There is certainly a lot to like about Ben Carson.  He has exposed the #BlackLivesMatter movement as a fraud, he favors a 15% flat tax, he unveils the deception of global warming, and he heavily criticized Obamacare.  He's articulate, smart, and right on a lot of issues.

But there are some issues he is mistaken on, and mistaken in a way that causes me to question whether he has a fundamental understanding of how the Constitution and a free-market economy work.  He supports ethanol subsidies, for example, which, aside from enriching farmers, only raise the price of both fueling our cars and buying products made with corn.  Carson supported the Corker amendment, saying it would increase Congress's involvement in the Iran deal when it actually reduced Congress's voice, showing that Carson didn't seem to understand that without that amendment, Obama would have needed 67 votes to support his deal.  Now he needs only 34.  This raises the question of whether Carson understands the constitutional limitations of the presidency.

In the economics realm, Carson believes that the deregulation of financial markets caused the housing crisis we are in.  He seems to be unaware that the opposite is true: that overregulation of the housing market caused the collapse of the real estate market and the stock market.  He doesn't seem to be aware of Community Reinvestment Act requirements that forced banks to lend to unqualified lenders, or the shifting of moral hazard by Fannie Mae guaranteeing huge numbers of mortgage loans, shielding banks from making responsible decisions.  The next president may be called on to make similar bailouts; Carson's lack of understanding of this is troubling.

Carson also supported amnesty for illegal aliens in 2013.  But since Trump did as well, and since many voters don't care what a candidate thought or believed before July of this year, I guess this is not such an issue.

On social issues, Carson seems to be quite liberal.  He supports civil unions for homosexuals and says that same-sex marriage is now "settled," as if we should just accept an unconstitutional ruling of the Supreme Court without protest.

In 1992, Carson authored a paper advocating the use of aborted baby organs for medical research, and he has defended it in recent comments, calling it merely "tissue in a tissue bank."  That's very troubling.

Carson supports raising tariffs, which make goods more expensive for Americans and perhaps would spark retaliatory measures that would reduce exports.  He also wants to raise the minimum wage, seemingly unaware that it will kill jobs.

As I said, there is a lot to like about Dr. Carson.  But he's also taken a lot of troubling positions.  Part of the problem may be that since he's never been a politician, he's never had to think all these issues through.  But is now the time to elect someone president who doesn't have a history (going back before July) of fixed views?  Because if we do, who knows what his views will be like when he winds up in the White House?

This article was produced by NewsMachete.com, the conservative news site.