The media plot re Carson thickens…
…or thins, depending on how you look at it.
The way the story stands right now is this, as best I can glean:
Almost all of Politico’s assertions about Carson and West Point have been walked back. No, the Carson campaign did not admit fabricating anything. Carson claims that he talked to Westmoreland at a dinner in 1969, and he was verbally offered a scholarship, not in the formal sense of an offer on paper but as a verbal assurance that if he wanted to apply he would be admitted and would get (as did every other cadet at that time) a free ride.
All the rest of it seems to boil down to nitpicking over the date of the meeting—was it Memorial Day, as Carson has held, or was it a few months earlier at a different banquet that Westmoreland attended in Detroit, as is more likely the case?
Wow, he probably got the date wrong by a few months for something that happened when he was seventeen. Run him out of town on a rail; the man should never be president!
The other stories that cast disparagement on Carson’s veracity are all of the “he said it happened, and we can’t find anyone who witnessed it” variety. These incidents were not for the most part things that could be verified by random people in the community, or even by anyone but Carson and the other person or people (usually rather few) involved, and none of those people has said he is lying. Of course, it’s possible that at some future point an actual lie of Carson’s that’s material in some way will emerge. But if not, it won’t be for lack of trying on the part of the MSM.
So far there’s very little, if any, red meat here. But you wouldn’t know it from the coverage. We on the right side of the blogosphere have followed this with interest and in detail, and have seen the slowly emerging retractions and Carson’s defense (some of those retractions have been from bloggers and pundits on the right who initially bought the Politico story).
But if you look at the MSM, you’d hardly know all of that was happening. I just did a search, and a vast number of papers that managed to cover the original “Carson the liar!!” story haven’t quite gotten around yet to taking any of it back. For example, at least as far as I can see, the NY Post and the Daily News still have only their original accusatory “Carson the liar” stories up without any updates or corrections, and in some cases have started on new stories in the same vein. This is the same media which failed to pursue Obama’s history—a history that was far more politically relevant, and featured a host of lies, then and now. For that matter, when did you last hear them talking about Hillary on the tarmac in Bosnia? And you won’t, either.
Politico did what it did to Carson with its eyes open. Writers know how to write, and they know what a word such as “offer” means versus words such as “application” and “acceptance.” They know that “scholarship” is not ordinarily some arcane and technical term of art. When used by most people, it means what we commonly understand it to mean, which is an education that’s paid for by the school or some other grant rather than by the student. When they printed that story yesterday about Dr. Carson, it was part of a concerted effort on the part of the media to sling enough mud at him that some of it was bound to stick. In the past, that sort of thing has worked; why not now?
And it has stuck. Commenter “K-E” wrote yesterday that “Politico should be ashamed of itself.” My reply was that not only was it very unlikely that Politico would be ashamed of itself, it probably would be very proud. That’s true whether Politico has had to change it’s story (which it did) or not:
UPDATE IV: Politico has now gutted its original piece, scrubbed the original title, removed the claims cited in this article as false, and added the following editor’s note:
Editor’s note: POLITICO stands by its reporting on this story, which has been updated to reflect Ben Carson’s on the record response. The original story and headline said that Carson’s campaign had admitted he “fabricated” a “full scholarship” from West Point, but now Carson denies that his campaign’s statement constituted such an admission, and the story and headline were changed to reflect that. POLITICO’s reporting established that Carson said he received a “full scholarship” from West Point, in writing and in public appearances over the years ”” but in fact he did not and there is actually no such thing as a “full scholarship” to the taxpayer-funded academy. And today in response to POLITICO he acknowledged for the first time that was not the case. Carson never explicitly wrote that he had applied for admission to West Point, although that was the clear implication of his claim to have received an offer of a “full scholarship,” a point that POLITICO’s initial report should have made clear.
