This is the latest from the Hillary Clinton camp where they make the startling claim that a President does NOT need to listen to experts. Since the president is obviously the expert on ALL matters and since Hillary has 35 years of experience, it is clear that she knows EVERYTHING that there is to know. The last time a President refused to listen to ANY of the experts and did something that most people disagreed with,
WE WENT TO WAR WITH IRAQ. Is it any wonder that many of us are so uneasy about even remotely considering her for the Presidency.
Here are the snippets from the article in HuffPo.
Wolfson said that Clinton would introduce legislation to alleviate the gas tax burden on consumers over the summer by having a windfall tax on oil company profits pick up the tab. He was non-committal as to whether or not the senator would leave the campaign trail and return to Washington to push the legislation.
Aides to Clinton could not, when asked, point to a single non-political expert who supported such a proposal, saying simply that it is a president's prerogative when to take expert advise.
"We believe the presidency requires leadership," said Wolfson. "There are times that a president will take a position that a broad support of quote-unquote experts agree with. And there are times they will take a position that quote-unquote experts do not agree with."
So the fact that EVERY major economist whether RW or LW has come out and SLAMMED this proposal if of NO consquence to Hillary Clinton. She after all has a PhD in caring for the poor, and knows what REALLY hurts the American people. Notice how she is donating so much money to charity i.e. her own campaign.
There are also unsubstantiated rumors that the Clintons are attempting despereately to cross the
Chief-Flip-Flopper threshold. It is increasingly becoming obvious that with proposals like these it will only be a matter of time before she overtakes McConfused and grabs this title leaving him eating dust in her wake.
Not mentioned on the conference call, but making its way around the Internet on Thursday, was a story from Clinton's 2000 Senate campaign in New York, when she came out in opposition to a gas tax holiday.
It is "a bad deal for New York and a potential bonanza for the oil companies," Clinton said of her Republican opponent Rick Lazio's plan to repeal 4.3 cents of the gas tax.
The campaign, on its website, said there was no contradiction between the two stances, pointing out that in 2000, the money would have been stripped from a highway trust fund, while in 2008, the senator would generate funds taxes on oil companies.
HuffPo tried exceedingly hard to find just ONE expert in any form or shape to agree with the validity and effectiveness of this proposal and came up with a big fat zero.
On Wednesday, The Huffington Post attempted to find one expert from any and all ideological persuasion who believed that a gas tax holiday is a wise idea. It proved impossible.
All emphasis is mine and the link to the story is :
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/05/01/clinton-camp-gas-plan-she_n_99643.html
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
