home

Trump Toxic

The Short Fingered Vulgarian seems to be overplaying his buffoonish hand. The latest - Jerry Seinfeld does not want to be seen standing next to him:

Comedian Jerry Seinfeld canceled an appearance at one of Donald Trumpís charity events, saying that he is disturbed by Trumpís rhetoric about President Obama. Seinfeld will however still make a monetary contribution to the charity, St. Judeís Childrenís Research Hospital.

Trump, in typical fashion, crudely lashes back:

We don't care that you broke your commitment," [Trump] wrote, [. . .] "What I do feel badly about is that I agreed to do, and did, your failed show, 'The Marriage Ref,' even though I thought it was absolutely terrible . . .

Trump seems on the verge of a Torpedo of Truth tour.

Speaking for me only

< The Future Of Online Gaming (The "Investing" Kind) | Thursday Afternoon Open Thread >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


  • Display: Sort:
    Karl Rove admits there is a "nutty" (5.00 / 1) (#4)
    by Militarytracy on Thu Apr 21, 2011 at 11:08:40 AM EST
    right when discussing Trump.  What the heck Karl?  Shunning your firstborn?

    This is the man who championed (5.00 / 1) (#5)
    by andgarden on Thu Apr 21, 2011 at 11:10:07 AM EST
    the Federal Marriage Amendment as a 2004 election strategy. I don't want to hear it from him.

    Parent
    The fact (5.00 / 2) (#6)
    by cal1942 on Thu Apr 21, 2011 at 11:19:26 AM EST
    that a Donald Trump makes noise about a foray into national politics is a sign, IMO, that public service has been turned into a joke, another win for the far right.

    Tea partiers, Trump, Laffer Curve resurrection, deficit hysteria, etc. all examples of the cheapening of public life; a result of the Conservative Movement over the past 4 decades.

    Yes, an evolution since Ronald Reagan. (5.00 / 2) (#12)
    by KeysDan on Thu Apr 21, 2011 at 11:56:29 AM EST
    He served two terms as California governor, and two as President--elected despite the recognition of many that government was not his strong suit.  The problem with social safety nets was the welfare queens riding around in Cadillacs, pollution was due to trees, school lunches needed to be cut back, counting catsup as a vegetable,  AIDs was--(dead air), and star war missile defense and military knowledge was co-mingled with old movies.  Trump is just picking up and carrying on.

    Parent
    Call in the EPA (5.00 / 1) (#10)
    by Dadler on Thu Apr 21, 2011 at 11:30:01 AM EST
    Or what's left of it.  The gross tonnage of waste between the Donald's ears is rivaled only by the microscopic marvel of the real Trump Tower.  How small is it, Don?  No doubt there are much bigger members at the jockey club.

    David Brooks and Gail Collins (5.00 / 1) (#13)
    by CST on Thu Apr 21, 2011 at 12:02:13 PM EST
    Discuss Iowa, trump, and the state of presidential politics.

    David Brooks - even when I sort of agree with you, you are such a condescending snob I hate myself for it.

    The best part is reading David Brooks feel sorry for himself because he doesn't get the presidential candidates to himself anymore.

    Anyway, Brooks on Trump:

    "America was built by ambitious vulgarians polite people wouldn't dine with. The vulgarians offer a nice counterpoint to the excesses of genteel culture. But that doesn't mean they are fit for statesmanship, or qualified for high office."

    What a bunch... (5.00 / 2) (#17)
    by sj on Thu Apr 21, 2011 at 12:26:54 PM EST
    ... of entitled claptrap.

    "America was built by ambitious vulgarians polite people wouldn't dine with. The vulgarians offer a nice counterpoint to the excesses of genteel culture. But that doesn't mean they are fit for statesmanship, or qualified for high office."

    Only patricians such as himself and his friends are fit for statesmanship.  Although he's right in that there have always been snobs who believed they were entitled to more than "vulgarians" (often defined as "men of business" so this is nothing new.  New money is so vulgar, don't you know?).  

    But think about that.  Not even money buys a "vulgarian" equality in the eyes of the entitled.  Think about how much less than that the rest of us are...

    Not defending Trump.  But the Village... ugh.

