No lets give Romney 4 more years of Bush politics that worked out so well 
Bush? Why bring up Bush at this point? Clinton left Bush a big mess, but nobody ever talks about that. All they talk about is how great the economy was under Clinton and how he left Bush a surplus. Yeah, right:
"President Clinton's tenure was characterized by economic prosperity and financial deregulation, which in many ways set the stage for the excesses of recent years. Among his biggest strokes of free-wheeling capitalism was the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act, which repealed the Glass-Steagall Act, a cornerstone of Depression-era regulation. He also signed the Commodity Futures Modernization Act, which exempted credit-default swaps from regulation. In 1995 Clinton loosened housing rules by rewriting the Community Reinvestment Act, which put added pressure on banks to lend in low-income neighborhoods."
http://www.time.com/time/specials/packages/article/0,28804,1877351_1877350_1877322,00.htmlIn 2001, right after Bush took office, there was a recession that drove many good companies out of business and left many unemployed. You gonna blame that on Bush too? It was the mess Clinton left him.
But the one thing that most contributed to the worse recession since The Great Depression was Clinton's decision not to regulate derivatives, even though he had been warned that his decision would soon leave people in the US and around the world jobless, homeless, hungry, that they would lose their 401K, their savings and that it would be the worst recession since the great depression. Clinton had a chance to prevent this mess, but he chose to do nothing. Bush did not get that chance.
Now Obama has had a chance too, four years do regulate derivatives. But he is still working on some BS law that won't fix anything. Romney may not do anything about this either. But Obama had his chance and failed. It's time to give somebody else a chance.
