Chronicles in the Trials and Tribulations of Hillary Clinton - Working Class Warrior(s) Speaking Fees

[barbos]

How do ex-presidents being paid for speeches equal buying influence? Ex-presidents are no longer in positions of power to do anything.

Suppose Bill Clinton comes to Goldman and says "I need $200k", and they say "No, we are not interested in your speech". Then Bill Clinton calls current president and tells him about it. Current president is not an idiot, he knows that he will be "giving" "speeches" after he leaves the office so he calls Goldman and tells him "I heard you decided to refuse to influence the government, is that true? Do I need to inform attorney general?"

These people don't just give money away, they get much more in return for that.

 

[barbos]

Fixed for you.

Jesus Christ. This has been going on for 200 years. Because a woman is using the system, everyone is up in arms. Where was all this fake outrage when Bill Clinton, GW, Reagan and every other politician was paid for their speeches.

I was not around during Ronald Raygun and GW so can't say. But I think this bullshit hit the new high with Clintons, partially due to the fact that Hillary was in the government and/or had presidential aspiration while Bill was giving speeches, very convenient arrangement if you ask me.

 

[Cheerful Charlie]

It has been called a delayed bribe. Do well by the big companies, and later on the big companies will give you big money for a nice speech. This issue came up when Bush 41 received a big payoff for a speech he gave in Japan, after he had left office. Such big payoffs for a short speech smack of corruption for many.

 

[Jolly_Penguin]

View attachment 5632

^ Why oh why couldn't THIS be the female candidate for U.S. President and the first female President of the U.S.A.? I would be so proud of you guys. Hillary.. not so much.

 

[barbos]

It has been called a delayed bribe. Do well by the big companies, and later on the big companies will give you big money for a nice speech. This issue came up when Bush 41 received a big payoff for a speech he gave in Japan, after he had left office. Such big payoffs for a short speech smack of corruption for many.

And if you are crappy or lazy speaker, they would simply hire you on some phony position within their company, board of directors or something. They can also hire your children, especially if you are a former president because hiring former POTUS would be just weird. Presidents are limited to speeches and children being employed.

 

[dismal]

Unlike Hillary, he does (or did) seem to be able to sell tickets to actual people acting in their capacities as individuals.

Call me when the only gig Justin Bieber can get is playing for huge dollars for Goldman Sachs and we'll discuss why only Goldman Sachs thinks he is such a great singer.

So now the Clintons have to sell tickets to 'actual people' acting in their capacities as 'individuals' for their speaking fees to be legitimate?

I am saying it would be evidence people were willing to pay to hear them speak. Or even show up when the product is being given away for free in the recent campaign.

The fact that the appeal of her speeches is selectively limited to large corporations with business before the government requires some other explanation.

And there is another questions to ponder: Why would a greedy and ruthless and evil profiteering corporation pay for even the best speech in the world? How does hearing a Hillary Clinton speech translate to Goldman's bottom line? does she inspire them to be more ruthless and evil and greedy?

 

[Nice Squirrel]

The fact that the appeal of her speeches is selectively limited to large corporations with business before the government requires some other explanation.

 

[braces_for_impact]

Fixed for you.

Jesus Christ. This has been going on for 200 years. Because a woman is using the system, everyone is up in arms. Where was all this fake outrage when Bill Clinton, GW, Reagan and every other politician was paid for their speeches.

Look, I'm sure there are some who will have a double standard for women. But many Americans feel this outrage, it's sincere, and it's on both sides of the aisle. How many times can "your side" make your electorate promises it will not keep within a certain time span before people really begin to notice? Like it or not, we're going through an anti-establishment phase on both sides of the aisle right now. Some of the reasons are similar, some are not, but Clinton is suffering mostly because she's part of the establishment, her laughable claims to the contrary. Combine this with her natural appearance of robotic insincerity (much like Nixon had) and an anti-establishment candidate like Sanders, and she's having a rough time.

Many of the people being tarred with the "sexism" label (many by Clinton's campaign) would be delighted to have a woman president. Many still wish Warren would run and would vote for her in a heartbeat. In fact, if she were running right now, I'd bet my last dollar she'd be steam rolling Hillary.

