Hmm. This is a matter of interpretation, and yours may or may not be accurate. At the time, I thought that Carson had been confused by the way that sound does and does not travel in such places (I have had a LITTLE experience going on and off stages, and unless they actually practice the people under realistic conditions, things can get confusing).

Trump COULD have been hanging out with Carson because he was being nice, but he could also simply wanted to be the last to come to the stage. He has certainly shown that he is a strong believer in using every bit of staging he can, to win his points.

presidents veto bills

and make difficult choices


----- happened to bush, with a couple of shoe throwing incidents




------ called bush a monkey, and his daughters drunken sluts




---- he should have just put it out when he ran the first time, nobody would have said anything..




-------- happened to bush


not sure what this has to do with anything... Reagan was shot....




---- kinda reaching now...



and this happened to bush...





and on,and on, and on



RESTRAINT

I am interested in when these things happened to BUSH,,

IF they happened,, where can I find the report?

I am speaking in regards to AMERICANS and his AMERICAN colleagues in government,,,,


when did they yell out liar during congressional hearings?
was Reagan shot INSIDE the white house?
who accused Bush of 'shuckin and jivn"?

try google, and don't say it didn't happen, because you were one of those liberals that was saying them...

I am not now nor have I ever been a presidential COLLEAGUE or member of the American press


and its not my job to research someone elses caim,,,or to back it up

not sure what your point is about Reagan... neither of those two "fence jumpers" had a gun, and was released soon after... so obarry was never in ANY danger...

and you know damn well they called bush every name in the book while he was in office, so quit trying to think that Idiot thats in there now has a rough time of anything... he's getting the same treatment, if not better, than bush ever did...

your liberalness is way to blind, i'm done trying to talk with someone that will not see any kind of reality... if you've already forgot how bad bush was treated while in office, then i'm not your teacher, just live in that stupid liberal, lying lifestyle you're so proud of...

my point is a previously highly secured HOME for whatever standing potus and potus family we had was penetrated not once, but twice somehow

my point is our sitting presidents have previously not been shown the direct disrespect (colleagues wagging fingers in their face), or had their still minor children personally attacked, or been critiqued by the press with racially charged terms (why would a mostly white press choose racially charged terms against a fellow white citizen?)

yet, through it all, the President keeps his cool

he doesn't respond with childish insults about their looks, or their disability, or their female issues, or narcissistic boasts of how much money he has or how pretty his women are


that's Class like a President should have, not the tacky schoolyard behavior of Donald

come now, don't succumb to the lazy thinking

'fighting lazy thought is the lifestyle I'm proud of'

'I never stated other presidents weren't treated 'bad',,,I said that this President shows restraint,,ie CLASS, when dealing with some of the UNIQUE types of disrespectful, ie 'bad treatment' he has received



whereas Trump, carries himself like the spoiled teenager with a silver spoon whose daddy contributed the most to the school who can therefore be as big an ARSE to others as he wishes while hiding behind the misplaced badge of 'honesty' and 'trustworthiness' because he doesn't have to be concerned with real consequences to those words or actions

blah, blah, blah... you're like the teacher on Charlie Brown...

brilliant non response

ID say IM used to that about 60 percent of the time in these threads



but I still hang around for that other 40 percent to have respectful conversation and debate with

blah, blah, blah... pat yourself on the back....
if you can't remember what was going on during Bush's time in office, there's no respect, no debate... just more liberal nonsense

Turns out the guy "Yelling liar" was right after all.

i'll give you the standard liberal response: PROVE IT...

oh, BTW, you're wanting everyone else to post links to support their claims, where is your links? everything you posted could be a bunch of hogwash to begin with, so the arguing could just be a liberal spin...

Actually, no, he wasn't.

The main problem he had, was that all members of Congress are supposed to conduct themselves in a certain respectful manner, specifically in order to maintain the respect of the people and of the world, for the United States itself.

By choosing to be an emotionally undisciplined child as he did, that particular congressman acted against the United States itself, regardless of his intentions.

Similar to how the members of Congress who went directly to Iran, and interfered with negotiations there, by telling the Iranians that they would see to it that any agreements made in the name of the United States, regardless of how lawfully they were arrived at, would be discarded.

They were traitors to United States interests as well, again regardless of WHY they did as they did.

They should all have been at least sanctioned by the rest of Congress.

liberals hate the truth..and other peoples opinions..

here is DT's thoughts on GW and the republicans...

