Dr. Ben’s altruism shames Hillary

By Tom Quiner

What a contrast.

Dr. Benjamin Carson is a self-made man. Born into abject poverty and nurtured by the tough love of his mother, he became a world famous neurosurgeon.

On the other hand, most would not consider Hillary Clinton a self-made woman. She was born into a middle class family, but married a rising political star in Bill Clinton. Her fame (and notoriety) have very much been the result of the connections of her famous husband.

There is nothing wrong with this. Many successful people have leveraged their connections to advance their careers. Ms. Hillary is certainly an intelligent woman with an extensive grasp of the workings of government.

Both Dr. Carson and Hillary Clinton are running for president. Honorable people can debate the relative merits (and demerits) of each candidate. Both have plusses … and minuses.

I am most struck by the contrast of their two foundations. The differences reveal much about the two candidates.

Dr. Ben Carson and his wife began the Carson Scholarship Fund long before politics ever entered their mind. The Clinton Foundation began when Bill Clinton left the presidency.

The Carson Scholarship Fund focuses in on a single issue: helping low income kids to pay for their education.

The Clinton Foundation has a broad reach, dealing with issues as diverse as:

√ Global health and wellness.

√ Increasing opportunities for girls.

√ Reducing childhood obesity.

√ Reducing preventable diseases.

√ Climate change.

Many of their initiatives are laudable. Some may be questionable, depending on your political perspective.

Here, though, is the stark contrast:

More than 90% of the Carson Scholarship Fund goes to helping the kids.

Less than 10% of the Clinton Foundation funding goes towards the causes they support.

In other words, the Carson Scholarship Fund is efficient and projects integrity to potential donors.

On the other hand, the Clinton Foundation appears to not be efficient, and based on recent revelations, appears to be less than forthright in its true intentions.

Donors to the Clinton Foundation are not concerned with the foundation’s integrity as much a its willingness to use Clinton clout to leverage donors’ cash contributions.

Even journalists get in the act, as witnessed by ABC’s George Stephanopoulos’ admission that he forked over $75,000 of his own money to the Clinton Foundation.

Integrity matters to us voters.

When weighing Hillary Clinton vs. Dr. Ben Carson, remember the difference between their respective foundations. The way they use donors’ money reveals much about the character of each.




  1. sigismundfedur96 on May 18, 2015 at 3:50 pm

    i wonnder if being the president changes your dreams?? ..aaft

  2. oarubio on May 19, 2015 at 8:44 pm

    Ha, the Clinton Foundation is just as inefficient as a Democratically controlled government!…….. Glad you understand the real meaning of “notoriety” — too many use it as if it’s something to shoot for.

    • quinersdiner on May 19, 2015 at 8:55 pm

      You got that right! Thanks for writing.