Originally Posted by
wmrs2
The majority of my post are on topic. You are the one that gets off topic in trying to defend your distorted view of world politics. The statement of one's political philosophy has everything to do with the legacy of GW Bush. You do not take as seriously the criticism of a Russian Communist of Ronald Regan because a serious communist is going to hate Regan for what he did to the socialist. The legacy of Bush as presented by Bush haters is flawed with bigotry. Don't you see, your opinion of Bush is not going to change because he beat you so many times. You call his legacy stupid but he outsmarted you. The Democrats never did defeat Bush but now they are attempting to spoil his legacy.
Why do you not respond to the quote about the frame of reference that Bush is judged by? Here it is:
"It may come to pass that the socialist in the Democratic Party will win out and America will become a socialist state like the majority of European countries. Those people in the Democratic Party who say America has lost respect and creditability with our allies are actually referring to the socialist and liberal politicians in Europe who sometimes do not speak for the majority of the people in their own countries. France is a great example of this fact. One election and suddenly the French love America."
"Democrats like to say we have lost respect in the eyes of the world but that is simply the opinion of liberals, socialist, and communist foreign and domestic. You can say about anything and back it up with facts, as you often do, but that does not mean that you are telling the whole story. Telling the truth to spin your political view may not be the way the real world is."
These statements have everything to do with Bush's place in history. Why do you not respond to these statements instead of lecturing us about staying on topic? The answer is that Bush's place in history is being framed by the liberals who control the news media. Your research is always going to be negative about Bush. Why?
No one cares that you say you are not a socialist or a communist. Since you are trying to frame Bush's place in history, it is fair to point out the frame of reference by which you judge the man. Like I stated, you have a right to your opinion but my opinion is that you are a liberal politician with liberal points of view; therefore, you are going to judge Bush harshly like the liberal Europeans do. You can do that. It is you right to do so.However, Bush's legacy may not be written by a liberal interpretation of history. If it is written by a conservative media, he will be considered among the great presidents.
I hope this is on topic enough for you to respond to what is actually said about Bush's place in history.
You obviously resent being classified as a socialist. Perhaps you should review your beliefs then to decide whether or not you want to remain in the Democratic Party. We certainly could use a fine fellow like you in our party. If I can help you understand your point of view better, or I should say, the point of view of the Democratic Party's point of view. just let me know. The help will always be here for you.
