Carson Claimed West Point Scholarship...Admits to NYTimes He Wasn’t Offered Aid

I was 17 in 1974. I fell down a flight of stairs and fractured a vertebrae in my back, spending almost the next year in a metal back brace. I remember the event, but I couldn't tell ya when in 1974.

It's looks like he got the month wrong and confused marching in the Memorial Day Parade as being at the same time as as the Banquet for Medal of Honor recipient Dwight Johnson. Not bad for a 46 year old memory.

In Bill Clinton's deposition in the Paula Jones case, his memory failed him 267 times for an event that took place just 3 years earlier.

 

Mods?

Isn't the title of the thread supposed to be a copy and paste of the linked article ?

Or are we allowed to make things up now ?


Or does it depend on subject matter...


.

 

LOL - I would change to the topic to thread title issues as well if I were a right winger who's panicking they've chosen to back a narcissistic liar for president

 

Well your evidence he was not told he could have a slot if be wanted one wanted one?

 

So what?

 

So ... Carson's claim that he was "offered a full scholarship to West Point" is clearly false, because only West Point can make such offers, and West Point never offered him anything.

Now, you're free to excuse this in any way you see fit, as many Carson supporters are. But don't pretend that what Carson wrote is true. At best, you can argue that Carson mistook an informal offer of help in applying for "being offered a full scholarship to West Point".

 

Well the title is a lie just like the one that says Politco reports the ACA saved 50000 lives. Ironic having a thread title thats a lie accusing Carson of lying.

 

If a General told you you could go to WP and do it for free would you not assume you were being offered a scholarship to WP? In reality everyone who goes to WP does so on a scholarship

 

Carson. Sociopath in Chief. The moonbats and corn flakes rejoice.

What a total joke this man is.

 

I do believe, if you read the rules, you are supposed to send a report function instead of "tattling" in a forum post. Maybe YOU should read the rules.

 

Carson's current opponents are not Obama or Clinton. Nor will Democrats be picking the Republican nominee.

It is complete hypocrisy to claim that dishonesty by Carson is irrelevant because Obama and Clinton were dishonest.

 

So if a general says to you "Hey, if you apply to West Point and are accepted, tuition is free", would you assume you had just been offered a full scholarship to West Point?

There is a difference between informing you of the fact that West Point is free, and actually offering you a spot at West Point.

However else you want to spin it, West Point never offered Carson ANYTHING. So Carson's claim that he was offered ANYTHING by West Point is false.

 

If right wingers and left wingers want honesty, the only candidate is Sanders.


The rest of them are known liars, scofflaws and ingrates. If the left and right want to pound the "transparency and honesty" drum, they have no choice but sanders - he's been saying and doing the same thing for 3 decades. Not a single one of these two bit throw away candidates he's against, liberal and conservative, even come close.

 

We want more than honesty . I have yet to see one proven lie by Sanders but many accusations

Bernie Sanders: six lies in five minutes

 

Everybody lies. Who cares? Would John Wayne have been "The Duke" if he had given us his real name?

 

If he told me I would be accepted IF I applied and that it would be free I would assume he was offering me a scholarship to WP or I may word it that way speaking to others. I dont see much difference here
Is there any doubt he would have been accepted? I dont think so

He never claimed WP offered him anything

 

Except for the asterisk and exclamation point, it's a C&P of the title as it first appeared on Politico, but which was subsequently changed by Politico.

 

That is your prerogative.

Note that the general did not oversee West Point admissions, so he couldn't have guaranteed admission if Carson applied. And one would think the general would have been clear on that. Admission to West Point is a very competitive process -- it has an acceptance rate of 9%. I doubt anyone would straight up say, "If you apply, you'll be accepted." More likely the general would have said, "You should consider applying to West Point; I think you'd have a good chance of being accepted."

Now, perhaps in Carson's mind that became "Hey! I can go to West Point for free!" But that's a somewhat weird way to interpret things. I've always known the difference between applying for something and being accepted, and knowing what a potential offer is vs. actually receiving the offer. Carson is apparently a smart guy, and he was confused on this point? To the point of telling the story the exact same way, with little variation, for years? In a way that just happened to make him look as good as possible?

And then there's the other obviously false claim related to this -- that he met with Westmoreland on Memorial Day, after marching in a parade. This, too, clearly didn't happen. So was it a lie, or was he once again confused -- taking two memorable events that happened on different days, and pushing them together in his mind?

I get confusion and fog of memory -- I often forget exact dates and times. But these two events were not throwaways -- they were both significant events in Carson's life. I might not be able to remember exactly when I met the general, but I would probably know that it occurred on a different day than me marching in the Memorial Day parade. I would probably be able to tell you which happened first, even if I couldn't tell you exactly how many weeks separated them.

Is that enough to brand Carson's claims a "lie"? No. They could simply be because of confusion.

I guess I don't think Carson's defense -- in which he's basically saying "I didn't lie; I'm just easily confused" -- helps him a whole lot. And let's not forget the certainty and degree of detail in Carson's stories. If he didn't quite remember, he could say so. Or he could have done some research to establish the timeline. He didn't. He instead apparently took foggy memories and wrote them down with great specificity and certainty. So now, besides being easily confused, he's also sloppy, or careless, or didn't think accuracy was very important.

I've known writers like that. Regardless of what you decide to believe about Carson's truthfulness, sloppy, careless and inaccurate or not good traits.

 

I bet he could. But even if he could not if he told me he could I would believe him. There also is not much confusion. If Westmorland had asked me if I wanted to go to WP for free I would assume I was being offered a scholarship to WP. What else would I think ? He had all the qualifications and having Westmoreland in your corner sure wouldnt hurt.

Yet I bet you back Obama

 

why wont you answer that thread you asked me to bump?

 

How the hell am I supposed to find it ?

 

Politico Changes Headline On Carson Story, Pretends It Didn’t

No surprises on this racist smear piece.

 

Yep... that's why Politico put a lengthy editor's note on the piece explaining what was corrected, and why.... :eyeroll:

 

Liberals love it when Hillary Clinton lies about dodging sniper fire, being named after Sir Edmund Hillary, or that she didn't send, receive, and store Top Secret information on an un-secured server.

Liberals don't care that Barack Obama claimed.

• his uncle helped liberate the Nazi death camp at Auschwitz during World War II. The problem? That story didn’t track with history, considering Auschwitz was liberated by Soviet forces.
• his “very existence” to the generosity of the Kennedy family, which he said paid for his Kenyan father to travel to America on a student scholarship and thus meet his Kansan mother.
• the civil rights march as the inspiration for his conception. The only problem with that, as conservative pundit Michelle Malkin points out, is that the president was already three years old when the march occurred in 1965.
• his step-grandfather was killed while fighting Dutch troops in Indonesia
• his mother’s experience as a cancer patient fighting to get coverage to pay for treatment for what her insurer said was a pre-existing condition
• his girlfriends attributes, it turned out to be a fabrication and was later claimed to be a "collaboration" of girlfriends.
• that families would receive $2,500 gain from insurance in Obamcare
• that we could keep our doctors
• that we could keep our plans
• that it was "not a tax".

Now that we have Politico amending the story themselves, we still have Liberals supporting the lie so they may attack a good man, meanwhile, they ignore more substantive lies so they may support Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama. How warped is this left wing ideology?