Exclusive: Carson claimed West Point 'scholarship' but never applied

a reply to: burdman30ott6

if you believe the person someone is today should be punished for the *thoughts* they had 50 years ago, you must be scared to death of everyone you meet.

Nope, not scared in the least. Someone come at me with a hammer and I'd stand my ground and blow their brains out.

You right wingers sure have no problem holding Obama to his past mistakes; or any libs for that matter; you haven't even gotten over Clintons BJ.

The West Point story is somewhat irrelevant.

The bigger picture is that this guy is incapable of doing the job, has a lot of crackpot theories and might even have some sort of psychological issues.

The establishment doesn't trust him and will go to great lengths to stop him and that transcends partisan politics.

I'm watching his press conference right now and he's in meltdown mode.

Wow, this got moved to LoL even though:

A) Carson's book is out there for anyone to read, and clearly says:

Afterward, Sgt. Hunt introduced me to General Westmoreland, and I had dinner with him and the Congressional Medal winners. Later I was offered a full scholarship to West Point. I didn’t refuse the scholarship outright, but I let them know that a military career wasn’t where I saw myself going.

B) Carson gave this interview:

“I was offered a full scholarship at West Point, got to meet General Westmoreland and go to Congressional Medal of Honor dinners. But decided really my pathway would be medicine.”

c) West Point doesn't give scholarships, period.

I'm curious how this is a Ludicrous Online Lie, given that the premises are all quite sound.

originally posted by: olaru12
Nope, not scared in the least. Someone come at me with a hammer and I'd stand my ground and blow their brains out.

You right wingers sure have no problem holding Obama to his past mistakes; or any libs for that matter; you haven't even gotten over Clintons BJ.

Again, you're comparing something a child did 50 years ago to recent actions of adults while in office... if you cannot see the difference then I can't help you.

a reply to: Greven

This thread gets moved to LOL and the thread pushing the pro-Carson side of this semantics game gets put on the front page.

Wonderful.

People are calling this serious character flaws, and yet still consider [snipped] Trump and [snipped] Hillary a viable candidate?

I must live in Bizzaroworld.

a reply to: smirkley

We do. Bizzarramerica where words mean more than actions, character flaws are meaningless unless the character lacks connections to the approved narrative, and the woman of the year is a man... This is a worse he'll than even Eisenhower warned of.

originally posted by: smirkley
People are calling this serious character flaws, and yet still consider McDonald Trump and Beverly Bill Hillary a viable candidate?

I must live in Bizzaroworld.

We all do: Bizzaroworld is a good description. And Dr. Ben trying to hit his mother in the head with a hammer doesn't help much.

Apparently as a youth he had a problem with anger. And as the media presses him on his past; I'm waiting for him find another hammer. However I doubt if he will get the chance because the Republicans are about to suggest he find another venue as politics for him just isn't working out like they thought it would. His position as the "big tent" poster boy has just come to a screeching halt.

One clown under the big top is enough and Trump already has the job.

Did anyone notice that this thread has been moved to the LUDICROUS ONLINE LIES forum (LOL)?
Applause Mods!

originally posted by: theantediluvian
a reply to: Greven

This thread gets moved to LOL and the thread pushing the pro-Carson side of this semantics game gets put on the front page.

Wonderful.

Yes, moved to ludicrous online lies.... probably because the headline / title and first paragraph of that Politico story (before they changed both later in the day) were ludicrous online lies.

a reply to: Greven

Let's get something straight, IF you decide to go to West Point it is, in fact, a FULL BOAT "Scholarship". No they don't offer scholarships, they don't have to, there is no cost to you or your parents for attending West Point, IF YOU ARE CHOSEN TO GO THERE and sponsored by a congressman... The actual story sounds like Ben would have been chosen had he wanted it, he didn't want to be a plebe. I don't blame him, the genuinely smart usually don't want to go through that rigor.

This "story" is semantics at it lamest and an ultimate candidate for the LOL Forum.

Carson didn't take the free ride to West Point, apparently he didn't need to. That and the fact he stated the Military life was not what he wanted makes that pretty clear doesn't it?

a reply to: Springer

Who was the person that wanted to appoint him though? From what I read that Gen would not have been one of them.
Don't doubt he has the connections though.

I do agree there is a lot of twist with semantics, but from both sides.

Wouldn't the only way you could say you were offered a full 'scholarship' is if you were accepted?

a reply to: Springer

I disagree. There are a few things going on here:

1. The original headline & lede from the Politico article.

"Ben Carson admits fabricating West Point scholarship"

Ben Carson’s campaign on Friday admitted, in a response to an inquiry from POLITICO, that a central point in his inspirational personal story was fabricated: his application and acceptance into the U.S. Military Academy at West Point.

What's at issue here is whether or not it's reasonable to characterize the account from Carson's book and his many public statements as implying that he'd applied to and been accepted by West Point. Also, whether or not it's reasonable to characterize the email response from the Carson's campaign manager, Barry Bennett, as an admission that the original narrative is a fabrication.