    Parent

    So true (none / 0) (#33)
    by ruffian on Thu Apr 21, 2011 at 03:11:08 PM EST
    I'm currently listening to Adam Goodheart's excellent book "1861" about America at the outbreak of the Civil War. The same type of insults were hurled at Lincoln before and after his election. Such a vulgarian from the frontier - unfit to hold office. And others, in not-so-subtle terms that parallel today, referred to him as a 'Black Republican' - and yes, it was meant to denote sympathy with the slaves - and drew him as an ape.

    We don't really get anywhere, do we?

    Parent

    A three dollar bill (5.00 / 1) (#15)
    by mmc9431 on Thu Apr 21, 2011 at 12:17:09 PM EST
    When Trump puts his own money into a run for office, I'll believe he's for real. So far I still think he's riding a media high and laughing all the way to the bank.

    What would be really scary is if people with money and power chose to give it to him. With his terrible reputation in the business world, I really can't believe they'd trust him with a dime.

    No wonder Republicans survey say they don't like any of the potential candidates.

    I cannot in my wildest dreams (none / 0) (#44)
    by gyrfalcon on Thu Apr 21, 2011 at 07:19:45 PM EST
    imagine Donald Trump being willing to hit the campaign trail in a serious way for a solid year.  I cannot in my wildest dreams imagine Trump imagining that he would enjoy the 24/7 grind of being president of the U.S.

    He likes being asked his opinions and getting to shoot his mouth off, that's all.  He's not going to run, not in a million years.

    Parent

    I am frankly surprised (none / 0) (#1)
    by andgarden on Thu Apr 21, 2011 at 10:58:09 AM EST
    that there hasn't been a campaign to get NBC to immediately cancel The Apprentice and fire Trump. I would applaud them for that. There's no place for hosts who facilitate racism on national TV. (Yes, I know, I know, Pat Buchanan).

    I think we are on the verge (none / 0) (#2)
    by Militarytracy on Thu Apr 21, 2011 at 10:59:39 AM EST
    of that push.

    Parent
    Perhaps what Trump really wants to do (none / 0) (#7)
    by nycstray on Thu Apr 21, 2011 at 11:21:45 AM EST
    is get a Sarah Palin like gig with Fox so he can sit around and shoot off his mouth for some more bucks and this is his audition?

    Parent
    I have no doubt that he could easily (5.00 / 3) (#8)
    by andgarden on Thu Apr 21, 2011 at 11:23:23 AM EST
    get that kind of job. The problem is that it would probably bore him after a little while. This is a man who has thousands of dollars to his name. Why should he settle for a Cable TV gig?

    Parent
    Heh (5.00 / 3) (#9)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Thu Apr 21, 2011 at 11:27:03 AM EST
    You know, actually he is making a business mistake here - assuming all publicity is good publicity.

    Trump basically runs a licensing business - his asset is the name Trump, and he sells it for a lot of things.

    For some strange reason, there was value in the name, but he is diminishing it quickly, even for the Jersey Shore/Real House Wives crowd.

    This has been a misstep by him on any level but it isnot clear he is planning on stopping. Ergo - Torpedo of Truth tour.

    He may have to run for President and just do reality TV for a living as he may be killing his licensing business.


    Parent

    Well (none / 0) (#3)
    by Ga6thDem on Thu Apr 21, 2011 at 11:06:43 AM EST
    at least all of this gets our minds off the economy!! And the plans that congress has for us.

    The one thing that could absolutely (none / 0) (#11)
    by Buckeye on Thu Apr 21, 2011 at 11:32:22 AM EST
    guarantee an Obama reelection is Trump doing well or winning the republican nomination.  He has SERIOUS baggage (makes Newt look like a saint), flip flopped on about every issue he talks about, and has no discipline.  He cannot help himself from participating in these public donnybrooks with the likes of Seinfeld, Cosby, Rosie, Gail Collins, etc. making himself look like a petulant, juvenile, spoiled little trust fund baby used to having his ass kissed and getting away with being a bully.

    Trump's current polling shows just how nuts the GOP base is right now.

