Why is it whenever I hear Dr. Ben Carson speak I think of that line from “Scarface?” You know, when Elvira Hancock (Michelle Pfeiffer) tells Tony Montana (Al Pacino), “Don’t get high on your own supply.”

As a physician, Dr. Carson has easy access to all types of medications. I’m not accusing him of sampling his own drugs, but you have to admit he does come off as someone who is medicated.

Words coming out of his mouth lately make no sense. He is offering word-salads that make Sarah Palin sound like a Rhodes Scholar.

Take for example this latest episode of reporters trying to ask Carson about his past:

“There is a desperation on behalf of some to try to find ways to tarnish me because they’ve been looking through everything, they have been talking to everybody I’ve ever known, everybody I’ve ever seen,” Carson told reporters at a media availability in Florida.

“‘There’s got to be a scandal. There’s got to be some nurse he’s had an affair with. There’s got to be something.’ They have gotten desperate,” Carson continued. “Next week, it will be my kindergarten teacher who said I peed in my pants. It’s ridiculous. But it’s OK because I totally expect it.”

This outburst was atypical for the otherwise cool and calm Dr. Carson. He truly seemed annoyed and agitated as never before. This was a striking departure from the laid-back personality he has displayed on the campaign trail.

There are a few explanations for Dr. Carson’s most recent behavior. It could be that the grind of the campaign trail is getting to him. He admitted, “A lot of times people say, ‘Why would someone who has had a wonderful career get involved in the dirty world of politics?’ I frequently ask myself that when I wake up in the morning. It is a dirty world.”

Another explanation could be that whether medication he takes to keep calm and mellow was wearing off.

Of course it could just be that the brilliant, 64-year-old brain surgeon, is simply losing his mind.

Photo | theguradian.com

Jeb, oh Jeb! Why couldn’t you have listened to that sage Mama Bush when she gave you advice on running for the presidency: Don’t! You would have spared yourself so much embarrassment and humiliation. You could have spared the country from watching one of the worst political campaigns in recent memory.

With all that money, one would have thought you could put together a competent campaign staff. But you have lurched from one gaffe to another. Your brain trust just never could figure out how to handle the 800-pound gorilla in the room: the Bush name. (The GOP Battle Of The Brands)

Now you’ve been reduced to telling Iowa voters, ““I’m gonna get better. I oughta get better. I know I have to get better.” Really? And you follow up that bizarre statement with, “You know, poll numbers, they go up and they go down.” Seriously?

Telling voters, who have long written you off, you’re a “grinder” and that “I eat nails when I wake up,” is just laughable. But of course, neither you nor your out-of-touch campaign apparatus sees the joke.

For God’s sake, do yourself and the country a favor, pull the plug on this rotting corpse otherwise known as your presidential campaign. Yes, we know the GOP establishment hasn’t completely given up on you; that there is still some money in the bank. But be a man and do the right thing.

Even Captain Obvious is asking you, and all those around you, to see the writing on the wall.

Photo |marketmenot.com

Below is the most recent compilation of all the national Republican presidential polls, as tracked by HuffPost. Donald Trump is comfortably in first place, followed by Ben Carson. As has been the case for months, Trump and Carson, both non-politicians, are the only two candidates in double figures.

The establishment favorite, Jeb Bush, is in third place but at a dismal 7.3%.

If we agree that none of those candidates polling under 5% have any real shot at becoming the GOP’s nominee, that leaves us with only five candidates: Donald Trump, Ben Carson, Jeb Bush, Marco Rubio and Ted Cruz.

Under this very likely scenario, the Republican presidential pick will emerge from among this group of five. But who will end up with the prize? Let’s look at the candidates more closely to see if we can predict the eventual champ.

Donald Trump – The celebrity billionaire who came from out of nowhere to rock the Republican establishment is still luxuriating in his fifteen minutes of fame. The man has a loyal, solid backing that will stay with him no matter what stupid things he says or does (some may say that is the basis for his appeal). While his poll numbers are tanking in Iowa, he is still the establishment’s worst nightmare. Will the Party allow this outsider to come out on top? Not if they have any say. They will do everything in their power to dethrone the Donald.

