Real tax burdens

Via the Tax Prof Blog, the Tax Foundation reports upon projected tax burdens under "pre-Bush," "Bush" and "Obama" tax regimes.  My question: Why isn't "pre-Bush" called "Clinton"?

Note in particular the effective tax rates at various income levels.  The "tax cuts for the rich" don't look nearly so dramatic as many politicians have made them sound. Married couple, two earners, no kids, $500,000 of income. Effective income tax rates:  Clinton, 26.0%, Bush, 24.8%, Obama, 26.1%. 

In fact, the Bush tax cuts for the middle class look rather more dramatic.  Married, one earner, two kids, $50,000 of income. Clinton, 5.7%, Bush, 1.4%, Obama, 0.6%.  That's four percentage points, nearly a 75% reduction, from the Bush tax cuts for this family.

Note that the table does not include the new Medicare taxes on high incomes.