Liberals... IF this is all Bush's fault, can you answer this?

I'm sorry but you talk about reason then say something like this "it stands to reason...that America would be in GREAT shape at least for a short time. That would be time to figure out an actual solution, no?" That just makes no sense, any short term situation has to end, in 1988 we saw it happen, in 2000 we saw it happen, in 2008 we saw it happen etc. Reagan let it happen in '88, Clinton let it happen in '00 and Bush let it happen in '08 because of their activity or inactivity as it were. This insistence that Bush's conduct was at all fiscally conservative is also nonsense, I would have voted for him if he was but someone who presides over two wars and not only doesn't pay for them but cuts taxes no less is a fool and pretending that just because there is someone you don't like (who is admittedly lackluster) like Obama that all of these problems started the first day he stepped into the White House is stupid.

Quoting unemployment and revenue bullet points in 2003 doesn't mean anything when it doesn't take into account the 800lbs gorilla in the corner that were the looming costs they were ignoring. For the record a record uptick int he stock market doesn't mean anything and you know it...wow all these corporations outsourcing jobs have had a really good year...there are approximately 300 million people in this country that now looks to the service industry rather than manufacturing to gauge the economy and you think the stock market means anything?

I don't really like Obama and I think the last two years have been nothing but partisan fighting for the sake of fighting but pretending that George W. Bush is at all blameless is ridiculous.

Unemployment did not become an issue until Dec 2007, well after the Democrats took control and well before Obama was elected. Since Dec 2007 unemployment has steadily been on the rise. Unemployment still has not reached what it was in 1982 under Reagan. Also between 2003-2006 unemployment was not consistently at 4.6 percent, in fact for most of 2003 it was at 6 percent.

If you want even more proof that Bush's policies created this mess, why don't you compare the state of the economy when Clinton left office to the state of the economy when Bush left office. Unemployment was at 4.2 percent when Bush took office, 7.1 percent when Clinton took office. No one is 100 percent blaming Bush but you CANNOT argue that he is not largely accountable for the situation the economy is in.

No.

The collapse was the result of Bush's policies.

Let's try an analogy.

Imagine someone eats nothing but candy and beer while watching tv. And for the first 6 months they feel great.

Then, they have a heart attack. While they are in the hospital, they are in physical rehab and eating healthy. On day 3, they say, I am eating healthy and exercising and I still feel bad. I felt better when I just ate candy, drank beer watched tv. Why can't I just do more of that until somone finds out a better solution?

We reached the end. We had the heart attack. The financial system almost completely collapsed.

The policies were for short term success. Over time, they would have done exactly what they did. A bubble always burst no matter how it is created.

Obama won't emulate Bush for two reasons 1) We have already seen that int he long term those policies can be catastrophic, and 2) It goes against everything he stands for.

Lax regulations which allows banks and wall street to run wild are not things he campaigned on. The record uptick in the stock market was because of rampant speculation and terrible lending practices and horrible valuation of assets that bank and mortgage companies had. That is nothing to be proud of.

When Bush left we had doubled the National Debt.

When Bush left we were shedding 3/4 million jobs a month.

You can put both Bush's and Reagan together and they collectively created less than the 22 Million jobs that Clinton created. Obama has already created more jobs than Bush (3.3 million -per CBO- as compared to 3 million Bush created in 8 years)

It was Bush who bailed out Wall Street causing almost 1 Trillion.

Please do your homework!

The "Bush" economic mess started with the Reagan revolution. It created a culture of de-regulation. Clinton and his advisors bought into this crap. With the Republican congress and Phil Gramm, Clinton signed into law two devastating pieces of legislation. One repealed the wall between investment banking and commercial banking which stood since the depression. The other was the Commodity Futures Modernization Act which let open the floodgates of derivatives.

This increased freedom created a massive asset bubble in real estate that burst causing 8 million people to lose their jobs.

The asset bubble in real estate was able to get blown out of proportion due to derivatives.

How do you explain the Democrats telling Bush that we were slipping into a recession for years (about which he did nothing) and warning him about the housing bubble (about which he did nothing) until the entire economy fell apart causing a global economic crisis.

Anyone can cherry pick a few questionable facts and spin a tale.

But we all REMEMBER what actually happened.

Umm... I'm no genius, but didn't the dems take back the house in 2006? Long before at the time republicans were in control of the house and senate in 2003, and brought us into debt when they went to war with Iraq for the oil?

Yeah and then the financial ramifications of 2 wars actually kicked in. F*ck Bush.

Since 2007 when Liberals took control of the House/Senate things have been all downhill.