    And the media, bless their (none / 0) (#14)
    by Anne on Thu Apr 21, 2011 at 12:07:31 PM EST
    craven little hearts, are only too willing to give us the daily play-by-play of the Trump Train Wreck, but not willing, of course, to do it in any honest kind of way (just made myself giggle a little thinking about the likelihood of an "honest" media, lol), but instead showcase him as if he's someone we need to pay attention to.  "Look!  Over here!  Donald Trump!"

    Doonesbury's been having a field day with Trump (start here, then look at Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday and today.

    My thinking is that Trump's going to lose it in a big way very soon; I think the media know that, and want to be there when it happens.  I watched him in an interview with someone from NBC the other night, and he was defensive, belligerent, rude and thin-skinned - and the questions weren't even that hard.

    Meanwhile, of course, the media is failing in a pretty spectacular way to cover the events that really matter; am really dreading the full-blown campaign season.

    Birther Nation - the 72% of Republicans who (none / 0) (#16)
    by Farmboy on Thu Apr 21, 2011 at 12:17:23 PM EST
    aren't sure Obama was born in the US - love Trump. He's preaching what they want to hear. Straight up conservatives want the Trump train wreck to happen soon so the conversation can get back to "their" agenda.

    I think that's why the media is giving Trump all the air time - the corporations want the fire to burn itself out, yet generate ad revenue while it lasts. Money talks...

    Parent

    What is with his face???????? (none / 0) (#18)
    by BarnBabe on Thu Apr 21, 2011 at 01:07:35 PM EST
    It is clashing with his hair. I use to think he was using a suntanning booth because he was orange. Someone said it was makeup-Fire the makeup artist.I know it is not my set as everyone else looks fine. But he is now like a powdered orange. And close up looks blotchy. Does he have a skin condition? I read that he gets big bucks for that show. Probably comes down to a mil an hour. Heh.

    Another Annoucement.... (none / 0) (#19)
    by ScottW714 on Thu Apr 21, 2011 at 01:09:15 PM EST
    CONCORD, N.H. -- Self-made millionaire and former two-term New Mexico Governor Gary Johnson said on Thursday he will seek the Republican nomination for U.S. president in 2012.

    http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/42703067/ns/politics-decision_2012/

    Who ?
    -------------------------------

    Back to Donald.  The fact that he didn't know Roe vs. Wade was about privacy and was called out on it on the Today Show just about had me busting my guts, even though I was home dead sick Monday.

    The guy is seriously running neck to neck in the stoooopidity race with Palin.  It actually wouldn't surprise me to find out the only reason he's in the game is to nail Palin.

    I would add, the money Trump could generate would be unheard of.  We all know he would be as pro-business as they get.  I bet he could easily double, if not triple Obama's warchest.  And I remember back in '99 everyone making fun of Bush and how they hoped he'd get the nomination.

    Could be worse. Johnson's name (none / 0) (#20)
    by oculus on Thu Apr 21, 2011 at 01:16:44 PM EST
    could be "Smith."

    I do find it amusing all the hue and cry over Trump.  Who will hue and cry over Palin now?

    Parent

    Beware (none / 0) (#26)
    by Ga6thDem on Thu Apr 21, 2011 at 02:02:01 PM EST
    of this guy. He wants to cut military spending and end the war on drugs.

    Parent
    Trump (none / 0) (#21)
    by klassicheart on Thu Apr 21, 2011 at 01:18:40 PM EST
    I find it ironic that you are jumping on the bash Trump train considering you were an early booster of the great "pol" Obama, someone who was directly responsible for the midterm disaster,a man who has significantly moved the Democratic party to the right and someone whose stewardship of this country is significantly less than stellar.  More Bushie with a dash of Reagan, wouldn't you say?  Or is the Bradley Manning torture understandable?  Or the many Obama positions that have undergone an about face?   Clearly, you and David Brooks had an early appreciation for Obama in common.  Why you would hold Gail Collins out as somebody  whose opinion one should value is beyond me.  A review of the DailyHowler.com amply demonstrates what a villager and propagandist she is.

