Top Menu

Follow Taylor on Twitter

Loser of the Week: Ben Carson’s Gafferiffic Gay Marriage Implosion

CARSON: Well, my thoughts are that marriage is between a man and a woman. It’s a well-established, fundamental pillar of society and no group, be they gays, be they NAMBLA, be they people who believe in bestiality. It doesn’t matter what they are. They don’t get to change the definition. So he, it’s not something that is against gays, it’s against anybody who wants to come along and change the fundamental definitions of pillars of society. It has significant ramifications. [via Dave Weigel]

bencarson

IT NEVER seems to take long before these right wing extremists reveal they haven’t a clue about conservatism. The latest Republican darling didn’t take long to prove he’s another unfit person to be on the political stage.

As a liberal, live and let live seems the best motto for life.

Anyone who is a real conservative should know this ideology begins with staying out of people’s personal lives, because it’s not where government should be.

But that ship sailed with the immoral minority and Rev. Jerry Falwell, Phyllis Schlafly and their followers. Since then Republicans have been trying to dig themselves out of a cultural hole that always had time against them. From Rush Limbaugh to Sean Hannity, where Ben Carson got into trouble, to Bill O’Reilly and many others on the right, they all represent a dying breed.

Ben Carson blew it big time this week, but he just couldn’t help himself.

, , , , , , , , , , ,

15 Responses to Loser of the Week: Ben Carson’s Gafferiffic Gay Marriage Implosion

  1. Marie205 March 29, 2013 at 8:46 am #

    Ben Carson blew it the day he step into the dirty world of politics. The man is a doctor he should have stuck to discussing medicine. Instead he is on TV pushing failed right wing ideas and policies. Also, from what I’ve learned about his family background he is very deeply religious, which is nothing wrong with that…accept when you push those strict conservatives beliefs on others…like he has been doing lately.

    He can think and feel how he wishes about certain issues in America…and I have the right not to listen nor vote for any of them in the future.

  2. DaGoat March 29, 2013 at 9:06 am #

    “Anyone who is a real conservative should know this ideology begins with staying out of people’s personal lives”

    Carson is being consistent with the traditional definition of conservatism, which is resistance to change. The GOP adopted a political stance of “staying out of people’s lives” which they proceeded to break many times.

    Since both parties are at times resistant to change and both parties are willing to get into people’s lives if it suits a political agenda, the traditional definitions have lost a lot of their meaning.

    • Marie205 March 29, 2013 at 9:17 am #

      Good point.

  3. Taylor Marsh March 29, 2013 at 9:33 am #

    False equivalencies simply do not work.

    Dems have always believed government can work in people’s lives to make them better. In a modern society that is increasingly unequal, this becomes even more important. Progressives inside Dem Party work constantly for change, though they fail because of their minority caucus status.

    William F. Buckley said before his death on Charlie Rose’s show that conservatism is about being against something. It never had anything to do with “resistance to change,” which doesn’t come close to what Buckley intoned.

    Carson has revealed what he’s against, that’s for sure.

    But conservatism, before Reagan embraced the immoral minority crew of the religious right, was never about taking rights away from people because they didn’t fit the unholy, un-Christian definition of being human. Reaganism, with it’s religious right contingent, was always doomed to fail conservatism, because it was moored in taking rights away from people, which is fundamentally un-American.

    The modern era just had to progress enough for younger generations to rise, people who were never going to embrace what the extremist fundamentalists made conservatism.

    What both parties have done is give rise to libertarianism.

    Now if we can all give rise to THE POPULAR VOTE over the Electoral College we’ll actually be on to something!

    • jjamele March 30, 2013 at 9:48 am #

      “Dems have always believed government can work in people’s lives to make them better. In a modern society that is increasingly unequal, this becomes even more important. Progressives inside Dem Party work constantly for change, though they fail because of their minority caucus status.”

      Do you really fail to see the logical fallacy in this paragraph?

      If Democrats “have always believed that government can work in people’s lives to make them better” why does there need to be “Progressives inside the Dem party” working constantly for change? Even more- why would they fail “because of their minority caucus status?”

      I think you meant to write “Democrats HAD always believed,” because the rest of your post describes how the party as a whole really doesn’t anymore- just a “minority caucus” within the party.

      • jinbaltimore April 1, 2013 at 3:27 pm #

        Spot on.

  4. secularhumanizinevoluter March 29, 2013 at 10:36 am #

    “IT NEVER seems to take long before these right wing extremists reveal they haven’t a clue about conservatism. The latest Republican darling didn’t take long to prove he’s another unfit person to be on the political stage.”

    Actually as far as the repugnantklan/teabagging/UBERChristohypocrite party is composed(DEcomposed?!!) today I think he’s PERFECT! He is the personification of the level of delusion and disconnect from reality of the conSERvatives today exemplified by his statements on gay marriage.

