Confronted with evidence, what does maybe-perhaps-sorta-Presidential candidate Donald Trump do? Well, he doubles down.
His letter to the New York Times is a masterpiece of fantasy, somehow both paranoid and narcissistic in equal measure.
First, Gail Collins writes a column called “Donald Trump Gets Weirder“, so what does The Donald do? He gets even weirder.
Equally of importance, there are no records in Hawaii that a Barack Hussein Obama was born there-no bills, no doctors names, no nurses names, no registrations, no payments, etc. As far as the two notices placed in newspapers, many things could have happened, but some feel the grandparents put an ad in order to show that he was a citizen of the U.S. with all of the benefits thereto. Everybody, after all, and especially then, wanted to be a United States citizen.
Just substitute your name (assuming you were born in America) and see how well this rant works.
Equally of importance, there are no records in [insert state of purported birth here] that a [insert your name here] was born there-no bills, no doctors names, no nurses names, no registrations, no payments, etc.
It puts me in mind of Hoyt Axton’s famous song lyrics:
Well, I never been to Heaven, but I been to Oklahoma.
Well they tell me I was born there, but I really don’t remember.
In Oklahoma, [or in Nairobi], what does it matter? What does it matter?
Any rant can be justified by the old construction “some feel”. Some feel the pyramids were constructed by aliens. Some feel that Sam the Dog speaks to them in the night in a Brooklyn backyard and orders them to kill people. Some feel the grandparents put an ad in the paper. The weasel-word “feel” means we don’t need no stinkin’ evidence or scientific fact: we’re epistemically closed, so we just feel stuff and it’s fiiiiine.
I miss the days when not just some people, but almost all people, refused to take Donald Trump seriously. I miss reading about him in Spy Magazine, where they referred to him consistently as “the short-fingered vulgarian“. I was so much older then. I’m younger than that now. And I’m consistently disappointed by the level of political discourse.
Postscript: Factcheck.org weighs in on the factual basis for the assertions in the letter.
I wonder how many conservatives are going to now complain that we progressives are “keeping alive” the birther issue?
The guy is really playing the media whore routine to the hilt. I wish they’d stop giving him free air time.
Trump knows birtherism is catnip for media. If you want instant publicity, it sure beats rolling out your ideas on fixing the deficit (boring!). Sadly, the media is dying for some drama, and Trump gives them what they want. Tim Pawlenty would kill for the attention.
I hope Trump runs.
Well, if we can’t have Palin/Bachmann, I guess Trump/Bachmann will have to do!
That’s right. It’s the media’s fault. Everyone knows that right wing politicians can’t help it. You put a camera in front of their faces, and they’re say stupid stuff just to get attention. We really should stop covering it when a conservative says something. None of the conservative voters would mind, or would accuse the media of liberal bias if we just stopped covering the statements of conservative candidates.
Or at least, the media should pick and choose which right wing candidates to cover. Because it’s not bias, if the media decides which candidates are media whores and so avoids them.
NO, NO, NO, NO!
KEEP giving Trump ALL the airtime the idiot (scratch that) gentleman wants!
He keeps reminding the REST of the voters why 2010 was a BIG mistake.
The idea that conservative politicians talk about birtherism simply because the media likes it doesn’t seem to fly. Why don’t any Democratic politicians support birtherist ideas? If it’s simply a way to get media attention, wouldn’t the media really jump on the story of a left-wing birther?
In point of fact, conservative politicians support birtherism because a segment of their base believes it. This sort of talk makes them popular — not with “the media”, but with a part of the conservative Republican base. Some of the far right actually believe it. Some wonder if there might be some substance to it. The rest (apparently) don’t really mind the crazy talk. Right wing politicians support birtherism — or refuse to condemn the nonsense — because their base eats it up, not because “the media” likes to report it.
If this were not true, there’d be no reason why the left-wing media whores wouldn’t be just as big into birtherism. But Democrats don’t buy birther fantasies (they have their own conspiracy fantasies). The Democratic base would crucify a liberal birther. In contrast, the Republican base is perfectly happy to embrace — or at least, tolerate — birther silliness. In fact, parts of the Republican base require it, and wouldn’t vote for someone who isn’t a birther — or who, at the least wouldn’t give birtherism a wink and a nudge,
Your argument is sound, dc, plus Donald Trump never had any trouble getting a camera to point in his direction even before this nonsense came along. Which is what I was saying with the Spy Magazine references. He was well-known to the media over 20 years ago, enough to merit parody. You don’t parody people no one’s ever heard of.
Hey that’s a good pooint. I can’t name one single Democrat/liberal birther. That might make for an interesting poll.
Fox News poll April 7 2011: 12% of Democrats believe President Obama was born elsewhere.
CNN/USA Today poll July 2010 (Q41): Percentage of Democrats who believe President Obama was born in another country: 7% “probably”, 8% “definitely”
I have questions about the definition of a “Democrat” in these polls, but there you are. It’s strange that more people would be certain he’s born in another country than those who think it’s likely. It makes me wonder about the incidence of lissencephaly among people polled.
Treme, when it comes to birthers, I think anencephaly is more applicable.
Actually the liberal equivalent of birtherism would be the persistence of insistence that Al Gore actually won Florida in 2000, despite mountains of well-documented evidence to the contrary.
The real upside of what Trump is doing: it forces the media to actually address the issue, instead of simply scoffing and then turning away.
Thus we see how something scary that’s whispered in the darkness can lose its oomph and look really, really silly when it’s dragged out into the light of day.
Nobody ever sits around a campfire telling that story about that “guy with the hook instead of a hand” when it’s high noon and the sun is shining.
Well I figured one of you smarties would know something about it. (incedentally, I had to look up lissencephaly; harsh). Not only would I question the definition of democrat but I would question the validity of a Fox poll.
anencephaly would be what the strawman had in Wizard of Oz. Wonder if he was Republican?
Anencephaly would be what the strawman had in Wizard of Oz. Wonder if he was Republican?
You may be on to something.
Never forget the quite succinct question Dorothy asked of the Scarecrow:
“What would you do with a brain if you HAD one?”
The very same question I have for a number of “scarecrows”!
Pingback: Hot Fudge Sunday April 10 | 538 Refugees
Dave Weigel fact-checks The Donald:
“Lies printed without edits in the Times.”