"Hillary Clinton Was Assailing Wall Street Before It Was Politically Expedient "

[Historic NY]

One of the constant and misplaced criticisms coming hourly from the often-rabid supporters of a certain “socialist in name only” Democratic presidential candidate is that former New York Senator and Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton is a shill for Wall Street. The implication and reason for perpetuating “a myth” is to portray Clinton as untrustworthy and a Wall Street wolf in sheep’s clothing preparing to eviscerate innocent liberals in particular, and middle class and poor Americans in general, if she can win the Democratic nomination and eventually the presidency.

However, like listening to Republicans and uninformed, fact-challenged Fox News devotees, one should consider the source and the motivation behind the non-stop condemnation of a worthy Democratic candidate for president; one whose criticism of the American financial system is more aligned with the things Elizabeth Warren has been screaming about than what President Obama says about the financial sector.

President Obama tends to see the financial sector as performing a fundamentally necessary role for the American economy that requires clearly delineated boundaries in the form of robust regulatory oversight. Hillary Rodham Clinton, however, the so-called “Wall Street shill” according to no small number of Democrats, has described the financial sector “as perniciously distorting the overall direction of the economy.” That is damn-sight curious coming from a so-called “Wall Street puppet” and considerably more progressive than many Democrats might believe.

Most people agree with the President that keeping the financial sector healthy is important to the economic stability of the nation. But as Elizabeth Warren and Hillary Clinton say, “the financial sector’s fundamental business model is flawed, both morally and economically.” As Senator Warren claims to whomever will listen, the American financial sector, Wall Street and banking has been set up and rigged to deliberately “shift any and all risk onto the shoulders of regular people who have no idea what they did wrong, and absolve those who caused the problem and are best prepared to bear the consequences.”

One of the reasons that, as a Senator representing New York, Hillary Clinton could have been labeled as “generally Wall Street-friendly” as a Democrat is because it is typical of congressional representatives to align themselves with business and commerce in the district or state they represent. However, when they are working on the national level, their focus broadens. For example, although as President, Barack Obama has adopted an environmental policy that is not pandering and promoting more coal, as a Senator from Illinois “Obama was a coal booster.” Likewise, as a Texas Senator, Lyndon Johnson was “an ardent segregationist,” but as president he did sign and promote the Civil Rights Act; the one Republicans would abolish if they could.

http://www.politicususa.com/2015/11/13/hillary-clinton-assailing-wall-street-politically-expedient.html?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter&utm_campaign=P2Blogs

[upaloopa]

1. You know when you think you have the true

religion you have to attack every other one in order to reinforce your belief in your superiority.
That requires you to invent reason to dislike all the other belief systems. After all if they aren't wrong where does that leave you?

[Thinkingabout]

2. Some people are from a rural state, others are from the Wall Street State.

[yallerdawg]

3. Remarks on Wall Street on Housing Crisis- December 5, 2007

What they did was not illegal in most cases. "Cut that out" speaks to morality and our better angels. And future legislation to come.

But we now have a great argument against the conservative notion of "self-regulation" - and the "invisible hand" seems to constantly involve a spanking!

If we're honest, we need to acknowledge that Wall Street has played a significant role in the current problems, and in particular in the housing crisis. A "see no evil" policy that financed irresponsible mortgage lending. A bond rating system riddled with conflicts of interest. A habit of issuing complex and opaque securities that even Wall Street itself doesn't seem to understand.

I believe we need a new beginning in our economic policy - one that strengthens our middle class and ensures that prosperity is widely shared, and is based on an ethic of shared responsibility. A new beginning that makes Wall Street shoulder its responsibility for this crisis, and that gives homeowners the breathing room they need. One that makes the most well-off among us pay our fair share and gives the middle class the help it needs for education, health care, and retirement security.

Our economy has been at risk by investment schemes aimed at making not just a few, but many extra dollars, and we need to start insisting on the right rules and transparency so this doesn't happen again.

So I'm here today to call on Wall Street to do its part - to help end the foreclosure crisis that is devastating middle class families and threatening the health of our economy.

http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/index.php?pid=77081

[Cha]

4. Oh yes, they love to smear Hillary with that or whatever else comes to their "that's all they got"

minds.

I just got accused of drinking the koolaid on a positive Hill thread in LBN. They are the insult wing.. 'cause where would they be without their personal ignorant attacks?

Mahalo HistoricNY