Bush Has a Good Economic Record, What Do you think?

[AlphaCentauri]

According to this WSJ article it is a Maverick

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122039890722392873.html

[gratuitous]

1. Are you better off now than you were eight years ago?

Do you like paying $3.75 a gallon for gas, or $1.50?

Well, that debate sure ended in a hurry.

[Zynx]

2. It's the worst economic performance of a two term president in history.

It is headed for the lowest economic growth rate since Herbert Hoover once this year is factored in. Job growth has been among the slowest rates on record.

[Union Thug]

3. "job growth" - the 'pukes have been on parade claiming the opposite...

I swear, over the past few days I've heard this talking point many times; Bush presided over some of the lowest unemployment rates in modern history. I'm not sure what numbers they are torturing to squeeze out such a bizarre statement, but be warned, that's the latest.

[EOTE]

4. How convenient for them.

People stay on the unemployment rolls for so long, they're force off. Then, when the unemployment numbers see a drop due to people who simply aren't allowed to file anymore, they call it a rise in employment. How fucking ridiculous. And this article is the most worthless piece of crap I've ever read. He mentions how the wealth inequality compared to other first world nations in 2000, but mentions NOTHING of how the inequality stands today. What is he trying to hide? Worthless.

[Union Thug]

5. What you said..and add to this that the metrics have changed over the years

and if we were measuring employment numbers using the metrics of 30 years ago, we'd be staring down the barrel of about 9-10% unemployment today.

[Zynx]

11. He started at about 4.4% unemployment. It's currently 5.7%.

[HughBeaumont]

6. Now, a voice from reality: During Bewsh's first term, it took 5 YEARS to create A net new job.

We're soon going to be heading for 8 STRAIGHT MONTHS of job losses.

All stock indexes are either at or below the same levels as when Bewsh took office.

Here's some more stats on this "astounding economy" from the POV of those that MATTER: the workers.

http://journals.democraticunderground.com/HughBeaumont/46

So, ONCE again, if the right wing brand of Supply Side economics hasn't worked in 28 years for the middle, working and poor classes . . . what makes ANYone who's either a fence sitter, independent or Republican think that McCain, considerably lull on economics, has a plan that will make things better this time around?

Please enlighten me, McCainiacs. PLEASE. If your candidate's plans didn't work before, logically explain to me without any kind of speculation as to how you THINK the economy will be under Barack Obama how you WON'T be voting against your best interests economically this time out? I'd LUUUUURVE to hear this one.

[conspirator]

7. Good economic record, yeah ... for the UPPER 1% of people nt

[HughBeaumont]

9. Like Will Pitt said:

When they say "Economy", they mean "Someone who's not you or me gettin' PAID".

[dkofos]

8. Him and the rest of the 1%ers had a great economy.

[lpbk2713]

10. Well ... AWOL Monkey-Boy broke many fiscal records, that's for sure.

... turning a budgetary surplus into a record deficit
being only one of his major achievements.