who risked his life “beyond the call of duty,” according to a website about black participation in the Vietnam War.

Carson spokesman Doug Watts could not immediately explain the discrepancies in Carson’s published account of meeting Westmoreland on Memorial Day 1969 and the general being in Washington that day.

“Dr. Carson was the top ROTC student in the city of Detroit,” Watts said in an email to The News. “In that role he was invited to meet General Westmoreland. He believes it was at a banquet. He can’t remember with specificity their brief conversation but it centered around Dr. Carson’s performance as ROTC City Executive Officer.”

so you're saying it's possible they met in Feb rather than May 45 years ago...


wait till they conclude he's been operating on brains all these years with phony diplomas:shocked:

I am getting a little tired of this historical dissection to be honest. Can't we take a look at Carson's policy insights instead?

Oh wait...

I'm not saying anything - Carson said in his autobiography it was Memorial Day. He shouldn't get pissed at the press for questioning things that don't line up if he can't get his facts straight.

Exactly my feeling.

Jim: why is Hilary's lie meaningless, but Carson's honesty is important?

Spence: apples and oranges

That covers it, in your mind? Case closed, move on?

you called it a lie...isn't it more likely he had the months wrong given the time lapse, the fact that Westmoreland was in Detroit at a dinner which seems to be what he described...and does it matter on which date it took place?

do you recall with specificity what you were doing in February or May of 1969

I realize that General Werstmoreland is no Bill Ayers, Rev. Wright, Rashid Khalidi or Frank Marshall Davis and Neurosurgery isn't quite Community Organizing and ROTC isn't quite puffing with the choom-choom gang...but can we get a grip??

mishandled....of course
she said on the campaign trail that top secret info on her private website server, that it wasn't classified originally.....according what she signed(document) made her totally responsible for sensitive documents in her possession.....not going to go on and on about it.....the whole subject does not need 10 pages of rant...:)

it truly is apples if you're a democrat and oranges if you're a republican

"It really has nothing to do with the use of the word"

That is a fair thing to say, and I agree. But many are focusing on the use of the work "scholarship" as evidence that he lied. In light of the fact that West Point uses that word, that accusation is insane.

Carson has never claimed that he applied. Never once that I can tell. If someone at West Point said to Carson "we'd love to have you, if you apply, you'll get accepted", and Carson describes that as being "offered a scholarship", is that really a dishonest statement?. He could have been more precise, but THAT'S a big deal? Really?

"This is not yellow journalism "

What's yellow journalism, is Politico claiming, in huge headlines, that Carson's camp admitted to fabricating the story. Carson's camp denies that anyone said that to Politico, and Politico removed that claim. Tell me that's not yellow journalism? Why woud Politico claim that Carson's team admitted the fabrication, then remove that claim, and not evenm apologize? You claim that's not yellow journalism? What was Politico's basis for stating that Carson's camp admitted the lie to them?