Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump called Monday for a "total and complete shutdown of Muslims entering the United States" ...The proposed ban wouldn't just apply to immigrants and visitors:
The proposed ban would apply to immigrants and visitors alike, a sweeping prohibition affecting all adherents of Islam who want to come to the U.S. The idea also raised immediate questions about whether it could pass muster under constitutional protections of the free exercise of religion.
When asked by The Hill whether that would include Muslim-American citizens currently abroad, Trump spokeswoman Hope Hicks replied over email: "Mr. Trump says, 'everyone.'"As Charles Johnson notes, the commenters at Breitbart love this idea:
Couldn't agree more.David Brody, of Pat Robertson's CBN news organization, thinks it's a gutsy move:
****
Mr Trump: "Cease All Muslim Immigration , NOW "
the people want this
TRUMP2016
****
Trump is the only one with common sense.
When you are at war, you do not let the enemy in.
****
WHERE THEY CAME FROM
****
yes and NOW!
Here is the truth whether you like it or not:@realDonaldTrump is only candidate to have the bravery to put out that statement on Muslims
— David Brody (@TheBrodyFile) December 7, 2015But it's all too much even for the rest of the GOP field:
Donald Trump is unhinged. His "policy" proposals are not serious.
— Jeb Bush (@JebBush) December 7, 2015On the Michael Medved Show, New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie called Trump’s position “ridiculous.”John Kasich calls the plan "outrageous divisiveness." Ben Carson's spokesperson says Carson "would not advocate" what Trump is advocating. Ted Cruz says Trump's proposal is "not my policy."
“There’s no question in my mind, but there are folks in this race who don’t care about what the law says because they’re used to being able to just fire people indiscriminately on television,” Christie said. “So, they don’t have to worry about laws say or not say.”
“And you do not need to be banning Muslims from the country,” Christie added. “That’s, in my view, that’s a ridiculous position and one that won’t even be productive.”
I think Trump may have gone too far this time -- not too far to suffer in the polls, of course (he'll probably get a bump), but so far out there that even fellow Republicans and pundits will make it uncomfortable for him to defend this position.
So will he walk it back? Maybe, a little.
Remember when we were told (accurately) that Trump had spoken approvingly of the notion of implementing a Muslim-tracking database? Trump accused the media of being "dishonest." Breitbart and Ann Coulter accused the press of smearing Trump. Dishonest LIEberal media! Trump was talking about tracking people arriving from overseas! he and his backers insisted. He'd had plenty of time to clarify his position in real time, and hadn't, but the guy who never walks things back did so in this case -- because he could then turn it all into an attack on the media.
That's what he'll do if he's put under enough pressure in this case. He can't claim that he didn't mean what he said, because the proposal is right there on his website.
But what he'll do is claim that we misunderstood his words. He'll base the claim on this sentence from his press release:
Until we are able to determine and understand this problem and the dangerous threat it poses, our country cannot be the victims of horrendous attacks by people that believe only in Jihad, and have no sense of reason or respect for human life.He'll say,
I didn't mean we'd ban Muslims forever -- I meant just until we can figure out what's going on. In a Trump administration, we're going to know what's going on very, very quickly. We'll know who's dangerous and who isn't. It won't take us very long to figure that out, because figuring it out is just good management.It'll all be the media's fault for misunderstanding him.
And the media will just report that and move on, as if nothing disturbing happened.
****
UPDATE, TUESDAY: Told ya.
In an exclusive interview with ABC News' Barbara Walters today, Republican presidential frontrunner Donald Trump, currently at the center of a political firestorm over his proposed ban on Muslims entering the U.S., responded to critics' concerns....
"It's short term," he said today of the proposed ban. "Let our country get its act together. ... It could be very quickly if our country could get its act together. ... We need toughness and smartness and we have to do it quickly."
