that was a retarded article.
Bush is to blame for a great many things.
most of them very dumb and shortsighted on his part.
he was and will remain one of the worst american presidents ever...but he did not create the fundamentals of the crisis, which was not budgetary. He did not create the derivatives that helped exacerbate this crisis. he did not pass any of the acts that helped screw up the banking system.
he has done alot of stupid crap. But to suggest he is solely to blame for this is just dumb.
there was no major economic crisis in the economy itself...the problem was the housing bubble. plain and simple. then ally that to the credit derivatives and you have a recipe for disaster.
and also, that author noted how "rosy" things were when Bush tookover...and indeed thigns were good in many respects.
but the author did not mention that the dot com bubble had just burst and the NASDAQ had crashed nearly 50% before Bush was inaugurated.
if people are blaming Bush for the economy Obama has inherited, two months in, that is fine...it is now late march...people are still blaming Bush...so by that logic, Bush was not to blame for the Recession we entered in MArch 2001 that lasted through November 2001.
Bush is not excused for all this...but it is also not solely his fault