am I supposed to assume that Hillary has "experience" dealing with the Economy? Why?

[FrenchieCat]

Currently, the nation’s economy has become an election issue, and so it should be.

The mortgage crisis nicely buffered by our harsh bankruptcy laws, the soaring cost of oil, gas, college tuition, health care, a growing deficit, a climbing unemployment rate and an unstable stock market is coming to a head. Include to the equation that we continue to fund our Invasion of Iraq at a very low return, and you get the picture; it’s the economy stupid.

And so, considering that this was Bill Clinton’s winning 1992 mantra, it is the conventional wisdom that the economy is an issue that should favor Hillary Clinton. Mrs. Clinton, brimming with self assured confidence that eight years living in the White house brings, has alluded to herself as being the “doer” solving real problems, while telling us that Mr. Obama is the “talker” offering “false” hope. She touts of having “been there, done that”, and that it would be wiser for Americans not to take a gamble (with Sen. Obama, I presume).

But there is a kink in Hillary’s sale of her direct experience in the area of the economy. As Sen. Obama reminds us:
He
wasn't willing to concede the former first lady's claims of a superior economics background.
" I am happy to compare my experiences with hers when it comes to the economy," Obama responded, when asked by reporters. "My understanding was that she wasn't Treasury Secretary in the Clinton Administration."

Obama, too, has been focusing on the economy in recent days. At a news conference in Cedar Rapids, Iowa, on Sunday, he tweaked Clinton for past support of the North American Free Trade Agreement. http://www.swamppolitics.com/news/politics/blog/2007/11/obama_clinton_spar_over_grips.html

So what are the two leading candidate offering in terms of direct assistance to the American People. What policies have actually been proposed to bring needed relief? Which is the “doer” and which is the “hopeful” approach?

In early December, Mrs. Clinton called for a “time out” on foreclosures, and a 90 day period to “review” what could be done. The point of the 90 days would be to give time for homeowners to work with lenders in trying to work out a better situation for foreclosure candidates.
Clinton said the freeze would give the housing market time to stabilize and homeowners time to build equity. She also called on the mortgage industry to provide regular reports on the number of mortgages they have modified.
If the administration fails to secure an agreement that includes those provisions, Clinton said she would push for legislation that would allow lenders to convert subprime mortgages into more affordable loans without permission of investors.
She also called for a $5 billion fund to help hard-hit communities and homeowners cope with the foreclosure crisis.
The subprime mortgage crisis has hit some states harder than others, including Florida, Nevada, California, Michigan and Ohio -- key states in next year's presidential” elections.http://www.reuters.com/article/politicsNews/idUSN0342861320071203

Meanwhile, back in August of 2007, Obama began addressing the foreclosure looming crisis, by proposing what the financial community labeled a “radical” plan:

Unscrupulous lenders who deceptively sold subprime mortgages to millions of Americans should be fined and the proceeds used to help bail out borrowers facing a wave of according to Barack Obama, the Democratic senator running to be his party’s presidential candidate.

The proposal is among the most radical yet from a leading Democrat and comes as Washington tries to respond to a growing wave of foreclosures and a crisis in credit markets.

It also comes amid greater discussion in Washington on whether the mortgage industry – including credit rating agencies involved in rating mortgage-related securities – should be more tightly regulated to prevent a repeat of the crisis.

Writing in today’s Financial Times, Mr Obama blamed lobbyists working on behalf of lenders for obstructing tougher regulation of the subprime industry, adding: “Our government failed to provide the regulatory scrutiny that could have prevented this crisis. http://thinkonthesethings.wordpress.com/2007/08/29/npr-obama-seeks-to-fine-unscrupulous-mortgage-lenders-to-address-foreclosure-crisis/

In October, Obama called for an investigation in Subprime lending practices:

“U.S. Senator Barack Obama (D-IL) today sent the following letter to FTC Commissioner Deborah Platt Majoras, calling on her to investigate the marketing practices of subprime lenders and the brokers of subprime loans to determine whether minority borrowers have been victims of discrimination.
Read the letter here: http://thinkonthesethings.wordpress.com/2007/10/18/obama-demands-investigation-into-subprime-loan-discrimination/

The letter is sharply worded and refers back to the days of the Clinton administration, where subprime loan targeting offering high interest rates was already an issue.