Ben Carson – When you listen to what the affable retired neurosurgeon says, it is clear the man is less politically sophisticated than even Trump. His main support comes from the religious right. But while he may be a hit with Iowa Evangelicals, that won’t be enough to secure the nomination for the fundamentalist doctor.

Jeb Bush – The man with all that early establishment support, and money, is turning out to be a dud. Much of this is due to the fact that he is a terrible campaigner. But the primary reason why his poll numbers have languished in the basement for so long is obvious … he’s a Bush. Most Republican voters have made it clear they do not want another Bush in the White House. Still, I would not give up on Jeb just yet. He is, after all, the man the Party wants and, if history is any guide, they usually get their way. But this time around, it doesn’t feel like “business as usual.” It is somewhat ironical Jeb is seen as “too moderate” for today’s Republican base.

Marco Rubio – The young Senator from Florida is still a little too wet behind the ears for a serious run at the nomination. He is a Washington insider trying to sell himself as an outsider. No matter how much he tries to distance himself from the Beltway, it won’t work. We’ve reached a moment when anti-establishment is in.

Ted Cruz – No one in the media seems to be talking about Cruz’ chances much. Perhaps the most far right candidate in the group, Tea Bagger types hold him in high esteem. He is an effective speaker and knows how to stir up a crowd. Grassroots Republicans just love him. In favorability polls, Cruz always finishes near the top. He is a sitting Senator but his supporters think of him as an outsider. Cruz’s ideology fits in well with where the Republican Party is today. In addition, he is well-liked by Evangelicals. Yes, the adults in the Party hate him. But if it’s either Trump or Carson, look for the Party establishment to “hold its nose” and strike a deal with the renegade Cruz.

I hate to admit this, but right now my pick would be for Cruz to secure the nomination, as ridiculous as that may sound.

What do you think? Leave a comment.

The latest polling of likely Iowa GOP caucus-goers shows presidential candidate, Ben Carson, leading the national front-runner, Donald Trump, for the first time. What could explain the appeal of this black man in an enclave (99%) of white conservative Republicans? My theory for his success is based on three factors:

1.The man is deeply religious.

Dr. Ben Carson is as fundamentalist a Christian as you’ll find. He is a Seventh-day Adventist; a sect that shares many similarities with Evangelicalism. This helps to explain the significant support he is getting from the large, Evangelical Republican base. (The Appeal Of “Mr. Excitement”)

The doctor is a staunch creationist who has labeled evolution “a myth,” the Big Bang theory “a fallacy” and the fossil record “dubious.” He has admitted God, by giving him a tap on the shoulder, directed he run for the presidency.

2. The man is your basic Uncle Tom.

Like fellow Republican Clarence Thomas, Carson is a man who benefited from social programs engineered by Democrats yet now despises those very programs. Conservatives just love this! There has never been an Uncle Tom they didn’t like. They delight when a black man, such as the successful Dr. Carson, criticizes Democrat-voting blacks as “slaves” on a plantation, too simple-minded to warrant freedom.

Ben Carson and his ilk, whose success and opportunities have come in large measure from standing on the shoulders of those selfless ancestors who sacrificed so much for future generations of blacks, are the classic examples of Uncle Toms.

3. The man is appealing to white racists.

This may seem counter-intuitive, but it does explain part of Carson’s appeal among some white Republicans. Because their hatred for Barack Obama opened them up to the charge of racism, some white Carson supporters take comfort in the fact that they can support this black man. The thinking goes like this, “I’m not a racist. I can support a black man. I just can’t support a black-Kenyan-Muslim-communist like Obama.”

The soft-spoken retired neurosurgeon seems like a nice man. But the more you listen to what he says and actually believes, you see just another run-of-the-mill , self-hating black Republican extremist.

To View / Post Comments

Photo | abcnews.go.com

Many innocent lives have been lost throughout the ages as a result of religious beliefs. An Oregon couple is now headed to prison for the death of their newborn because their faith does not allow them to believe in doctors.

An Oregon State Supreme Court Judge has ruled “faith healing” is no substitute for medical care. The couple, Dale and Shannon Hickman, who had been found guilty of manslaughter in the death of their newborn son in 2011, will now be held in separate state penitentiaries until at least January 2018.

Dale and Shannon Hickman, as members of the Oregon-based Followers of Christ Church, believe in “faith healing” and not in traditional medical care. When their premature son was born at home, weighing just 3 pounds, 7 ounces, they chose not to go to the hospital but to pray over the dying baby and “anointed” his head with oil.

