I think Bush should be excised from any real comparison between Republicans and Democrats, simply because he was hands-down the worst President this country has ever seen. So, for example, when I see right-wingers on message boards decrying Obama's policies and then complaining that they have a right to do so because Democrats complained so much about Bush, well... Everyone had a right to want Bush out of office. He hemorrhaged billions into a bogus war, passed out cash and choice positions to his cronies, and shredded Americans' civil liberties. He wasn't just any old Republican that you dislike on the basis of his Republicanism. Does that make sense? I wasn't politically active when Bush Sr. was in office, but I doubt if I had been that I would have hungered for his impeachment like I did for Bush Jr.'s.

So, the difference to me boils down to Bush Jr. being the worst President in history. No matter how much Republicans want to deprecate Obama for his supposed socialism, he hasn't been in office long enough for anyone to declare him a monumental failure or for anyone to accurately predict the long-term consequences of his actions, such as his signing of the bailout bill, his healthcare plan, etc. Not to mention that the critique of Bush Jr. by liberals and conservatives alike tended to be accurate, while the critique of Obama as a socialist is akin to calling someone a commie. In other words, it's a pejorative term not for actual socialists, but for anyone who doesn't subscribe to right-wing values. And while I don't think a campaign against Rush is going to discourage any of his followers (rather the opposite: they'll rally around him more), perhaps it will convince people with more moderate values to recognize him for what he really is, which is to say a dangerous threat to intelligence and civil rights.