Editor’s note: the following is in response to a letter printed in the Nov. 27 edition of The Courier-Herald.
Ah, Lee, Lee, you got to let go, man.
So, let’s review once again.
(Full disclosure, I am not a real fan of many of the Bush policies but respect the man and respect history.)
The “Bush recession” actually started a long time before he took the oath of office. The signs were clear at least a year before and Clinton knew about the coming crash of the tech bubble but did and said nothing cause the next Republican would get tagged for it. Democrat politics at its best. This was around the same time Clinton was caught selling missile technology to the communist Chinese (who last month announced they can now hit any U.S. city with a nuke) for campaign funds. The highest unemployment rates in Bush’s entire eight years in office was his last at 7.8 percent, compared to President Obama’s low of (officially) 8.1 percent, so far. Six years later the official rate is about 8 percent, but if you use the same metrics as the Bush era it’s 13 to 15 percent. Unemployment in the first (nearly) four years of Obama’s presidency was higher than that of any single month in president Bush’s eight years in office and it’s not getting better. Methodologies and reporting policies mysteriously changed under “I Won.” Imagine that.
As to the housing crash, let’s see who ordered the mortgage lenders to loan money to anyone, especially if they demonstrably couldn’t pay it back…anyone? Bueller? Clinton, Democrat Congress, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. Bush gave seven speeches within a year of taking office asking the Congress to rein in F/F to stop the disaster. Barney Frank (D), the Congressional head of F/F, called him a racist.
So Lee, 1) ya got to move into the 21st century and look at what’s what over a half a decade later. And 2) how’s that “hope and change” working out for ya?
Craig C. Sarver