Ben Carson on Syrian refugees

I heard the interview with Ben Carson, retired neurosurgeon and current Republican presidential candidate, this morning.

One thing stuck with me. In answer to the interviewers question about letting Syrian refugees in, his first response was to say that, likely, at least some of them are extremists trying to sneak into the US, for what purpose he didn't say.

OK, I get that incoming refugees need to be verified that they're NOT provocateurs trying to get in, playing on sympathies. I don't know that I like the assumption that people fleeing war and persecution obviously are lying and using our own generous nature against us, but I do understand the necessity. We need to streamline the vetting, though; every refugee is examined by more than 3 separate government agencies and departments. It can take years, Years! to get through the vetting. Actual refugees stand a very good chance of being dead by the time they're allowed to escape.

That aside, what struck me was that when the interviewer pressed; "assuming we weed out the extremists, how many would you let it?" Dr. Carson's first statement was he'd let in people who have skills we need, and that's basically it.

So, the only people who can get asylum from war and persecution, and perhaps even physical or sexual assault by soldiers, are the people who are useful to us? Children, or aged or infirm, can't be useful, so they're out of luck?

For a doctor, even one who's retired, that is depressingly and frighteningly selfish, and troubling.

And it seems from the rhetoric that most (if not all) of the Republican candidates feel this way, or even worse; don't want to let anybody in, no matter their skills or their needs.

Just now, I don't think he has to worry about extremists using our generous nature against us; we don't seem to have one any more.