Republican's did not have "complete control" of the congress for much of the last 8 years. From Jan 2001 - Jan 2003 the Senate changed hands 4 times because it was a 50/50 split with people jumping parties, a senator dying, and a late term replacement that created a techinical change of hands but no actual change since the senate was out of session. Jan 2003 - Jan 2007 Republicans had a majority and held narrow control. Dems got it in Jan 2007 to present. So over the last 8 years, dems had it for 3.5 years and Repubs had it for 4.5 years. Source: http://www.senate.gov/pagelayout/history/one_item_and_teasers/partydiv.htm
The senate is not like the House where simple majority makes you able to do what you want. You may recall all the rancor during those first 2 years where it was changing hands so often. Also a number of virtual filibusters (threatening filibuster to force the need for a 60 vote majority to win cloture and bring the bill to an up or down floor vote) that happened in that 03-07 period. There was the famous "gang of 14" headed up by McCain to broker a bipartisan effort to break the log jam on federal and supreme court nominations. This was needed because republican's couldn't rule the roost with the narrow majority they had, the minority democrats had a great deal of power over what came up for vote. Same goes for 07-present where the Senate Dems have been all but impotent to get a damn thing done, much to the chagrin of the hard left base voters that got them there. Though in their case it has been more about not even trying than being blocked by Republicans. That and waiting out the end of the administration and the current vote balance in the Senate in the hopes of getting a 60 seat majority in the Senate and winning the WH. If that were to happen then one could actually say truthfully that Democrats will have near total control of the federal government.
I note that Bush, Greenspan, McCain and a number of others made their attempts to wake people up to this looming threat in that 2003-2007 period, and were shut down each time by Senate democrats. As much as you'd like to think of Bush as Czar of the country and Republicans as supreme rulers of the congress, it simply is not even remotely the case.
The House is a more clear case with Republican control from 2001-2007 and Dems 2007-present. And because the rules of the House are such that majority has a great deal of power in just about everything, it is fair to say the Republicans had "complete control" of the House during that time. I make no excuses for their inability to move some legislation of the kind McCain and others in the Senate and White House were suggesting, except to say that if it failed to get footing in the upper chamber then it made little sense for them to do anything on it in the lower chamber. The fact is the media was not interested in it, the democrats were singing "let the good times roll", Bush didn't use his bully pulpit nearly enough on this and the few people who were raising the red flags on this looming crisis (though not even they likely understood the magnitude of what it would become) were Republicans.
And that video was very good. Cuts were a bit too frenetic for my taste, but it was highly effective in making the case for a large Democrat hand in this mess. Despite it's partisan bent, it presented nothing but critical facts that aren't making it into the mainstream discussion of this as of yet and presented them in a clear, linear narrative. There is certainly a Bush/Republican role in this mess, but it is not the "deregulation" angle that is being parroted around as of late. It is the maintenance of very low Fed interest rates for too long after the recovery from the dot com and 9/11 recessions. However, this did not create the problem, it only accelerated it. The fact is the Dems planted this time bomb over the past 30 years are wrongly getting away with their repeated denials of responsibility on this mess. I don't blame them entirely, but they had a far larger hand in it than is being acknowledged and it is clear they haven't learned a damned thing as a result of this. They are still pushing the same crap that gave birth to this. Saying the most important thing is to keep people, who can't afford it, in their homes. No sense of pulling back on fiscally unsound mandates for banks to give loans for low income, risky borrowers. Attempting to create a new revenue stream to feed their ACORN slush fund in the bailout bill! All the while saying it is Republicans who are being irresponsible and standing in the way of a deal being struck. It feel like I'm in bizzaro world.