It appears that Sen. Obama has not so much of the “wait and see” plan that Sen. Clinton would suggest. Based on what Obama has offered, it appears that his proposal are much more agressive than Hillary would care to acknowledge.


-------------------------------

So both Clinton and Obama offer stimulus packages dealing with some of the current economic issues.

Just like any other Presidents, Bill Clinton had a good team around him, and he had good judgement on economic matters. However, we are not electing Bill Clinton, and he is not the only one who has good judgment or knows who to have around as a team. There were some good times, and then there was NAFTA, so I'm not feeling as fuzzy for the '90 as some might.

Obama also has good sound jugdment, and he knows some smart folks too. In fact, if Obama became Prez, I bet if he wanted, he could get Bill to answer some questions, or better yet he could call Bloomberg.

As a tax accountant who’s married to a financial consultant, I’m not coming to the conclusion that Mrs. Clinton has more answers.....even if she give off that perception. She may easily be the Talker that she refers to when mentioning her opponent. Mr. Obama in fact, appears to want much more radical action; indeed it appears that the talker also “does”.

Hillary’s Stimulus Proposal coverage--70 Billion
http://today.reuters.com/news/articlenews.aspx?type=topNews&storyid=2008-01-11T173043Z_01_N10245304_RTRUKOC_0_US-USA-POLITICS-CLINTON-ECONOMY.xml

Obama’s Stimulus proposal coverage-- 75 Billion
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20080113/pl_nm/usa_politics_obama_dc

[Jeremy of Kansas]

1. Raptor Jesus, way to copy paste. nt.

[FrenchieCat]

11. I have bolded what I wrote vs. what I attributed...and it appears more of the text is bolded, so....

You are giving me a compliment in believing that I cut and pasted all of this! (the italics print is what I lifted as quotes and correctly attributed.

So Thanks! :hi:
----------------------
Currently, the nation’s economy has become an election issue, and so it should be.

The mortgage crisis nicely buffered by our harsh bankruptcy laws, the soaring cost of oil, gas, college tuition, health care, a growing deficit, a climbing unemployment rate and an unstable stock market is coming to a head. Include to the equation that we continue to fund our Invasion of Iraq at a very low return, and you get the picture; it’s the economy stupid.

And so, considering that this was Bill Clinton’s winning 1992 mantra, it is the conventional wisdom that the economy is an issue that should favor Hillary Clinton. Mrs. Clinton, brimming with self assured confidence that eight years living in the White house brings, has alluded to herself as being the “doer” solving real problems, while telling us that Mr. Obama is the “talker” offering “false” hope. She touts of having “been there, done that”, and that it would be wiser for Americans not to take a gamble (with Sen. Obama, I presume).

But there is a kink in Hillary’s sale of her direct experience in the area of the economy. As Sen. Obama reminds us:
He
wasn't willing to concede the former first lady's claims of a superior economics background.
" I am happy to compare my experiences with hers when it comes to the economy," Obama responded, when asked by reporters. "My understanding was that she wasn't Treasury Secretary in the Clinton Administration."

Obama, too, has been focusing on the economy in recent days. At a news conference in Cedar Rapids, Iowa, on Sunday, he tweaked Clinton for past support of the North American Free Trade Agreement. http://www.swamppolitics.com/news/politics/blog/2007/11...

So what are the two leading candidate offering in terms of direct assistance to the American People. What policies have actually been proposed to bring needed relief? Which is the “doer” and which is the “hopeful” approach?

In early December, Mrs. Clinton called for a “time out” on foreclosures, and a 90 day period to “review” what could be done. The point of the 90 days would be to give time for homeowners to work with lenders in trying to work out a better situation for foreclosure candidates.
Clinton said the freeze would give the housing market time to stabilize and homeowners time to build equity. She also called on the mortgage industry to provide regular reports on the number of mortgages they have modified.

If the administration fails to secure an agreement that includes those provisions, Clinton said she would push for legislation that would allow lenders to convert subprime mortgages into more affordable loans without permission of investors.
She also called for a $5 billion fund to help hard-hit communities and homeowners cope with the foreclosure crisis.
The subprime mortgage crisis has hit some states harder than others, including Florida, Nevada, California, Michigan and Ohio -- key states in next year's presidential” elections.http://www.reuters.com/article/politicsNews/idUSN034286...