There was an uninvited guest onstage Saturday night at the latest and most brutal Republican presidential debate: George W. Bush.

The focus on Bush 43's legacy signals a big problem for the GOP. Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), who declared in a prior debate that he missed the bygone president, pronounced W the winner last night. But no matter how much Jeb Bush defended his brother, or Marco Rubio came to the former president's aid, that Bush's legacy abruptly became a question at all, at this very late date, dealt the establishment a potentially crippling blow.

Yes, the establishment — there's that word again, used advisedly but of necessity. For what was supposed to be more established a fact in the Republican Party but that George W. Bush — at a bare, bare minimum — was the right man in office on Sept. 11? Yet here was Donald Trump, naked in a way few have really seen him before, slamming home the message again and again: W messed up. He hurt the party. And he hurt the country.

"The World Trade Center came down during the reign of George Bush," Trump growled. "He kept us safe? That is not safe." Technically true, but, as is so often the case with Trump, the details came second to theme, and the theme went far beyond 9/11 or the gasps and boos Trump's comments brought. Trump slapped W on Iraq, too. "The war in Iraq was a big, fat mistake. They lied," he said of Dubya's administration. "They said there were weapons of mass destruction. There were none."

Leave aside the particulars. (Saddam's men, ruled by fear and deceit, habitually lied and believed lies about their own WMD and other special weapons.) Trump's eye-popping broadsides against the Bush administration far exceeded some kind of coming-out party as a Democrat. Nor were they animated by a longing to merely belittle Jeb Bush or exact juvenile revenge. Rather, they were illustrative of the sweeping but specific theme of Trump's night and his campaign, revealed with typical deadpan cockiness in his closing remarks.

"Politicians are all talk, no action."

But wait, you say. George W. Bush took lots of action!

"You've seen where they've taken you to," Trump says. "We are [at a budget of] 19 trillion dollars right now […]. We need a very big change." Because, of course, "we don't win anymore."

Vacuous, you say. Pablum.

But consider the logic within. In a culture where "politics" has become an echo chamber — a vain hall of mirrors installed by the worship of rhetoric and self-regard — true politics, the art and science of victory, is dead. The kinds of action that arise from a corrupt political culture, from the corrupted idea that politics is a game of semiotics first, are, therefore, also corrupted: fake actions, actions without integrity, actions born to lose.

Trump is saying that, under George W. Bush, the Republican Party allowed its understanding of politics to be corrupted. For whatever reason, under Bush, the GOP became a party that let self-aware rhetorical posturing dictate the way policy was formulated. The result was failure across the board. Worst of all was the ensuing failure of memory as Republicans forgot the winning arts and sciences. In so doing, they enabled America to lose its way in the hall of mirrors — and lose its greatness.

This is a dagger to the heart of the Bush legacy.

But Trump is not just running against Bushism. He's running against what it's a symptom of — the certain kind of insider sophistry that he says defines the political class. That's why he was onstage at all last night. That's why he's in first place now. And that's why he's more at home in the GOP than so many want to admit.

To understand how that could possibly be, understand what he's not arguing.

The typical critique of politics today is that the ruling class has been corrupted by privilege. There's too much money in politics; there's too much of a cult of access; the tropes go on and on. Trump's not saying that. Instead, he's saying, the ruling class has been corrupted by foolishness. The problem isn't that "the politicians" have vanished behind the velvet rope. It's that they've vanished up their own rear ends. Obsessed with themselves, they have forgotten who they are. They have lost their way — and ours.

Hard as it is to stomach or say, that is a kind of wisdom so deep, so populist, and so potent that many conservatives can't help but flutter toward it. Then again, neither can many moderate or liberal Republicans, which is why Trump performs well across all groups.

To be sure, in some ways Trump is a dreadful messenger for this dreadful message. Then again, watching him up work up there like a Soviet wrestler, it's clear this man is not riding a fad or indulging a fantasy. An immense physical and mental strain is involved in hitting his fellow candidates — hungry, disciplined men — on issue after issue. He is delivering an intense message that no one else has proven capable of delivering with the requisite intensity: a shocking insight, when you pause to think about it, but for the fact that in this election year, nothing can shock anymore.

http://www.theweek.com/articles/606035/why-donald-trumps-vicious-attack-george-w-bush-brutally-effective--brilliant

Still unable to argue directly to the point?

I take that as admission you were wrong.

The Republicans pointedly ignored the Constitution. Dishonorable in the extreme, to say the least.

lol... think what you want...