Cronyism, Nepotism, and the Current President Bush

National Review ^ | 10/18/2005 | Adam Bellow

[185JHP]

Well done.

[185JHP]

Well done.

[CBart95]

Thanks for the correction.
And for your uncanny accuracy at missing the point unerringly.

[Ol' Dan Tucker]

Who cares? He proved himself competent in 164 disasters prior to Katrina. He gets fired because Kathleen Babineaux Blanco doesn't want to turn loose of her National Guard and Ray Nagin's cops are lootin' and shootin' right alongside the thugs.

Bwaahahahahahahaha....

Such is the life of a political crony.

[curiosity]

Best get a move on, on that research, because I'm more than certain that the Iron Lady, dear Maggie Thatcher, the grocer's daughter, would find it patently ridiculous and hysterically funny that you claim that she was born into the aristocracy.

I didn't say every Torie was an aristocrat. Most aren't. The point, however, is that historically, the Tories were the ones that tended to side more Aristocratic interests. That's not true in every case, or course, but it is a general trend. The most outspoken defenders of the monarchy and House of Lords are Tories, for example.

[nopardons]

Do yourself a very big favour and don't talk about things you know little to nothing whatsoever about.

Now, go look up Benjamin Disraeli...another non aristo.

You've changed the topic and backpedaled, from your original post. You began this discussion on another foot entirely and now that you've been called on it and refuted handily, you're off on another track. Just admit that you are dead wrong and be done with it.

[toddlintown]

Your wrong. The article's a hack job on Bush and implies a connection with the Bush family and criminality.

This croynism and nepotism descriptions are new talking points from the dems and you're falling right in line. Bush basher.

[curiosity]

On this thread you have done nothing but attack strawmen. I am confident any unbiased observer can figure that out for himself and will see my arguments stand. Therefore, I see no further need to waste my time responding to you. Good day to you.

[nopardons]

Tsk,tsk,tsk...you pulled that last night and it didn't stand you in good stead then, either. I back you into a corner, from which you are utterly incapable of extricating yourself from, so you say "GOOD NIGHT", as you did last night ( but then came back and posted some more! ), or now claim that it isn't worth wasting time trying to refute me, as you just did.

"Stawmen"? Yes, pet, that's what you keep throwing out; when you aren't backpedaling, changing the topic,and/or just endlessly repeating, parrotlike, the same exact drivel over and over and over again.

Yes, by all means, let's allow the readers of this thread decide for themselves, just which of us has the valid argument. And since several have already responded, favouring my posts, your retreat is many hours delayed, the better part of valor. Get thee hence and ho sulk in a corner.

[Right Wing Professor]

Yes, by all means, let's allow the readers of this thread decide for themselves, just which of us has the valid argument.

OK, glad to oblige. I think you have a marginal hold on sanity.

[nopardons]

That wasn't the query to decide, I doubt that you read ALL of my posts on this, but thanks for playing anyway. :-)