Connect with us

GOP Hero Ben Carson: ‘Be They Gays, Be They NAMBLA, Be They People Who Believe In Bestiality’

Published

on

The latest darling of the Tea Party says that gays, pedophiles, “people who believe in bestiality,” and “NAMBLA” don’t get to “redefine” marriage. Dr. Ben Carson, who came to national attention when he delivered a speech earlier this year at the National Prayer Breakfast, shared with Fox News’ Sean Hannity his “thoughts … that marriage is between a man and a woman, it’s a well-established fundamental pillar of society.”

“No group, be they gays, be they NAMBLA [the North American Man/Boy Love Association], be they people who believe in bestiality, it doesn’t matter what they are, they don’t get to change the definition. So it’s not something that’s against gays, it’s against anybody who wants to come along and change the fundamental definitions of pillars of society. It has signifcant ramifications.”

Dr. Carson is a neurosurgeon and the director of pediatric neurosurgery at Johns Hopkins Hospital in Baltimore, Maryland — one of, if not the top hospitals in the world. This means that Dr. Ben Carson literally is a brain surgeon, and proves that bigotry and ignorance are like a virus — they know neither race nor intellect, and unlike their host, they don’t discriminate.

Over at Think Progress, Adam Peck writes:

The segment ended shorty afterward, leaving Hannity with no time to clarify whether Carson, himself a black man, would have also been opposed to the 1967 Supreme Court ruling in Loving v. Virginia, a decision that redefined the same “fundamental pillar of society” as something that could not be inhibited by race.

Carson’s comments also puts him at odds with every major medical association in the country. Both the American Medical Association’s code of conduct and the American Psychiatric Association’s Diagnostic Statistical Manual contain strong and unambiguous language on homosexuality as neither a medical nor psychological condition but rather a perfectly healthy and biologically-rooted lifestyle, and remain critical of anyone who suggests otherwise.

He is also far from the first Republican to equate homosexuality to things like pedophilia. Rush Limbaugh, Bill O’Reilly, state lawmakers and conservatives everywhere have all sought to paint the LGBT community and pedophiles with the same brush, even as their own party is pulled in the direction of equality.

Of course, professional backlash has been swift. Media Matters reports:

“I don’t think most people at Hopkins think what he says on this subject matters,” Professor Todd Shepard, co-director of the university’s Program for the Study of Women, Gender, and Sexuality, said in a statement toMedia Matters. “They make him look nasty, petty, and ill-informed. It doesn’t tell us anything about his amazing abilities as a surgeon. It does remind us, however, that those abilities do not mean we should listen to what he says in any other domain.”

Baltimore Sun media critic David Zurawik wrote that Fox had “created a climate” for Carson’s “partisan, polarizing and possibly hurtful language.”

Shepard, who teaches French history as well as gender and sexuality studies, compared Carson to the French intellectuals who supported the prosecution of Alfred Dreyfus at the turn of the 20th century.

“I admire Dr. Carson as a neurosurgeon, but his intervention into this debate proves that, like those who defended the Army and the Church against Dreyfus, he prefers to defend the ways things have been rather than individual rights and to deny that informed and rational debate is a better basis for making decisions than received wisdom,” said Shepard. “I doubt that he would apply these lessons to his professional life. In this case, where he knows nothing more than hearsay, the good doctor is wrong about the history.”

Shepard concluded that these “reactionary and rancid claims do remind us of how far the general discussion has advanced beyond Dr. Carson and his far-right audience.”

In early February at the National Prayer Breakfast, Dr. Carson stood next to President Barack Obama and unleashed a ludicrous diagnosis of the economy and America’s woes, which apparently include “political correctness.”

Slate’s Dave Weigel notes that in Carson’s book, he “spends a little time explaining why marriage shouldn’t be redefined to include same-sex unions.”:

“I have no problem whatsoever,” he writes, “with allowing gay people to live as they please, as long as they don’t try to impose their lifestyle on everyone else. Marriage is a very sacred institution and should not be degraded by allowing every other type of relationship to be made equivalent to it.”

Up to now, across a series of friendly profiles, nobody thought to ask Carson about marriage. The first time someone did, he took a sharp turn into Gaffe City.

