Carson: Obama refugee plan a ‘suspension of intellect’

Republican presidential candidate Ban Carson is calling President Obama’s decision to allow 10,000 Syrian refugees into the country over the next year a “suspension of intellect.”

“Bringing people into this country from that area of the world I think is a huge mistake, because why wouldn’t they infiltrate them with people who are ideologically opposed to us?” Carson asked on “Fox News Sunday.” “It would be foolish for them not to do that.”

Reports have surfaced that at least one of the terrorists who attacked Paris on Friday entered France posing as a migrant.

The Republican presidential hopeful held out the option of putting U.S. boots on the ground to combat the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria (ISIS) if he is elected commander in chief.

“I don’t want to put a specific number on it, or indicate what types of people there are, because those are decisions that I think are made by people who have a tremendous amount of military experience and capability,” Carson said.

read more:

Views: 529

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Carsons response sounds like a  PC statement and pathetic. This is all the guy has. See him now what you see is what you get. Weak and pathetic.

Yeah, sure. If Carson is weak, what the heck do you think Obama's response has been for 7 seven years in office to everything threatening America. Suspension of intellect is a kind criticism, I say it's treasonous action to bring the enemy here.


You are SOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO right on this one. 

It is a real shame that the President of France is showing the way to take revenge on those animals. Of course, I know b. HUSSEIN o. will not do anything to hurt his brothers. AND NO, he is not stupid. He is doing EXACTLY what he set out to do. DESTROY AMERICA!!

Carson says, "I don’t want to put a specific number on it, or indicate what types of people there are, because those are decisions that I think are made by people who have a tremendous amount of military experience and capability."

DUH, if you want to be president of the U.S. YOU, Mr. Carson better be able to make those decisions very fast. You don't have the luxury of taking the time to take an X-Ray and studying it for days. 

AND, what the hell is, “suspension of intellect??” It is COMMON SENSE, STUPID. 



Exactly as you put it- the US is not a patient waiting for x-ray results along with a lab report.

Could you picture him at an oval table trying to decide who to listen to?uh  those with tremendous military experience or  uh those with military capability.

It;s such a political answer -which means' BS your way out of the question, making it seem over everyone's head, so you, Mr Carson  ,look intelligent.

Actually this is another example of suspension of intellect don't you agree James? I mean am I right on this one or not:


You are so right. And no I cannot picture him in the oval office at all. If we do, we can kiss our country goodbye. 

The rest of your post just confirms my whole post. Yes, he is a smart man, yes, he was a great doctor and yes, I believe that his is a moral man, BUT HE IS NO WHERE NEAR A RONALD REAGAN. NOT EVEN CLOSE. 

But also, most of us are not stupid either, we can see BS when it is looking us straight in the eyes, that is if he keeps them open enough when he speaks. 



I was trying to confirm your post as it was so on target. 

Though I am not so sure Carson is a moral man and perhaps it is because he cannot keep his eyes open when he speaks.

You know the old timers never trusted anyone they couldn't make eye to eye contact just thinking of my grandparents lol .

To me if you can't look someone in the eyes and sustain it then yer a  hidin something lol

Carson is like a piece of luggage ya can't open cause you don't have the key.

Can you imagine ,if we had a President,who would listen to advice from the Military Leaders, as opposed to one who can't even play Monopoly.  Their business is War, Obama's is Community Organizing.    Great difference in abilities.


Don't import any of them.  0, does anyone know that number?

Full scale attacks, take no prisoners, remove all muslimes from the U.S. to include the traitors that support them. Want a war come on and start the ball here in the U.S., be your last jihad as the people will take out any and all of you, destroy your mosques! We are tired of this crap - bring it on.  

Makes total sense from the treasonous view point of our Chief Commander of Jackasses...Semper Fi Nam 66-67

10,000-20,000 men Is the size of a military division.  92% of European refugees are military aged men. 




Political Cartoons by AF Branco

Political Cartoons by AF Branco


Horrible: Democrats Set The Constitution On Fire With Fraudulent Impeachment

House Democrats unveiled two articles of impeachment against President Donald Trump on Tuesday morning after an investigation that violated fundamental provisions of the Constitution and the Bill of Rights.

The investigation of the president began with the complaint of a so-called “whistleblower” who turned out to be a rogue Central Intelligence Agency employee, protected by a lawyer who had called for a “coup” against Trump in early 2017.

Democrats first demanded that the “whistleblower” be allowed to testify. But after House Intelligence Committee chair Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA) was found to have lied about his committee’s contact with the “whistleblower,” and after details of the “whistleblower’s” bias began to leak, Democrats reversed course. In violation of the President Trump’s Sixth Amendment right to confront his accuser, Democrats refused to allow the “whistleblower” to testify. They argue the president’s procedural rights, even if they existed, would not apply until he was tried in the Senate — but they also invented a fraudulent “right to anonymity” that, they hope, might conceal the whistleblower even then.

Schiff began the “impeachment inquiry” in secret, behind the closed doors of the Sensitive Compartmentalized Information Facility (SCIF) in the basement of the U.S. Capitol, even though none of the testimony was deemed classified. Few members of Congress were allowed access. Schiff allowed selective bits of testimony to leak to friendly media, while withholding transcripts of testimony.

Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (D-CA), having allowed the secret process to unfold, legitimized it with a party-line vote authorizing the inquiry. The House resolution denied President Trump the procedural rights enjoyed by Presidents Richard Nixon and Bill Clinton, and denied the minority party the traditional right to object to witnesses called by the majority.

Rather than the House Judiciary Committee, which traditionally handles impeachment, Pelosi also deputized the House Intelligence Committee to conduct fact-finding; the Judiciary Committee was turned into a rubber stamp. Schiff held a few public hearings, but often failed to release transcripts containing exculpatory evidence until after they had passed.

In the course of the Intelligence Committee’s investigation, Schiff quietly spied on the telephone records of his Republican counterpart, Ranking Member Devin Nunes (R-CA). He also snooped on the phone records of a journalist, John Solomon; and on the phone records of former New York City mayor Rudy Giuliani, acting as President Trump’s personal lawyer.

Schiff’s eavesdropping violated both the First Amendment right to press freedom and the Sixth Amendment right to counsel. Yet he proceeded undeterred by constitutional rights, publishing the phone logs in his committee’s report without warning, confirmation, or explanation, alleging that Nunes and the others were part of a conspiracy to assist the president’s allegedly impeachable conduct. When Republicans on the Judiciary Committee asked the Intelligence Committee’s majority counsel, Daniel Goldman, to explain the phone logs, he refused to answer,

Ironically, Schiff had done exactly what Democrats accuse Trump of doing: abused his power to dig up dirt on political opponents, then obstructed a congressional investigation into his party’s and his committee’s misconduct.

Democrats’ articles of impeachment include one for the dubious charge of “abuse of power,” which is not mentioned in the Constitution; and one for “obstruction of Congress,” which in this case is an abuse of power in itself.

Alexander Hamilton, writing about impeachment in Federalist 65, warned that “there will always be the greatest danger that the decision will be regulated more by the comparative strength of parties, than by the real demonstrations of innocence or guilt.” Democrats have fulfilled Hamilton’s worst fears.

The Trump impeachment will soon replace the 1868 impeachment of President Andrew Johnson — which the House Judiciary Committee staff actually cited as a positive precedent — as the worst in American history.

In service of their “coup,” Democrats have trampled the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. The Republic has never been in greater danger.

You don't get to interrupt me

© 2019   Created by Steve - Ning Creator.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service