Every few days, at least once a week, I see headlines about something outrageous Trump has said. Until recently my reaction tended to go like this:
1) Gosh, that sounds bad.
2) I wonder if he actually said it.
3) I will look for the transcript or the tweet and learn the truth.
Two months ago, I wrote a post condemning the way journalists distort Trump’s words. At least one commenter (who hasn’t been heard from since) seemed to take this as a defense of Trump, but it wasn’t. It was an objection to the press making a bad situation worse by making Trump look even worse than he actually is: pouring gasoline on an already dangerous fire. From that post:
I do care about the transformation of most of the national press into a weapon for [Trump’s] enemies, because it means that the institutions which are supposed to inform us, and are always eager to preen themselves upon their own importance, have more or less abandoned that duty where domestic politics is concerned.
Well, that was a happier time, a time when I was naive enough to think that the distinction between “true” and “false” could make much difference in the level of rage consuming our politics. Now my reaction to the latest Awful Trump story is:
1) Gosh, that sounds bad.
2) I wonder if he actually said it.
3) Oh, who gives a ****?
It doesn’t matter. Trump haters don’t care whether he actually said it or not. Trump lovers, if they care, will assume the reports are false. Both will probably soon forget about it, but their anger will have been pumped up a bit further, and the cold civil war will get hotter.
By the way: I made the first notes for this post last weekend, prompted by that moment’s outrage. Today, when I sat down to complete it, I had to stop and think to recall what the outrage had been about. I’d be surprised if you remember (looking it up doesn’t count).
Light On Dark Water 
Leave a reply to Stu Cancel reply