I dont think either President can accept much blame or credit for the overall growth.

A chimp could've been in office during the Clinton years, and he would've enjoyed the same explosive growth of the economy due primarily to technology. The most intelligent move Clinton made during that time was the move he didn't make. He made the decision to NOT do anything to inhibit growth of the internet including NOT taxing ecommerce to the chagrin of most of the rest of the democratic party.

The dot bomb exploded in March of 2000, that was still on Bill's watch. By the time George W. inherited it in January 2001, the economy was already a mess. And again, I dont care who was in office on 9/11/2001, the economy was dealt a knockout blow.

But if you're going to give President's credit...or blame....it's worth pointing out that the current economic upturn started at the same time George W. cut taxes...

I agree with that. I could never understand logically, why people would want to return to the clinton economy. One which completely collapsed.

you think it collapsed because of Clinton???

I don't think he has ANYTHING to do with it's rise or it's demise
(well, demise part I am not so sure, as it was his DOJ idea to go after Microsoft)

I don't think it was all his fault, but that economy under him was one people want to go back to.

I think one of his main faults as far as the economy was sweeping problems under the rug to create a fantasyland where there was no problems in the world and people can sit back and merrily buy overvalued techstocks.

the ONLY way to get back to THAT Economy is
NEW TECHNOLOGOCAL/Biological/etc
REVOLUTION,
like railroads were,
automobiles were,
computers were
internet was....

EVERY BOOM in US Economy was acompanied by invention

Collapsed? 8 solid years under Clinton and the worst that happened was a very minor recession after he left office. Increasing the size of the economy by 50% and only having it drop 1% or so in the recession after is phenomenal - not a collapse. He also had the good sense to reduce the deficit as the economy grew. Something which George Bush hasn't planned to do. If we're going to deficit spend during slow times we should have the sense to reduce it during good times. That is the idea anyway. Borrow now to smooth out the down economic periods and pay it back during good times.

And if you're talking about the stock market people were, in Greenspan's words, "Irrationally exuberant". Not Clinton's fault.

Colin, on this we agree, I don't see that the Bush way of doing things has any "recovery" to get the debt back in line in the future, rather a continued increase in the size of government, the number of agencies, department heads, and such... You can only buy a good economy for a while before the problems start again. Please see Japan for more on what happens after a bubble bursts, interest rates drop to nothing, and the government no longer has any leverage with which to work on the economy.

I am starting to wonder if the VERY right wing policies and ideas are not being played to try to get Bush to average back to the middle, considering his fiscal policies (not in theory, but in practice) see to lean to the big government extreme left view of the world.

Alex

my first guess is so they won't be in a country on some list to be invaded and occupied by the US military?

and as for your statement "bush and us conservatives" you might want to spend a moment reading carrie's post about what bush has accomplished and ask yourself if any of those policies could be considered 'conservative'.

anyone that is truly conservative nowadays is more likely to consider themselves a libertarian or a constitutionalist. the republicans and the democrats are just the far right and the right wings of the big corporation party.

when the government and the corporations were partners in the past the history books called this 'fascism'. since the US media is owned by the big corporations now they use euphemisms like "democracy" or "capitalism" to describe the current state of things, but anyone with the slightest historical knowledge knows the real deal.