In response to:

Let Bush be

dlinville Wrote: Sep 13, 2012 11:45 AM
Yes your right leave bush out of this,because if we would of elected someone other then him we wouldn't have this obummer idiot period. I blame the f-ing idiots who put bush in office for his 2nd term.Americans are that blind and oflopny isn't much better then bush or O-bummer.
Don't Tread On Me3 Wrote: Sep 14, 2012 9:36 AM
He wasn't perfect but far far better than the Ketchup Gigilo, the Ozone Man, or any other Demmie possibility. He was a breath of fresh air after the relentless stench of Clinton. Just the fact he wasn't a Dem was a massive advantage.

It's a difference between "we can at least improve on his weaknesses from there" and "this guy is either grotesquely incompetent, or he's deliberately destroying the country".
Iopine Wrote: Sep 13, 2012 6:31 PM
TheHeretic Wrote: Sep 13, 2012 5:44 PM
I voted for Bush both times and I've never regretted it. I voted for him in 2000 because I believed he was better than Gore. Or, if you prefer, Gore was worse than Bush. I voted for him in 2004 because I believed he was better than Kerry. I've never seen any reason to change my mind in either case. As for you calling me an idiot, I will let the other posters judge which one of us writes a more coherent post.
AlDavis2011 Wrote: Sep 13, 2012 3:30 PM
Dlinvul, take a pill why don't you!
The theme of the president's 2012 re-election campaign is that George W. Bush left such a terrible mess that Barack Obama could hardly be expected to clean it up in four years.

In other words, 43 months of unemployment rates above 8 percent, $5 trillion in new borrowing, $16 trillion in aggregate debt, gas prices of nearly $4 per gallon, a dive in average family income and involvement in two wars were all due to George Bush and simply too difficult for anyone else to overcome. So Obama cannot be judged on his record between 2009 and 2012.