Ben Carson ‘Welcomes the Magnifying Glass’—Just Not on Mannatech

Ben Carson and Armstrong Williams at Carson Book Party 2008

Ben Carson and Armstrong Williams at Carson Book Party 2008

Dr. Ben Carson is not happy with the media nor is he thrilled with a question during Wednesday night’s Republican debate about his 10-year involvement with Mannatech, a nutritional supplement company charged with operating an illegal marketing scheme. They paid out $7 million to settle a class-action lawsuit in 2009.

Carson called CNBC moderator Carlos Quintanilla’s inquiry a “gotcha” question. Carson insisted it was “absurd” he had any “relationship” with the company; he was simply a paid speaker, assuring the panel if his photo was on Mannatech’s homepage, it was there “without my permission.” Carson also said as one of the Washington Speaker’s Bureau’s “most prolific speakers” he spoke to countless groups. With his world-renowned status as a brilliant neurosurgeon and his high speaking fees, Mannatech might be facing a lawsuit for using Carson’s image to hawk products without his consent.

The day after the debate Carson held a press conference prior to his speech at Christian Colorado University calling the debate process “silly and not helpful.” Carson said he has instructed his campaign staff to reach out to other Republican candidates “to talk about a change in format.”

Carson stated debates should “help the people get to know the candidates, and get to know what’s behind them, and what their thinking process is, what their philosophy is.” According to Carson all the Mannatech coverage is part of the “gotcha agenda” by a “secular progressive” press.

Is Carson’s long history with Mannatech fair game? Was it genuinely a “gotcha” question? Amidst the Alinskyite insults, snarkiness and ridicule aimed at most of the candidates by the CNBC  moderators, it’s hard to tell. If it was, Carson’s shrewd “gotcha” answer calling the hoopla over Mannatech “total propaganda” won him points with the audience.

Carson’s desire to make the debates more substantive and policy-oriented is certainly admirable but it does not eliminate the need to do what he himself suggested to Newsmax’s Ed Berliner five months before he announced his candidacy.

From youtube:

BERLINER: I really want to hear from you, why people should look at Ben Carson and say “he’s the guy, what is it that sets you apart and makes them want to trust you over everybody else?”

CARSON: In this vetting process to really look at a person’s entire life. And that should tell you a great deal. There are some people that are thrust into positions of great responsibility, and sometimes we don’t vet them. We don’t look into their past, we don’t look into their associations. We don’t look into their accomplishments. We don’t look into the kind of person they are. And all of those things become clear. I actually welcome the magnifying glass. I don’t have any problem.

BERLINER: When you discuss all those issues about looking back at someone’s past, do you, are you perhaps discussing a current president of the United States?

CARSON: I think he might be included in that group, yes.

BERLINER: Where perhaps people did not go deep enough and look into his past.

CARSON: Or they didn’t care. They would see certain big gaps and they go “mmmh, that’s okay, he’s a good guy.”

Being under the magnifying glass is a bit harder than Carson anticipated. At Thursday’s press function Carson expressed frustration with those vetting and verifying his own past words and actions.

I mean, all you have to do is go and Google my name. Every morning there’s 10 articles, ‘Carson said this, and he said this, and 30 years ago he did this.’ It’s just craziness. You know? … It would be comical if it weren’t so sad.

Perhaps, a debate is not the place to bring up Donald Trump’s bankruptcies, or Carly Fiorina’s less than stellar performance at Hewlett Packard, or in Ben Carson’s case, his affiliation with a company accused of deceptive advertising.

But is it really “craziness” and “comical” to practice due diligence, especially now, with the future of our country at stake in 2016? Americans are very forgiving people, it’s not the flaws in a candidate’s character or the mistakes people make that rouse their anger, it is almost always the cover-up.

Image credit: screengrab

About M. Catharine Evans

Brother and sister Hans and Sophie Schell, co-founder and member of White Rose, an underground student anti-Nazi group, printed flyers and pamphlets denouncing Hitler and his regime. They were arrested February 18, 1943. Both were beheaded February 22, 1943. In Sophie's cell, a guard recovered a little scrap of paper with the word "Freedom" written on it. Before he died, her brother Hans urged good people "to stand defiant before overwhelming power." And to his brother he wrote, "Remain strong--no compromises." As our representatives in the press and in DC on all sides--Republican, Independent, Democrat, Libertarian, right and left wing--cower and compromise before the evil Obama regime, real patriots speak out everywhere.
This entry was posted in Elections and Campaigns, Must Read, News, Politics and tagged , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

2 Responses to Ben Carson ‘Welcomes the Magnifying Glass’—Just Not on Mannatech

  1. KBR says:

    A lie breaking the Hippocratic Oath?
    I appreciate your vetting comments about Ben Carson. Apparently there are very few who are willing to ask questions about this man. “Vetting” started with horse races: before you ran a racehorse, he needed to be checked by a veterinarian, i.e. “be vetted.” No one wants a horse that dies during a race.
    We need to think about that too. The presidency is much too important to put in a person who may be in poor health: are we then really voting for the vp as president?
    Dr. Carson had prostate cancer, which he claims is completely cured. In fact, in an Ebony magazine article, he says “There’s no chance of it coming back [after removal of the prostate gland], unless I grow another prostate.”
    But that is very wrong, he should know that, and it is especially unethical for a doctor to state such a lie in a magazine for black persons: “in 2012, black men had the highest rate of getting prostate cancer, followed by white, Hispanic, American Indian/Alaska Native men, and Asian/Pacific Islander.”( )
    Black men are also more likely to get the most aggressive types of prostate cancer.

    “However, despite the cancer appearing to be totally contained based upon the pathology report, some “rogue cancer cells” can escape. Therefore, there is always a risk for recurrence, no matter how favorable the pathology report, which is why all patients are advised to have follow-up visits. If everything looks clean on the pathology report, a 5-30% chance of recurrence is still possible, depending upon the Gleason grade and tumor volume.”
    So, is Dr. Carson in denial about this, or lying deliberately? Can even a highly intelligent brain surgeon buy into snake oil for hope?
    Is his Mannatech involvement related? Mannatech did pay for his 2.5 million dollar endowed chair at John’s Hopkins. “Well three years ago I had an endowed chair bestowed upon me,” Mr. Carson said in his “Keynote Address” at a 2011 Mannatech convention. “And uh, it requires $2.5 million to do an endowed chair and I’m proud to say that part of that $2.5 million came from Mannatech.”
    Disingenuous to call that “not a relationship.
    BTW: It didn’t take a brain surgeon to find these articles online: I am not a brain surgeon.
    See also:

  2. Pingback: Update: Lineup of Ben Carson’s ‘Dubious Character’ Associations |

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s