<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: November 5, 2008</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.hillaryis44.org/2008/09/24/november-5-2008/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.hillaryis44.org/2008/09/24/november-5-2008/</link>
	<description>We started this website because we believe Senator Hillary Clinton will be an excellent 44th President of the United States.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 16 Mar 2010 13:15:27 -0600</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.5</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: carbynew</title>
		<link>http://www.hillaryis44.org/2008/09/24/november-5-2008/#comment-208753</link>
		<dc:creator>carbynew</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 26 Sep 2008 20:37:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.hillaryis44.org/?p=744#comment-208753</guid>
		<description>Is anybody listening to Nancy Pelosi on TV?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Is anybody listening to Nancy Pelosi on TV?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: pm317</title>
		<link>http://www.hillaryis44.org/2008/09/24/november-5-2008/#comment-208752</link>
		<dc:creator>pm317</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 26 Sep 2008 20:33:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.hillaryis44.org/?p=744#comment-208752</guid>
		<description>provision for ACORN has been mentioned by at least two sources now Lindsay Graham, Kudlow in his article above...</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>provision for ACORN has been mentioned by at least two sources now Lindsay Graham, Kudlow in his article above&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: gonzotx</title>
		<link>http://www.hillaryis44.org/2008/09/24/november-5-2008/#comment-208751</link>
		<dc:creator>gonzotx</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 26 Sep 2008 20:32:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.hillaryis44.org/?p=744#comment-208751</guid>
		<description>A Paulson-Cantor Plan Is a Win-Win for Taxpayers [Larry Kudlow]

KUDLOW IS FOR FREE MARKET AS LONG AS HE AND HIS BUDDIES REAP (RAPE) THE PROFITS</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>A Paulson-Cantor Plan Is a Win-Win for Taxpayers [Larry Kudlow]</p>
<p>KUDLOW IS FOR FREE MARKET AS LONG AS HE AND HIS BUDDIES REAP (RAPE) THE PROFITS</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: admin</title>
		<link>http://www.hillaryis44.org/2008/09/24/november-5-2008/#comment-208750</link>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 26 Sep 2008 20:32:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.hillaryis44.org/?p=744#comment-208750</guid>
		<description>NEW ARTICLE IS UP.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>NEW ARTICLE IS UP.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: henry</title>
		<link>http://www.hillaryis44.org/2008/09/24/november-5-2008/#comment-208749</link>
		<dc:creator>henry</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 26 Sep 2008 20:29:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.hillaryis44.org/?p=744#comment-208749</guid>
		<description>Wonder how many democrats are feeling buyers remorse?
I read elsewhere that there was no provision for ACORN. Any body know if its true?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Wonder how many democrats are feeling buyers remorse?<br />
I read elsewhere that there was no provision for ACORN. Any body know if its true?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: jbstonesfan</title>
		<link>http://www.hillaryis44.org/2008/09/24/november-5-2008/#comment-208748</link>
		<dc:creator>jbstonesfan</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 26 Sep 2008 20:26:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.hillaryis44.org/?p=744#comment-208748</guid>
		<description>The country is in real trouble and we could have had both Hillary and Bill back at the helm to steady the ship. I will never forgive the DNC for what they did....</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The country is in real trouble and we could have had both Hillary and Bill back at the helm to steady the ship. I will never forgive the DNC for what they did&#8230;.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: pm317</title>
		<link>http://www.hillaryis44.org/2008/09/24/november-5-2008/#comment-208747</link>
		<dc:creator>pm317</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 26 Sep 2008 20:25:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.hillaryis44.org/?p=744#comment-208747</guid>
		<description>You can watch CGI videos from the link below. BC was actually very gracious and supportive (contrary to the newsmax story I had up thread) in introducing Obama -- just goes to show you Clinton&#039;s magnanimity not that Obama deserves it in the least.

