Historians look at the RECORD instead of currently fashionable rhetoric, and in that regard, Bush actually has a very good economic record;

The Economy (GDP)

GDP when Clinton left office in 2000 = $9.821 Trillion.

GDP when Bush left office in 2008 = $14.394 Trillion, an increase of 46.6%, or 5.81% per year.

GDP for 2012 (last info available) = $15.602 Trillion, an increase of 8.4%, or 2.1% per year.

The Deficits

Total Deficits for Bush over 8 years = $2.006 Trillion ($251 Billion per year).

Total Deficits for Obama thru 2012 = $5.059Trillion (1,274 Billion per year – 5+ times as much).

Employment (average).

Total Average Employed in 2000 (Clinton's last year) = 131,794,000 jobs

Total Average Employed in 2008 (Bush's last year) = 136,849,000 jobs, for an average gain of 5,054,000 jobs.

Total Average Employed in 2012 (Obama's 4^th year) = 133,735,000 jobs, for an average LOSS of 3,114,000 jobs under Obama.

Sources for GDP and Deficits - http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget/Historicals

Source for Employment/Jobs – Official Government Bureau of Labor Statistics -

PS - Using Jimmy Carter's infamous 'Misery Index" (Combined Unemployment % Inflation Rates - lower is better), Bush had the second best average Index over the last 40 years at 8.11% - Clinton's Index was only slightly better at 7.80%. Jimmy Carter got as high as 21.98% in 1980.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Misery_index_%28economics%29

Bush, always trying avoid responsibility for the decisions he made, while trying to take credit for the sterling economy Bill Clinton left behind, while relying on lies his peers are willing to tell in order to manufacture the legacy Bush wants to leave behind, instead of the history.

I suspect the more time goes by, the more closely the relationship between George "Curveball" Bush and Osama Bin Laden might be examined, as well as GWB flying all 100 members of Bin Laden's family to safety when no American could fly, and without being questioned by our Secret Service, FBI or CIA.

Even the elder Bush is best known for breaking his "read my lips, no new taxes" promise.

ROY WILSON-336103

You forget to account for the population increase in your figures. More people=more people employed. Doesn't mean Bush created jobs. As we all know, he didn't.

Manufacturing declined during the Bush years. The American auto industry was on life support even before the financial crisis of 2008.

Total Deficits for Bush over 8 years = $2.006 Trillion ($251 Billion per year).

Total Deficits for Obama thru 2012 = $5.059Trillion

the problem is, you making the assumption that

1; 2 wars where paid for and did continue to add to the deficit.

2; bush tax cut for the top 1% where "deficit neutral" ( that was never true) and did continue to add to the deficit.

3; conservative economic policy that lead to the worst downturn in our economy.....and did continue to add to the deficit.

yadda yadda yadda.

history will be kind to my brother

good luck with that.

Amy B. Portland, ME "ROY WILSON-336103You forget to account for the population increase in your figures. More people=more people employed. Doesn't mean Bush created jobs. As we all know, he didn't."

Are you pretending that the population didn't grow under Obama, where we had a net LOSS of more than 3 million jobs?

Chris@SLC Total Deficits for Bush over 8 years = $2.006 Trillion ($251 Billion per year).Total Deficits for Obama thru 2012 = $5.059Trillion................the problem is, you making the assumption that.."

The problem is YOUR assumptions;

1 - The total cost of the wars WERE included in Bush's Deficits, despite wild accusations to the contrary.

2 - The total effect of the tax cuts (80% of which went to the Middle/Lower income classes) WERE included in Bush's Deficits.

3 - It wasn't 'conservative economic policies' that led to the 'worst downturn in our economy' - it was the 'sub-prime' lending practices of Fannie Mae & Freddie Mac in the foolish attempt to make everyone a home owner. Conservative lending practices (requiring a down payment and actual proof of income) would have PREVENTED the sub-prime housing collapse, which was at the root of the economic drop.

yadda yadda yadda

Roy you are half right, dont forget the de regulation the came after Glass-Stegall went away. Let business set the market my eye. They will always find a way to mess it up.

Roy Wilson, the jobs were lost before Obama took office and you know it. The economy was headed in a downward spiral that took a few months to bottom. Since that time jobs have been on the increase and 35 straight month of positive job growth proves it. But you continue to post your non-sense figures that really don't tell the truth and I will continue to bitch slap you back into consciousness.

Johntho "Since that time jobs have been on the increase and 35 straight month of positive job growth proves it."

