An economic record only Bush could be proud of

Following up on the last item for a moment, there was one other part of Bush’s speech to CPAC that warranted special attention.

“When I took office, we inherited a recession — and then we acted. We were guided by this principle: the best way to help our economy grow is to leave money in the hands of those responsible for our prosperity. That, of course, would be the American people. And so with your support, we passed one of the largest tax cuts in American history — and then we cut taxes again. In all, we delivered nearly $2 trillion in tax relief over the past seven years.

Our critics wanted a different approach. They believed that the best way to keep the economy — to help the economy was to keep taxes in Washington and expand the size and scope of the federal government…. Despite these dire predictions, the tax cuts we passed contributed to a record 52 months of job creation. They helped produce strong economic growth — and the increased revenues from that growth have put us on track to a balance our budget by 2012. Here is the bottom line: tax relief works.”

Now, I suspect I’m easily dismissed by Bush and his allies as part of the reality-based community, but I tend to think of the president’s economic record as something of a disaster. Anytime Bush wants to list his accomplishments in office, it must be a difficult challenge, but given the state of the economy, this looks like a topic to be avoided.

But not this guy; he wants to brag about his economic record, using some of the silliest arguments imaginable.

Let’s take these quickly, one at a time.

* “When I took office, we inherited a recession.” That’s demonstrably false.

* “Despite these dire predictions, the tax cuts we passed contributed to a record 52 months of job creation.” First, the 52-month streak ended last month. Second, Bush has only added, on average, 369,000 private-sector jobs per year over the course of his presidency (nearly one-fifth the total under Clinton, who raised taxes).

* “[Tax cuts] helped produce strong economic growth.” Unfortunately, “strong” is a subjective word. In reality, Bush has produced the worst GDP growth of any president of the last 50 years.

* “[I]increased revenues from that growth have put us on track to a balance our budget by 2012.” First, we’re nowhere near “on track” to balance the budget by 2012; Bush’s own OMB projects deficits of over $400 billion in each of the next two years. Second, the increased-revenue argument sounds an awful lot like the ridiculous “tax fairy” nonsense Republicans are so fond of.

* “Here is the bottom line: tax relief works.” Works for whom?

The irony is, Bush not only screwed up every possible facet of the nation’s fiscal and economic health, he was wrong in all of his predictions. He assured the nation that if he got his tax cuts through, he could balance the budget, match (if not, exceed) Clinton’s record on job growth, match (if not, exceed) Clinton’s record on GDP growth, reduce poverty, and watch the stock market soar.

All of those predictions weren’t just mistakes, the opposite came to fruition. Every number that was supposed to go down went up, and the numbers that were supposed to go up went down. It’s not even a matter of opinion — the guarantees of 2001 and 2003 were simply wrong. The benefits of Bush’s policies never materialized.

Mr. President, you might want to find something different to brag about. This record is humiliating.

Steve, you know it’s not about the facts. It’s about truthiness. And ole W has that in spades.

  • CPAC is the Republican’s annual gift to the world. They provide their opponents enough ammo in a couple days to last all year. If the Democrats and the press would only have the guts to use it.

  • “the best way to help our economy grow is to leave money in the hands of those responsible for our prosperity. That, of course, would be the American people.”

    That, of course, would the the richest American people. Tax revenue is not left in the hands of government, after all; it returns to the economy. The only difference is who prioritizes where the money gets spent. The government ideally spends money to benefit the public. In private hands, money is spent to increase the profits of the already wealthy.

  • Were there any non-millionaires (besides any reporters or event staff) in that room?

    The Bush economy has worked very well for them, what else matters?

  • If HRC gets the nomination, having McCain on the other side will be useful in that there will be no disincentive to compare with the 90s (as opposed to having say a Huckabee who is younger and could counter with a new versus old theme that McCain just cant use)

    The reality is a simple set of line graphs showing all of these indicators under Bush 1, then Clinton, then Bush 2 and asking which people want going forward — up with Dems or down with Repubs – makes the election so easy even a caveman could do it.

  • I guess all that strong growth is what’s generating the need for a stimulus package?

    Everything Bush says should be followed by the statement “this is the guy who sold us the stories about WMDs”.

    Bush sees no downside to lying like a rug. He can’t lose, because when you have no credibility left, you don’t need to worry about losing any.

  • and just while we’re talking about reality, anyone who calls the budget “balanced” by counting the prefunding of FICA is, of course, a total liar. what matters is the general fund balance, since we should be accumulating a social security surplus, not funding current government activities with it.

  • If HRC gets the nomination, having McCain on the other side will be useful in that there will be no disincentive to compare with the 90s — Zeitgeist

    Obama can do the same thing. Just start your graph with the day Bush took office.

  • Speaking of cavemen…is there any truth to the rumors that McCain is in talks with one of the Geico cave men – apparently he thinks it might help if he could find a running mate who makes him look younger.

  • Bush sees no downside to lying like a rug.

    I know there is a good Optimistic Rug joke here somewhere, but I’m all out. . .