After a bit of consideration, my opinion is that they went beyond what could be reasonably be said on both counts but neither is exactly a "bald-faced lie" either. This issue is further complicated by the fact that nobody involved — not Carson, his ghost writer or the Politico author — seems to fully understand the admissions process at West Point and basically nobody seems to understand completely how that education is paid for.

Which brings me to...

2. Carson's story and semantics

- According to the National Center for Education Statistics, there were 14,977 applications in the Fall of 2014 and 9% of those applications were accepted. What people are hung up on the nomination part. From the West Point admissions page:

You must obtain a nomination in order to compete for admission to West Point, and you should apply for all nominations for which you are eligible during the spring of your junior year. At a minimum, candidates are eligible for a congressional nomination from their representative in Congress, their two U.S. senators, and the vice president of the United States.

Its not clear if all 15 thousand applicants had the requisite nominations, but what is clear is that the nomination isn't a guarantee and those who can nominate applicants, nominate numerous applicants and only a percentage if any are going to make it through the rigorous admissions process and get accepted.

In this regard, Ben Carson & friends have gone far beyond what can reasonable be said. Allow me to remind you of the account from the book cited in the article (linked in the OP):

At the end of my twelfth grade I marched at the head of the Memorial Day parade. I felt so proud, my chest bursting with ribbons and braids of every kind. To make it more wonderful, we had important visitors that day. Two soliders who had won the Congressional Medal of Honor in Viet Nam[sic] were present. More exciting to me, General William Westmoreland (very prominent in the Viet Nam war) attended with an impressive entourage. Afterward, Sgt. Hunt introduced me to General Westmoreland, and I had dinner with him and the congressional Medal winners. Later I was offered a full scholarship to West Point.

I didn't refuse the scholarship outright, but I let them know that a military career wasn't where I saw myself going. As overjoyed as I felt to be offered such a scholarship, I wasn't really tempted. The scholarship would have obligated me to spend four years in military after I finished college, precluding my chances to go on to medical school.

No. That did not happen. That COULD not happen because that's not how the admission process works. Reading that excerpt and transcripts of many times he's repeated this narrative, there's a clear and deliberate attempt to give the impression that he had been made some sort of official offer that he formally declined. It's CARSON and his ghost writer that continuously refer to this as a "scholarship" that he's turning down.

- While there's no tuition there are costs that aren't paid by Uncle Sam. This is estimated to be $10,000 a year for books, uniforms, etc according to this student resource site. Cadets are paid. The pay starts out at $900 a month. A portion of this pay is automatically put into an account to pay for these expenses. However, students CAN receive OUTSIDE scholarships to pay for these expenses. The West Point site lists many of these scholarship programs. Keep in mind that nobody he would have conceivably been speaking to could have been offering any of the scholarships listed.

Given the above, a lot of people are speaking matter-of-factly and are just plain wrong regarding admissions and costs. Now I can accept that he misunderstood at 17 years of age, but to keep repeating this story is ridiculous. The clear implication is that he "turned down West Point" regardless of whether he uses the term "scholarship" incorrectly or not, the whole thing is bs. He never applied, therefore he was never accepted and so he couldn't have turned down something that wasn't offered.

3. Carson doesn't seem to be aware of the words that come out of mouth or he's playing stupid.

Here's what he said tonight as reported in The Blaze:

Carson was answering questions at a news conference when a reporter implied he said he received a full scholarship.

“I never said I received a full scholarship,” the retired neurosurgeon quipped back. “I never said — wait a minute, don’t lie! I never said I received a full scholarship. Nowhere did I say that.”

“There have been reports today—,” the reporter said.

“Politico, as you know, told a bold-faced lie,” Carson said. “They have been called out on it by The Washington Post and The New York Times and I’m sure there will be several others who call them out on that. Because there are actually some people with integrity in your business.”

The exact words "I received a full scholarship" may never have come out of his mouth but in this instance, it's Carson who is playing lame semantics games because what he has said on many occasions is that he was "offered a full scholarship" that he "turned down." Again, the practical difference is negligible because nobody is saying that he actually took money and the word received isn't used in the Politico article either.

a reply to: Springer

4. Additional considerations

All of this came out after a CNN reporter's interviews with nine people who knew Ben Carson in his youth called into question some of the other stories from "his" book about throwing bricks and attempted murder of a friend/classmate (who has now become a "close relative.") Basically nobody who spoke to the reporter knew anything about any of the incidents. It's now common knowledge that Ben Carson didn't write his own book and it's been further revealed that there are at least some factual errors (Westmoreland wasn't in Detroit on Memorial Day so it couldn't have taken place exactly as he said) and at least in terms of the West Point narrative, considerable artistic license has been used repeatedly. This doesn't bode well for the veracity of these other stories alleged to be factual accounts of events from his past.

