TRUMP ridicules GW Bush's thousand points of light...

[Billy_Kinetta]

good , happy to see the TRUMP go after the 'bush's' .

Why?

Maybe because they're globalist bastards that..grand-daddy funded the Nazis, Son stripped American's rights, and grandson had thousands of good, American boys killed for personal purposes.

And as bad as they were, the whack-job alternatives presented in 2000 and 2004 would have been completely disastrous.

 

[Biff_Poindexter]

‘So uncalled for’: George W. Bush’s former press secretary chides Trump for mocking ‘thousand points of light’


By John WagnerJuly 6 at 7:15 AMEmail the author

Ari Fleischer

✔@AriFleischer

This is so uncalled for. Going after a 94-year-old, former President’s promotion of volunteerism. I don’t mind potus being a fighter. I do mind him being rude.
Jeff Zeleny

✔@jeffzeleny

In Montana, Trump takes a strange swipe at @GeorgeHWBush: “Thousand points of light. What does that mean? I know one thing. Make America Great Again we understand. Putting America first we understand. Thousand points of light, I never quite got that one. What the hell is that?”
8:44 PM - Jul 5, 2018

• 
  
• 
  
• 4,442
  • 4,128 people are talking about this
  
  

Twitter Ads info and privacy
Trump took aim at the slogan used by the 41st president, George H.W. Bush, during a freewheeling speech Thursday in which he also joked about the #MeToo movement, renewed questions about the heritage of Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) and derided the intelligence of Rep. Maxine Waters (D-Calif.)....
‘So uncalled for’: George W. Bush’s former press secretary chides Trump for mocking ‘thousand points of light’

I agree with Trump -- what is that?
Keep it simple -- that is why the Bushes were and will always be losers

Never supported them, never will --- wonder why so many Trump lovers were such big Bush supporters

--------------------------------simply because people learn or notice things at different times and at different speeds and paces is my guess . I probably voted 'ghwb' but the end of my voting 'bush' or 'repub' came when 'gwb' was running for his second term and then i didn't vote for 'gwb' Biff .

The more realistic reason is because people worship power and will carry water for whoever the Top D or R is at the time

Some lend themselves to being more cultish than others -- what we are witnessing with this current iteration of cultish GOP voters is something they won't be able to disavow themselves from later

 

[Marion Morrison]

good , happy to see the TRUMP go after the 'bush's' .

Why?

Maybe because they're globalist bastards that..grand-daddy funded the Nazis, Son stripped American's rights, and grandson had thousands of good, American boys killed for personal purposes.

And as bad as they were, the whack-job alternatives presented in 2000 and 2004 would have been completely disastrous.

Who were those again? I voted for Perot 1 time. He knew his stuff. I voted for Obama, too. He talked a good game that 1st round. Did not deliver, not at all. IMO, the 2nd time, he just just voter-frauded the whole election, but probably still have would have won, anyways. Not by as much.

 

[amethyst]

The bush, clinton, and Obama era got us to the mess trump is fixing.

 

[Biff_Poindexter]

It’s so hilarious to see President Trump speak a few words and seconds later the regressive left are defending Bush.

Last I recall, both Bushes were the devil incarnate during their presidencies. The left truly has no moral or ethical compass.

and republicans said anyone who opposed George W was a terrorist and hated America --- remember that bullshit?

 

[Biff_Poindexter]

Babs considered Slick Willy another son of hers....Herbert Walker openly admitted he voted for Hillary... Dubya invaded Iraq because Saddam tried to assassinate his father....it's about time somebody called out the Bush family for what they are.

How come no republicans were saying that back when they were fearmongering us into a war??

 

[dave p]

It’s so hilarious to see President Trump speak a few words and seconds later the regressive left are defending Bush.

Last I recall, both Bushes were the devil incarnate during their presidencies. The left truly has no moral or ethical compass.

and republicans said anyone who opposed George W was a terrorist and hated America --- remember that bullshit?

Not all Republicans said that.

 

[rightwinger]

The concept of a thousand points of light is above Trumps intellectual paygrade

Trump admitted that last night

 

[Biff_Poindexter]

It’s so hilarious to see President Trump speak a few words and seconds later the regressive left are defending Bush.

