Remember when the Wall Street Journal was a respectable, go-to source? ~ you know, pre-Murdoch ~ ~ this editorial is primo "Fox-worthy" ~ Sooz

The president who must not be named
By Steve Benen - Fri Nov 30, 2012 2:49 PM EST

The Wall Street Journal editorial page believes President Obama has an "economic growth deficit," and publishes an image comparing GDP by year under Presidents Reagan, Clinton, and Obama.



Now, in a comparison like this, context is everything. Reagan and Clinton didn't inherit global economic catastrophes, didn't need mandatory Senate supermajorities to pass legislation, didn't have debt-ceiling fiascos to put up with, didn't have the luxury of getting economic boosts from the Fed lowering interest rates, etc. All of these relevant details went unmentioned.

But Jon Chait notices something else omitted from the WSJ visual.

No George W. Bush! Possibly there wasn't enough room. Or possibly the lesson of the most recent former president, whose tax cuts are set to expire and who presided over poor economic growth, might not offer the lesson the Journal editorial page is seeking to convey.

The WSJ also left out George H.W. Bush, probably for the same reason.

http://maddowblog.msnbc.com/_news/2012/11/30/15576365-the-president-who-must-not-be-named?lite

Bush? Bush?
Doesn't ring a bell.

Citing 1984 under Reagan with 7.2% growth is funny.
Those were the days of 20% mortgages, too.

leaving Clinton in was also a mistake.