Get your figures right - it's been 28 months of positive job growth, but then Bush had 46 months of job growth after the effects of 9/11 were overcome, during which time more than 7.8 million net new jobs were added.

ROY, you're tilting at windmills here.

1 - The total cost of the wars WERE included in Bush's Deficits, despite wild accusations to the contrary.

You have proof of this, yes?

"The 43rd President of the United States" had Congress fund Iraq and Afghanistan through emergency spending measures...that is money on top of anything he actually included in the budget.

Please read the following...

www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=newsarchive&sid=aU4LjR1UOdt4&refer=us

The GatewayBull "Roy you are half right, dont forget the de regulation the came after Glass-Stegall went away."

Yes, that is true - this 'deregulation was also a big part of the problem, but the 'Bush Bashers' seem to forget that this deregulation was signed by Clinton, not Bush.

But then the Liberals never let FACTS get in the way of a perfectly good 'spin'.

Da Noid "1 - The total cost of the wars WERE included in Bush's Deficits, despite wild accusations to the contrary....You have proof of this, yes?"

Yes - the government issues figures on total spending at the end of each fiscal year.

Your silly attempt to confuse the issue with Budget battles is deliberately misleading - obviously, you do not understand how the government Budgeting/Spending works - here's a short primer;

1 - Congress and the President pass a Budget for the fiscal year, which reflects ESTIMATED spending.

2 - If additional spending is required, an 'Additional Appropriations Request' is made by either the President or Congress. If it passes, it's added to the Budget, making a 'revised' Budget for the year.

3 - After the fiscal year is over, the Final Spending totals are accumulated, including ALL war costs and this is reported, making all Budget 'estimates' obsolete.

Your feeble attempt to claim that those Budget disagreements during each fiscal year somehow means that Bush didn't include the war costs in his final spending is nonsense. If you actually READ the Bloomberg link you posted, you would see the truth.

PS - The idea that using 'Additional Appropriations Requests' was some devious plot by Bush to hide the war costs is disproved by the following link, which shows that Obama ALSO used the exact same process to fund additional war costs in May 2009 - 2 months AFTER he signed the 2009 Budget in March 2009.

http://vcnv.org/president-obamas-war-budget-analyzing-the-numbers

Flaming Lib "ROY, you're tilting at windmills here."

Hope springs eternal that Liberals will abandon their core motto of;

"Don't confuse me with facts, my mind's already made up"

lol

Time to move on - Coffee is brewing - Bye, and have a nice day :)

Roy,

President Obama came into office in the midst of the worst financial crisis since the Great Depression. I swear, Republicans think more highly of Obama's power than us Democrats do, if they think he could have halted the unemployment slide just by raising his right hand?

Whether the budget included or didn't include war spending the fact is that there were no revenue offsets. You don't increase spending for wars or anything else without the revenue to do so. You certainly don't reduce the revenue while increasing spending.

Democrats prefer tax and spend while the Republicans prefer borrow and spend. The later is more expensive because of interest than the former but neither is particularly good.

Instead of cutting taxes Bush and the Congress should have sold bonds or kept the tax rates where they were or even increased them to reflect the increase in spending for the wars. Apparently they thought they could gut safety net programs in favor of the military-industrial complex. What a fine mess that got us into.

I have something to say in defense of George Dubya... He was a snake when 'Merka picked him up.

Amy B. Portland, ME "Roy, I swear, Republicans think more highly of Obama's power than us Democrats do, if they think he could have halted the unemployment slide just by raising his right hand?"

As I recall, Obama promised that he would keep Unemployment 'under 8%' if he got his 'stimulus' bill passed. It was signed only about 3 weeks after he was sworn in, but the Unemployment Rate exceeded 8% for the next 44 straight months.

Perhaps it was Obama that overestimated his 'power'.

lol

The Bushes are trying to shape history the way they fantacize about, and try to defend of the worst president in history. When Bush was in office, he refused to listen to anyone, now he expects for us to listen to his "liars and denyers" try to preach to us about what we should think of the man who lied us into war, allowed us to be hit by terrorists, and destroyed the entire United States Economy which made millions of families lose their homes and their jobs.

How can we forget George "Curveball" Bush when we're still trying to recover from his failed economic policies and dig our way out of the 2nd Great Depression, not to mention the fact there are arrest warrants out for Bush and Cheney for war crimes and crimes against humanity in certain countries in the world.

Are we supposed to forget how the Iraqis "thanked" George W. Bush for invading their country, by throwing shoes at him?

GNOP Cry - It wasn't Bushes fault....it's Obama's fault....

his wife was pleasant