Skip to main content

Jeb can't have it both ways...

I've found the Donald Trump-Jeb Bush Twitter debate oddly amusing. Perhaps I find it sadly humorous that two 60+-year-old men running for president would engage in such a juvenile discussion, or I'm just easily entertained.

For anyone who hasn't heard about this back-and-forth among the two Republican candidates, it started with Donald Trump's criticism of Jeb's older brother, former president George W. Bush, at the GOP CNN debate last month. Jeb responded by adamantly defending his brother, contending that he kept America safe. About a month later, the Donald decided to resort back to the topic, stating outright that 9/11 occurred on George W. Bush's watch, which, as history would tell us, is accurate.

Jeb Bush then responded with this tweet:

"How pathetic for @realdonaldtrump to criticize the president for 9/11. We were attacked & my brother kept us safe."

Read that tweet again. Yes, you read it correctly - "We were attacked & my brother kept us safe." How does that work exactly? If Jeb's brother was president when we were attacked, how then did he keep us safe? I'm sorry, but Jeb can't have it both ways. He could have said, "After the 9/11 attacks, for the most part, my brother kept us safe," but he can't say, "We were attacked & my brother kept us safe." Those two events can't coexist peacefully with one another, unlike fish and humans, according to Dubya.

Given that tweet, expect Jeb to tweet the following messages at some point:

- "The mass shooting was tragic, but guns kept the victims safe."

- "I cheated on my wife last night & was loyal in doing so."

- "I did fail a class in college & was honored with an academic award."

- "The car accident was brutal & the insurance company loves me for it."

- "The woman may have had an abortion, but she never had sex."

- "When I contradict myself, I'm really not."

Uh huh...and this is supposedly the "smart Bush"...

http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/jeb-bush-defends-brother-against-donald-trumps-911-criticism
Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Boycotting jukeboxes because of TouchTunes

I love music and enjoy hitting the bar(s) over the weekend, so naturally, when the mood strikes me, I've never been coy about playing some songs on the jukebox. This past Thursday, a friend of mine turned 50, so several friends of her's, including myself, all met up to celebrate the occasion. At around 9:30, a friend of mine and I both chipped in $5 to play some songs on the jukebox. Four hours and 231 skips later, we gave up on hearing the songs we had selected, and went home knowing we had just wasted $5. This wasn't the first time such a thing had happened to me (and many others), and due to that, I'll be boycotting jukeboxes. Why? The scam known as TouchTunes. You see, here's how the plot typically breaks down. A person (or group of people) downloads the TouchTunes app on his/her phone, consumes one too many adult beverages, and due to this, has less care for spending extra money to hear the songs of their choosing right NOW. That's the thing with TouchTun
2 comments
Read more

The difference between "looking" and "checking out"

I may be way off with these numbers, but it's my approximation that at least 75% of individuals whom are involved in a serious relationship feel it's perfectly acceptable to "check out" members of the opposite sex they're not involved with. Meanwhile, approximately 25% either don't feel this is acceptable or aren't sure about the matter. I hadn't thought about this matter for a while, but since I've been dating a woman for about 8 months, the topic has been pondered about some. When reading or hearing others discuss this very issue, I often times hear comments similar to the following: "It's human nature to look." "There's nothing wrong with checking others out. I'm sure he/she does it too!" "It's fine to do it. Just don't tell your boyfriend/girlfriend about it or do it in front of them!" "It's natural to find people attractive." When observing the array of comments, I i
Post a Comment
Read more

The verdict is in. To no one's surprise, Jonathan Hoenig has been found guilty of being an idiot.

Just recently, when discussing the Michael Brown shooting and whether or not race had anything to do with it, Fox News contributor Jonathan Hoenig said, "You know who talks about race? Racists." One moment while I provide Mr. Hoenig with the well deserved slow-clap. :: slow-claps for two seconds :: So, that was quite the line by Mr. Hoenig, wasn't it? "You know who talks about race? Racists." Well, wasn't he just talking about race? So, by his own words, I guess that makes him a racist. Also, if he wants to be consistent, does this mean that people whom talk about gender are sexists and people whom talk about sexual orientation are homophobes? With that line of thinking, Hoenig would engage in the following back-and-forths: Hoenig: "So, who are you voting for?" A woman: "The Democratic candidate, because he's been adamant about his support for equal rights for women." Hoenig: "You sexist feminist nazi!"
Post a Comment
Read more