Quote: Frank Cannon wrote in post #136

---

Quote: musiclady wrote in post #88

---

Still repeating the false accusation about "vigilantes" I see.

This is part of the reason the anti-Bush ranks aren't taken seriously.

(There are other partial truths in your list, algernon. Please be more careful).

---

How about the list I cited. I see no one wants to discuss the damage those ideas or policies have done. Some of them are actually giving the current Marxist cover for his ever expanding role of the Federal Govt' in all levels of our lives today.

I also forgot to add the Bush II instituted both the elimination of the incandescent light bulb and raised CAFE standards to absurdly unachievable levels.

---

Quote: Frank Cannon wrote in post #146

---

So what?

---

Quote: Cedric wrote in post #135

---

Quote: musiclady wrote in post #133

---

I'm just willing to give the guy the benefit of the doubt....

---

Oh, that'll never fly around here.

---

Quote: Cedric wrote in post #153

---

Quote: Palinista wrote in post #150

---

From my understanding the man was a Christian.

---

Oh, that doesn't matter......there will be no salvation for moderates!

---

Quote: Frank Cannon wrote in post #142

---

Quote: musiclady wrote in post #139

---

I know Bush's policies, including the stupid light bulb thing. I've established repeatedly that I disagreed with him on multiple policy issues.

It's just not relevant to this thread.

---

I disagree. The argument is basically why George P is getting the skunk eye from Conservatives. My reason for doing so is that other Bush's in office have veered far from their stated intentions. For some of us, it is the apple falling from the tree/Acorn and an Oak argument. This issue comes up in any endevour where the son takes over the family business, fair or not.

---

Quote: Frank Cannon wrote in post #142

---

Quote: musiclady wrote in post #139

---

I know Bush's policies, including the stupid light bulb thing. I've established repeatedly that I disagreed with him on multiple policy issues.

It's just not relevant to this thread.

---

I disagree. The argument is basically why George P is getting the skunk eye from Conservatives. My reason for doing so is that other Bush's in office have veered far from their stated intentions. For some of us, it is the apple falling from the tree/Acorn and an Oak argument. This issue comes up in any endevour where the son takes over the family business, fair or not.

---

Quote: algernonpj wrote in post #151

---

Quote: Frank Cannon wrote in post #136

---

Quote: musiclady wrote in post #88

---

Still repeating the false accusation about "vigilantes" I see.

This is part of the reason the anti-Bush ranks aren't taken seriously.

(There are other partial truths in your list, algernon. Please be more careful).

---

How about the list I cited. I see no one wants to discuss the damage those ideas or policies have done. Some of them are actually giving the current Marxist cover for his ever expanding role of the Federal Govt' in all levels of our lives today.

I also forgot to add the Bush II instituted both the elimination of the incandescent light bulb and raised CAFE standards to absurdly unachievable levels.

---

Frank C,

Not only was my request for links ignored, but my concurrent request for comments on your list was ignored also.

Both lists seem to contain uncomfortable truths about the Bush family dynasty, the damage done by their policies, and the fact they paved the way to Obama's ever expanding federal government.

---

Quote: Thunderbird wrote in post #152

---

Quote: Frank Cannon wrote in post #146

---

So what?

---

So..you're blaming Bush for all the sins of the party while giving a free pass to others like Santorum.

That inconsistency is at odds with the principled conservative position your side is attempting to stake out.

---

Quote: algernonpj wrote in post #157

---

Quote: Frank Cannon wrote in post #142

---

Quote: musiclady wrote in post #139

---

I know Bush's policies, including the stupid light bulb thing. I've established repeatedly that I disagreed with him on multiple policy issues.

It's just not relevant to this thread.

---

I disagree. The argument is basically why George P is getting the skunk eye from Conservatives. My reason for doing so is that other Bush's in office have veered far from their stated intentions. For some of us, it is the apple falling from the tree/Acorn and an Oak argument. This issue comes up in any endevour where the son takes over the family business, fair or not.