www.clintonglobalinitiative.org/NETCOMMUNITY/Page.aspx?pid=2827&amp;srcid=2439</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>You can watch CGI videos from the link below. BC was actually very gracious and supportive (contrary to the newsmax story I had up thread) in introducing Obama &#8212; just goes to show you Clinton&#8217;s magnanimity not that Obama deserves it in the least.</p>
<p><a href="http://www.clintonglobalinitiative.org/NETCOMMUNITY/Page.aspx?pid=2827&amp;srcid=2439" rel="nofollow">http://www.clintonglobalinitiative.org/NETCOMMUNITY/Page.aspx?pid=2827&amp;srcid=2439</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Idunn</title>
		<link>http://www.hillaryis44.org/2008/09/24/november-5-2008/#comment-208746</link>
		<dc:creator>Idunn</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 26 Sep 2008 20:19:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.hillaryis44.org/?p=744#comment-208746</guid>
		<description>&lt;i&gt;Essentially, House Republican leaders want a slimmer, cleaner Paulson plan supplemented by Mr. Cantor’s mortgage-bond insurance program. &lt;/i&gt;

I could swallow that pill. But I&#039;ll tell you, there is no fucking way I would be happy with ANY bailout plan that contained earmarks. NONE, and especially none going to ACORN.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><i>Essentially, House Republican leaders want a slimmer, cleaner Paulson plan supplemented by Mr. Cantor’s mortgage-bond insurance program. </i></p>
<p>I could swallow that pill. But I&#8217;ll tell you, there is no fucking way I would be happy with ANY bailout plan that contained earmarks. NONE, and especially none going to ACORN.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Lin67</title>
		<link>http://www.hillaryis44.org/2008/09/24/november-5-2008/#comment-208745</link>
		<dc:creator>Lin67</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 26 Sep 2008 20:13:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.hillaryis44.org/?p=744#comment-208745</guid>
		<description>Carby i&#039;m a little confused, who wanted Paulson bill as is, Bush or Sherman? I&#039;m guessing Bush? anyway, read this. What do you guys think.

A Paulson-Cantor Plan Is a Win-Win for Taxpayers   [Larry Kudlow]

The single-biggest mistake in the Paulson bank-rescue-plan marketing effort has been the failure to explain clearly how taxpayers are going to recoup $700 billion used to buy toxic assets at auction in order to unfreeze the banking system. In other words, folks don’t understand how taxpayers will be paid back, and may actually make profits, which will enable the new government debt to be erased after the Treasury bank-rescue is completed. 

Here’s the key point: Any loan package bought by the Treasury will be 100 percent taxpayer owned. Period. 

Let’s walk through this hypothetical for a moment. Through a market-driven auction, the Treasury will purchase some dollar amount — say $100 billion — of loans that banks will sell. The Treasury will then buy those loans at the prices that fill the auction, starting with the lowest prices and working up. Now, the Treasury will hold those bonds either to maturity or for a sale in the open market if rising prices in the market make that sale attractive. In other words, suppose the Treasury buys a bond package at 20 cents on the dollar. They hold it for a while, and if market conditions improve, they sell it for 50 cents on the dollar to some buyer (e.g., an investment fund, a private-equity fund, a hedgie). The Treasury will make the sale at the higher price in order to gain a profit for taxpayers. 

In the meantime, as the Treasury holds the loans, the government will get monthly cash-flows coming in on the mortgages, or on any other loans that it owns. So it is win-win for taxpayers. First, taxpayers get the cash flow generated by the assets. (Something like a 10 percent interest rate.) Second, if the loan is sold for profit, the taxpayers will own that profit. And the new law must of course stipulate that all the cash flows and/or profits go for debt-reduction to protect taxpayers.

I don’t think a lot of folks understand this win-win scenario. Let me repeat: The taxpayers own the bonds the Treasury buys; the taxpayers own the cash flows generated by the bonds; the taxpayers own the profits when the bonds are sold; and the taxpayers benefit when the profits and cash flows are used to pay-down government debt.