Sadly, this Editor’s Note is still untrue. Politico obviously didn’t stand by its reporting, given that they changed the central claims. Their ridiculous attempt to pass off their editorializing as a possible interpretation of Carson’s campaign’s response is nonsensical. Furthermore, Politico did not establish that he did not receive a “full scholarship” offer from West Point — informally, he did receive such an offer, and in colloquial terms as well as West Point marketing materials, free tuition constitutes a scholarship. As for the notion that Carson implied he had applied to West Point, this is blatantly false — he says in both his own book as well as on Facebook, and has for years, that he applied only to Yale.
But that first headline that readers saw is the one that would tend to stick in the brain, “Ben Carson admits fabricating West Point scholarship.” The point of all of this is not to print the truth, it’s to damage Ben Carson’s candidacy by the death of a thousand cuts. And if you look around the blogosphere and on YouTube, there are plenty of commenters jumping on the “Ben Carson is a liar/fabricator” bandwagon, just as Politico knew they would and planned that they would.
It will not end here. Carson must be destroyed, as John Nolte (and others) predicted shortly before yesterday’s news broke:
Let me be very, very clear about one thing: The DC Media cannot allow Dr. Ben Carson to become President of the United States. And if the DC Media has to put on white robes, burn crosses, grab firehoses, and sic German Shepherds on Carson, they will. In fact, they already have. Not literally, but the tactics and the goals are exactly the same: By any means necessary, destroy the free-thinking black man who threatens our power.
It is just a historical fact, settled science if you will, that since the days of slavery, and straight through to Jim Crow and Segregation, that Democrats have sought to personally destroy any black person who dares threaten their power base. Dr. Carson is a huge threat to the Democrat Party, almost all of the DC Media is populated by leftwing Democrats, and therefore he must be destroyed ”” he must be Clarence Thomas’d.
Carson is a big threat to the Democrats, and they know it. So they are going about the neutralizing of that threat in the easiest and most effective way they know. Because they can.
[NOTE: I’ve entertained the thought that next up with Carson will be an accusation of sexual harassment or other misbehavior against him. Could be. But I actually think they’ll stick to with this “he’s a liar” tactic, because it hits him where it hurts, and his autobiography provides tons of fodder for this sort of attack. As would anyone’s, including Barack Obama’s, if they cared to do so.
Of course, once they’ve established Carson as a liar, then they might go to the sexual accusations because the ground will have been prepared, as it were.]
The media are also wringing all the mileage they can over this “Egyptian pyramids were used to store grain” thing that is so stupid I haven’t even bothered to look into it.
You know, I said that by 2004 the MSM stopped even pretending to themselves they were being impartial in their treatment of politics, and by 2008 they stopped even pretending to their audience that they were being unbiased. As jaded as I am, it still amazes me how low they are willing to stoop, and how many people continue to accept their narrative uncritically.
They are the enemy. Bombing foreign brown jihadists and rag heads over seas isn’t going to win the war, when your enemy is a closer than people like to think.
Hey! I made it into your post. Wow. Thanks. I very much enjoy reading your blog and feel that many on here (including yourself) are intellectually superior to me! I try to keep up…
I watched a 20-minute clip of Dr. Carson’s presser yesterday. Call me impressed. He was the exact opposite of Hillary and Obama. He took question after question after question from the media and answered them very well, considering he had no idea what these people were going to throw at him. I saw him as tough, steady and incredibly believable.
I also liked that he threw things back at the media about Obama. They deserved it. Bringing up Obama’s sealed records, etc.
Watching him take on a pack of journalists with aplomb shows me that Dr. Carson is tougher underneath than we think. I’m glad this happened b/c a lot voters need to see that Dr. Carson can fight and push back. I think his numbers will actually go up, and I also predict he will raise more money after this.
Let’s see now all 4 service academies recruit for sports and call these full scholarships. How many blacks were at West Point at the time Dr. Carson left high school? The general met a bright black kid, who was a major JR ROTC figure, of course he would offer him a full scholarship, just apply and you are in is probably how the conversation went. Remember Dr. Carson got a full ride at Yale, the only school he applied to. His WP story rings very true to me!
Neo:
Don’t discount the possibility that the Left will pay a female that worked close to Carson to LIE about an affair.