    “What both parties have done is give rise to libertarianism. ”

    From everything I have seen “libertarianism” is just another refuge for the wingnuts even MORE delusional and extreme then the teabaggers. But they don’t want to pay taxes and they want to smoke pot while they deny women reproductive rights and protection of constitutional rights of woman and minorities….and the public from unsafe peoducts and drugs etc. etc. etc.

    “But conservatism, before Reagan embraced the immoral minority crew of the religious right, was never about taking rights away from people because they didn’t fit the unholy, un-Christian definition of being human. Reaganism, with it’s religious right contingent, was always doomed to fail conservatism, because it was moored in taking rights away from people, which is fundamentally un-American.”

    That is the money quote….Reagan sold the soul of the Republican Party to the wingnut right. The craziest most extreme element in our society. Short term gain…long term extinction. Even if the wingnuts DON’T want them teaching that thar EVILution stuff in science classes these angry old white folks just couldn’t evolve.

    • Taylor Marsh March 29, 2013 at 10:42 am #

      Quibble, here… Just one point on libertarianism, which begins with Gary Johnson, who is FOR women’s rights *and* marriage equality. On the tax issue you are correct.

      The fake libertarians are represented by the Pauls and others.

      As for Reaganism, it lies in shambles at the feet of Limbaugh, Hannity and others who can’t come close to rewriting history deep and fast enough to change the facts.

      • jjamele March 30, 2013 at 9:51 am #

        Um, no. Reaganism in terms of economics continues to be the driving force of the political discourse. It’s permeated both political parties. The only “debate” going on now is How Much To Cut. WHETHER to cut was an argument thirty years ago- it’s not anymore. And no one is discussing serious tax increases on the wealthy- another issue that was debated back before Reaganism became our guiding light to hell. Heck, you can’t even get a decent discussion on removing the SS cap from any leading member of either party.

        Reaganism lies in shambles? Please. It’s stronger than ever.

  5. spincitysd March 29, 2013 at 4:34 pm #

    I have a hard and fast, if politically incorrect, rule on Black Republicans; they are always part of the clown car. What these men and women do is provide cover, they are the shield against the charges of institutional racism in the GOP. But their very rarity in the ranks and the ideology these men and women adhere to makes them outliers at best and sell outs / freaks at worst. That is why, Colin Powell excepted, they implode the very nanosecond they come under the klieg lights. But even General Powell is more of a throw-back edition Republican. He is the last Edward Brooks Republican standing and he would have been drummed out of the party a long time ago if it were not for his skin tone and history.

    There is no real room for either working class nor upwardly mobile Middle Class African Americans in the Republican Party. The ideology of the party is antithetical to an overwhelming majority of blacks. The few Black folk who could put up with this nonsense deserted the party right after Katrina. The actions of the Republican Party, gerrymandering, Voter ID laws, and the general foot-in-mouth disease of your standard issue, pasty-white-male Republican pol have contributed to the demographic wipeout the Elephants endure. Obama got 90% of the African-American vote for a reason.

  6. DaGoat March 29, 2013 at 6:47 pm #

    “I have a hard and fast, if politically incorrect, rule on Black Republicans; they are always part of the clown car. What these men and women do is provide cover, they are the shield against the charges of institutional racism in the GOP.”

    While victims of racism from other quarters it seems.

    • spincitysd March 30, 2013 at 7:58 am #

      Oh please, spare me the pity party. The disconnect between the dreams and aspirations of Black America and what the Modern Republican Party stands for makes the very notion of “Black Republican” a near Oxymoron.

      You can always find a minority of a minority who will work against the interests of their group. You can always find a individual with enough cognitive dissonance or just plain narcism, willing to be that very special person that is the exception that “proves” the rule.

      But the minute you take them out of the hothouse environment where they grew, these flower always wilt. Clarence Thomas, Condoleezza Rice, Hermann Cain, they all failed in spectacular fashion. Ben Carlson failed in the exact same way because of the ideology of the Modern Republican Party. The ideology fails, thus the man or woman fails.

      It’s not the messenger, it’s the message. More importantly it is a message that has damn little relevance to anyone who is not a White, rural, evangelical Southerner.

      • jjamele March 30, 2013 at 9:54 am #

        Some African Americans are Republicans because they care more about low taxes for the wealthy, banning abortion and preventing gays from getting married than they do about racism.

        Some Gays are Republicans because they care more about low taxes for the wealthy, banning abortion, and stopping the poor family down the street from “milking the system” than they do about gay rights.

        This isn’t complicated. Everyone prioritizes. It’s pretty arrogant to dismiss and vilify people who don’t list priorities in the order you think is proper.

  7. DaGoat March 30, 2013 at 8:29 am #

    No pity here. But just to clarify, you look first a person’s politics or ideology, then look at their skin color to make a final judgment on them. And because you are a progressive and know what’s best for minorities, it’s OK to do that.

    • secularhumanizinevoluter March 30, 2013 at 9:52 am #

      YEAH! I mean…those Jews who actually did the work of running the Concentration camps….they were AOK right?

.... a writer is someone who takes the universal whore of language
and turns her into a virgin again.  ~ erica jong