The American Spectator

home
ADVERTISEMENT
Print Email
Text Size

The Spectacle Blog

Worse Than Bush

Mitt Romney has made Obama's failure to improve the economy his campaign theme, and has claimed that Obama's polices have made the recession "deeper and more painful." Recently various left-of-center commentators have ripped Romney for this statement, on the grounds that most economic indicators have been improving (even though they've been improving far too slowly).

The problem is that Romney hasn't specified a baseline. It seems clear to me that Romney is saying that Obama inherited a recession from George W. Bush and then made it worse than Bush would have. Romney's on safe ground making that claim, because it's totally unfalsifiable, as are all of Obama's boasts about the recovery (..."jobs created or saved").

Also...Romney's probably right.

View all comments (21) | Leave a comment

Wayne | 7.5.11 @ 3:11PM

Why are Republicans so STUPID? The economy was running well until REID and PELOSI took over congress. Obama just completed the trifecta. Romney needs to compare 2007 to 2011. It was the Democrats refusal to drill that primed the pump of the oil crises that drove the price of oil to $150 per gallon. It was the Democrats refusal to fix Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac that resulted in the housing collapse.

Alan Brooks| 7.5.11 @ 5:46PM

Didn't Bush sign the Prescription Drug Plan BEFORE the '06 election? the GOP wont admit it is generally statist.

Chuck| 7.5.11 @ 4:20PM

Just what pretell is Romney's solution to our economic ills? When is the former governor going to lay out a plan of economic growth? Or is it going to be like Clinton, "The Econony" whatever hoping that whatever would be enough to skate by. Remember Clinton had no specific economic program in the '92 campaign then it came after he took office giving us a massive retroactive tax increase. Mr. Romney, just what are your positons on taxes, budget cutting and the debt ceiling? "Nice try" won't do, the Democrats will see to that. Your willingness to work with Democrats in the Congress should tell us something just like your willingness to work with Democrats in the Mass. state legislature to pass Romneycare.

irish19| 7.5.11 @ 10:50PM

It tells me not to vote for him.

Occam's Tool| 7.5.11 @ 4:21PM

Cut taxes and spending; with defense spend what you need.

wodiej| 7.5.11 @ 4:47PM

Never liked Bush. He is alot of the reason Obama got elected.

Bill Hussein O'Stalin| 7.5.11 @ 5:47PM

All Romney or anyone else to do is seize on the report released by the White Council of Economic Advisors. It indicates that each stimulus job cost the taxpayers $278,000, mostly for minimum wage positions.
http://www.weeklystandard.com/.....76014.html
When the Obama administration releases a report on the Friday before a long weekend, it’s clearly not trying to draw attention to the report’s contents. Sure enough, the “Seventh Quarterly Report” on the economic impact of the “stimulus,” released on Friday, July 1, provides further evidence that President Obama’s economic “stimulus” did very little, if anything, to stimulate the economy, and a whole lot to stimulate the debt.

The report was written by the White House’s Council of Economic Advisors, a group of three economists who were all handpicked by Obama, and it chronicles the alleged success of the “stimulus” in adding or saving jobs. The council reports that, using “mainstream estimates of economic multipliers for the effects of fiscal stimulus” (which it describes as a “natural way to estimate the effects of” the legislation), the “stimulus” has added or saved just under 2.4 million jobs — whether private or public — at a cost (to date) of $666 billion. That’s a cost to taxpayers of $278,000 per job.

TheRightIsAnythingBut| 7.5.11 @ 6:28PM

Took the opportunity of the 4th long weekend to visit D.C. and see the National Portrait Gallery.
And it was nice to see here a headline "Worse Than Bush." Although I'm the first to espouse casual clothing, the portrait of Bush in open collar casual shirt was really telling of the man - no sense of the moment, no sense of history, no sense of the Presidency. No sense, period.

Oh - a clue for the above posters - Bush only guaranteed the margin of victory in 2008.

And for all of you Clinton haters, on the near wall to Dubya, I do have to say the slightly askew representation of Clinton was right on. Clinton is definitely slightly askew on his morals and ability to take ownership for his mistakes. But - and this is a big 'un - given the choice between George I and Bill and Dole and Bill, I'd vote for Clinton again.

And this year's Republican Presidential field is not likely to spur much interest on my part, either. Except to guffaw.