Actually, for taxpayers, it’s a win-win-win-win. 

Think about this. The troubled assets purchased by the Treasury right now are likely to be very under-priced because of the chaotic and frozen market conditions. But over time, through monthly cash-flow payments or through loan sales, taxpayers will get all their money back and in great likelihood a handsome profit.

I have been in conversation with leading House Republicans all day. And they understand these key points. Unfortunately, this understanding did not materialize in their original meeting with Mr. Paulson a few days ago. But now the actual reality is sinking in. 

Another point: Republican leader Eric Cantor has an excellent idea for a federal bond insurance guarantee for straight mortgage-backed paper, financed by private-sector insurance premiums. That will improve investor confidence in mortgage bonds and will make those bonds highly marketable. Importantly, senior Treasury officials have told me that Mr. Paulson will accept the insurance idea as an option in the final bill, alongside the ability of the Treasury to purchase distressed assets.

Sources also tell me that other conditions will be necessary to bring the House GOP along. First, the ACORN slush fund must be removed. Second, the so-called union proxy to run a slate of corporate directors is a big problem. Third, all profits from the Treasury rescue mission must be used to reduce the national debt — 100 percent. Fourth, Republican members are opposed to bankruptcy judges setting mortgage terms and interest rates (Sen. Obama also is opposed). Fifth, the so-called government equity ownership of banks is distasteful because it effectively creates a corporate tax increase on banks at a time when they are struggling. And last, the Treasury secretary’s request for $700 billion is regarded as way too high.

