18 Feb 17
Originally posted by KazetNagorraDifferent than attempting to Sabotage the president.To announce that there must be no criticism of the president, or that we are to stand by the president, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public.
-Theodore Roosevelt
18 Feb 17
Originally posted by EladarOnly a supporter of "the president will not be questioned" such as yourself thinks this is "treason".
http://nypost.com/2017/02/18/obama-linked-activists-have-a-training-manual-for-protesting-trump/
Obama is the first former President who has made it a point to sabotage the sitting President.
Obama really needs to be prosecuted as a traitor.
18 Feb 17
Originally posted by EladarEven if the guy who tried to bring affordable healthcare to all Americans did attack Trump, so what? It's politics.
http://nypost.com/2017/02/18/obama-linked-activists-have-a-training-manual-for-protesting-trump/
Obama is the first former President who has made it a point to sabotage the sitting President.
Obama really needs to be prosecuted as a traitor.
Just grow up.
18 Feb 17
Originally posted by divegeesterPolitical voices should be organic, not planned and trained sabotage.
Even if the guy who tried to bring affordable healthcare to all Americans did attack Trump, so what? It's politics.
Just grow up.
Obama is the first former president who actively undermined the next president.
18 Feb 17
1 edit
Originally posted by divegeester"W" just disappeared and made it a point not to be a critic of Obama because he wanted to have some class.
Even if the guy who tried to bring affordable healthcare to all Americans did attack Trump, so what? It's politics.
Just grow up.
Which political tactic do you find more appealing? Which is more tactical politically?
18 Feb 17
1 edit
Originally posted by whodeyUm, no. Bush was so hated (his approval ratings in 20's) by the time he left, he made it a point to keep a low profile. In fact, W stayed out of the spotlight for so long, news outlets noticed this. You can Google "Bush" and "low profile".
"W" just disappeared and made it a point not to be a critic of Obama because he wanted to have some class.
Which political tactic do you find more appealing? Which is more tactical politically?
In short, Bush's lack of criticism was due to being considered the worst president of all time. He isn't in a position to criticize anyone.
Even so:
http://www.businessinsider.com/george-w-bush-just-sharply-criticized-obama-for-the-first-time-2015-4
on a closed-door Saturday event with Jewish donors, Bush offered his harshest public assessment of President Barack Obama's foreign policy.
Bloomberg's Josh Rogin reported that Bush said Obama had caused the US to "retreat" around the world and that Obama had charted the wrong course in his nuclear negotiations with Iran.
"He also said Obama was misreading Iran's intentions while relaxing sanctions on Tehran too easily," Rogin wrote of Bush's remarks at a Nevada event hosted by the Republican Jewish Coalition. "Bush said that Obama's plan to lift sanctions on Iran with a promise that they could snap back in place at any time was not plausible.
"He also said the deal would be bad for American national security in the long term: 'You think the Middle East is chaotic now? Imagine what it looks like for our grandchildren. That's how Americans should view the deal.'"
Bush further criticized Obama for pulling US troops out of Iraq too quickly in 2011, though Obama has insisted his hands were tied on the matter.
18 Feb 17
Originally posted by vivifyhttp://www.cnn.com/2013/07/04/politics/bush-president-relationships/
Um, no. Bush was so hated (his approval ratings in 20's) by the time he left, he made it a point to keep a low profile. In fact, W stayed out of the spotlight for so long, news outlets noticed this. You can Google "Bush" and "low profile".
In short, Bush's lack of criticism was due to being considered the worst president of all time. He isn't in a po ...[text shortened]... f Iraq too quickly in 2011, though Obama has insisted his hands were tied on the matter.[/quote]
Do you consider cnn a fake news site?