---

Then there is also the issue of learning from history.

---

Quote: musiclady wrote in post #158

---

Quote: algernonpj wrote in post #151

---

Quote: Frank Cannon wrote in post #136

---

Quote: musiclady wrote in post #88

---

Still repeating the false accusation about "vigilantes" I see.

This is part of the reason the anti-Bush ranks aren't taken seriously.

(There are other partial truths in your list, algernon. Please be more careful).

---

How about the list I cited. I see no one wants to discuss the damage those ideas or policies have done. Some of them are actually giving the current Marxist cover for his ever expanding role of the Federal Govt' in all levels of our lives today.

I also forgot to add the Bush II instituted both the elimination of the incandescent light bulb and raised CAFE standards to absurdly unachievable levels.

---

Frank C,

Not only was my request for links ignored, but my concurrent request for comments on your list was ignored also.

Both lists seem to contain uncomfortable truths about the Bush family dynasty, the damage done by their policies, and the fact they paved the way to Obama's ever expanding federal government.

---

Perhaps you should start a thread where it's not just a hijack of the discussion, algernon.

Then you'll find out the truth about those who oppose your (questionable) laundry lists.

Unless you find that 'uncomfortable.'

---

Quote: algernonpj wrote in post #162

---

Quote: musiclady wrote in post #158

---

Quote: algernonpj wrote in post #151

---

Quote: Frank Cannon wrote in post #136

---

Quote: musiclady wrote in post #88

---

Still repeating the false accusation about "vigilantes" I see.

This is part of the reason the anti-Bush ranks aren't taken seriously.

(There are other partial truths in your list, algernon. Please be more careful).

---

How about the list I cited. I see no one wants to discuss the damage those ideas or policies have done. Some of them are actually giving the current Marxist cover for his ever expanding role of the Federal Govt' in all levels of our lives today.

I also forgot to add the Bush II instituted both the elimination of the incandescent light bulb and raised CAFE standards to absurdly unachievable levels.

---

Frank C,

Not only was my request for links ignored, but my concurrent request for comments on your list was ignored also.

Both lists seem to contain uncomfortable truths about the Bush family dynasty, the damage done by their policies, and the fact they paved the way to Obama's ever expanding federal government.

---

Perhaps you should start a thread where it's not just a hijack of the discussion, algernon.

Then you'll find out the truth about those who oppose your (questionable) laundry lists.

Unless you find that 'uncomfortable.'

---

Is your name Frank or is this just a way to avoid answering Frank's question?

---

Quote: musiclady wrote in post #158

---

Quote: algernonpj wrote in post #151

---

Quote: Frank Cannon wrote in post #136

---

Quote: musiclady wrote in post #88

---

Still repeating the false accusation about "vigilantes" I see.

This is part of the reason the anti-Bush ranks aren't taken seriously.

(There are other partial truths in your list, algernon. Please be more careful).

---

How about the list I cited. I see no one wants to discuss the damage those ideas or policies have done. Some of them are actually giving the current Marxist cover for his ever expanding role of the Federal Govt' in all levels of our lives today.

I also forgot to add the Bush II instituted both the elimination of the incandescent light bulb and raised CAFE standards to absurdly unachievable levels.

---

Frank C,

Not only was my request for links ignored, but my concurrent request for comments on your list was ignored also.

Both lists seem to contain uncomfortable truths about the Bush family dynasty, the damage done by their policies, and the fact they paved the way to Obama's ever expanding federal government.

---

Perhaps you should start a thread where it's not just a hijack of the discussion, algernon.

Then you'll find out the truth about those who oppose your (questionable) laundry lists.

Unless you find that 'uncomfortable.'

---

Still avoiding the relevant issue I see.

Is it right to judge a nephew and condemn him based on his uncle's bad behavior?

Yes. Or No.