Image Image Image Image Image Image Image Image Image Image

The Blue & Gray Press | December 11, 2017

Scroll to top

Top

Ben Carson lacks political background, questions his campaign

Ben Carson lacks political background, questions his campaign

By HANNAH PARKER

Compared to other presidential candidates, Ben Carson’s political background is not very impressive, yet somehow he climbed his way into second place right behind Donald Trump for the Republican nomination.

Carson was born in Detroit, Michigan where he grew up a child of divorce. He was raised by his single mother, and despite his childhood adversity he found himself accepted to Yale University. Carson majored in psychology at Yale, and later received his Master’s Degree from the University of Michigan Medical School.

Clearly unstoppable, he then became a neurosurgery resident at John Hopkins Hospital where he completed his most successful surgery, separating two conjoined twins. Carson retired from his work as a surgeon in 2013 after receiving numerous awards such as the Presidential Medal of Freedom.

Later, Carson wrote multiple articles and books about his accomplishments, work ethic and faith basis.

Although he is an extraordinarily gifted and intelligent person, Carson’s political career is shortlisted. He did not even affiliate with the Republican Party until Nov. 4, 2014.

However, just because Carson does not have a fruitful political background does not mean he would not make a good president but his lack of experience could cloud his immediate judgment.

Other presidential candidates that have political background have dealt with public opinions and concerns, but how would someone who solely has medical history appeal to all public concerns in a progressive way even when they oppose his views and the views of his party?

Carson’s lack of experience does not only question his ability to be America’s next

Republican nominee, or possible president, but also his knowledge of the political system and how it works.

Just recently on Sunday, Sept. 27, Carson said in an interview with CNN, that for a Muslim to be president they must “reject the tenets of Islam.”

“I would have problems with somebody who embraced all the doctrines associated with Islam,” Carson said. “If they are not willing to reject sharia and all the portions of it that are talked about in the Quran, if they are not willing to reject that, and subject that to American values and the Constitution, then of course, I would.”

With Carson generalizing all Muslims into one category, making them “unfit” to run the nation, he contradicts himself. Is it not one of our first amendment rights to freedom of religion?

By Carson saying a Muslim would have to abandon his faith to be a political leader is a perfect example of someone who does not have the experience or knowledge to run the country.

Further, Carson has a strong Christian faith, which begs the question, does that mean he should not be president?

Does every candidate have to abandon their faith to be able to “subject to American values and the Constitution?”

Carson’s lack of social progression is evident from his lack of political history. It is important that our next president has political experience to understand the political system in order to lead our country appropriately.

Comments

  1. UMW Parent

    With all due respect, Dr. Carson did not lump all Muslims into one group “unfit to run the nation”–he said that a Muslim would need to reject Sharia law before he would could support that person for President. Sharia law goes beyond religion, it is a way of life and it is completely at odds with most of our Constitution. Christianity, on the other hand, is not at odds with our Constitution. We have plenty of Christian leaders and many of them have chosen to reject what many see as the teachings of the bible, but they still call themselves Christian. A Muslim, therefore, could still practice Islam while rejecting Sharia. I’m not sure any Muslim would actually do this. On a separate note, Dr. Carson’s lack of political background is what appeals to many. Career politicians are often corrupt liars whose allegiance lies with their donors rather than their constituents.

  2. umw alum

    The author has a point. Like Trump, Dr. Carson’s lack of political background is what makes him appear as an absurd candidate. ALL previously elected presidents have had at least one of these three types of experience: 1) previously served as an elected official at some level, 2) previously served as an appointed government official at some level, or 3) served as a high ranking military official. No candidate of any party who has ever run for president and lacked the above criteria has ever won. Not a single one. Saying that we want to place our country in the hands of a president who lacks any relevant experience is like saying we’d prefer to place our life in the hands of someone who has never performed neurosurgery, let alone any kind of minor surgery. What sane-minded person would find that appealing?? As a neurosurgeon, Ben Carson should understand that terrifying logic. If he did, and chose to run anyway, then he must be marvelously stupid or an arrogant hypocrite.