    Instead, it would be infinitely more worthwhile for you to discuss some of the issues Trump mentions, rebutting them factually instead of with innuendo.  Start with trade policy, specifically China's currency manipulation.  And tell me again why our diplomats do such a terrific job of negotiation, as does Obama?  And wasn't it you who commented extensively on Obama's negotiating talents?  As to the birth certificate, please explain why the long form hasn't been released.  I understand one does not mention such a thing in intellectual circles...because it is so obvious. But is it possible the long form that does exist and has not been produced, contains something else? And if it was shown to certain reporters, why hasn't it been released publicly?  Why was it that there was a thirst for original documentation vis a vis Bush, and legitimately so, but not so much on Obama?  He had a secret deal with the drug companies during the health care disaster bill, yet that can be overlooked. Also explain your take on the Rezko matter, something else Trump mentioned.  It was a strange land transaction involving Obama's house....do you have any problems with it?  Or is it typical in your experience? Was his association with Rezko concerning to you, especially a closeness that wrought this strange deal?   Clinton brought it up during the primaries and was pilloried. Does that make it a non issue?   And inasmuch as the media clearly made a difference in the primaries, and clearly had a preference, why should any of their claims be trusted? The preference for Obama, certainly in retrospect, does not seem inspired or intelligent. Or are you now inclined to trust media claims or "noted" and "trusted" reporters like Brooks and Collins? Did any those authentic columnists write about what was exposed in wikileaks?  What does make Collins so read worthy in your opinion?  This is not to say that Trump doesn't have his own issues.  But it's rather hypocritical to criticize Trump without finding equally questionable positions taken by Obama.  Let's see...we're in 3 wars with Obama and he continually pumps a narrative about deficit reduction on the backs of the middle class.  But let's focus on Trump and the politically astute Jerry Seinfeld.

    Well, is Trump the frontrunner for your (none / 0) (#22)
    by observed on Thu Apr 21, 2011 at 01:30:48 PM EST
    party or not?
    Who else should we discuss---Palin? Huckabee? Jindal?

    Parent
    not sure if this is supposed to be a reply to me.. (none / 0) (#24)
    by CST on Thu Apr 21, 2011 at 01:44:00 PM EST
    If it is - try the "reply" button next time.

    I only assume so because I linked to the Brooks/Collins piece.  Just as an FYI, I linked to it because it made me laugh, not because I take it seriously.  It's clearly a bunch of holier-than-thou nonsense lamenting about how the unwashed masses have taken over.  But I find it funny in it's rediculousness, sorry if you do not.

    As for everything else in your comment (paragraphs people!) - I could give two $hits about what's in the long form.  Maybe it doesn't exist.  Maybe it does and it says he was born on Venus.  I really don't care, I think it's a stupid rule anyway, and I also happen to believe based on all the other circumstances surrounding his life that he was born in this country.  Frankly, I'm a little confused as to why it even matters (legally) where he was born if his mother was a U.S. citizen.

    as for Bradley Manning, I'm glad the moved him.  I don't agree with his treatment.  I also don't agree with the fact that that treatment is fairly routine and has been for years on a number of "high risk prisoners".  I do not support those actions.

    And I really have nothing to say on Rezko since I don't know that much about it, other than - I don't think Trump is really the person to be talking about shady business deals since I thought that was his campaign platform.

    Parent

    not a reply to you (none / 0) (#30)
    by klassicheart on Thu Apr 21, 2011 at 02:29:50 PM EST
    but to observed

    Parent
    claptrap (none / 0) (#23)
    by klassicheart on Thu Apr 21, 2011 at 01:39:43 PM EST
    This is the villager idiocy that has brought us to where we are now.  Condescension from people who have clearly been wrong on a host of issues is not something to brag about.  The academic elite are not always so prescient.  The elite universities lost a fortune and a good percentage of their endowments in the meltdown of 2008.  The majority of the elite backed the great Obama while trashing Hillary with false narratives and further made a mockery  of what racism is by accusing Bill and Hillary of it.  Obama was  marketed successfully to a host of people. In truth, he was a marketing phenomenon. This slick campaign was especially successful on the elite and their entertainment industry brethren.  Obama had no background or concrete accomplishments that justified their devotion.  Somehow his Harvard degree and excellent reading skills were sufficient for too many, who preferred a more superficial examination of his readiness to be President.  Again, this is in no way  a comment on the brainwashing that goes on in the right wing and evangelical communities.  I am so sick of the propaganda on both sides of the spectrum...and am less willing to vote for the lesser of two evils.  This failure to be intellectually honest and rigorous will be our downfall.