It would be “he said, she said” and like with Justice Thomas the charges would be “serious.”
As the female reporter said of the UVA Rolling Stone rape story, you shouldn’t let the facts get in the way of a good narrative. The Politico is lying for the truth.
Cornhead:
Believe me, I haven’t discounted that possibility AT ALL. I’ve been expecting it, actually (and Carson mentioned in one of his news conferences recently that he expects that is next on their list). It’s just that this “liar” campaign has been so successful that the other might not be necessary.
K-E raises a good point. Carson’s quiet demeanor can hide the fact that he’s tough and doesn’t take any crap. And most importantly, he’s not letting the media write the narrative like most Republicans seem to do. Cruz is my favorite, but I like Dr. Carson a lot and should he become the candidate, I would not hold my nose when voting for him.
Coming from the party of Lurch “guns to Khmer Rouge for Nixon” Kerry and Hillary “named two years in advance” Clinton is pretty rich.
Since the first moves of WWIII appear on the board, a war time president is a must. Which of these guys or gal do you want in the Captain’s chair when the Romulans and Klingons come accross the neutral zone. Can Cruz be trusted? He seems the best choice.
As an aside, I can never see STNG now without thinking Walter Blunt.
This story brought back some memories. In 1964 or 65, as a member of the US Navel Sea Cadets, I met with a graduate of the Navel Academy to see if I would be interested in seeking an appointment. I have little recollection of what was discussed but I remember telling him that I didn’t think my grades in HS were of academy quality. I was 15 or 16 yrs. old and the most vivid memory was of his class ring. What a piece of hardware!
This encounter wasn’t unusual considering that Vietnam was really getting hot and officers were needed.
Dr. Carson wasn’t lying. He should have chosen his words a bit more carefully.
The left is riding high and full of hubris after 8 years of success with Obama. What they don’t realize is the extent of anger bordering on desperation that is afoot in America. To the hard core left this is a paper war. If they succeed in this despicable way they assume that the right will roll over as they always have. THAT WILL NOT HAPPEN THIS TIME!
In case you are interested in “paper war” here is an introduction:
http://www.amazon.com/Paper-War-Propaganda-Battle-Cassino/dp/097622450X
I am very glad to read this post, neo.
Thanks for clearing the ‘buzz’ out of my system.
THAT WILL NOT HAPPEN THIS TIME!
The older generations, with Parker as a notable exception, would roll over. That’s what they have been conditioned their entire life with, bipartisanship “compromise”. That’s how a “classy person” handles it.
Conflict, terrorism, and internal wars are something the newer generation is more familiar with and it makes more sense to them, this concept of Total War.
If people like Old had the fortitude to seek out differing views, like my own advice would hold, he might not have fallen for this. But the older generation tend to be stuck in their ways, making them very easy subjects and prey for the Leftist alliance.
Being very weak to enemy propaganda, has certain consequences in a war. It’s even a vice, taken to certain extents.
I’ve been thinking for 15 years we are sliding to the edge of the National abyss.
I’m one of the oldsters that Ymar seems to be referencing, but the guys my age I hang with are all armed to the teeth, have ammo to spare, and await the final provocation. One thing’s for sure: if the Obamabots come for us, we’re taking some of them down with us. Doesn’t matter what uniform they wear.
Carson should sue for defamation. He would have to meet a higher burden of proof being a public figure, but maybe he could win.
The counter tactic to this is obvious:
Those outlets who engage in lies must be publicly called to account, preferably during a debate.
They must be exposed in a very public manner so that voters can see who they’re dealing with.
One thing’s for sure: if the Obamabots come for us, we’re taking some of them down with us. Doesn’t matter what uniform they wear.
On a tactical level, that has benefit. On the strategic and logistical level, it does not allow the overthrow of an American occupation.
Power projection is a big issue when it comes to this topic. The Left can take apart the resistance one city at a time, moving into the suburbs to control food production, if they were smart about it. The police unions are already executing the biker clubs, and people just sit around like it isn’t their problem. It will be, though, when the SWAT team busts in at night.
