So it’s obvious that the various exaggerated or false attacks on Ben Carson’s character-driven account of his life and work have actually helped him.
It’s both heartening and prudent that most Republican public intellectuals are rallying to his defense. They know, I think, that for many voters he’s making the Republican brand more appealing. He’s expertly intertwined his exceptional accomplishments with America’s singular mixture of the spirit of liberty and the spirit of religion. Sure, it’s corny, but he does express what Republicans claim to believe. He’s a real American hero — or at least more heroic than some huge job creator or Silicon Valley disruptive innovator.
Carson’s narrative compares well with that given by candidate Obama in 2008. Sure, Obama is probably smarter and certainly a better writer. But what exactly did Obama do prior to becoming president? And it’s pretty clear whose narrative is, overall, more embellished. Carson, as much as Obama, claims to be the change we can believe in.
Bill Kristol, for one, has upgraded Carson from totally implausible as president — or the same as Trump — to a candidate a reasonable person could support. That’s not to say Bill’s actually supporting Ben himself. What make Carson seem more qualified is his fine campaign — on the levels of both rhetoric and organization. Carson is doing well in comparing himself with the Founders who weren’t career politicians but excelled in real professions, and certainly it’s a marvel to have the best pediatric surgeon of all time magnanimously offering his talents to a country in need. If only Carson really did have the classical learning of said leading Founders.
I wouldn’t go as far as Bill in thinking that Carson is ready to lead. And I assume that his support won’t implode — but narrow — as the debates are reduced to three or four candidates. Then his lack of policy depth will become too clear to ignore.
For now, it seems that the explosion of attacks against Carson’s character originate more in Republican opposition research than in the evildoing of the liberal media. The Democrats would, of course, welcome Carson’s nomination. They assume Hillary Clinton would eat him for lunch. As she probably would. At this point, though, it’s between likely and inevitable that the most savvy Republican candidate in the debate will pull a Bernie Sanders, perhaps artfully deploying “damn,” to demand that the character attacks stop and the focus be on the issues that really confront the American people. Then the candidates should feel perfectly free to be all over Ben on the issues.
Bill adds that if Trump were nominated, he’d be for a third-party ticket of either Carson–Webb or Webb–Carson. I guess that would be the American-greatness or American-heroes ticket. It would be a worthy choice for protest voters, but it wouldn’t be the ticket to good government if actually elected. It would highlight issues and concerns that should inform anyone who does govern well, though.
I got an e-mail just now wondering why Carson feels compelled to share his opinions about the Pyramids (or the literal story of creation or the demonic origin of the theory of evolution) with us. It can’t help him! I hope Carson keeps speaking his mind and heart, always telling the truth as he sees it. He may convince lots of voters he has no business being president. But not at the price of his soul.
Of course I wish Dr. Carson were more like public-spirited physicians such as Leon Kass or the novelist Walker Percy. Then he could show us the way between scientism and fundamentalism on issues such as biotechnology, abortion, marriage, climate change, and so forth and so on. I can wish he were a philosopher physician. But, you know, Kass and Percy didn’t excel in the actual practice of medicine. The all-around excellence of the philosopher physician is about as rare as that of the philosopher king.