I mean that in a bad way. He's worse. Here's what Bush's tax cuts look like for each income bracket:
It's comparing them to Pawlenty's plan, which isn't ideal. But it was the best I could find with the income brackets listed like that. The main point is that Bush cut taxes for everyone across the board. Though he did cut them more the high up the income bracket you were. This is what's known as a regressive tax cut. Taxes were cut the same rate across the board, which ignores the fact that 5% of one's income means more to someone making $20,000 than it does to someone making $20,000,000.
Compare that to Romney's plan which Kevin Drum shows us:
As Kevin says, there's a reason Paul Ryan doesn't want to talk about this tax plan. Bush's was bad enough. Romney's is even worse because he keeps the cuts for the higher income brackets while actually raising taxes on the lower income brackets. Bush at least had the sense to hide the fact that his tax cuts were primarily for the rich by saying he cut everyone's taxes (while not mentioning that they were regressive). Romney can't hide the fact that his tax cuts are purely about giving rich people more money.