    Trump stirs debate (none / 0) (#28)
    by klassicheart on Thu Apr 21, 2011 at 02:20:35 PM EST
    I'd take Trump any day over Haley Barbour or Tim Pawlenty....over any of the Republican preferreds.  At least there would be a lively debate.  Palin is inarticulate and ill informed.  Huckabee is a good debater.  But Trump doesn't care what anybody thinks.  Again, how could anybody who supported universal health care and choice, and does not talk about deficit reduction on the back of the middle class, be in any way as bad as the programmed Republicans?   By the way, wasn't Dean demonized by the media because of the way he said "Yee haw?"  The big Democratic elites trashed Dean as extreme during the 2004 primaries. They ran him out of the primaries.   Buying into the "common wisdom," especially when it comes from elites, is worrisome.  Trump would stir up a debate because he doesn't care what the elites think.  He's not a villager.  And be very afraid of villagers.  Remember, Obama just came out in favor of reducing the mortgage deduction, which is already capped.  Always the middle class he goes after.  And he never ceased to tell us how much he admired Ronald Reagan.  Trump thought Bush was disastrous as well as Obama, and said so during both Presidencies.

    Parent
    Manning and what it says about Obama (none / 0) (#29)
    by klassicheart on Thu Apr 21, 2011 at 02:28:40 PM EST
    Obama's reply to the reporter who asked about Manning's treatment, tells you a lot about the great Obama.  I find that comment of his, let alone his actions or lack therof, far more concerning than anything Trump has said. And this says nothing about his positions on a host of other important issues that should worry people. Manning was transferred because it was becoming a bigger issue than Obama wanted it to be.  Otherwise, Obama could have cared less.

    Parent
    It's quite possible that (1) the media (none / 0) (#32)
    by Anne on Thu Apr 21, 2011 at 02:42:47 PM EST
    is giving Trump so much airtime in order to contrast with their media-darling Obama, or (2) the GOP knows that the more time Trump spends in front of the camera, the more sane and reasonable their eventual nominee will appear, pretty much negating whatever edge Obama has in the sane-and-reasonable department in the chase for the independent voter.

    "Lively" debate is meaningless if it's all about the entertainment factor and not the substantive factor; I can do without the "look at me!" ego-fest liveliness of a Trump or a Palin, thank you.  Both Trump and Palin cannot quite hide how impressed they are with themselves and all the attention they're getting - Hollywood or the circus would garner the same results.

    The media is always going to be all over anything that drives ratings, and the more outrageous Trump - or Palin - get, the more of them the media will try to force on us.  Which is why I seldom tune in to the news anymore, because it isn't really news, just bad entertainment.  Something both Trump and Palin know a lot about.

    And while the Trumpapalooza may make Democrats look sane and reasonable, there really isn't a whole lot of difference between the parties anymore: they're both going the same place, at different speeds and by different routes - but the same, nonetheless.

    Which makes it likely that more people than ever will decide to sit out, having decided that voting for whichever candidates are on the ballot would be co-dependently insane.

    We shall see.


    Parent

    Obama's (none / 0) (#35)
    by Ga6thDem on Thu Apr 21, 2011 at 03:22:49 PM EST
    not the media darling anymore. Right now I don't think there is one but I'm sure they'll find one.

    Parent
    I think being the presumptive nominee (none / 0) (#36)
    by Anne on Thu Apr 21, 2011 at 03:40:15 PM EST
    is - for now - the equivalent of being the media darling, if that makes any sense.

    Not being one to watch a lot of TV talking heads, I may not be correct that he is not getting that much criticism - my sense is that the criticism is pretty tame - nothing like what it really should be.

    Parent

    the problem is not (none / 0) (#37)
    by CST on Thu Apr 21, 2011 at 03:47:03 PM EST
    that the criticism is tame, per say.

    It's that it's wrong.

    As in, they are criticizing him for stupid cr@p and taking their eyes off the important stuff.