Last I recall, both Bushes were the devil incarnate during their presidencies. The left truly has no moral or ethical compass.

and republicans said anyone who opposed George W was a terrorist and hated America --- remember that bullshit?

Not all Republicans said that.

lol @ not all republicans said that

that is a very weak deflection from the fact that the official GOP position thru all of the bush years was to demonize anyone who disagreed with the Iraq War -- including calling a war vet-amputee (Max Cleeland) the same as Bin Laden in a GOP paid for campaign ad

This WILL NOT be one of those times republicans get to revise history.

 

[dave p]

It’s so hilarious to see President Trump speak a few words and seconds later the regressive left are defending Bush.

Last I recall, both Bushes were the devil incarnate during their presidencies. The left truly has no moral or ethical compass.

and republicans said anyone who opposed George W was a terrorist and hated America --- remember that bullshit?

Not all Republicans said that.

lol @ not all republicans said that

that is a very weak deflection from the fact that the official GOP position thru all of the bush years was to demonize anyone who disagreed with the Iraq War -- including calling a war vet-amputee (Max Cleeland) the same as Bin Laden in a GOP paid for campaign ad

This WILL NOT be one of those times republicans get to revise history.

I am not trying to reverse history, merely trying to be accurate. When you say Republicans, you imply all. That is the problem when you generalize, you skew the conversation and inject falsehoods. Its the same when someone says Democrats. The best way to say it is " most Republicans" or " most Democrats."

 

[amethyst]

The concept is a thousand points of light is above Trumps intellectual paygrade

Trump admitted that last night

A thousand points of light did NOT:

create millions of jobs,
make the VA accountable with immediate care for vets
Seek peace with russia and Korea
Lower taxes for corporations so they can compete globally
Support law enforcement and those that secure the border
Keep immigration in check

Trump has a right to slap any president that didn't put Americans first.

 

[Biff_Poindexter]

It’s so hilarious to see President Trump speak a few words and seconds later the regressive left are defending Bush.

Last I recall, both Bushes were the devil incarnate during their presidencies. The left truly has no moral or ethical compass.

and republicans said anyone who opposed George W was a terrorist and hated America --- remember that bullshit?

Not all Republicans said that.

lol @ not all republicans said that

that is a very weak deflection from the fact that the official GOP position thru all of the bush years was to demonize anyone who disagreed with the Iraq War -- including calling a war vet-amputee (Max Cleeland) the same as Bin Laden in a GOP paid for campaign ad

This WILL NOT be one of those times republicans get to revise history.

I am not trying to reverse history, merely trying to be accurate. When you say Republicans, you imply all. That is the problem when you generalize, you skew the conversation and inject falsehoods. Its the same when someone says Democrats. The best way to say it is " most Republicans" or " most Democrats."

No, you harp on the "not all republicans" thing because you can't refute my underlying point -- the discourse was changed forever during the Bush years because of republicans willingness to paint anyone who dissented from the neo-con narrative of the Iraq war as being terrorist traitors..

Let me recap a couple, since memory is like kryptonite so some:

When Senator Daschle expressed mild concerns about the over-reaching powers of the Patriot Act -- this was the GOP response "Daschle's divisive comments have the effect of giving aid and comfort to our enemies by allowing them to exploit divisions in our country."

When John Murtha said that the strategy has to be changed in Iraq or we risk losing the war, the GOP response "Democrats are basically giving aid and comfort to the enemy putting American lives at risk."

Over and over again, any time you spoke out against the patriot Act, against the war strategy, against the new multiple agencies being created such as DHS, ICE, etc -- the GOP response was always to accuse them of being on the side of terrorists -- so its easy to come back years later after the history is clear that dissent was justified, after your own president has trashed Bush like a sport -- its easy to Now say "not all republicans agreed with bush" -- courage would have been to have said it then

 

[dave p]

Last I recall, both Bushes were the devil incarnate during their presidencies. The left truly has no moral or ethical compass.

and republicans said anyone who opposed George W was a terrorist and hated America --- remember that bullshit?

Not all Republicans said that.

lol @ not all republicans said that

that is a very weak deflection from the fact that the official GOP position thru all of the bush years was to demonize anyone who disagreed with the Iraq War -- including calling a war vet-amputee (Max Cleeland) the same as Bin Laden in a GOP paid for campaign ad

This WILL NOT be one of those times republicans get to revise history.

