Reply #31: Hmmm...not quite, I think

[JackintheGreen]

Rather we seem to be approaching the same destination from radically different paths. Hence, loggerheads.

I take no issue with your original post. I agree whole-heartedly, in fact. Rather what I had lighted upon is from G.C.Mandrake's reply, as follows:

"I tend to concur with the earlier poster. The Bush Family, in other circumstances, would be the family at the end of the block with stacked tires in the yard."

This is the "Deliverance"-style apple dandies reference I noted and took issue with. The other circumstances would have to go back generations in order for the Bushes to be that family.

Nor do I dispute the fact that they seem to be mean-spirited, petty, small people. However, to me * appears to be the only one to use these stellar qualities as his daily stock-in-trade. His family at least has the decency to *try* to conceal them on a day-to-day basis. Of course, that's all it is, and the black brassiere of their inner selves all too readily shows through the white blouse of outer appearances.

How's THAT for a labored metaphor?

Or as Mandrake continued:

"They are the trashy little, pig-eyed, jug-eared loutish legacy of the cheapening of the American political process."

But W's generation is the only one to wear it on their sleeves like mourning widows.

So my apologies for perhaps leading others to misconstrue your original post, and also to Mandrake for being less than clear.

But I do think that we are all in general agreement about the boorishness of current office-holder.

No?