Who believes this Hogwash?!

Checkout this headline from, Yahoo News today: Clinton upstages Republicans with economic plan. An economic plan from a democrat candidate for president? Huh? What is even funnier is the boldface headline on the actual article which refers to Madame Clinton's plan using the word, "stimulus". Who can read the beginning of this article and actually believe this plan will stimulate our economy? I mean, how will it really help the American economy avoid a recession. She wants an immediate $30 billion dollars for lower income families affected by the so-called mortgage crisis, and an additional $40 billion in unspecified monies intended, the article reads, "mainly for the poor and unemployed". $70 billion total in spending, that's spending mind you, to stimulate our economy. The federal government is going to spend their way out of or rather avoid a recession. And- I cannot believe people swallow this garbage as anything other than sanctimonious claptrap- if her spender-as-saviour plan does not work (how couldn't it, right?) she proposes tax cuts for those citizens who pay the least taxes if any at all. Actually I took a little editorial freedom in calling her backup plan tax cuts, the article reads: rebates. How can one cut taxes for those who do not actually pay taxes? Easy give them money for no apparent reason other than calling it a stimulus plan. What? Yahoo must think... I don't know what they were thinking. Perhaps this is boilerplate, by the book journalism. A simple reporting of the facts as they were stated by Mrs. Clinton. Please, my fair readers, read this article. I am asking you to read it, because of my confidence in your respective intelligence. I can find no reason for her "plan", other than her presumption that Americans are either greedy or moronic.
And please notice that the author of this stunning piece of journalism infers that her announcement actually, "upstages" the Republican candidates from last night.

How is a handout going to help the poor and unemployed? How specifically? Oh, they will pay bills and purchase goods putting the money back into our economy (why not pay their bills for them). Then what? After a few weeks or months when they are struggling again, should we give them more money? Heck why should they ever work again? Mrs. Clinton, when she becomes president will just give every poor or unemployed individual an allowance. And that way she will keep a large enough voter base and maybe even grow it, so in eight years Chelsea can run for president. By that time there will be alot of poor and unemployed people that will need just the kind of help the federal government specializes in: subsidized help. Man, we could stimulate this economy forever if everyone was poor. The federal government will just print more money, which is subsidized by... wait a minute... if everyone is poor who will subsidize. Hey!! That's not fair!