Is this true??

[PaulS]

I can't imagine being so partisan that when I found out the frontrunner for my party is a confirmed liar, I could somehow try to turn it into a negative for another party.

I know I read Hillary was shot at by a sniper 1,000s of times but how many times did she actually say that?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[scottw]

what exactly did he lie about?

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by PaulS

I can't imagine being so partisan that when I found out the frontrunner for my party is a confirmed liar, I could somehow try to turn it into a negative for another party.

I know I read Hillary was shot at by a sniper 1,000s of times but how many times did she actually say that?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

"the frontrunner for my party is a confirmed liar"

It's not nearly as clear as POLITICO made it seem. And POLITICO is no longer claiming that Carson's camp admitted a fabrication.

What we know, I think, is that his book claims that Gen Westmorland offered him a scholarship to West Point at a dinner they had together. Carson is claiming that Westmorland encouraged him to apply, and that he would certainly get in.

If that's what happened, is Carson lying about being offered a scholarship? Probably.

He's not my candidate, he lost me a short while ago when he aid he would not have invaded Afghanistan. He says some strange things. And he may have some problems with the truth. We've had enough of that.

Why did I bring up Hilary? Because Spence claims that her lie (and there is zero doubt about that) isn't morally equivalent to Carson's lie. I am asking him to elaborate, but he won't. I just want to see his reasoning, maybe I am judging her too harshly, and I want to be fair.

"how many times did she actually say that"

Once that I know of. She couldn't repeat the claim, because immediately after she made the claim, the video surfaced showing that instead of being shot at by a sniper, she was hugged by smiling children.

Her excuse? She was tired.

Think of the contempt she has for the sheep she wants to lead, if she believes we would all buy that as an excuse. Let's assume she is telling the truth about why she lied. If she becomes delusional when she is tired, what's going to happen when she gets woken up at 3 AM and has to deal with an emergency?

I will not vote for Carson in a primary. If he wins the primary, I would gladly vote for him over anyone on the other side. If my choice is between two liars, I'll plug my nose and vote for the liar who (1) is staunchly pro life, and who (2) has a sufficient grasp of 5th grade arithmetic to know that we cannot ever raise taxes high enough to cover our upcoming entitlement obligations, and (3) is honest enough to say out loud that white people aren't the cause of most problems that plague the black community today, and (4) is sane enough to say out loud "boys use the boys' bathroom, and girls use the girls' bathroom". I still can't get my head around the fact that liberals are making an issue out of #4, they have gone that far off the deep end.

[scottw]

so the only people who can possibly know about the scholarship offer and whether or not it occurred are Carson and Westmoreland...right?

[spence]

Originally Posted by scottw

so the only people who can possibly know about the scholarship offer and whether or not it occurred are Carson and Westmoreland...right?

I think it's well established now that he never applied and therefore couldn't have been offered admittance let alone a "scholarship."

In the grand scheme it's not a huge deal compared to his other beliefs.

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by spence

I think it's well established now that he never applied and therefore couldn't have been offered admittance let alone a "scholarship."

In the grand scheme it's not a huge deal compared to his other beliefs.

Fair enough and agreed.

POLITICO went way over the line in their zeal to discredit him. POLITICO reported that Carson's camp admitted a lie, then POLITICO had to take that back. If no one from Carson's camp admitted anything, why did POLITICO report otherwise?

There seems to be exactly zero basis (other than the desire for to do Hilary's dirty work) for politico to claim, in a headline, that Carson's camp admitted to lying.

He's a black conservative, and he's doing well, so he must be destroyed.

They're doing the same to Rubio. Hilary claimed she was "broke" when she left the White House (despite all the stuff they stole on their way out), and nobody said anything. Yet if Rubio's finances are less than stellar, it says something about his ability to be president.

It's a joke.

[scottw]

Originally Posted by spence

I think it's well established now that he never applied and therefore couldn't have been offered admittance let alone a "scholarship."

In the grand scheme it's not a huge deal compared to his other beliefs.

I don't believe he ever said he applied...that is also well established...he was very clear that he'd only applied to one school because that was all that he could afford

you have no idea what the conversation was that he had and if you read to the bottom of my most recent post with the articles attached(second article) you'll see that West Point uses "scholarship" to describe the financial arrangement with it's cadets....it is very possible that given his record in ROTC at that time he was told that he would be a good candidate for acceptance and that would include what amounted to a "scholarship"

I don't know that he didn't make this all up...seems very unlikely... and it seems like you are making up more based on nothing and false premise than he can possibly be accused of doing in this case

[spence]

Originally Posted by scottw

you have no idea what the conversation was that he had...

I don't know that he didn't make this all up...seems very unlikely... and it seems like you are making up more based on nothing and false premise than he can possibly be accused of doing in this case

His conversation in 1969 is irrelevant. The statements in writing contrasted with reality are the issue. I can understand how a 17 year old could take a positive remark for more than it was, not an adult writing books...

Carson seems to be having a hard time defending his personal narrative, which is sad because he's a great success story.

No really, I knifed a guy! I threw rocks! I tried to smash my mom with a hammer!

It's surreal.

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by spence

It's surreal.

I agree.

How would you describe this...I came under sniper fire! My husband wasn't unfaithful, Newt Gingrich is just making it look that way!

Why can't you just write a few sentences offering your opinions on that?

[scottw]

Originally Posted by spence

His conversation in 1969 is irrelevant. The statements in writing contrasted with reality are the issue. I can understand how a 17 year old could take a positive remark for more than it was, not an adult writing books..."statements in writing contrasted with reality are the issue" please elaborate

Carson seems to be having a hard time defending his personal narrative, which is sad because he's a great success story. he doesn't have any trouble defending it from what I can see

No really, I knifed a guy! I threw rocks! I tried to smash my mom with a hammer! this is impossible?, I don't think he's claimed to have actually knifed anyone and as a kid...I threw lots of rocks, got in fights

It's surreal.

I understand that for you Obama's writing and bizarre associations were not "surreal" and completely dismissable...somehow Carson's are...most likely nothing more than a different standard for folks of different political persuasions which you are quite consistent with...