9 comments:
Yeah, but I seriously doubt he will have to walk it back. This is just one more reason why the GOP base will see Trump as the only true representative of their values. Trump has found, yet again, a wedge issue to deepen the divide between himself and the rest of the GOP field -- and again, he's positioned himself on the side that will win the wild, enthusiastic approval of the GOP rank and file.
We truly are on the road to fascism.
Jack, I thought the same thing at first, since the only criticism he's getting isn't coming from the 3 medium fish trailing him and this nomination process is turning out to be well-and-truly committed to picking someone outside the GOP establishment (Even tho Rubio is the 'most' establishment of the 4 tops, he's shutting up on these matters.).
But I'm actually leaning toward Steve M. on this, in the sense that somewhere along the line, as he has repeatedly over the past 3 months, I'd expect Trump to say something that fuzzifies his stance, while somehow leaving the core of it intact. Maybe that's what Steve really means, because by now it's quite clear that Trump's style of 'walk back' is unique in several respects, most characteristically in somehow not seeming like one at all to two categories of audience: his own supporters and the discerning press - neither of which are every likely to change their mind about his candidacy.
Cruz is best placed to move right around this, because his own type of clarity holds a much more studied elusiveness. But it's a big, big problem for Rubio, because sooner or later he's going to have to say SOMETHING, and at that point he'll find - as I expect he knows already - the two leaders going after him (Carson, too, might say something that superficially conflicts with anything squishy, but he's still bleeding out.).
Cruz is going to game the Iowa caucuses and indeed might end up in winning both the beauty contest and the delegates, and he'll win N.H. handily. Then the going gets South Cackalacky so things will get even weirder.
I wish Hunter S. Thompson and Molly Ivins were still around!
They might not have any cure(s) to offer for this current brand of conservative insanity, but they'd sure as hell have plenty of smart and witty observations - and belly-laughs, too!
"When the going gets weird," like it is now, I miss those two old pro's!
Btw - I'm with Steve on this one. Not only is Trump becoming a master at turning his fascist and idiotic comments back on the media, but his followers don't give a shit if he does or not.
To them, he's just telling the "the truth!"
FSM, do they ever "believe" that!!!
When I first read that this morning, I thought of that one sentence paragraph Steve clipped above "damn, nice caveat." He has no reason to walk it back.
Damn, I miss Molly too.
I think it'll be fun to watch how Cruz positions himself as this escalates, since he has his eye on scooping these same Trump supporters later he'll have to pirouette delicately.
pourmecoffee suggested that when he steps aside, Trump'll "go upriver like Kurtz". But that's misread of Heart of Darkness, yes? He's already gone deep into "unsound methods". I continue to think that he only leaves if and when Reinhold Priebus offers him the GOP chair (Trump'll only agree once it's been "classed up" with gilt edges & inserts of raw gemstones.), and we'll learn about it as he & Cruz emerge out of the belly of a Trump helicopter, onto the tarmac at Reagan International, swagger onto a carpet of almost pornographic fuschia, and announce they've agreed on a formula dividing all spoils.
Well, let's be fair. He'll allow the Saudi owners of condos in Trump Tower to stay.
Well, he took a few toes back a millimeter or so, and stuck an entire leg out.
He went all fuzzy on what he'd do with Muslim-American citizens ("We love you."). He conceded - grudgingly, at best - that we "need" Muslims to contribute to defeating "ISIS". Then he pretty much reiterated everything, bobbed and weaved on internment camps (trying to cozy up to FDR, while specifically pointing to presidential directives ... tho leaving out that FDR's were issued consistent with the will of Congress, while implying he'd do it as president in essence regardless of Congress). And he opened up a brand new Mexican Wall-Mart of nutso on 'going in with ground troops and taking their oil, and giving some of the proceeds to our veterans', which is basically piracy & an undeniable war crime.
He's getting all his 'original' "information" from Frank Gaffney, mouthing it, and letting it appear all squishy by fake flattery & pandering & name-dropping & utter bullshit.
Post a Comment