Valid argument, but it's fair to expect movement in the right direction pretty quickly.
Depends on the specific circumstances. Again, Bush had Democrats falling over themselves to go along with whatever he wanted to do. Democrats were the 'Alan Colmes' or 'Washington Generals' back then whereas Obama has had the exact converse of that situation where Republicans are even going so far as you oppose him when he does exactly what they want and ask for. A game of :
Republicans: "WE want *THIS*!"
Obama: "O.k., that sounds fair. You can have *THIS*."
Republicans: "No…we do not want *THIS* now and are offended you would suggest such a disastrous policy for our country!"
Obama: "Ok…what Do you want?"
Republicans: "You out of office you sock monkey Sambo m*th*rf*ck*r! And tell everyone to quit inferring there may be racist elements at work here you uppity n*gg*r!"
So surely you can see that this is quite a different challenge for a sitting President. Hard to get anything done when faced with that kind of nonsense.
The ship won't turn on a dime, but somebody'd better be cranking the shit out of the helm. Not only are we not averting disaster, but we're full steam ahead for some really sharp rocks. That's not unreasonable to complain about, and that's got exactly nothing to do with Dubya.
Whether we are headed for really sharp rocks or not remains to be seen. That Republicans are the ones trying to steer us towards really sharp rocks because their chances for getting back into power in November hinge on this seems lost on you. And to say that all of this has NOTHING to do with Dubtya…?! I almost fell out of my chair laughing! I shouldn't have to remind you of why we are in this mess in the first place right?
The problem with that argument is that I'm quite confident we'd have remarkably different definitions of "GOOD spending". If your defense hinges on my blind acceptance of your subjective judgment, it's a shaky defense.
I don't doubt we have different definitions but you are at a severe disadvantage here because the records are working against the idea that Republicans know anything about fiscal responsibility and good spending.
Reagan? Drove us into a record setting deficit and caused huge unemployment while turning AIDS into an epidemic and doing away with the 'Fairness doctrine' that has allowed Fox News and such to come about.
Bush Sr.: Drove us further into deficit and unemployment by maintaining the "Trickle down" disaster of Reagan and expanding the rift between the top 1% of America and the rest of America.
Clinton: Got lucky with the internet coming about when it did and was more of a Conservative Democrat to be sure but he DID manage to dig us OUT of Bush's deficit with his "Liberal 'tax-and-spend' policies"(eye roll) and left office with a few trillion dollars in surplus.
Shrub/Dubya: Set fire to the surplus and drove us right back into a deficit that his dad would have been proud of! As a direct result the country ends up in a recession with record breaking unemployment, all while corporate America reports record setting profits(none of which have 'trickled down' to the rest of us BTW).
You can dodge all of that all you want but let's face it, when Republicans get into office, the country suffers…every single time! And this is not juust flukey bad luck. it is directly because of Conservative policies and the wealthiest 1% manipulatuing the poor and uneducated majority into fucking themselves while blaming the very people looking out for them! I generally hate it when people try to drag George Orwell into these things to attack one side or the other but I dare say that the comparison here is apt. What is Fox News if not a mouthpiece for 'Big Brother' offering 'Newspeak' in minute by minute bulletins?
