"But after three years of extravagant promises and dismal results, the time for excuses has passed."
...
"No sensible person blames Mr. Bush for the onset of the recession in 2001. But he does deserve blame for the fact that all he has to show for three years of supposed job-creation policies is a mountain of debt."

Now, of course "three years of extravagant promises" is simply a flat out lie. In order to believe this you would have Bush telling the country that economy was doing well after the nuts flew airplanes into buildings.
What is true is the administration and Bush, said we were in a recession [hardly counts as an "extravagant promise"] and about a year ago said we were coming out of a recession- was also saying this was the reason why tax cut were needed, remember. We, of course, were actually coming out of a recession. About 6 months ago, the adminstration was saying that as we were coming out of a recession, we would soon get job growth- which we have.

It's somewhat decent that he doesn't blame Bush for the tech bubble. I don't think you can honestly "blame" anyone for it, rather I think it was managed about as good as can be expected- except in the sense that too many people expected this to continue and didn't allow for a downturn. In other words, too many people did not know or were unwilling to allow that economic boom cyles do not last forever. [Some Govts spent as though it was going to continue, and individuals didn't want to miss out on the chance of getting "easy money"].

Finally, when these wackos say we that "2.4 million jobs have vanished in the last three years". They are picking the lowest unemployment rate of the top of bubble. It's sort of like revving your engine until it explodes- and after fixing the engine, saying the engine isn't fixed until the engine again reachs the rpms that the engine had exploded. Even this totally unrealistic expectation is possible- but if we actually ever get to 3.9 or lower, these wackos will simply change the topic, giving dire warnings about the grave dangers of inflation from a very tight labor market [they would at this point actually have a somewhat valid point].
The problem isn't the economy, the problem is they simply don't like the fact that a Dem isn't the President.