There are a lot of survival communitis and preppers have been going strangely mainstream since some years now, but those are passive, static, and defensive formations. The Left cannot be stopped by defensive organizations. Certainly a civil war isn’t prevented by defensive organizations.
The Democrat South took the measure of abolitionists, using bounties to harass them and inflict violence on the speakers. With the notable exception of John Brown and the Underground Railroad, the Democrat South considered the abolitionists to be a bunch of Quaking, shaking, pacifists that would refuse to fight.
This estimation turned out to be wrong, because Lincoln wasn’t an abolitionist, he was very close to fighting a duel before both parties called it off, and that has some Southern gentleman credit. And Lincoln was a nationalist, not a pacifist. Nor was Sheridan or Sherman a pacifist…
The point is, if the Left even thinks they can get away with full scale strategic mobilization, they will give it a go. Even if the resistance would mobilize faster. Right now, it doesn’t look to the Left like people can do anything.
I would also make a very distinct point, which is that extremely strong emotions makes it possible for people to pull the trigger continuously without combat fatigue and burnout.
As a militia defense, it is easy to organize the defense because people have the strong emotion of defending their community and families. But an offensive force requires a different emotion. They don’t bring their families along on attacks.
Even if people are armed to the teeth, if they lack the warrior mentality or military conditioning that stops their social limiters from working, fighting a war to the knife is not particularly easy. For either side.
Ymar, all of what you write is true. BUT organizing for a violent overthrow meets overwhelming obstacles. Militias and other organized forces of arms are not gonna happen. It is not the 18th century anymore.
The best we can do as we are taken down is to take some of them with us, not just going quietly into that good night. Maybe a phoenix will emerge from those ashes. Maybe.
BUT organizing for a violent overthrow meets overwhelming obstacles.
4th gen warfare isn’t particularly concerned about violent overthrow. That is too simplistic an action in war, everyone expects it, thus it isn’t very asymmetrical in an asymmetrical conflict. Which is why you don’t hear me talk about guns and what not all the time.
Having guns and not being able to use them, just makes a stand off. At the ranch vs Reid, when he was trying to take over, that’s a good use of offensive deterence and can keep the enemy from certain kinds of territorial conquests. But that in and of itself, should be seen as the only way to project power.
Propaganda, mind control via the internet, are proven forms where asymmetrical power projection exists, but does not rely upon physical force. It was only recently thought that people online actually put my theories to the test against the Leftist alliance. Before then, it was just some theoretical surmises on my part.
Correction, should not be seen as the only way to project power.
It is not the 18th century anymore.
Which is why having superior number of arms isn’t a strategic or logistical trump card. Back then, it was, because you could hunt with firearms, taking care of logistics, and you can snipe officers and deny enemy logistical transport using raids, so strategy. And you can win battles with them too. They used them a lot, all the time.
But these days, just buying munitions and waiting, is different.
Parker mentioned Unintended Consequences.
By John Ross
That has an interesting take on civil armed conflict. The book is out of print, though.
But people still focus too much on armed conflict, even as the non armed conflict sweeps them by. One of the reasons why Islam was so superior in conquering and destroying other people for centuries and centuries, as empires fell and got replaced, is because Islam didn’t care who was at war and who was fighting who with what. They were going to raid you and depopulate you, demoralize you, irregardless of what was going on.
Until people get that Full Spectrum idea of Total War, economic war, propaganda war, soul crushing demoralization campaigns, their damage against the Left will be zero. Since they are waiting for some armed conflict to happen.
Y,
I know plenty of old people, men and women, who feel younger than their years, and will not roll over when push comes to shove. And, they taught their children well. All the fascist left can do is kill you, and if they want to kill you they want to kill your children, grandchildren, and your dogs and kittens. Nothing to be gained by rolling over. Perhaps you are living in the wrong place?
BTW, anyone besides me notice the only gop candidate free of msm scrutiny and smear is the donald?
Perhaps you are living in the wrong place?
I think you overestimate the place you live in as representative of the majority of America, urban or surburban.