    I can't tell you how many articles I've seen about how Obama was "mean" to Ryan and rejecting bipartisanship in his speech which will be the end of debt negotiations and cause fiscal disaster upon this great land.

    I can't remember the last time I saw and article about Iraq.

    Parent

    Well (none / 0) (#39)
    by Ga6thDem on Thu Apr 21, 2011 at 05:32:16 PM EST
    fortunately Obama brought that on himself with the PPUS crap. I mean they still would probably criticize him but he's the one that campaigned on being the PPUS.

    But you're right, in the sense that there's more important stuff than bipartisanship but that's the high broderism of the beltway media for ya.

    Parent

    I don't know. (none / 0) (#40)
    by Ga6thDem on Thu Apr 21, 2011 at 05:33:26 PM EST
    Politico has really been on his case from what I've read but they aren't criticizing him on policy so much as being "testy" and other stuff.

    Parent
    Trump's actual policy (none / 0) (#45)
    by gyrfalcon on Thu Apr 21, 2011 at 07:28:09 PM EST
    opinions are so beyond moronic, they're not bothering with them much at all.  But he's not being treated gently or respectfully anywhere other than Fox News that I've seen.

    Parent
    Obama is a media darling (none / 0) (#42)
    by klassicheart on Thu Apr 21, 2011 at 06:54:37 PM EST
    Who has criticized him?  I thought I heard how great his latest "speech" was. The worst criticism I've heard was echoed by someone else here...about his testiness.  But has anyone talked about Obama's trade policies?  Or muddled foreign policy?
    I hear no substantive criticism.  In fact, he is applauded for his reasonable "deficit policy."

    Parent
    full of himself (none / 0) (#41)
    by klassicheart on Thu Apr 21, 2011 at 06:44:51 PM EST
    It is true Trump is egocentric. But so what?  Obama is the ultimate villager....He wants to be part of this favored elite and do what is acceptable to them not us.  Is that preferable? He has all the "right" people around him.  But where has that gotten him? More importantly, where has it gotten the country?  Do the working class trust him?  Has he helped labor? Has he worried about jobs?  No. In fact, he is busy agreeing to cut investments in rail and other necessary spending to please who? Meanwhile, how much is it costing a day in Libya?  Has anyone told us lately?  Trump is a nominal Republican.  And the fact that he really belongs to no party is to me a plus.  And that is why the Republican elite don't like him.  He doesn't cater to them or carry their water.  He even warned them about Ryan's plan...saying they were getting ahead of themselves. And he is talking about substance.  He wants talk about trade policy...but the media want to talk about the birth certificate.  So, to the extent he puts the issue of trade policy, and our policies towards OPEC front and center, it's a plus.  Because all I hear from both Republicans and Democrats is why the deficit needs to be balanced on the backs of the middle class.  Listen to the gang of 6.  Listen to Obama's closest ally in the Senate, Durbin. Do you like what you hear? We have gone from a discussion of medicare for those 50+ to cutting medicare... from the Democrats.  How bad is that? And all of this talk while we spend billions on 3 wars and no discussion of why. Why clamor for Trump to leave?  Trump is a wild card and this race needs to be shaken up.  He used the birther issue to jump ahead.  Didn't Obama use racism to jump ahead of Hillary? It can be argued that both are  somewhat cynical.  But Obama promised transparency.  And he certainly hasn't delivered that...so why should he get a pass on a small easy issue?  

    Parent
    Oh, please. This is just too ridiculous (5.00 / 2) (#47)
    by Anne on Thu Apr 21, 2011 at 08:00:39 PM EST
    for words.

    I wouldn't give you a dime for a sack full of this crop of Democrats, but that doesn't mean I'm going to look at someone like Donald Trump as anything more than what he is: part of the 2012 pre-election Crazy Train that consists of him, Palin and Michelle Bachman; when the train pulls into the station, they have an instant circus.

    There is nothing he or they could say that would make them credible.  

    Nothing.

    Parent

    klassicheart is a chatterer and a (none / 0) (#58)
    by Jeralyn on Fri Apr 29, 2011 at 01:58:42 AM EST
    is blogclogging. S/he is limited to  four comments a day.