I am not trying to reverse history, merely trying to be accurate. When you say Republicans, you imply all. That is the problem when you generalize, you skew the conversation and inject falsehoods. Its the same when someone says Democrats. The best way to say it is " most Republicans" or " most Democrats."

No, you harp on the "not all republicans" thing because you can't refute my underlying point -- the discourse was changed forever during the Bush years because of republicans willingness to paint anyone who dissented from the neo-con narrative of the Iraq war as being terrorist traitors..

Let me recap a couple, since memory is like kryptonite so some:

When Senator Daschle expressed mild concerns about the over-reaching powers of the Patriot Act -- this was the GOP response "Daschle's divisive comments have the effect of giving aid and comfort to our enemies by allowing them to exploit divisions in our country."

When John Murtha said that the strategy has to be changed in Iraq or we risk losing the war, the GOP response "Democrats are basically giving aid and comfort to the enemy putting American lives at risk."

Over and over again, any time you spoke out against the patriot Act, against the war strategy, against the new multiple agencies being created such as DHS, ICE, etc -- the GOP response was always to accuse them of being on the side of terrorists -- so its easy to come back years later after the history is clear that dissent was justified, after your own president has trashed Bush like a sport -- its easy to then say "not all republicans agreed with bush"

I guess comprehension isn't one of you skills. I said not all because not all said those things. Period end of story.

You should get off your high horse and be civil and realize that I was simply pointing out the error in how you stated something.

 

[Biff_Poindexter]

It’s so hilarious to see President Trump speak a few words and seconds later the regressive left are defending Bush.

Last I recall, both Bushes were the devil incarnate during their presidencies. The left truly has no moral or ethical compass.

and republicans said anyone who opposed George W was a terrorist and hated America --- remember that bullshit?

Not all Republicans said that.

lol @ not all republicans said that

that is a very weak deflection from the fact that the official GOP position thru all of the bush years was to demonize anyone who disagreed with the Iraq War -- including calling a war vet-amputee (Max Cleeland) the same as Bin Laden in a GOP paid for campaign ad

This WILL NOT be one of those times republicans get to revise history.

I am not trying to reverse history, merely trying to be accurate. When you say Republicans, you imply all. That is the problem when you generalize, you skew the conversation and inject falsehoods. Its the same when someone says Democrats. The best way to say it is " most Republicans" or " most Democrats."

My apologies if I seem harsh -- it is not my intent

...but for things to really change in this country -- we have to stop this habit of having selective amnesia -- that goes for both sides

...but when it came to the Obama years -- it takes quite a bit of pretzel twisting to claim Obama spoke the same type of divisive rhetoric that Trump does...can you imagine if Obama said Bush's family funded Nazis in any of his campaign speeches -- or mocked McCain as a fake war hero because he was a POW during a presidential debate?

 

[Biff_Poindexter]

and republicans said anyone who opposed George W was a terrorist and hated America --- remember that bullshit?

Not all Republicans said that.

lol @ not all republicans said that

that is a very weak deflection from the fact that the official GOP position thru all of the bush years was to demonize anyone who disagreed with the Iraq War -- including calling a war vet-amputee (Max Cleeland) the same as Bin Laden in a GOP paid for campaign ad

This WILL NOT be one of those times republicans get to revise history.

I am not trying to reverse history, merely trying to be accurate. When you say Republicans, you imply all. That is the problem when you generalize, you skew the conversation and inject falsehoods. Its the same when someone says Democrats. The best way to say it is " most Republicans" or " most Democrats."

No, you harp on the "not all republicans" thing because you can't refute my underlying point -- the discourse was changed forever during the Bush years because of republicans willingness to paint anyone who dissented from the neo-con narrative of the Iraq war as being terrorist traitors..

Let me recap a couple, since memory is like kryptonite so some:

When Senator Daschle expressed mild concerns about the over-reaching powers of the Patriot Act -- this was the GOP response "Daschle's divisive comments have the effect of giving aid and comfort to our enemies by allowing them to exploit divisions in our country."

When John Murtha said that the strategy has to be changed in Iraq or we risk losing the war, the GOP response "Democrats are basically giving aid and comfort to the enemy putting American lives at risk."