  • OK Obama supporters. Here is a good question for you to answer for me … what will his approach to an economic change look like?

    This is one of the reasons we need more debates … we need to ask them both some more questions on what they will do next.

    I’m curious about a lot of things —

  • “What an impressive crowd: the haves, and the have-mores. Some people call you the elite, I call you my base. …”

    Seen through that prism, Bush has done a heck of a job.

  • Paul Krugman. Evil incarnate, according to my nutty relatives. But he taught the kinds of courses Bush routinely took a gentleman’s (i.e., legatee’s) C in. Read today’s column and get back to me about Bush’seconomic success.

  • Facts are pesky things:

    National debt the day Bush took office: $5.727 trillion

    National debt as of Feb. 7, 2008 $9.223 trillion

    The nation is approximately $3.5 trillion dollars MORE in debt today than it was the day when Bush took office.

    Of course, Bush lives in la-la land where everything is just fine and dandy.

  • Have no doubt that the Republicans will hang the Bush-induced decline of the economy around the neck of a Democratic president. Absent some practical genius-level economic advice and some lucky breaks, the Dem will be one-term president.

  • “When I took office, we inherited a recession.”

    This is one of the more perplexing claims. When Bush was running for office in 2000, he said we needed to enact tax cuts, because Washington can’t be trusted with American’s good hard-earned money. No one was talking about recession. It wasn’t until after the election that he claimed we needed tax cuts to prevent a recession, and even then he didn’t know if we were in one or not. He said we’d have to leave that up to the experts.

    Am I the only one who is a little peeved that a president with an MBA talks about economics only in terms that a third grader can understand? Even when he talks to business groups, he talks like he got his insight from “My Pet Goat.”

  • Bush sold Congress on the tax cuts for the wealthy to get us out of the recession (never mind the underlying business cycle in a capitalistic economy – nobody pays attention to that anymore). Now we’re going into another recession (never mind the underlying . . . ), the tax breaks for the rich are even larger, so doesn’t that then prove the tax cuts for the wealthy don’t work, if one accepts Bush’s own fantasy economic theories?

    I don’t understand why the public can’t get it. They know Bush is a disaster. They know McCain is simply more Bush – wars and tax cuts for the rich. But they’ll probably put him in the White House if Hillary is the nominee, and might even do that if Obama is.

    What’s wrong with the American people? Why can’t the Democrats win this election in an absolute blowout? It’s just mind boggling. If Bush hadn’t been the worst president in history, the Dems woudn’t stand a chance in 2008. It makes no sense.

    And it makes no sense that liberals are bashing Hillary 24/7. They ought to be bashing Republican foreign and domestic policy. Hillary is not destroying this country. The Republicans are.

  • “…“A lie told often enough becomes the truth.” – V. I. Lenin”
    Not in this day and age. Liars are easily exposed today.

    Lying like a rug bought in the propaganda “show room” marketplace in Iraq by McCain and Graham trying to sell us on the success of the surge while getting the sellers killed in the marketplace by snipers in response to their visit to get a good deal on that rug.

    Bush uses the same tactics as Fox Noise believing his audience is too stupid to know the difference between truth and propaganda who will accept any message as long as it comes from their idolized messenger.

    This is what the dems need to make clear to voters and not just assume they know the cause of their misery. Our national energy policy is based on secret Cheney meetings with operatives whose identities we are not allowed to know. For all we know our resources were sold to the Arab nations.

  • Isn’t the economy suppose to flourish in time of war ??
    Guess Bush didn’t get that memo either.

    Would Bush just save us the headache and blame everything on Clinton. No need to tell us this and that, just hold up a sign that reads “Clinton’s Fault” when a reporter asks him a question regarding his inadequacies.

    With any luck at all (for both parties) they can go green and recycle the signs in 12 years.

  • The wealth aristocracy created since Reagan took office in 1981 is now self-perpetuating. Without an estate tax, all of that ill-gotten-gain will be passed from one generation to the next creating a class of slackers, neer-do-wells, and layabouts like we haven’t seen in decades. Such a hereditary aristocracy, as with all aristocracies, cares only about itself, and Bush has always personified this class. All the people he drinks beer with (oops, he doesn’t drink anymore. Yeah, right) are just like him, living in a bubble of luxury with no worries about the future. The rest of us simply don’t exist in their world. Indeed not. We have to work, or worked all our lives, to gain a little security and comfort. They have it all handed to them, indeed they believe they are entitled. The bumper sticker on my car now reads “Janury 20, 2009: The end of an error.” If it were only so.

  • It’s a well-known fact that conservatives suffer from dementia and severe memory loss. How else could any one of them buy the shit this guy is shoveling?

    It’s like Republicans are living the movie Memento where stuff happens and they have no memory of why it’s happening. And the rest of us are living Groundhog Day.

  • The Bush Record, summarized for easy use:

    1. Inherited a surplus, gave taxcuts to the super-rich, leading us to deficits.
    2. Led a slow jobless recovery fueled by a housing bubble fueled by easy borrowing from China.
    3. Housing bubble inflated due to lack of oversight, burst, throwing us into recession.