There are significant differences, regional and cultura, between Georgia and say… California. Which also includes New England vs where ever you are, Parker.
It is not that I live in a Blue Haven full of traitors. It is that I don’t expect this to be the norm for America or the mainstream. If it was the mainstream, nobody would ever start a war against them. But they would if they could.
will not roll over when push comes to shove.
Waiting until the enemy has their ambush and attack forces all set up, is not an offense based mindset. It’s a reactionary one, a defensive one.
Defense and waiting for the enemy to act so you can react, does not win wars or even battles for that matter.
So the key phrase “when push comes to shove” is deficient in certain effects. Do you really want to wait until the Leftist alliance has time to import in 50 million Muslim invaders to conquer your state, Parker? And if you manage to defeat them all by yourself, French Muslim nukes will take care of who remains.
I know that I, my family, friends, and others I hang out with are a minority. But I think we represent perhaps 10%. I also think it takes less than 10% to prevail. Urban and suburban areas will become cannibal holocaust zones when/if the balloon goes up. Its easy to imagine a Chicago weekend where 2,000, not 20 are murdered. They will eat their children, literally and figuratively.
Y,
50 million? 500,000 will be enough to start the ball rolling. You seem to assume people like me have not been planning and preparing for decades. And, good night, its time to snuggle up with Mrs. parker
This quote from a famous Hollywood director seems to fit the discussion on several threads:
I think you and I, all of us, have some sort of stake in the United States. If it fails, the failure will be that of us all. Of mankind itself. It will cost us all. . . . I think of the United States as a country which is an arena and in that arena there is a drama being played out. . . . . I have seen that the struggle is the struggle of free men.
Elia Kazan
You seem to assume people like me have not been planning and preparing for decades.
As I mentioned before, preppers and preparation is a survival asset. But my point here was to separate out “offense”, the attacks needed to win a war, vs merely survival.
I also think it takes less than 10% to prevail.
The 3% of the Revolution, serving as propagandists, cadre, philosophers, diplomats, and leaders yes. But they were serving as cadre, not holed up in their survival off grid communities, if you recall. Cadre have to lead from the front, where people can more easily kill them, if they seek to organize the rest of this human sheeple.
Without an organization, 3% is just 3%.
And as for the 50 million number, that’s what it would take to fully occupy, resettle, and colonize America, so it’s a rather abstract throwaway number. Which may not be all that abstract soon enough. Certainly 500,000, the “big numbers” Army people thought would be needed to occupy and pacify Iraq, a nation with far less than the total able bodied manpower of the US, would start the ball. And Good Morning.
All these scenarios of CW II ignore one large fact. We do not exist in isolation. How much effort was expended in CW I to draw foreign powers into one side or the other? Rhetorical question, and the answer is “a lot”. As the Army of Northern New York sets to invade NYC against the Peoples Army, do you really think the Russians or Chinese will not take advantage of the US being torn asunder by CW II to not step in? The UN would declare the Russians as “peacemakers” and then the occupation of the US would commence “for our own good”.
It’s not a fact, it’s a possible scenario.
And people who still preparing their tactics, are not ready to talk about or learn much about higher strategies or logistics.
The Biblical prophecy about Mystery Babylon hinted that the great city nation of New York would fall apart and be torn apart. Theologians keep arguing about whether Mystery Babylon was Rome, Jerusalem, Mecca or some other holy site with some interesting features. But the point is, preparation is about preparing for the worst, and hoping for the best. Not preparing for the best, hoping for the worst, which seems to be what people like to do.
If there’s a scenario like that, how would you prepare for it? If the answer is “nothing can be done”, then you aren’t really preparing and there’s no point talking about it until it happens. Or some closer chronological event triggers the ability to do something about it.
Just as French Muslims getting WMDs, America’s options are limited, since Europe is the one welcoming in the invaders.
remember, Carson’s family suffered under Jim Crow and slavery, while Obama’s benefitted.