If the Hickmans had phoned 911 as soon as their son was born, one state doctor estimated that he “would have had a 99 percent chance of survival.”

The most troubling aspect of this story is not the much-hyped clash between religious beliefs and the law. No, it is between deeply held religious beliefs and common sense.

As of February 2015, 39 states and the District of Columbia have “laws providing that parents or caretakers who fail to provide medical assistance to a child because of their religious beliefs are not criminally liable for harm to the child.” In addition, federal law does not require parents to provide medical treatments to children that are against their religious beliefs.

The fact is, Oregon only completely removed its own religious exemptions for such cases in 2011 as a direct response to infant deaths among the Followers of Christ. The legislation passed unanimously.

But striking down this exemption came too late for many children born into the small fundamentalist sect. Reports have claimed that as many as 78 children and 10 women have died among the “faith healing” believers … all deaths during childbirth.

Dale and Shannon Hickman will have plenty of time to think about why their god forsook them and their infant son at their hour of need.

It is truly incredible to think that in 2015,  in 39 states, the Hickmans would have been allowed to walk free!

Image courtesy of holohololand at FreeDigitalPhotos.net

In an important, but underreported, legal decision, a Milwaukee jury recently awarded more than $5 million to two police officers who were severely wounded with a pistol that a local gun shop sold to a straw buyer in 2009.

The case has been closely watched by all parties with a stake in the gun debate – gun control advocates, the firearms industry and legal scholars – because the suit was a rare test for a jury to decide the responsibility of gun sellers for the criminal use of their products.

This was only the second time in the last ten years that a civil lawsuit alleging negligence against a gun shop reached a jury. Significantly, it is the first time a jury sided with the injured party (the other gun case was in Alaska but the jury found for the gun shop.) Most cases against gun makers and sellers never get to see the light of day as they are dismissed (thrown out of court) due to both state and federal laws prohibiting such suits.

Victims and municipalities have tried suing the gun industry for years but, in more than 30 states, specific laws have been passed barring most lawsuits against gun makers and sellers for the way their products are used by buyers.

In 2005, Congress passed the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act, which basically shields the gun industry from liability. But the law provides a limited exception: Victims wounded with a weapon can pursue civil damages if the seller of a firearm knew, or should have known, that the transaction was illegal, or that it would very likely pose a danger.

The plaintiffs’ lawyers were able to prove their lawsuit fell under the federal exception, thus avoiding the defendant’s motion to dismiss.

Specifically, the lawyers were able to show the gun shop in question failed to pick up on the many red flags that should have aroused suspicion on the day of the gun purchase. The jury determined that it was obvious the ostensible purchaser was fronting for an 18-year-old (too young to legally purchase the gun himself) who accompanied him to the store. One month after the sham purchase, the 18-year-old shot the two officers leaving them with serious injuries.

Just as with lawsuits against the tobacco industry and drug companies, leave it to the trial lawyers to do what legislators refuse to do… protect the general public from dangerous products. It is only when makers and sellers of deadly products fear the threat of big jury awards that they, through sheer self interest, voluntarily change their ways.

Whether this case “opens the floodgates” for other gun injury lawsuits remains to be seen. An appeal is sure to follow. But if one knows trial lawyers, the smell of large fees is too intoxicating not to start hammering away with a more suits. Now that the dam has sprung a leak, watch out!

To View / Post Comments

Looking at the chaos within the Republican Party, one cannot help but think of the boiling frog anecdote. It is a tale of slow death. The premise is that if a frog is placed in boiling water, it will jump out, but if it is placed in cold water that is slowly heated, it will not perceive the danger and will be cooked to death.

Starting with the presidency of Ronald Reagan, who famously stated at his first inauguration, “Government is not the solution to our problem, government is the problem,” the party of Lincoln and Eisenhower has had the heat slowly turned up on itself by a far right fringe that always existed within its ranks. The slow process of listing further right over the years culminated with the wholehearted embrace of the radical Tea Party after the election of Barack Obama in 2008.

The problem with the GOP isn’t only with what’s taking place in the House, where a small group of mostly TeaBaggers, paradoxically calling themselves the Freedom Caucus, will not support any Speaker who dares speak the word “compromise,” it can also be seen in the Republican presidential nominating contest.