  • ***Hark*** Dems will win the WH in a blowout. All this “McCain can win” crap is just to sell the race so MSM can make their campaign profits. Repubs can’t just come out and say “sorry, our programs are ruining the nation and have put us in this disastrous state and because we can’t think of anyway to change it on our own without proving our own hypocrisy and losing a lot of personal profit we’ve decided to vote democratic this election and not even offer a candidate.”

    Have more confidence and trust in the voting public Hark, at least in this election…no republican will win the WH no matter who we nominate because this has all got to end or we will loose our democracy and our nation. The only presidential race is the democratic primaries. Voters have turned out in record numbers not because of the candidates but because they want to end this republican fiasco of disaster and obstructionism. The numbers of dem and independents voting dem so outnumber the repubs that it will be one of the biggest blowouts of all time in American presidential races.

    Relax, no republican will win the WH this election no matter who we nominate. Whoever wins the democratic nomination will be the next president.

  • #18 Damp said: “Am I the only one who is a little peeved that a president with an MBA talks about economics only in terms that a third grader can understand? Even when he talks to business groups, he talks like he got his insight from “My Pet Goat.””

    Damp, did you miss the joke from 2008: Do you know why that when Bush explains things to the audience, he talks to them like they are 5 year olds? Because that’s how his advisers(?) explain it to him!!

  • Danp said: http://www.barackobama.com/issues/economy/

    In response to Barack economic plans for a sinking economy from Marion @ 12 ask.

    I just read his whole economic sound bites and didn’t find anything there that will help in the short term.

    There is but one way to immediately get this economy jump started and that is investing in America’s infrastructure and not Iraq’s $300 billion investment would balance the budget, help shore up SS and medicare, pay down the national debt thus reducing interest payments thus producing more money paid on the national debt.

    There is a very simple way to fix health care for the long run but no-one has the guts to do it. My solution would be pay the tuition for Americans to attend college to be doctors and nurses and when they sign up they commit to equal years service in rural and underprivilged areas of service at living wages.

  • #27

    I agree with the infrastructure argument about helping the American economy, and DO GOOD at the same time. We should think of this program as a modern WPA, which will help unemployment, bring massive dollars to many industies, and (how’s this for a quaint idea) help rebuild and modernize American transportation, and contribute to our citizens safety on their daily commutes.

  • bjobotts @ 25

    I totally agree the american people of all stripes except the group (guns, gays and abortion fools) represent have had enough of the bull**** for 8 years and aren’t going to take it anymore. I expect any time now that our great color coding system will be up and running. When an Muslim man or woman takes a pitcue of a beautiful water tower the alert will move to “RED” and the media will tell us to BOTLO for muslims with cameras. 75% of americams are not going to buy it this time. (I hope)

  • ***I know there is a good Optimistic Rug joke here somewhere, but I’m all out. . .***

    Bush: the one rug that’ll never be considered “a bargain” by a US politician visiting Baghdad.

    One simply has to ask—0is this idiot somehow neurologically related to the fat slob who occupied the WH in 1929? I keep looking at the numbers, and reading between the lines of absolute crap being peddled by all the “administration economists who fiddle while Rome burns.”

    Our economy shows all the signs not of mere stagnation, but of having ground to a complete halt. “Jobs created” over the past 7 years are worth demonstrably less than the jobs lost during that same time period. From an economic standpoint, that’s a reversal into negative territory. Gasoline is what—60% higher than it was a year ago? Milk—10%-15% higher? Beef, pork, and chicken—15%? Fresh fruits and vegetables—20%-25%? Bread—15%? Wages didn’t keep pace with these basics; that demonstrated negative wage growth. Healthcare has gone through the roof, as have the costs of attaining healthcare coverage. Millions of families now own homes that have lost value, while others are now making payments on homes that are worth less than the mortgage notes.

    It gets worse when one realizes that, contrary to statements made over the past few years by foreign economies that they were no longer tied to the US economy, the disaster wrought on the US economy is carrying into the other major economies with a vengeance. Bu$h and his cronies have denied every single indicator of a pending recession for almost two years now, while an ever-growing cadre of economic professionals have said that it was happening. Three months ago, they said we were there—and still, Bu$h denied the facts.

    Are they now opening up to using the dreaded “R” word because “recession” has become a convenient understatement? Is there now a possibility that the “R” word might need a bit of revision, replaced by an even more sinister term—something beginning with a “D,” perhaps?

  • As some comedian or other on this blog once suggested (I think it might have been RacerX, but if I’m wrong, I apologize to the true author), “Bush felt so badly about the plight of the poor in America that he made thousands more of them, so they would have company”.

    Just like The Simpsons….it’s funny because it’s true.

  • People also seem to forget that the dollar has been devalued by over 25 percent, when you look at stock market numbers, keep that in mind.

  • Not that Countrywide is innocent, but how much blame is the sub-prime crisis getting that should really go to the war?

  • Comments are closed.