<<if you think that the Bush presidency was bad three years ago when the Democrats took over Congress . . . >>
Ah, no, that is not what I said. I'm not fixated on "three years ago when the Democrats took over Congress." Bush was still the President then, still controlled the executive branch, and the Democrats did not have a filibuster-proof majority in the Senate.
Of course not you are fixated on a point in time that you chose.
That point in time does not coincide with a real change in the economy.
I note that for Bush your attitude is that, it happened on his watch , it is his.
But what happens on Obamas watch has roots eight years deep.
Deepen those roots and see that many important things happen that the President doesnot order.
The dot .com bubble burst months before Clinton left office and irrational exuberance was over.
Bush struggled with a sinking economy untill 9-11 when a national tragedy harmed the banking industry (yes Virginia Banks do create real value) and for most of his presidency had better employment numbers than Clinton did , now what makes more diffrence , more people makeing exuberant money on the stock market on electronic IPOs or more people haveing Jobs?
Now for Obama my attitude is , it happens on his watch, it is his.