Over and over again, any time you spoke out against the patriot Act, against the war strategy, against the new multiple agencies being created such as DHS, ICE, etc -- the GOP response was always to accuse them of being on the side of terrorists -- so its easy to come back years later after the history is clear that dissent was justified, after your own president has trashed Bush like a sport -- its easy to then say "not all republicans agreed with bush"

I guess comprehension isn't one of you skills. I said not all because not all said those things. Period end of story.

You should get off your high horse and be civil and realize that I was simply pointing out the error in how you stated something.

You can keep on harping on to the "not all" disclaimer as much as you wish -- anyone with sense would know that when people speak about republicans/democrats they are not saying every single one does it--but no party does anything that they don't feel the OVERWHELMING MAJORITY of their party won't support

 

[dave p]

Last I recall, both Bushes were the devil incarnate during their presidencies. The left truly has no moral or ethical compass.

and republicans said anyone who opposed George W was a terrorist and hated America --- remember that bullshit?

Not all Republicans said that.

lol @ not all republicans said that

that is a very weak deflection from the fact that the official GOP position thru all of the bush years was to demonize anyone who disagreed with the Iraq War -- including calling a war vet-amputee (Max Cleeland) the same as Bin Laden in a GOP paid for campaign ad

This WILL NOT be one of those times republicans get to revise history.

I am not trying to reverse history, merely trying to be accurate. When you say Republicans, you imply all. That is the problem when you generalize, you skew the conversation and inject falsehoods. Its the same when someone says Democrats. The best way to say it is " most Republicans" or " most Democrats."

My apologies if I seem harsh -- it is not my intent

...but for things to really change in this country -- we have to stop this habit of having selective amnesia -- that goes for both sides

...but when it came to the Obama years -- it takes quite a bit of pretzel twisting to claim Obama spoke the same type of divisive rhetoric that Trump does...can you imagine if Obama said Bush's family funded Nazis in any of his campaign speeches -- or mocked McCain as a fake war hero because he was a POW during a presidential debate?

I agree that both sides need to be civil and less antagonistic. I am not here to say nor have I ever compared the Obama years to the trump years or any other administration to another. I am here in the present and looking how to move forward. My statement was meant to show how a word or lack of a word could help create misunderstanding.

Thank you.

 

[pismoe]

Other posters make good points but for ME the 'bushs' are a buncha 'pwicks' and thats all of them male or female , young and old and mostly thats just an OPINION of mine . Anyway , for me , i realized when i realized [whenever that was] that the 'bushs' , 'jebito' in particular were a bunch of mexican - latino - hispanic immigration lovers looking to change the ethnic makeup of the USA . 'jebito' would then take advantage of the imported 'mexican' vote that his Father and Brother imported into the USA by showing off his entire 'mexican' family from his wife to his kids . To me , this is the issue that makes me dislike the 'bushs' Biff and DaveP .

 

[rightwinger]

The concept is a thousand points of light is above Trumps intellectual paygrade

Trump admitted that last night

A thousand points of light did NOT:

create millions of jobs,
make the VA accountable with immediate care for vets
Seek peace with russia and Korea
Lower taxes for corporations so they can compete globally
Support law enforcement and those that secure the border
Keep immigration in check

Trump has a right to slap any president that didn't put Americans first.

Bush 41 actually was a vet and a war hero
Bush negotiated peace with the USSR
Bush actually sought to tear down walls not build them
Bush saved Kuwait

 

[Indeependent]

The concept is a thousand points of light is above Trumps intellectual paygrade

Trump admitted that last night

A thousand points of light did NOT:

create millions of jobs,
make the VA accountable with immediate care for vets
Seek peace with russia and Korea
Lower taxes for corporations so they can compete globally
Support law enforcement and those that secure the border
Keep immigration in check

Trump has a right to slap any president that didn't put Americans first.

Bush 41 actually was a vet and a war hero
Bush negotiated peace with the USSR
Bush actually sought to tear down walls not build them
Bush saved Kuwait

Fuck all Bushes.
You’ll love everyone Trump hates, you hypocrite.

 

[Nia88]

It’s so hilarious to see President Trump speak a few words and seconds later the regressive left are defending Bush.

And those few words have such venom. I have no love for Bush Sr. He was just as bad as his son when he was president.

But the man is in a freaking wheel chair and his wife just died. There’s something called tact and empathy. Which clearly Trump and his supporters lack.