Why is any of this important? Because Ben Carson makes it important. His life's story, as it's sketchily relayed in the book he didn't write, and as he keeps repeating at every opportunity. If the guy was some cantankerous raconteur, the fact that several events in his life story might not be exactly true could be forgiven — the world could use a few more Twain-like individuals.

That's not the case here. This is a man who wants to be the President of the United States of America. He thrust himself into the fire just like everyone else and if he's been 'telling tales' then he should expect to be called out on it.

Instead, he's playing the same game as the rest of the GOP candidates are playing which ironically enough, Trump really kicked off in the Fox News debate (also ironic, he's now slamming Carson in tweets) — whining about how the media is unfair every time he's asked a question he doesn't want to give a straight answer to. Worse yet, he's injecting Obama into his whining like a petulant child. When did this become a thing? If you ask me, every candidate should be running a gauntlet of hard questions. Not praising the "friendly" outlets and crying incessantly about the rest. Priebus pretty much guaranteed that this is going to be the ongoing theme for this election cycle.

He's weak. He's a little crazy. His communication skills are lacking. It's completely fair to call him out on grandiose story-telling, he's running for President. Look at how quickly he went into meltdown mode, he's clearly not fit to be President even if he wasn't a bulls#r.

I might have to ignore politics this election because I'm already disgusted with the GOP candidates and conservatives in general demanding that their candidates be coddled. Boo-friggin-hoo.

I don't care about the other lies, but hey

Antedeluvian

Ben Carson addressed the stuff about his violent youth. The CNN hacks didn't even know enough to check with people around when any of it happened, he said most happened in MIDDLE SCHOOL, they interviewed people he didn't know till high school.

Somewhere earlier in the thread someone figured out when the General Westmoreland dinner happened, do you remember the exact date and time of everything from your high school days?

Just more shoddy journalism, what else should be expected in today's media?

Politico has redacted that article. I don't care for the guy but the evidence if you can call it that was nonsense so You should takethis down because it isn't true. MODS ?

a reply to: Foderalover

Well, it was moved to LOL yesterday... and now it's been moved out. See further up this page, such as my previous post.
Interesting, and I believe a warranted change back.

a reply to: Greven

The move back is a nod to the member's ability to dig a little deeper and draw their own conclusions on the topic, not any sort of legitimization of the topic, itself.

Ben Carson is clearly a serial liar. And apparently always for the same reason ... to make himself look good.

Here's yet more, from that bastion of liberalism, The Wall Street Journal:

In his 1990 autobiography, “Gifted Hands,” Mr. Carson writes of a Yale psychology professor who told Mr. Carson, then a junior, and the other students in the class—identified by Mr. Carson as Perceptions 301—that their final exam papers had “inadvertently burned,” requiring all 150 students to retake it. The new exam, Mr. Carson recalled in the book, was much tougher. All the students but Mr. Carson walked out.

“The professor came toward me. With her was a photographer for the Yale Daily News who paused and snapped my picture,” Mr. Carson wrote. “ ‘A hoax,’ the teacher said. ‘We wanted to see who was the most honest student in the class.’ ” Mr. Carson wrote that the professor handed him a $10 bill.

No photo identifying Mr. Carson as a student ever ran, according to the Yale Daily News archives, and no stories from that era mention a class called Perceptions 301. Yale Librarian Claryn Spies said Friday there was no psychology course by that name or class number during any of Mr. Carson’s years at Yale.

Lied about being honest. Good one, Ben.

originally posted by: burdman30ott6
a reply to: Greven

The move back is a nod to the member's ability to dig a little deeper and draw their own conclusions on the topic, not any sort of legitimization of the topic, itself.

Appreciated.

I think Politico fumbled the initial reporting in their zeal to sensationalize and apparently their editorial staff/legal department came to a similar conclusion as they amended the headline. Particularly in regards to whether or not Carson/his campaign were admitting to a fabrication.

However, setting that faux pas aside, in my opinion they still uncovered something that is a fit topic for legitimate discussion. If it were simply an isolated instance of poor word choice or mixed up memories, I believe this would be a non-issue but the way things are shaping up, this is arguably one of many questionable accounts he's given about his life.

There's another example from the WSJ article Moresby excerpted (WSJ source):

Mr. Carson, then a junior with a key to a biology lab where he worked part time, told The Wall Street Journal last month that he protected a few white students from the attacks by hiding them there.

It is a dramatic account of courage and kindness, and it couldn’t be confirmed in interviews with a half-dozen of Mr. Carson’s classmates and his high school physics teacher. The students all remembered the riot. None recalled hearing about white students hiding in the biology lab, and Mr. Carson couldn’t remember any names of those he sheltered.

“It may have happened, but I didn’t see it myself or hear about it,” said Gregory Vartanian, a white classmate of Mr. Carson’s who served in the ROTC with Mr. Carson and is now a retired U.S. Marshal.

The lack of substantiation by independent sources for any single event isn't necessarily damning on its own but taken together the multiple questionable accounts form what seems to me to be a compelling albeit circumstantial case.