Its a state issue, not a federal issue and should never have been the "law of the land." Frankly, no tax money at all should be used to pay for or subsidize anyones lack of judgment and encourage their desire to be unaccountable for their actions.

I can't entirely agree with this. Yes, some issues are more relevant than others. Consider this one about planned parenthood, 1. Should tax dollars be paying for this at all (Knowing a POTUS candidates position is very relevant) 2. Is the selling of aborted organs and baby parts something that the fedgov and the American people should in any way be affiliated with (again very relevant) 3. Why is planned parenthood in existence when O-care was supposed to be providing "universal coverage" (again very relevant). 4. Carson's composure (very relevant) 5. Carson's ability to think clearly and present his position intelligently (hugely important).

I know where you're coming from but there is more than a year before the election. Why not used all of this time to get a fuller ideas of the character of each of these people. I don't see how it hurts.

No matter who is elected the chances that they will reverse the loss of freedoms is small, so much is against that happening. No matter who, except perhaps the one who is an uncompromised Objectivist who can appeal to everyone. I don't see that one yet. Carson does not like ACA, but I don't know where he stands on Medicare where our present mess began. So I don't really believe he can accomplish much. Not yet anyway. But he can allow us to go back to the days before Roe vs. Wade simply because he is pro-life. Desperate women are going to risk lives again seeking illegal abortions. Why risk that? And someone has said that the real crime rate has dropped since Roe vs. Wade. Anyone here know about that?

re:oaths
Without real penalties for breaking the oaths (e.g., recall and forfeiture of office) there will be little motivation for improvement. The day when the conscience and integrity of the 'public servant' was effective is long gone.

I agree with your assessment of the media and the candidates should set the agenda. One of the worst mistakes made in the recent debates of the Republicans was letting the moderators insert them selves into the debate by virtue of Trumps big, dumb mouth. The emphasis on policy and plans was lost for revenge and insults.

If the presidential debates are to move in the direction of government improvement and not get lost in the religious cloud and hatred over abortions, the government, what used to be congress, must decide if abortion is murder and therefore illegal. Not the candidates who have no official stand. Until that time, we are all going to lose the chance to break the socialist/media domination of the discussion. Let the law decide and if enough oppose the law, change it. Wasting precious government time on religious issue has to stop or we will end up like the Muslim countries with violence and hatred controlling all activities . Make the winners swear their oaths of office on the Constitution, not some religious text. I want them, to swear to uphold the Law... not their religion.

Every issue matters to someone, but many issues are not worth national attention. "Matters" is relative. Some issues are much more important and resolving them would create a massive benefit to individuals and liberty. Discussing other issues (e.g., PP) is like having a discussion about which political party is worse when the house we are in is burning down. PP is a distraction. Its a relatively unimportant issue that is being used to prevent focus on the issues that must be addressed ASAP to restore liberty, restore free markets, stop statist power and control over poroductive people. Fix those first and the PP is already resolved.

Totally agree.
Humanity doesn't appear to be ready for the likes of Dr. Ben Carson. Interesting to see how the CNN commentator changes the subject as Carson shoots him down.

The single and only challenge I have with Ben Carson is his 'delivery' is really weird/slow/abstracted.. He always seems to have a good thought process going, but it takes him a while to get there, and its almost like he has a speech impediment or something. I pretty much always agree with him though (when he eventually spits it out). I prefer people that are more direct in their mindset though.

I kind of cringed when I read that Trump has Carl Icahn in mind for Secretary of the Treasury... ugh.

I agree, no one person can unilaterally overthrow Roe v. Wade, but in about 99% of abortions, the situation and outcome is pretty much a moral deficit. I like to know where a candidate stands on it.

Every issue matters, so the question becomes or is "what can any one person do to start the process of rectifying all of the wrong that is in existence at this time?"

Tapper: "Doesn't that make the argument ... that those services are not available for minorities..."

Carson: "I thought that they were supposed to get all those things based on Obamacare."

Zing!

PS - There isn't a PP clinic in the nation who offers mammograms. They refer those out.

I understand your point, AJ, but we have to stop taking the dregs the media feeds us. This topic (chosen by the media) is designed to avoid the issues that matter.

You're voting for a person. How that person answers the questions, even these, helps you measure than person.

Character is important, but this is still a distraction from the issues that the statists don't want anyone to address rationally.

I disagree. Even though this not a very important topic as it relates to the presidency it does show us quite a bit about Carson's character, temperament and thought process. There is a moral issue at stake with planned parenthood and its use of public dollars to fund its actions. Everyone is so concerned about a candidate putting his faith to the forefront to make policy decisions, insisting that he set his beliefs aside to respectfully govern over a diverse population with many beliefs. Why is this issue of tax money being spent to kill unborn children not held to the same standard? Why is the fedgov involved at all at any level?

I do not think Carson will survive the GOP hit-squads and make it to the nomination. The shame of it is he is the type of man, intelligent and concise and steadfast in his conviction, that would assemble a brilliant team that could repair this country..of this I have zero doubt.

Man, he sounds good there. I use that term often ("sanctity of life") to shut down a lot of arguments. There is something to that..."sanctity of life".

Honestly, I believe that he is far too fine a man to lower himself into the morass of 21st century American politics. If we had leadership that was genuinely interested in working towards a better America, he'd be the Man! I think he has the qualities to do a grand job, but our current government is incapable of doing anything good without first asking, "what's in it for me?".

Stop wasting time on 'issues' that do nothing to solve the problem of big government, lost liberty, looterism/corporate welfare/corruption/illegal immigration and the effects on the free market economy that can REALLY create jobs in America.
Don't let the media set the agenda because they have a bias toward big socialist government.
Ignore these inane questions that are a a misdirection and distraction!