Mitt Romney — April 20, 2012 at 11:18 am

Why Mitt Will Never Apologize for George W. Bush


This economy we ruined. These wars we didn’t end. These deficits we created over 8 years. How dare this President not fix everything immediately!

When Mitt Romney realized he could only get the Republicans behind him by being George W. Bush’s biggest apologist, he must have known that would make him look like a fool.

How could he defend going around the world blaming everything George W. Bush did wrong on President Obama? It’s a blame Roosevelt for inheriting Hoover’s economy strategy. Who would buy such steaming, gelatinous bullpuck?

Fox News and people who got fat Bush tax breaks that’s who.

If you’re in the middle class, you could maybe afford a hood for your Geo Metro with your Bush tax break. Guys like Mitt Romney could buy a Geo Metro factory. You can’t trust too many people who get tax breaks 10X  the size the median American salary to vote for higher taxes.

(BTW: Name one job Mitt Romney created with his Bush tax break please. More on this in a forthcoming post. Subscribe to Eclectablog to get it via email.)

But who else would blame this President for everything Bush did YET give credit for Bush for anything good that happens (like this President making the historically brave decision to bet his presidency on going into Pakistan to get bin Laden)?

Steve Benen thinks most Americans would have laughed at you for making an argument against like this against Roosevelt in 1936. But in 2012, the people who got fat Bush tax breaks have amazing ways to spread their messages. All they have to do is tithe a fraction of their tax breaks to Karl Rove—a guy who only blames Bush for exactly one thing: breaking his heart any time he saunters out of a room.

So Mitt, knowing he was a very tough case, opened his argument by making up a lie that he has repeated over and over. He said the President apologized for America. LOLGOP Fact rated that claim “Super Psychotic.”

No one is apologizing for America. ALL sensible Americans apologize for George W. Bush.

It’s an insane argument that requires careful narrative structure. First it requires you to identify America with George W. Bush. Then trying to fix the problems that George W. Bush left seems almost unpatriotic.

Now Romney is in the second chapter of his strategy to blame the President for the crises he inherited.

Yesterday the Mitt Romney made an appearance at a factory that closed during the Bush Administration to attack the President.

In Ohio, Romney is forced to admit that the economy is getting better. The unemployment rate is now as low as it has been since October 2008. You can’t blame this president if the unemployment rate is lower than he inherited, unless that’s your only hope.

Mitt Romney wants you ignore the heroics it took to save this economy and blame this President for not making like totally way better.

The governor who was 47th best at creating jobs wants you to believe that by simply following Paul Ryan’s 1-step plan to punish poor people everything would have been totally better. Believe him. He’s rich. His wife had choices!

Romney has to use that frame in hopes that people people will not compare their personal economies to what was happening in 2008. 401ks crushed; 800,000 jobs gone each month; no hope that markets wouldn’t just crumble to zero and go away.

Those dog days are over.

But we can’t forget how far we’ve come. This President’s achievements—expanding Medicaid, Medicare, ending pre-existing conditions, ending Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell, saving Detroit, reforming student loans and bringing Elizabeth Warren’s Consumer Financial Protection Bureau to life—are inspiring achievements that will be missed sorely if lost.

Don’t let ANYONE, even progressives, minimize them.


There’s a still a huge risk we can go right back to George W. Bush’s America. And if that happens again, we have no one to blame but ourselves.

[CC image by the viral sensation DonkeyHotey.]

  • CB_Demented

    Not that the president, this one or the last, has much of anything to do with the unemployment rate, but while the percentage may be what it was in 2008, there are 2 million fewer people in the workforce. So it’s a bit disingenuous by either party to make much hay of unemployment statistics.

    And while you can tout those things the President can rightly lay claim to having done, there’s so much more he didn’t do that he should of…the most important of which he chose to ignore so he could pass his healthcare bill.

    What he ignored when he had an ironclad, filibuster-proof majority, was the regulation of Wall Street and the Banking industry…you know…the two forces who combined to give us the disingenuous unemployment numbers everyone likes to throw around.

    Because make no mistake, it took Republicans and Democrats working together for decades to completely fuck our economy in 2008. The number 1 priority of ANY president walking into the mess Obama inherited in 2008 should have been making sure it could never happen again.

    Yet not a damn thing was done in this regard. The next big bubble, whatever it may be, will see an industry with the same lack of regulation that facilitated a near total financial collapse of this nation. No regulations on derivative trading have been created. Nothing to stop credit default swaps. Not even any regulations to make sure that more than the one insurance company, who still isn’t completely or properly up to date with a proper financial IT infrastructure, is holding almost all the paper for credit defaults.

    All the things the few rational members of the Occupy movement who actually could articulate the problem on camera, wanted to change could have been done.

    But instead, he spent all his political capital on something that every line in Vegas will give you short odds will be overturned by SCoTUS.

    Healthcare is important, but it doesn’t hold a candle to making sure the too big to fail crowd can’t completely collapse the whole system in pursuit of the next big complex derivative scheme. It doesn’t matter what law is on the books if there is no economy, because there will be no revenue to pay for it.

    • drsquid

      Did everybody hear that? Dodd-Frank doesn’t exist! No FinReg ever! No perp walks! Bully pulpit!

      The number one priority was to get something moving immediately. The “never happen again” would come later, and it did. That you don’t pay attention to anything except what poutragers tell you to is not the President’s problem.

      Poutragers are just so infantile.

    • Bill Cole

      “when he [Obama] had an ironclad, filibuster-proof majority”
      That phrase is a dead giveaway for delusion and/or deception. It assumes a Democratic Party discipline that has not existed for any major legislation in my lifetime and may never have existed. 

      • CB_Demented

         It assumes the Democratic party really is about doing what’s good for the company and recognizes that the single greatest threat to the company is another collapse of the economy. It assumes that they arent’ talking out of their ass when they say they support the 99%, and that they really mean all these social programs they want as something that’s good for the people rather than just a system of control in which they make voters dependent upon them to insure future power.

        Nothing was more important than insuring that another collapse like we had in 2008 could ever happen again. And the Democrats and the President were just as full shit as the Republicans. Their shit just stank in a different fashion and came with a different shiny wrapper.

        • CB_Demented

           friggin auto correct. Country, not company.

        • Bill Cole

          You speak of the Democratic Party as if it is an organization with a common goal and unified strategy operating as an intentional and conscious team, and that it includes people like Ben Nelson, Bart Stupak, and Joe Lieberman as part of a coherent team. That is not reality. 

          In the real world, the Democratic Party in the House has long included a significant conservative faction who would be Republicans but for the extremism of their districts’  GOP. In the Senate it has 2 “members” who don’t even carry the “D” label and more who are routinely out of line with the Progressive branch of the party on economic issues. The Democratic Party at the national level is averse to discipline and always has been. For most of the life of the GOP, the Democrats have only managed to reach national success by embracing as broad a range of voters and politicians as possible. What that means for the periods when they hold nominal legislative control is that they act as their own opposition.