Ironically, Dr. Carson’s latest book is America the Beautiful: Rediscovering What Made This Nation Great. Equating gays to NAMBLA, pedophiles, and “people who believe in bestiality,” we’re certain, isn’t part of what made America great, and diminishes both Dr. Carson and his employer.

http://mediamatters.org/embed/193282

There's a reason 10,000 people subscribe to NCRM. You can get the news before it breaks just by subscribing, plus you can learn something new every day.
Continue Reading
Click to comment
 
 

Enjoy this piece?

… then let us make a small request. The New Civil Rights Movement depends on readers like you to meet our ongoing expenses and continue producing quality progressive journalism. Three Silicon Valley giants consume 70 percent of all online advertising dollars, so we need your help to continue doing what we do.

NCRM is independent. You won’t find mainstream media bias here. From unflinching coverage of religious extremism, to spotlighting efforts to roll back our rights, NCRM continues to speak truth to power. America needs independent voices like NCRM to be sure no one is forgotten.

Every reader contribution, whatever the amount, makes a tremendous difference. Help ensure NCRM remains independent long into the future. Support progressive journalism with a one-time contribution to NCRM, or click here to become a subscriber. Thank you. Click here to donate by check.

News

These 19 Democrats May Already Be Jockeying for a Presidential Run: Report

Published

on

The November midterms are more than nine months away, but already there are well over a dozen Democrats who could be showing signs of interest in running for the White House in 2028.

That’s according to Zenith Research pollster Adam Carlson, who identified nineteen Democrats with varying degrees of proximity to a presidential race.

The list includes current and former U.S. Senators, Congress members, governors, and mayors. One former cabinet secretary, one former ambassador, and one former astronaut. But overall, the list is heavy with executive experience — not just Washington politicians. That could be a feather in the cap for Democrats, as the GOP’s current bench appears to be drawn largely from inside the Trump administration — and voters may not want four, if not eight, more years of the same.

Nearly all have accumulated years — and in some cases, decades — of experience in government, spanning local, state, and national offices, yet none is older than in their mid-60s. The youngest is currently just one year beyond the Constitution’s 35-year age threshold. And today, after nearly a decade of some of the oldest U.S. presidents in history, that age range could bring a sigh of relief for many voters.

Many also hail from across the country, rather than being concentrated among so-called coastal elites — a longstanding critique often leveled at Democrats.

READ MORE: ‘Damage Control’: Trump Mocked for New Weekly Barnstorming Blitz Months Ahead of Midterms

Carlson divided the list into categories. Five are “clearly running,” six seem likely, four fall into a “wouldn’t be surprised” section, and just one is seen as “unlikely.” The future of two could depend on the 2026 race, and one is a “wildcard.”

Here are Carlson’s predictions:

Those clearly signaling a run include Kentucky Governor Andy Beshear; former U.S. Transportation Secretary and former South Bend mayor Pete Buttigieg; former Chicago mayor and U.S. ambassador Rahm Emanuel — who also served in the Obama White House; California Governor Gavin Newsom; and Pennsylvania Governor Josh Shapiro.

The “seems likely” group ranges from former Newark mayor and current U.S. Senator Cory Booker, to former Vice President Kamala Harris, along with U.S. Senator and former NASA astronaut Mark Kelly, U.S. Rep. Ro Khanna, U.S. Senator Chris Murphy, and Illinois Gov. JB Pritzker.

Under “wouldn’t be surprised,” are U.S. Senator Ruben Gallego, Maryland Governor Wes Moore, U.S. Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, (AOC), and U.S. Senator Chris Van Hollen.

The “unlikely” candidate, according to Carlson, is Michigan Governor Gretchen Whitmer.

The two “depends on 2026” candidates are both U.S. Senators, and both from Georgia: Senator Jon Ossoff and Senator Raphael Warnock.

Lastly, the “wildcard”: political commentator and television host Jon Stewart.

READ MORE: ‘Can Barely Keep His Eyes Open’: Trump Mocked Over ‘Ramblefest’ Davos Speech

 

Image via Shutterstock

Continue Reading

News

‘Damage Control’: Trump Mocked for New Weekly Barnstorming Blitz Months Ahead of Midterms

Published

on

As his poll numbers continue to drop, the White House is announcing that President Donald Trump will begin a weekly barnstorming blitz of the country to rally supporters with stump speeches designed to change voters’ perceptions that high prices are Trump’s fault.

“Trump’s first stop will be on Tuesday in Iowa, where he will deliver a speech on the economy and energy, chief of staff Susie Wiles told reporters on the way to Davos, Switzerland,” Politico reported. “The travel blitz beginning in January is much earlier than during his first term, when he began traveling aggressively to support candidates just after Labor Day.”

