Guest shiloh357 Posted October 20, 2017 Share Posted October 20, 2017 2 minutes ago, Butero said: I don't think that President Trump has former President Bush mad at him anymore than he may have already been. I don't know if you remember, but during the campaign, Trump said Bush didn't keep us safe and referred to 9-11. He said a lot of things during the campaign in order to win that angered his political opponents. I really think the former President has moved past that. What is taking place is you are seeing differences of opinion over globalism verses nationalism. It was his Father that mentioned the new world order. The former President is seeing us move away from that and back towards nationalism, and he doesn't agree with it. I have always been a nationalist. I was a supporter of Patrick Buchanan before Trump, and voted for him in the GOP Primaries in 1992 and 1996. I preferred him when he ran for President on the Reform Party in 2000, but knew he couldn't win so I wound up voting for Bush to stop Gore. As far as the speech goes, I am not worried about veiled anything. If he isn't going to come out and mention Trump by name, but only insinuate things, I will just ignore him. I am looking at two visions for this nation's future, one towards globalism and one towards nationalism. I am on the side of nationalism. Former Presidents making speeches won't have any real influence on anyone. It just helps endear them to fellow establishment politicians and globalists. It goes back to something I said in another thread. We are all being forced to take sides. I am clearly taking the side of standing with other America First patriots over the New World Order. Well not only that but the way he went after Jeb Bush had an effect. Jeb was the GoP favorite. He was supposed to win. The GoP had picked him to be the nominee and were it not for Trump, Jeb would have been the GoP nominee in the General Election and we would have Hillary for president. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Butero Posted October 20, 2017 Share Posted October 20, 2017 Just now, shiloh357 said: Well not only that but the way he went after Jeb Bush had an effect. Jeb was the GoP favorite. He was supposed to win. The GoP had picked him to be the nominee and were it not for Trump, Jeb would have been the GoP nominee in the General Election and we would have Hillary for president. That is a good point. Jeb Bush was supposed to be the nominee and they had a plan in place to have him be the last man standing. They didn't count on Trump. I am not so sure Hillary would have beaten him, though, when you look at the electoral map, she may have. Bush wouldn't have won in Pennsylvania, Michigan and Wisconsin, because he had a different message. Either way, we would have had a left wing Democrat or a wishy-washy globalist in the White House if not for Trump and we would have continued moving in the wrong direction. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest shiloh357 Posted October 20, 2017 Share Posted October 20, 2017 Just now, Butero said: That is a good point. Jeb Bush was supposed to be the nominee and they had a plan in place to have him be the last man standing. They didn't count on Trump. I am not so sure Hillary would have beaten him, though, when you look at the electoral map, she may have. Bush wouldn't have won in Pennsylvania, Michigan and Wisconsin, because he had a different message. Either way, we would have had a left wing Democrat or a wishy-washy globalist in the White House if not for Trump and we would have continued moving in the wrong direction. Bush could not have withstood the kind of attacks that CNN and the media established launched on Clinton's behalf against Trump the last three weeks before election day. Trump is a tank and the parade of women claiming to have been raped or molested by Trump stopped the minute Trump said he was going to prosecute over defamation. Trump withstood the barrage of media attacks that would have sunk any of the other Gop candidates. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LadyKay Posted October 20, 2017 Group: Royal Member Followers: 12 Topic Count: 385 Topics Per Day: 0.10 Content Count: 7,692 Content Per Day: 1.93 Reputation: 4,809 Days Won: 3 Joined: 05/28/2013 Status: Offline Share Posted October 20, 2017 22 minutes ago, Butero said: I don't think that President Trump has former President Bush mad at him anymore than he may have already been. I don't know if you remember, but during the campaign, Trump said Bush didn't keep us safe and referred to 9-11. He said a lot of things during the campaign in order to win that angered his political opponents. I really think the former President has moved past that. What is taking place is you are seeing differences of opinion over globalism verses nationalism. It was his Father that mentioned the new world order. The former President is seeing us move away from that and back towards nationalism, and he doesn't agree with it. I have always been a nationalist. I was a supporter of Patrick Buchanan before Trump, and voted for him in the GOP Primaries in 1992 and 1996. I preferred him when he ran for President on the Reform Party in 2000, but knew he couldn't win so I wound up voting for Bush to stop Gore. As far as the speech goes, I am not worried about veiled anything. If he isn't going to come out and mention Trump by name, but only insinuate things, I will just ignore him. I am looking at two visions for this nation's future, one towards globalism and one towards nationalism. I am on the side of nationalism. Former Presidents making speeches won't have any real influence on anyone. It just helps endear them to fellow establishment politicians and globalists. It goes back to something I said in another thread. We are all being forced to take sides. I am clearly taking the side of standing with other America First patriots over the New World Order. I just don't recall ever see such things before. The siting president running down a former president. A former president talking badly about a sitting president. My what interesting times we are living in. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SavedByGrace1981 Posted October 20, 2017 Group: Royal Member Followers: 6 Topic Count: 104 Topics Per Day: 0.02 Content Count: 2,923 Content Per Day: 0.61 Reputation: 462 Days Won: 2 Joined: 04/02/2011 Status: Offline Birthday: 03/22/1953 Share Posted October 20, 2017 9 minutes ago, LadyKay said: I just don't recall ever see such things before. The siting president running down a former president. A former president talking badly about a sitting president. My what interesting times we are living in. A NY Times article from 10 years ago: When Former Presidents Assail the Chief Blessings, -Ed Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LadyKay Posted October 20, 2017 Group: Royal Member Followers: 12 Topic Count: 385 Topics Per Day: 0.10 Content Count: 7,692 Content Per Day: 1.93 Reputation: 4,809 Days Won: 3 Joined: 05/28/2013 Status: Offline Share Posted October 20, 2017 4 hours ago, shiloh357 said: No, it is true of those who dishonestly criticize Trump, as occurs regularly on this board. I'm not sure how criticism can be dishonest. If I don't like something someone said or the way someone did something and I say so, that is criticism. The only way I would could be dishonest is if I really did like what someone did or said but I say other wise. So far with me that has not been the case. So no. I am not being dishonest about my criticism of Trump on this forum. I really do say what I am feeling. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Butero Posted October 20, 2017 Share Posted October 20, 2017 2 hours ago, LadyKay said: I just don't recall ever see such things before. The siting president running down a former president. A former president talking badly about a sitting president. My what interesting times we are living in. I know I am a bit older than you, so I have seen a lot of interesting things over the years. I saw a President forced to resign while facing the threat of impeachment, and his Vice President that was never elected take office. The former VP had already resigned. I saw a virtually unknown Congressman from Georgia become President, followed by an actor turned California Governor who was once a Democrat. I saw a man elected in large part because of a third party candidate taking away votes from the incumbent. I saw that man impeached and disbarred by a judge he had appointed because of perjury, yet remain in office. I saw two Presidents win while losing the popular vote but winning the electoral college vote. I saw the Supreme Court have to be brought into an election because the loser tried to manufacture votes to win. I have seen two women get the nomination of Vice President from a major party, only to lose, followed by the first woman to get the nomination for President of a major party who also lost, when she was said to be a lock. I witnessed the first Indonesian born man rise to become President, who has yet to prove his eligibility. He presented a phony birth certificate, and everyone knows it was phony. It had the wrong hospital name on it for the time he was born. I have seen the media come out of the closet and show themselves for the propagandists they are, even admitting they were working to defeat Donald Trump. They justified their actions by saying he was unfit. The bottom line is that having a President criticized by a former President of his own party, and having him criticize the former President of his own party in return is not that big of a deal in comparison to things in the past. We had a President give us a Surgeon General whose main emphasis was on something I can't talk about here, and had a President put condoms on a holiday tree that was known in the past as a Christmas tree. I learned about things we can do with cigars I never thought of and even discovered a new phrase called a "Lewinsky." The stuff happening now is not that big of a deal. You have an anti-establishment candidate winning, and the establishment is threatened, so they criticize him. Not much to see here in comparison to things in the past. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Butero Posted October 20, 2017 Share Posted October 20, 2017 1 hour ago, LadyKay said: I'm not sure how criticism can be dishonest. If I don't like something someone said or the way someone did something and I say so, that is criticism. The only way I would could be dishonest is if I really did like what someone did or said but I say other wise. So far with me that has not been the case. So no. I am not being dishonest about my criticism of Trump on this forum. I really do say what I am feeling. I am not speaking of you, but in general terms. The way one can be dishonest in their criticism is by making things up, exaggerating things, or flat out lying. They can really dislike Trump but be dishonest. Some people have been guilty or such things. I want to thank you for that comment about seeing things you have never seen before. It got me thinking back on past administrations. I had forgotten what a running soap opera the Clinton administration was. The stuff that was going on was disgusting, yet Democrats kept defending him. It didn't matter what he did. That has come back to bite them today, because it has made Trump immune from almost anything. He could do almost anything, and we would fight his removal because of Bill Clinton. There was one scandal after another the entire time he was in office. With Trump, it is mostly about his behavior and his past. Big deal! The Russian stuff is all made up, and most are getting sick of hearing about it. Just one other thought. I have often times wondered if George W Bush would have ever been President had Clinton been removed. Think about it. Gore would have become President, and would have been the incumbent going into 2000, likely with good will from the American people. I believe that he would have had an easier time winning that election as an incumbent than as the Vice President. I really think the Democrats hurt themselves, but there is no way to know for sure. Since Gore lost, Clinton remaining President was likely a blessing in disguise. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest shiloh357 Posted October 20, 2017 Share Posted October 20, 2017 1 hour ago, LadyKay said: I'm not sure how criticism can be dishonest. Like calling him mentally ill when it isn't true. Calling him a racist when it isn't true. When any mistake Trump makes is treated like the stupidest mistake in the world, even though it is a common error made by other presidents and is never criticized in the same manner. When Trump is legally prohibited from keeping a campaign promise, but his critics treat it as if Trump is unwilling to keep it, and then is called a liar for not keeping it. When he is blamed from Congress refusing to do their job. Those are just a few examples of dishonest and might I say, unfair, criticism. Quote If I don't like something someone said or the way someone did something and I say so, that is criticism. The only way I would could be dishonest is if I really did like what someone did or said but I say other wise. No, I have explained above what I mean by dishonest criticism. Quote So far with me that has not been the case. So no. I am not being dishonest about my criticism of Trump on this forum. I really do say what I am feeling. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ayin jade Posted October 20, 2017 Group: Worthy Ministers Followers: 44 Topic Count: 6,178 Topics Per Day: 0.88 Content Count: 43,795 Content Per Day: 6.20 Reputation: 11,243 Days Won: 58 Joined: 01/03/2005 Status: Offline Share Posted October 20, 2017 7 hours ago, LadyKay said: I just don't recall ever see such things before. The siting president running down a former president. A former president talking badly about a sitting president. My what interesting times we are living in. Really? While it was customary for a former president to stay out of things, this bit with obama and bush going after trump is just part of the overall establishment attacking trump. However obama in his inaugural address as president attacked bush. Throughout the obama years, bush got blamed a whole bunch of times. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2009/jan/21/obama-inauguration-speech Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts