[Dont_Tread_On_Me_888]

There was absolutley no correlation, he just happened to be pres when the tech boom took

Correct, and Scumbag happened to be president when the pending Y2K preparations and the mega-billions needed worldwide to comply happened.

Scumbag should receive neither credit for that nor criticism for the March 2000 stock market crash. Bush should receive neither credit for an economic indicator today nor blame for the recession.

Presidents have little to do with economic trends.

[Rennes Templar]

The fact is Clinton recieved all credit and no blame. W should receive same from the hypocratic MSM.

[groanup]

Presidents have little to do with economic trends

True, but presidents set the agenda. Clinton had a booming economy in spite of an anti growth agenda. He presided over a bubble.

Bush set the agenda to pull the economy out of recession by proposing investment and wage tax cuts that had some meat to them. Not just some rebate tossed into the pile.

In the case of Bush's tax cuts, the economic trend can be traced directly to them. Look at GDP growth beginning with 2003 up to date and look at GDP growth prior to 2003.