Why is a defeat for the Bush tyranny a loss for our nation?

[Uncle Emanuel Watkins]

While we have a functioning government when it is creating measures which move us towards the civil purpose in our Consitution, we erode to living in a futile tyranny when our government masqeurades itself as a false movement instead.
Both the Clinton and the Bush Jr. administrations eroded into tyranny by playing the part of movements which practiced the business of digging up past legal precedents -- measures which worked functionally during their respective time in history but are now irrelevent to the present. While the Clintons dug up leftover legal precedents from the Civil Rights movement during their liberal administration, the Bush administration has likewise dug up leftover legal precedents from the Reagan years in which his father was part.
A false movement erodes our gorvernment into tyranny because it dallies in legal precedents from prior movements rather than beginning with a whole new approach towards civil purpose by creating new measures.
So, why should it be considered a loss for our nation when it would be a tyranny over us that loses? Likewise, why should it be considered a victory for our nation when it would be a tyranny over us that is victorious? Such would be a victory for tyranny and a defeat for Democracy.

[Uncle Emanuel Watkins]

Undeleted