J.C.Eaton| 7.5.11 @ 6:41PM

Bush wasn't much but I'm terribly curious as to what you Obamaniacs find so compelling. How are you better off? What's better for America? What does life look like through your very strange eyes?

W| 7.5.11 @ 7:11PM

If you voted for Clinton, a draft dodger disbarred lawyer-convicted perjurer (in civil court), and would again vote for him, knowing what he did, then you have zero credibility in judging a president. Clinton also ignored the terrorists attacks in 1993 Trade Center, the Cole, the embassies, refusing to arrest osama when he was offered to us, the pardons for money, the renting of the Lincoln Bedroom, How can you vote for him?

TheRightIsAnythingBut| 7.5.11 @ 8:08PM

W, please learn to read. I said "given the choice." Can you take off your ideological beer goggles long enough to consider an English sentence for its meaning? I wasn't happy with the choices presented although I admired then and continue to admire Dole.

And if you're willing to call Clinton a draft dodger, how about a little fairness? Your own mouse-that-roared Dick Cheney said, when asked why he did not serve said in effect ""I had other priorities in the '60s than military service" as attributed in Dionne, E.J. Jr. (January 17, 2006). "Murtha and the Mudslingers". The Washington Post (Washington, DC).
But - ooopppss - that was in the Post and it couldn't possibly be right, could it?

How about his own 1989 confirmation testimony that he received deferments to finish a college career that lasted six years rather than four, owing to sub par academic performance and the need to work to pay for his education. Initially, he was not called up because the Selective Service System was only taking older men. When he became eligible for the draft, he applied for four deferments in sequence. He applied for his fifth exemption on January 19, 1966, when his wife was about 10 weeks pregnant. He was granted 3-A status, the "hardship" exemption, which excluded men with children or dependent parents. In January 1967, Cheney turned 26 and was no longer eligible for the draft. That was in the New York Times but again - oooopppps - can't trust the Times, can you?

I DARE you to read - for yourself and in their entirety, No FOX-lite excerpts - Articles 86 and 87 of the Military Code of Justice. Hint - It concerns desertion and failure to complete one's duty. Then look up George W. Bush.

W| 7.5.11 @ 11:02PM

"But - and this is a big 'un - given the choice between George I and Bill and Dole and Bill, I'd vote for Clinton again."
How did I misread this. You said you would vote for clinton again against Bush and Dole. What is clouding your brain? Maybe you should work for eric holder and prosecute GWB for desertion. Even the most idiotic lefty on MSNBC has not gone this far. Is this the new line at dailykos?
Given your support of Clinton, you should have admired Cheney for applying for those deferments.
Your choice in 92 was between Bush, a war hero, and Clinton, a draft dodger. Your choice in 96 was between Dole, a war hero, and Clinton, a draft dodger. Both times you went with the Draft Dodger, and now you say you would do it again, and you complain I did not understand your sentence? And then attempt to justify it by Cheney's deferments. as if you were thinking about Cheney when you voted in 92 and 96.
Your excuse for voting for Clinton is illogical and pathetic.

ds80| 7.6.11 @ 7:32AM

Give it up, W. AnyButt makes his judgments based on portraits hanging on a wall. How telling.

W| 7.6.11 @ 9:45AM

ds80, can't resist responding to these lefty zombies who have prepared talking points but then cannot answer when questioned.

TheRightIsAnythingBut| 7.6.11 @ 11:40AM

I have answered you, W.

And, ds80, you obviously can't read without the aid of ideological beer goggles, either. So thanks for the laugh.

TheRightIsAnythingBut| 7.6.11 @ 11:36AM

Yup. Poking at the Right is fun and the responses oh-so-predictable.

Anyway - Let's follow your "logic." In 2000, I had a choice between a Vietnam veteran (Gore) and a VP draft dodger candidate and a Presidential candidate whose departure from the military was at least questionable. So I should have voted for Gore. Your logic, not mine.

In 2004, I had the same choice of a VP draft dodger and a Presidential candidate whose departure from the military was at least questionable and a candidate who was decorated in VietNam. So I should have voted for Kerry. Your logic, not mine.

My entire point is that the GOP and Democrats are equally swine and voting, unfortunately, is nearly always choosing the lesser of 2 evils. My plea to you - obviously ignored - was for fairness.