    Parent
    Seinfeld should have honored his Commitment ! (none / 0) (#43)
    by samsguy18 on Thu Apr 21, 2011 at 07:18:38 PM EST
     Fundraising for research and centers like St Jude's is very difficult especially during the present economic climate. This was Eric Trumps charity event not his Dad's.

    It's been reported (none / 0) (#46)
    by CoralGables on Thu Apr 21, 2011 at 07:39:24 PM EST
    that Seinfeld made a contribution to both the Eric Trump Foundation and St. Jude's.

    Parent
    Yes he did .....however (none / 0) (#48)
    by samsguy18 on Thu Apr 21, 2011 at 08:11:35 PM EST
    There is alot of planning that goes into an event of this size and the celebrity draw is an important factor. The fact he cancelled will have a significant impact.

    Parent
    Maybe the organizers (5.00 / 1) (#51)
    by andgarden on Thu Apr 21, 2011 at 09:18:59 PM EST
    should "fire" Trump? I sure would.

    Parent
    The event isn't until Sept (none / 0) (#50)
    by nycstray on Thu Apr 21, 2011 at 09:16:27 PM EST
    and they already have Bret Michaels replacing him. I'm sure Trump can find others if need be. JS said he would do it before Trump went off the rails. He has every right not to do the event if the circumstances have changed to something that makes him uncomfortable. Not like he canceled last minute and left them hanging . . .

    Parent
    JS could have withdrawn quietly....... (none / 0) (#54)
    by samsguy18 on Fri Apr 22, 2011 at 06:19:14 AM EST
    Since the event wasn't taking place until September..Instead he had his manager contact the media...

    Parent
    We always complain (none / 0) (#49)
    by NYShooter on Thu Apr 21, 2011 at 09:13:25 PM EST
     that when a public figure is morally compromised by his/her association with the one creating that dilemma, the proper thing to do is resign. That was the case in the Manning affair and the subsequent cries for Hillary to resign.
     My take on Seinfeld's cancellation is that he was truly repulsed by Trump's repugnant, some claim racist, attacks on Barack Obama. It didn't help that when Trump was called on his alleged racism, he answered by referring to African Americans as "the Blacks."

    Personally, I don't think he's a racist, but a loud mouthed, uninformed buffoon, I would agree with.

    When he comes out with crap like billing the Iraqis for "liberating" them, or threatening Libya and Saudi Arabia with "going in and taking it," if they don't increase oil production, or poking a stick in China's eyes with veiled threats and belligerent comments like "they need us more than we need them," it may rile up the Tea Party crazies, but I've had enough of bullies foaming at the mouth and appealing to "guts" instead of brains.

    Trump may very well get the Republican nomination, not that I believe that he wants it, but America doesn't have enough crazies to put him into the White House. And, much as I would love to see Obama challenged, I would hope it would come from the opposite direction of a "Donald."

    Trump may not be a racist personally, (5.00 / 2) (#52)
    by andgarden on Thu Apr 21, 2011 at 09:20:53 PM EST
    but birtherism is unquestionable racist. So at an absolutely minimum, Trump is facilitating racism.

    Parent
    That description applies to many Republican ... (none / 0) (#53)
    by Erehwon on Fri Apr 22, 2011 at 01:40:55 AM EST
    candidates in the past thirty years or more ... grist to the mill ...

    Parent
    And you would think, (none / 0) (#57)
    by NYShooter on Fri Apr 22, 2011 at 07:37:50 AM EST
    after 30 years, they would conclude that "garbage in-garbage out," describes political parties as well as computers.

    Parent
    Insofar (none / 0) (#56)
    by NYShooter on Fri Apr 22, 2011 at 07:33:44 AM EST
     as a large plurality, if not a majority, of the Pea brains Trump is courting fit that bill there's no argument from me.

    Parent
    Why? (none / 0) (#55)
    by mmc9431 on Fri Apr 22, 2011 at 07:23:53 AM EST
    I can't understand why St. Jude would want Trump as a headliner in a charity benefit. He is a contraversial politican at best. For everyone that he would attract, there will be as many that he repels. A charity benefit doesn't need or want to be at the center of the Trump circus.