perfidy

You say the attacks on Bush are similar to the attacks on Reagan. You seem to imply that the attacks on Reagan were misplaced, that he wasn't an amiable dunce, that he did have a grasp on policy, wasn't leading us to hell, and faced down the global menace of communism. So are you saying that Bush is no Reagan, and that this comparison is wrong?

So is Bush stupid, unable to comprehend the policies he's advocating (or not advocating), and not facing down terrorism? And you're asking if this behavior is deliberate? Or that critics were right to criticise Reagan but wrong on Bush?

Forgive me, but I don't see what you're getting at.