- HW Bush, in deciding for Hillary is deciding against the Constitution, for abortion on demand for any reason at any time, against economic growth, for mass immigration, in opposition to the Second Amendment, adding nails to the coffin of whatever still in effect good aspects of his or his son’s achievements . . .
- First ladies are ever so simpatico
- The good thing is, wholly unintentionally, the Bushes may be helping Trump as they work on collapsing their “above it all” personas.
The Bushes have finally decided to “come out fighting”…taking on political opponents as they’ve never done before. Unfortunately their “political opponents” are conservative Republicans.
Did you ever hear G W say that **”I don’t like the guy” about any Democrat?, Obama?, Ted Kennedy?, the Clintons?
Ever hear him say that he saw any Democrat as “opportunistic”?
No, I didn’t think so.
All the years since he and “Poppy” left office, the Bushes kept silent about the policies and actions of their Democratic successors and would-be successors. Many of us, including me, believed it was because of their profound respect for the office and their sincere belief that criticism of those who held the office they understood was fraught with great challenge would be detrimental to their country and the American people. They were far too gracious and respectful toward the United States that political ‘sniping’ toward the nation’s current leaders, regardless of Party affiliation, was beneath the dignity of the office they had proudly held… we thought.
Now, it is becoming clear, that’s bulls–t! It’s the “Washington Establishment” for which the Bushes have “profound respect.” (graphics below not part of material referenced)
From a Politico collection by Gabriel Debenedetti
Over a 24-hour span that began with Jeb Bush’s surprising and sardonic cameo in Sunday’s Emmy Awards broadcast and Monday night’s reports that his father, former President George H.W. Bush, had told a family friend privately that he intended to support Hillary Clinton, the Bushes returned to the headlines, and are giving Trump just the establishment foil he so capably exploits.
“He probably loves that former President Bush isn’t backing him because it underlines his whole case against the establishment,” one former Jeb Bush campaign staffer said. “I bet he’s highlighting it in his stump speech before long.”
Elsewhere by Politico’s Debenedetti
Several sources close to the former president expressed frustration Tuesday with the notion that Townsend would publicize what she heard while visiting a 92-year-old man’s living room, calling it a breach of privacy. But the former president himself issued no statement denying the reports of what he said.
Even before news of Bush’s backing, Clinton’s campaign has been running a television ad highlighting a number of Republicans criticizing Trump. And she has already won endorsements from many Republicans who worked in one or both Bush 
administrations. But just as early forecasts of a possible Bush-Clinton matchup were met with frustration and fatigue in the run-up to this year’s campaign cycle, confirmation this week of some sort of alliance between the families may only serve to harden the electorate’s obvious antipathy to dynastic, establishment politics.
“The reality is, if all of this meant something, Donald Trump would not be the nominee,” said Bruce Haynes, a GOP consultant in Washington. “Out in Raleigh and Des Moines, people don’t give a damn about what the Bushes say or do. If anything, they see the establishment politicians closing ranks around Clinton and are more emboldened to do the opposite.”
What about Laura? . . . What more can be said?
By Krissah Thompson / The Washington Post In tense election year, Laura Bush picks an interesting ally, Michelle Obama (excerpts)
The friendliness between the families during this nasty election cycle underscores the nation’s flailing tradition of bipartisanship and comity, said Cokie Roberts, who was a moderator for a 2014 panel they took part in and has interviewed both women.
“They are friends and … they wanted to do [this] together because they like doing it together, which is so heartening in our troubled times,” Ms. Roberts said.
In her subtle way, Ms. Obama seemed several times to tweak Mr. Trump — though, as in her now-famous Democratic convention speech in July, she never used his name. On the sobering experience of visiting wounded military veterans, she said Friday, “that’s something a commander in chief thinks about before they pop off about going to war. Because when you’ve spent time on a base and you know these men and women and you know their families, you don’t just talk about war like there are no implications.
And Laura sat there, subtly of course
(snip)
Ms. Bush concurred: “It’s also a great example for the world to see that women of different political parties in the United States agree on so many issues. … When you watch television, you think that everyone in the United States disagrees with everybody else. But in fact, we as Americans agree on so many more things than we disagree on.”
What would that be Laura – the Constitution, the size of government, the threat of Islamic terrorism, confiscatory taxation, the right to life, immigration, indeed culture, and etc., etc., etc.? Small things Ms Bush? All those things said by Barrack and Moochelle – about how W wrecked the economy, impoverished people, tortured people, was a reckless war monger , a women hater, good Lord the list goes on . . . you agree on so much???
At the Archives on Friday, moderator Bob Woodruff kept the conversation focused on the military; the 2016 campaign never directly came up. Ms. Bush probably wouldn’t have said much about it anyway. As Ms. Bush was giving interviews earlier this year to promote a children’s book, a reporter wanted to know whether she would vote for Mr. Trump. “Don’t ask me that,” she pleaded.
But silence can speak volumes. And in Washington, who you sit beside matters.
Hours after sharing the stage with Ms. Bush, Ms. Obama headed to Northern Virginia, where she held her first solo campaign rally in support of Ms. Clinton.
The Bush style of noblesse oblige is getting insufferable as its duplicitous use is exposed. The collaborative use they put it to when it comes to Democrats results in bigger and bigger government. Not fighting it is conceding it. And the ever so deep bond of the First Ladies, so simpatico on the things that really really count ??? Well, we can imagine the well-kept First Ladies in duet singing Nobody Knows the Trouble I’ve seen:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AdavA_2QA0c
DLH and R Mall
Oh. I failed to mention that GW Bush did call one political opponent “opportunistic” and even conceded that he “didn’t like that guy”. That “opponent” was Ted Cruz.