“Trump has struggled to articulate an affordability message that moves the needle with voters, and a purposeful tack back to domestic matters could help that perception,” Politico noted, adding that “polling has regularly shown Trump’s popularity slipping and voters beginning to blame his policies for the high cost of living.”

According to Zeteo News’ Prem Thakker, Trump is running negative — and in some cases double-digit negative — in a dozen states that will hold elections for the U.S. Senate this November. Thakker cited data from The Economist, which also shows that the president’s net approval rating is now -19 percent, down two points from last week and “the lowest it has been this term.”

READ MORE: DOJ Delay Continues as Judge Denies Epstein Files Special Master

Some of those state ratings, Thakker noted, include:
Georgia: -18.6%
Maine: -18.4%
Texas: -17.2%
Michigan: -15.8%
N Carolina: -13.6%

Meanwhile, some appeared optimistic.

“As President Trump barnstorms the country to advance his America First agenda, Republicans are poised to defy history in the midterms,” Republican National Committee spokesperson Kiersten Pels told Politico.

Others took a different view.

The Bulwark’s Sarah Longwell rejected former Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) spokesperson Katie Miller’s suggestion that Trump’s travel to Iowa means that he’s “running.”

“This is a hilarious tweet,” Longwell wrote. “Trump isn’t going to Iowa because he is running. He’s going for damage control because his tariffs have made the state a pickup for Democrats.”

The Lincoln Project added, “Trump’s ‘Affordability Hoax’ heads to Iowa to tell Iowans that everything’s fine, despite their worst-in-the-country economy.”

On Tuesday, CNN’s John King reported that while Democrats understand that Iowa will be an uphill battle, they see opportunity.

“Democrats have a huge opportunity and Republicans acknowledge it,” King also told Anderson Cooper. “If the election were tomorrow, the Democrats would take back the House without question. The only part is the margin.”

READ MORE: ‘Can Barely Keep His Eyes Open’: Trump Mocked Over ‘Ramblefest’ Davos Speech

 

Image via Reuters 

Continue Reading

News

DOJ Delay Continues as Judge Denies Epstein Files Special Master

Published

on

Thirty-three days after the Trump Department of Justice was required by law to release the Epstein Files — but failed to produce even one percent of them — a federal judge has rejected a bipartisan effort to appoint a special master to oversee production of the documents.

U.S. Reps. Ro Khanna (D-CA) and Thomas Massie (R-KY), authors of the Epstein Files Transparency Act (EFTA), went to court to make their request. On Wednesday, U.S. District Judge Paul Engelmayer declined that request, stating that he does not have the authority to appoint a special master.

“Their request is ‘important’ and ‘timely,’ but the appropriate vehicle may be a lawsuit or Congress, the judge says,” according to All Rise News editor-in-chief Adam Klasfeld.

“This criminal case does not give the Court any charter to supervise DOJ’s compliance with the EFTA,” Judge Engelmayer wrote, as New York Daily News reporter Molly Crane-Newman reported. “And the motion exceeds the bounds of permissible amici participation. This decision is without prejudice to the Representatives’ right to initiate a separate lawsuit. The Representatives are also, of course, at liberty to pursue oversight of DOJ via the tools available to Congress.”

READ MORE: ‘Can Barely Keep His Eyes Open’: Trump Mocked Over ‘Ramblefest’ Davos Speech

On Tuesday, Crane-Newman reported that attorneys for the two congressmen had renewed “their push to seek a special master to oversee the Epstein files release, saying the government ‘cannot be relied upon to act with disinterest and objectively to do what is best for the survivors. It has its own conflicting interests.'”

Former Palm Beach County State Attorney Dave Aronberg, earlier on Wednesday, told MSNOW, “I don’t think we’ll see the entire file until Trump is out of office.”

“I think part of the problem here for Congressmen Khanna and Massie is that the law that they wrote is riddled with loopholes. It does not have an enforcement mechanism. So they’re trying to figure out how to get the DOJ to turn over all the documents, but there’s nothing in the law that forces them to do so under penalty of whatever,” he explained.

Aronberg called it “a real big question whether or not they, as members of Congress, have the standing to get this judge in a closed case to force the DOJ to turn over the documents.”

READ MORE: Canadian Prime Minister Warns World Order Has Ruptured

 

Image via Reuters

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © 2020 AlterNet Media.