[Democrats hate too much]

NO RUBIO...

by the way, Reagan made this mistake in 1980. By him selecting Bush as VP we were stuck with with 30 years of Establishment once Reagan left office. According to Rush, after Bush won the first thing Bush did was get rid of all the Reagan people. NO ESTABLISHMENT and besides Rubio would seal a loss in the rubio’s home state of Florida.

[Hardastarboard]

Since you brought it up, in one sense it IS all Bush's fault (GHW, not W). If he had held to Reagan's conservative legacy, if he hadn't raised taxes when he vowed not to, and if he had taken that scumbag Clinton more seriously (and if Perot hadn't gotten into the race - that one was a wild card), he would have been re-elected and we wouldn't have had 8 years of the most corrupt President in American history (Warren Harding was the Pope compared to Clinton).

Clinton's "success" (or perhaps more correctly lack of visible failure), made it safe to vote for Democrats again (since NO ONE in their right mind would have voted Democrat again after the Jimmy Carter debacle of the late 70's). If Clinton hadn't been President, there would have been no 0bama, since it still wouldn't be "safe" to vote for the Democrat. Without Bill Clinton, there wouldn't have been a Hillary Clinton, at least on the national scene.

At the end of the day, much of the nightmare of the last 30 years is directly due to GHW Bush's failure of vision. We're all going to end up slaves because of him, in the long run.

As a side note, if Clinton had lost in 1992, Hitlery would have divorced him, and he would have been free to play as much as he wanted. It would have worked out better for him, too. :-)