Meanwhile, back in August of 2007, Obama began addressing the foreclosure looming crisis, by proposing what the financial community labeled a “radical” plan:

Unscrupulous lenders who deceptively sold subprime mortgages to millions of Americans should be fined and the proceeds used to help bail out borrowers facing a wave of according to Barack Obama, the Democratic senator running to be his party’s presidential candidate.

The proposal is among the most radical yet from a leading Democrat and comes as Washington tries to respond to a growing wave of foreclosures and a crisis in credit markets.

It also comes amid greater discussion in Washington on whether the mortgage industry – including credit rating agencies involved in rating mortgage-related securities – should be more tightly regulated to prevent a repeat of the crisis.

Writing in today’s Financial Times, Mr Obama blamed lobbyists working on behalf of lenders for obstructing tougher regulation of the subprime industry, adding: “Our government failed to provide the regulatory scrutiny that could have prevented this crisis. http://thinkonthesethings.wordpress.com/2007/08/29/npr-... /

In October, Obama called for an investigation in Subprime lending practices:

“U.S. Senator Barack Obama (D-IL) today sent the following letter to FTC Commissioner Deborah Platt Majoras, calling on her to investigate the marketing practices of subprime lenders and the brokers of subprime loans to determine whether minority borrowers have been victims of discrimination.
Read the letter here: http://thinkonthesethings.wordpress.com/2007/10/18/obam... /

The letter is sharply worded and refers back to the days of the Clinton administration, where subprime loan targeting offering high interest rates was already an issue.

It appears that Sen. Obama has not so much of the “wait and see” plan that Sen. Clinton would suggest. Based on what Obama has offered, it appears that his proposal are much more agressive than Hillary would care to acknowledge.


-------------------------------

So both Clinton and Obama offer stimulus packages dealing with some of the current economic issues.

Just like any other Presidents, Bill Clinton had a good team around him, and he had good judgement on economic matters. However, we are not electing Bill Clinton, and he is not the only one who has good judgment or knows who to have around as a team. There were some good times, and then there was NAFTA, so I'm not feeling as fuzzy for the '90 as some might.

Obama also has good sound jugdment, and he knows some smart folks too. In fact, if Obama became Prez, I bet if he wanted, he could get Bill to answer some questions, or better yet he could call Bloomberg.

As a tax accountant who’s married to a financial consultant, I’m not coming to the conclusion that Mrs. Clinton has more answers.....even if she give off that perception. She may easily be the Talker that she refers to when mentioning her opponent. Mr. Obama in fact, appears to want much more radical action; indeed it appears that the talker also “does”.

Hillary’s Stimulus Proposal coverage--70 Billion
http://today.reuters.com/news/articlenews.aspx?type=top...

Obama’s Stimulus proposal coverage-- 75 Billion
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20080113/pl_nm/usa_politics_...

[TreasonousBastard]

2. Why work yourself up like that? None of them...

have any experience actually being President or influencing the economy, although Hillary was closest to someone who did. Yeah, I know, that doesn't make her any more prepared for the office than Nancy Reagan or Laura Bush, but it's still something on the plus side.

I've read through lots of economic plans, and they all fall down in some areas-- not that any of them have the snowball's chance of passing. I pretty much ignore them, except to see who in the crew leans libertarian and will return to some of the worst excesses of Reaganomics. Fortunately, that's none of our people. Unfortunately, our people haven't come up with anything radical and workable, either. Maybe they're thinking about it, but what they're thinking is too scary to admit in public during an election.

Everybody, even those other guys across the hall, is repackaging old ideas with new slogans and hoping for the best. What they will actually do when in office is anybody's guess.

So, I goes for blind trust in who I guess is the one who is open to workable ideas and has the stones to push for them, knows when to fold 'em and won't bet the country and get us into more trouble than we're already in.

I really dunno how Edwards or Gravel stacks up here, and crossed Dennis off the list. Everone else, though, including the ones who already bailed, I feel comfortable putting my trust in.

