From New York Daily News, we give you more of Mitt Romney’s BFF:
In an address at the North Carolina State Republican Convention, Trump said the outcome of this season’s “Celebrity Apprentice” shows he’s no racist.“Somebody said, ‘Oh, because I brought up the birth certificate, I’m a racist,’ ” Trump said Friday.
“I said, ‘How can I be a racist? I just picked Arsenio Hall.’ ” [Pols emphasis]
Rep. Mike Coffman very sensibly did not comment.
Our current theory is Trump is going deliberately nuts to give cover not just to Mitt Romney, but to Coffman and a whole slew of Republicans who, unlike Trump, are running for something. But for that to be true, Romney would need to keep Trump at arm’s length, which he hasn’t.
We may be giving Trump too much credit for thinking, but that doesn’t excuse his legitimation.
I recall when I was a little kid in the 80s, my parents mentioning Donald Trump as a someone to look-up to, emulate, etc. I had an uncle who worked at his casino in Atlantic City, so the Donald was kind of revered in my family (Italians from Jersey, I guess easily impressed).
I just can’t believe he really buys this birther bullshit. I mean, I can, but just- aye aye aye .
What a jackass.
and really liked it. Absolutely can’t stand the guy today.
That’s the same one I read, and I loved it.
In middle school, I was convinced that between that book, and those “buy real estate with no money down” schemes that used to be on TV all the time, that I could make millions!
‘Classy’ and Trump are mutually exclusive.
These people vote. These people may be a key voting block in Nevada, a swing state.
This statement makes no sense at all. The republicans want the “birther vote.” My “current theory” is that the repubs have polling data suggesting that surrogates can push the “Birther issue” without losing votes for Republicans.
I think that there is only one response and that should come from a Democratic LAWYER who would cite the constitutional clause ”Full faith and credit” and show that this “birther” argument is not an attack on Obama it is an attack on our Constitution and specifically on the ability of individual states to establish citizenship and more specifically on the integrity of the state of Hawaii. As such, the “birthers” threaten the constitution and ultimately every US citizen’s ability to
validate his/her own citizenship.
But dems respond? OMG…NO. dems run away and then from safe havens publish absurd statements like the one I just quoted.
I was unable to spot a link or citation.
Read the post at the top.
I confined my search to dwyers post…
duh.
Even if they don’t lose R votes, they don’t gain anything. This appeals strictly to people who would never vote for Obama anyway.
I think , if anything, they feel it might help them hang on to wing nuts like some of my husband’s cousins who they fear might go third party (however these particular wing nut cousins will vote Bircher just like they did in 2008 so jokes them) because the GOP, as far right as it has gone, is still not right enough or crazy enough for them.
As it threatens to turn off more in the middle than it turns on in the tiny universe of Bircher et al voters, I doubt this is going to be one of those brilliant GOP sneaky message triumphs.
My issue, of course, is will the Dems respond effectively?
Because one way to pull in those extra votes is for there to be no response from the dems….and what I have already heard, is that if the birthers were not “on to something” why don’t the Dems fight back?
just let those voters go.
We’ve been here… let it go…
they are chasing a squirrel down a hole.
give them more rope…(if you need another axiom, or cliche, just let me know, but I have to water my garden, so I will be out for a while).
My issue, of course, is will the Dems respond effectively?
Because one way to pull in those extra votes is for there to be no response from the dems….and what I have already heard, is that if the birthers were not “on to something” why don’t the Dems fight back?
Anyone else having trouble?
If not, I am sorry, I double posted.