The real reason Dems hate Bush

[dazzleman]

I think that a lot of the hatred towards Bush is regional prejudice.  Elitist Democrats in the northeast think that everybody else is less intelligent than they are, and Texans top the hate list for these "tolerant" people.

I think that Bush will get a lot of credit from history for tackling the terrrorism issue, which Clinton dodged and avoided because he was too busy with his extra-cirricular activities.

Whether you agree or not, Bush has taken some risks to do what he thinks is right for the country, and for the security of the American people, while Clinton put his own political fortunes above those of a people who were too busy enjoying the economic prosperity of the time to notice.

History never judges that kindly.

[dazzleman]

President Bush reflects a certain moral certainty about traditional values that liberals hate.  Liberals are immediately hostile to anybody who actually believes in anything beyond their own twisted brand of "tolerance," which of course never extends to anybody who doesn't agree with their issues down the line.

Human beings are highly capable of irrational hatred toward people based on skin color, religion, beliefs or even geography.  I have found that this type of hatred usually tells you more about the person doing the hating than the object of the hatred.

Bush's legacy is up in the air at this point, but I don't see him being another Warren Harding.  I would say that there's a greater chance that Clinton will be another Warren Harding -- somebody who was popular in office because he didn't rock the boat by dealing with any of the issues facing the country, and whose presidency became more inconsequential as time went by and it became clear that he had passed all the problems on to his successor.  Bush has grappled with the terrorism problem that Clinton ignored, and it will define his legacy for better or worse.

[dazzleman]

I've been wondering why the libs hate George W. so much. Way more than Reagan, or even Nixon. It's a mystery to many Republicans. I think I have found the answer. The reason is because deep down in thier shriveled black hearts, they know that however the economy goes, whatever he does in Iraq, that Bush will go down as one of the greats. History will look upon him favorably, even if he doesn't get re-elected. They are bitter about not getting anything done with Clinton. That they had thier chance, and thier wonderboy was just average. When people think about Clinton 20 years from now, they will remember Monica Lewinsky. When people remember Bush, regardless of this upcoming elections results, they will remember his leadership after 9/11. They know that they cant destroy that legacy, and they hate him for it. They hate that he has one up on them. Your thoughts?

Democrats hate Bush because they are experiencing massive frustration:

1)over the Clinton impeachment debacle and the 2000 election debacle, and

2)over the marginalization of 60's and 70's political liberalism, particularly the sort that relished in anti-authoritarianism. Hey, America's moved to the right - the baby-boomers had a great youth, but it's over - over for them, and can't be replicated by current or future generations. Bush is just the sort of person, clearly on the other side of the cultural divide and a little cocky about it, who gives them fits.

As far as Bush's place in history, the best that could be recorded of our time is that as a result of 9/11, America and Britain began a liberalizing campaign  that eventually brought most of the nations of the Middle East into modernity. Clearly  this struggle will be playing out for the rest of our lives, and there are many forces arrayed against the trend towards tolerance and away from tyranny in the Middle East, but America's actions in the world (or lack thereof) are as critical now as they were in 1941. That is why this election ranks as one of the great historic elections.

As far as Clinton is concerned, history will note that he had a chance to create a permanent realignment of his party, perhaps bringing it into dominance of the White House for a few more cycles, but threw it away to self-infatuation and sex addiction, compounding his disastrous judgement by failing to patch up his differences with Gore and somehow use his political abilities to help him get elected.

very well said

[dazzleman]

Missouri has been called a microcosm of the US as a whole.  And like Ohio, Missouri usually picks the winner in presidential elections.