In the Civil War of 1861, the role of the US Navy was crucial. In any future civil war, the role of the Navy, Air Force, and perhaps Space Command would be equally decisive, including decisive in terms of allowing or preventing foreign intervention.
Put this on the wrong thread:
they now admit it was all a fabrication:
http://thefederalist.com/2015/11/06/politico-admits-fabricating-a-hit-piece-on-ben-carson/
physicsguy:
If you read that Federalist piece you just linked to, the title is somewhat sarcastic. It’s imitating the original Politico title, using the words “admits fabricating” even though Politico didn’t exactly admit that, not up-front anyway.
Physics, Neo Neo, this is why I pay as little attention to the MSM and popular culture as it is possible to do so, while still remaining up to date on issues.
Corruption, Corruption, Corruption. Not even firewalls and anti virus detectors will save you there once they get your port address.
Oblio, a pertinent point, since a Navy can keep many invaders away, as it did for Japan or Britain.
But then again, have people ever noticed what’s going on at the naval academies and other service academies?
It’s intentional on the Left’s part. This is no mere coincidence or accident.
Hey, who that “Frank” guy in Obozo’s book, mentioned fifteen times, anyway?
I’m just asking questions, you know – like the reporter’s in “Truth” did – Just asking???
The MSM are Democrat cheerleaders with byline. That’s’ why the NYtimes exists, and that’s the “standard” admired and taught at J-Schools.
The Politico is a WashPost staff off-shoot. Thus, it’s no different than other NYTimes’ wannabe’s.
And that’s why I’ve ignored this story. Ho, hum – another fake “black” like Herman Cain must be trashed.
The newest crap journalism award goes to the Wall Street Journal that implied they could find ‘no record’ of a class Carson took at Yale nor his claim of a test re-taken, which ended up being a bit of a ‘hoax’ psychological experiment on the class. Carson whacked back hard today with PROOF of this class and a news article clipping from 1970 Yale paper that proves his story was accurate.
The press is going to crumble if they keep doing such a lousy job of researching. Do they really think they are smarter and better than Dr. Carson? That he had to make up his life history in order to elevate himself? Seriously?
The guy grew up in poverty and became a brain surgeon. I don’t think he needs to puff up his autobiography at ALL in order to prove what an amazing person he is.
LOUSY press and their obvious BIAS toward Dr. Carson. It’s sickening.
K-E:
Yes, it’s not just the traditionally liberal press that’s doing this. It reminds me a bit of Palin, whom even some press and pundits on the right turned on.
What I think is going on is this—when Carson was just the brain surgeon who helped kids, the elites (i.e. the press) on the right thought he was A-okay. When he was just the guy who criticized Obama in that first speech, the elites on the right thought he was A-okay. But once they realized he was one of those “religious nuts,” and maybe had a few idea of the sort they attributed to Palin (dinosaurs walking the earth or whatever it was), then they started trying to debunk him, and that includes his credentials. How can he be a scientist and a fundamentalist Christian at the same time? Those things don’t compute in their minds. So they don’t like him anymore, and he becomes fair game in their eyes.
As Orson indicated, Carson is getting the Cain treatment. When Blacks become Republicans who go off the Democratic Plantation, they have to be destroyed. Seemly everyone in the media mis-remembers that the Democrats were the party of Southern secession, Jim Crow segregation and were against the Civil Rights Act. Yet Obama and Clinton get a pass by the media on their very obvious lies.
The uninformed voters in our country are destroying our freedoms by voting in power hungry violaters of the rule of law called progressive Democrats.
I wonder how many of these hard-working journalists looked closely into the Hillary-under-enemy-fire story.
The Democrats reconstructed the history and causes of slavery and secession in the South. It takes unearthing new or old elements to expose what really happened back then.
The Northern victory claim that they ended slavery with the war and the Southern Democrat belief that the war was about (their) freedom or state’s rights, were both erroneous in many ways.
As for attacks, defending against them is tough.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p5TMmxlsLN8
Counter attacking, is easier in many ways and more effective. Don’t just turtle up, the Left will wear you down eventually in the siege.