W| 7.6.11 @ 12:31PM

Algore was a photographer in Vietnam, arranged by daddy Senator Gore. Remember how he lied about being in combat in the "tall grass?'
Kerry was opposed by veterans because he took an early leave (is this desertion under your theory) after two minor wounds on his hand, referred to by his crew as scratches.
Since you cannot defend your vote on Clinton, you now want to focus on Cheney.
What do you mean by idealogical "beer" glasses?

The One Who Runs Like a Duck| 7.5.11 @ 7:36PM

We are all gun runners now, Anything Butt. I am better than Bush.

I won the war in Iraq. Just ask Joe Biden.

I surged in Afghanistan. Mission accomplished for real this time.

I used Predator Drones to avoid the horrible practices of capturing and questioning terrorists. Terrorists and their families don't accuse me of harsh interrogations because they are all dead.

I murdered Osama Has Bin after a speedy trial in New York City. This is how you use the courts to go after terrorists.

I fight for Gitmo every day. We will close it after the next election. Really.

Military tribunals for everyone, baby. They are really not that bad.

I not only fight for gun rights, I send them down to Mexico in the form of my guns for criminals program.

I jumped into the meaningful fight in Libya while skillfully avoiding supporting the Syrian or Iranian people. Nobody will ever accuse me of acting in the United State's interests.

I took big bucks from BP, GE, pharmaceuticals, wind turbine manufacturers, high speed rail lobbyists and anybody else that would give it. I delivered to these public spirited organizations with a trillion dollar stimulus package. Sure the public got hosed but I kept my promises.

Bush didn't know the first thing about the corporatist way and he didn't even look like Il Duce. I am your man. Where is Ethiopia? I am ready to attack but not sure which one of the 57 states it is. Maybe it is one of the ones I haven't visited yet.

Golf is the game of the proletariat, baby. Chevy Volts for the poor.

TheRightIsAnythingBut| 7.5.11 @ 8:14PM

Duckie, you do the worst imitation of "Cereal Killer" from the movie "Hackers" that I've ever come across.

The One Who Runs Like a Duck| 7.5.11 @ 10:28PM

I am a killer, Anything Butt. I am killing our country, baby. Thanks for the help. Let's jam all the wind farms into a Chevy Volt and send it on high speed rail to Martha's Vineyard. Make sure your boyfriend wears protection. It is like my gay nanny used to say, "you can never be too careful when you have a gay nanny". All my trolls do the duck walk.

martin j smith| 7.6.11 @ 10:25AM

For those in Lala land: This election will mainly be ( the Presidential one I mean ) about one thing : Either you approve or disapprove of Obama period.
Its not about, well what are you going to do but what voters do not want. I think most voters don't always know what they want but sure as heckfire know what they don't want. But I would guess that voters want some one who: Talks like a grown up to them, is pro-American, talks with not down to the voters,sounds responsible, and is not Obama. Beyond that its a crap shoot.

Leave a Comment

N.B. We encourage readers to share and discuss their thoughtful and relevant comments about this Spectator article. Comments are routinely monitored and will be deleted if profane, bigoted, or grossly impolite. Please be respectful. (And don't feed the trolls!) Thank you.

More Blog Posts by Joseph Lawler

http://spectator.org/blog/2011/07/05/worse-than-bush

ADVERTISEMENT

SPONSORED LINKS

Special Feature

Better that we become a nation of choosers rather than beggars. Our symposium on choice from the May, 2012 issue:

A Time for Choosing

James Piereson

The Road from Serfdom

Stephen Moore and Peter Ferrara

FLASHBACK TO: 1984

Clip of the Day

Most Popular Articles

Meet the Flukes!

F. H. Buckley | 5.25.12

The Wisconsin Turning Point

Peter Ferrara | 5.23.12

In Search of Muhammad

Aymenn Jawad Al-Tamimi | 5.25.12

Age and Kyl

Quin Hillyer | 5.25.12

Follow Me

Jay D. Homnick | 5.25.12

A Test of National Honor

Hal G.P. Colebatch | 5.25.12

How About the Record of DOE Capital?

William Tucker | 5.25.12

The Great Debate

R. Emmett Tyrrell, Jr. | 5.24.12

ADVERTISEMENT