[aquart]

3. She sure can't deal for a house the way Obama can.

[ellisonz]

8. But she can sure throw a kitchen sink...

[fightindonkey]

4. FrenchieCat, Next Time, Actually Come Up With Your Own Text.

[FrenchieCat]

13. See post #11, and

thanks for the compliment. Reads like a real article, hey? Warms my heart.

[Perry Logan]

5. "She is the only candidate in either party who has come forward with serious remedies..."

Stephen Schlesinger:

"Yesterday Hillary Clinton announced a proposal to deal with the increasing economic frailty of our country. She advocated a $70 billion emergency spending package and a back-up of a $40 billion tax rebate if economic conditions worsened. Her proposal was serious, substantive and measured. It was a direct attempt to help the most threatened people in America at this time -- namely, lower-income families facing foreclosures of their mortgages, those in need of home heating assistance, the unemployed who require extend jobless benefits and aid to alternative energy and environmental programs. Her package of initiatives tells why she is starting to gain in the presidential race -- because she is acting rather than talking. She is the only candidate in either party who has come forward with serious remedies for a grave downturn in the American economy. One of the reasons why she won in New Hampshire, in retrospect, was she had earlier helped enact legislation which expanded the economy of that state -- and its voters appreciated it. Now she is doing the same for the nation. This is policy over pizzazz."
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/stephen-schlesinger/hillary-clinton-is-a-subs_b_81211.html

[HughBeaumont]

7. Yeah, remedies like sending jobs overseas and increasing visas . . .

. . . despite the fact that there are multitudes of un/underemployed citizens HERE in need of that same work.

http://www.atimes.com/atimes/South_Asia/GC01Df03.html
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/articleshow/538674.cms
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/articleshow/593175.cms

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UhLBSLLIhUs
Hillary pushes for more h1-b visas and outsourcing

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cLNOSGM2jK4
Hillary Clinton's hypocrisy (part 1)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jgdrh2Bc95M
Hillary Clinton's hypocrisy (part 2)

[Maribelle]

6. Hillary supported NAFTA but was not Treasury Secretary?

Am I understanding this correctly from you: that we can bang on Hillary when she was First Lady for all and sundry that we want to put out there as a huge negative against her, but we can totally dismiss anything during the same period that could possibly help her?

I'm having trouble keeping up with this convoluted logic used against Hillary.

[JTFrog]

9. And I'm having trouble with the logic of supporting

a platform of Profit trump health care, Profit trumps domestic jobs and Power trumps peace.

She kept her powder dry for IWR, Kyl-Lieberman, Patriot Act and the Family Entertainment Protection Act? Voting to send my kids to Iraq while pretending to protect my kids from the evil video games!?!

With all the negative she's produced in the last 5 years, who cares what she did in the white house. It certainly isn't going to change what she's done lately.

[styersc]

10. Your proposition is weak.

" I am happy to compare my experiences with hers when it comes to the economy," Obama responded, when asked by reporters. "My understanding was that she wasn't Treasury Secretary in the Clinton Administration."-Sen. Obama

So Obama's "experience" is that he was also, not the Secretary of Treasury during the Clinton Adminsitration?

In his argument for why he should be the president, he might want to avoid directing the audience to what he was or wasn't during the Clinton administration, since during the majority of the Clinton administration, Barak Obama was not old enough to be president (according to the dictates of the Constitution).

[FrenchieCat]

12. Actually my proposition isn't weak......

it simply states that Mrs. Hillary 'on day one' Clinton really isn't the only one with ideas on how to get things done.....and although she wants to get the benefit of the prior Clinton administration on economic matters, she wasn't the factor that she alludes to.

That is why this is a democracy; because there are many wonderful people in this country with great ideas. Robert Rubin isn't the only one.....and I'm sure that if President Obama called on Robert Rubin, Mr. Rubin would return the call. Mr. Bloomberg too....as well as a great many others.

[elixir]

14. I don't think HRC alludes to her WH years as experience but does refer to her stint as senator.

[FrenchieCat]

15. But she has done as much as she claims....although she "talks" about it a lot.....

I'm the Doer, she says; Obama is the talker.

My point is that she talks a lot about doing....and alludes to that being why she is more qualified.

She voted to authorize the IWR, as well as other calamities offered up by the Bush administration; I'll grant her that!