The Republican frontrunner for the nomination is a TV celebrity/ real estate billionaire who is as loony as they come. The man with zero political experience is followed by a Christian fundamentalist doctor and a failed CEO… all with the same political experience: zip, nada. Could there be more of a repudiation of the party establishment than this?

But all this begs an important question: who is the party establishment? Who are the leaders of the GOP? If you were to answer Roger Ailes or Rush Limbaugh, you’re probably not far off. That listing boat is today totally rudderless.

What we are witnessing is something not very often seen … the death of a political party as we once knew it. The process leading up to its demise was slow and steady, too gradual for the Grand Old Party to notice and jump out of the pot.

The story of the frog in boiling water is a metaphor for the inability or unwillingness of someone or something to react to threats that occur gradually, such as having your political party hijacked by a bunch of political nihilists.

R.I.P GOP. Sorry, but no one will miss you.

To View / Post Comments

Image courtesy of Photography by BJWOK at FreeDigitalPhotos.net

Has there ever been a greater gap between the will of the American people and the actions of their elected officials than on the issue of universal background checks? In a poll released just one week before this week’s gun massacre at Umpqua Community College in Oregon, a Quinnipiac University poll found that 93% of Americans favor universal background checks for gun purchases. And most startling, the high number cuts across the political divide. While more Democrats favor background checks than do Republicans, the difference is a paltry 8% … 98% to 90%.

Here are the Quinnipiac University poll results:

Some conservatives are attacking the poll as “rigged” and are claiming respondents didn’t fully understand the question. As discussed in Breitbart News, “The American voter has to be lucid enough to understand that when people are pushing background checks” these “checks might not really be the end goal. The goal might actually be something larger, something which cannot be accomplished without first getting a foot in the door via background checks.”

Ah, the old “foot in the door” analogy. (Breitbart News)

Perhaps the more startling dissonance is not that of the American people and there elected representatives but that of the American voter and his or her voting pattern. How could so many voters how favor background checks keep voting for politicians who are against such legislation?

My theory is that they are confused by the NRA’s scoring system. Voters who see an “A” next to a politician’s name incorrectly think it’s a good thing. After all, aren’t “A’s” better than “D’s?”

In the clearest display of how little the truth matters to rabid House Republicans, Cecile Richards, Planned Parenthood president, was raked over the coals yesterday during a marathon Congressional “hearing.” Led by Jason Chaffetz,, chairman of the House’s Committee of Oversight and Government Reform, the farce devolved into an inquisition as Chaffetz continually interrupted and cut off Richards as she tried answering his questions.

On what many observers have labeled one of the more “shameful days” for House Republicans ( and that is saying a lot), the five hour interrogation was filled with more lies than you might find at a Pathological Liars’ convention.

If Congressional hearings are meant to get at the truth of whatever is being investigated, this was not one of them. The topic of defunding the women’s health service provider is turning into this season’s Benghazi.

As the feisty and unshakable Richards observed, “ “I think the whole purpose of this hearing was to convince themselves that it is OK to deny women the ability to go to the health care provider of their choice, because 2.7 million women and men choose Planned Parenthood, and they were trying to say they wanted to take that choice away from them.”

The highlight of the “hearing” came when Rep. Chaffetz surprised Richards with a graph proving how, over the years, Planned Parenthood has provided more abortions than cancer screenings and preventative services.

When Richards said she’d never seen the graph before, Chaffetz replied: “It comes straight from your annual reports.”

After being briefed by her lawyer, Richards shot back, “My lawyers just informed me that the source of this information is Americans United for Life, an anti-abortion group. I would check your source.” A red-faced Chaffetz ended his questioning at that point.

More shameful than the source of the graph, however, is its complete lack of meaning. The graph is the type of representation that would earn a high school student an “F” in any math class. The problem is that it does not contain a “y” axis. This allowed its creators to simply plot the results wherever they chose in order to create a compelling, but false, visual effect.

The irony of all this is that, while this spectacle will play well with their base, the Washington witch hunt will only hurt the GOP in the upcoming election since 69% of Americans believe the federal government shouldn’t be shut down over Planned Parenthood’s funding.

What’s that you say, Bobby, your party needs to stop being the “stupid party?”