Essentially, House Republican leaders want a slimmer, cleaner Paulson plan supplemented by Mr. Cantor’s mortgage-bond insurance program. I think it’s a good package that would be great news for stock and bond markets that are now ailing badly. It would set the stage for a gradual return to normalcy on the part of bank lenders, including loans to small businesses, consumers, and homeowners. It would be a pro-growth package at a time when the economy desperately needs a prosperity tonic.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Carby i&#8217;m a little confused, who wanted Paulson bill as is, Bush or Sherman? I&#8217;m guessing Bush? anyway, read this. What do you guys think.</p>
<p>A Paulson-Cantor Plan Is a Win-Win for Taxpayers   [Larry Kudlow]</p>
<p>The single-biggest mistake in the Paulson bank-rescue-plan marketing effort has been the failure to explain clearly how taxpayers are going to recoup $700 billion used to buy toxic assets at auction in order to unfreeze the banking system. In other words, folks don’t understand how taxpayers will be paid back, and may actually make profits, which will enable the new government debt to be erased after the Treasury bank-rescue is completed. </p>
<p>Here’s the key point: Any loan package bought by the Treasury will be 100 percent taxpayer owned. Period. </p>
<p>Let’s walk through this hypothetical for a moment. Through a market-driven auction, the Treasury will purchase some dollar amount — say $100 billion — of loans that banks will sell. The Treasury will then buy those loans at the prices that fill the auction, starting with the lowest prices and working up. Now, the Treasury will hold those bonds either to maturity or for a sale in the open market if rising prices in the market make that sale attractive. In other words, suppose the Treasury buys a bond package at 20 cents on the dollar. They hold it for a while, and if market conditions improve, they sell it for 50 cents on the dollar to some buyer (e.g., an investment fund, a private-equity fund, a hedgie). The Treasury will make the sale at the higher price in order to gain a profit for taxpayers. </p>
<p>In the meantime, as the Treasury holds the loans, the government will get monthly cash-flows coming in on the mortgages, or on any other loans that it owns. So it is win-win for taxpayers. First, taxpayers get the cash flow generated by the assets. (Something like a 10 percent interest rate.) Second, if the loan is sold for profit, the taxpayers will own that profit. And the new law must of course stipulate that all the cash flows and/or profits go for debt-reduction to protect taxpayers.</p>
<p>I don’t think a lot of folks understand this win-win scenario. Let me repeat: The taxpayers own the bonds the Treasury buys; the taxpayers own the cash flows generated by the bonds; the taxpayers own the profits when the bonds are sold; and the taxpayers benefit when the profits and cash flows are used to pay-down government debt.</p>
<p>Actually, for taxpayers, it’s a win-win-win-win. </p>
<p>Think about this. The troubled assets purchased by the Treasury right now are likely to be very under-priced because of the chaotic and frozen market conditions. But over time, through monthly cash-flow payments or through loan sales, taxpayers will get all their money back and in great likelihood a handsome profit.</p>
<p>I have been in conversation with leading House Republicans all day. And they understand these key points. Unfortunately, this understanding did not materialize in their original meeting with Mr. Paulson a few days ago. But now the actual reality is sinking in. </p>
<p>Another point: Republican leader Eric Cantor has an excellent idea for a federal bond insurance guarantee for straight mortgage-backed paper, financed by private-sector insurance premiums. That will improve investor confidence in mortgage bonds and will make those bonds highly marketable. Importantly, senior Treasury officials have told me that Mr. Paulson will accept the insurance idea as an option in the final bill, alongside the ability of the Treasury to purchase distressed assets.</p>
<p>Sources also tell me that other conditions will be necessary to bring the House GOP along. First, the ACORN slush fund must be removed. Second, the so-called union proxy to run a slate of corporate directors is a big problem. Third, all profits from the Treasury rescue mission must be used to reduce the national debt — 100 percent. Fourth, Republican members are opposed to bankruptcy judges setting mortgage terms and interest rates (Sen. Obama also is opposed). Fifth, the so-called government equity ownership of banks is distasteful because it effectively creates a corporate tax increase on banks at a time when they are struggling. And last, the Treasury secretary’s request for $700 billion is regarded as way too high.</p>
<p>Essentially, House Republican leaders want a slimmer, cleaner Paulson plan supplemented by Mr. Cantor’s mortgage-bond insurance program. I think it’s a good package that would be great news for stock and bond markets that are now ailing badly. It would set the stage for a gradual return to normalcy on the part of bank lenders, including loans to small businesses, consumers, and homeowners. It would be a pro-growth package at a time when the economy desperately needs a prosperity tonic.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: carbynew</title>
		<link>http://www.hillaryis44.org/2008/09/24/november-5-2008/#comment-208744</link>
		<dc:creator>carbynew</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 26 Sep 2008 20:01:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.hillaryis44.org/?p=744#comment-208744</guid>
		<description>It looks like the House isn&#039;t as supportive as the Senate...Bill Sherman-D my congressman is blaming the president for this mess because he wanted Paulson bill as is.

He saying Wall Street and Paulsen are fearmongering to have the bill ready by Monday but he think we need to slow down and get a good bill instead of a very bad bill. Where once it was 95%, now it&#039;s 50% of the Paulsen bill....he think it should be less. 

This is a California Democrat who said he was afraid a very bad bill would get pass now there hope that slowling down the process we will get a good bill. He hoping the jewish holiday will bring a breathing room....he said Wall Street and the Admin is pushing the fear factor to get the bill they want...not want is best for the country.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It looks like the House isn&#8217;t as supportive as the Senate&#8230;Bill Sherman-D my congressman is blaming the president for this mess because he wanted Paulson bill as is.</p>
<p>He saying Wall Street and Paulsen are fearmongering to have the bill ready by Monday but he think we need to slow down and get a good bill instead of a very bad bill. Where once it was 95%, now it&#8217;s 50% of the Paulsen bill&#8230;.he think it should be less. </p>
<p>This is a California Democrat who said he was afraid a very bad bill would get pass now there hope that slowling down the process we will get a good bill. He hoping the jewish holiday will bring a breathing room&#8230;.he said Wall Street and the Admin is pushing the fear factor to get the bill they want&#8230;not want is best for the country.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