 

[coloradoatheist]

Jesus Christ. This has been going on for 200 years. Because a woman is using the system, everyone is up in arms. Where was all this fake outrage when Bill Clinton, GW, Reagan and every other politician was paid for their speeches.

Look, I'm sure there are some who will have a double standard for women. But many Americans feel this outrage, it's sincere, and it's on both sides of the aisle. How many times can "your side" make your electorate promises it will not keep within a certain time span before people really begin to notice? Like it or not, we're going through an anti-establishment phase on both sides of the aisle right now. Some of the reasons are similar, some are not, but Clinton is suffering mostly because she's part of the establishment, her laughable claims to the contrary. Combine this with her natural appearance of robotic insincerity (much like Nixon had) and an anti-establishment candidate like Sanders, and she's having a rough time.

Many of the people being tarred with the "sexism" label (many by Clinton's campaign) would be delighted to have a woman president. Many still wish Warren would run and would vote for her in a heartbeat. In fact, if she were running right now, I'd bet my last dollar she'd be steam rolling Hillary.

I can't understand why anybody likes Hillary. At least Bernie has some principles. She is the epitome of what we hate in politics.

I don't have the disdain for the Republicans because they are pro business. But Hillary talks from all sides of herself.

 

[KeepTalking]

Look, I'm sure there are some who will have a double standard for women. But many Americans feel this outrage, it's sincere, and it's on both sides of the aisle. How many times can "your side" make your electorate promises it will not keep within a certain time span before people really begin to notice? Like it or not, we're going through an anti-establishment phase on both sides of the aisle right now. Some of the reasons are similar, some are not, but Clinton is suffering mostly because she's part of the establishment, her laughable claims to the contrary. Combine this with her natural appearance of robotic insincerity (much like Nixon had) and an anti-establishment candidate like Sanders, and she's having a rough time.

Many of the people being tarred with the "sexism" label (many by Clinton's campaign) would be delighted to have a woman president. Many still wish Warren would run and would vote for her in a heartbeat. In fact, if she were running right now, I'd bet my last dollar she'd be steam rolling Hillary.

I can't understand why anybody likes Hillary. At least Bernie has some principles. She is the epitome of what we hate in politics.

And I just don't get the absolute hate that Republicans hold for Hillary. I have a conservative coworker who supports Cruz, with whom I talk politics all the time (we get along very well in the workplace despite or polar opposite political leanings). He has this hate for Hillary that he cannot even articulate. Any mention of Hillary is enough to start him frothing at the mouth. He claims it's because she lies, I point out that all politicians lie, he says it's because she has done nothing to deserve her place in politics, I point out that the lesser Bush was much less deserving than is Hillary (lately I just say "Palin", and drop the mic). Then we have another drink, and bitch about his boss (not mine, cuz she is awesome).

I don't have the disdain for the Republicans because they are pro business. But Hillary talks from all sides of herself.

With a small adjustment of the gender specific pronoun, that same thing can be said of virtually all politicians.

 

[coloradoatheist]

And I just don't get the absolute hate that Republicans hold for Hillary. I have a conservative coworker who supports Cruz, with whom I talk politics all the time (we get along very well in the workplace despite or polar opposite political leanings). He has this hate for Hillary that he cannot even articulate. Any mention of Hillary is enough to start him frothing at the mouth. He claims it's because she lies, I point out that all politicians lie, he says it's because she has done nothing to deserve her place in politics, I point out that the lesser Bush was much less deserving than is Hillary (lately I just say "Palin", and drop the mic). Then we have another drink, and bitch about his boss (not mine, cuz she is awesome).

I will agree, but I don't think Hillary deserves any respect, she's a politician with no backbone. That's why Trump is liked because people don't think he will talk out of both sides of his mouth.

With a small adjustment of the gender specific pronoun, that same thing can be said of virtually all politicians.

Yes, but this election has been about trying to get rid of them, hence Trump's popularity. But Bernie represents what people want from the Democratic party. What does Hillary represent that people want?

 

[untermensche]

I don't have the disdain for the Republicans because they are pro business. But Hillary talks from all sides of herself.

So if the Taliban were just "pro-business", whatever you think that means, they would be OK for you?

 

[dismal]

Politicians like Hillary hurt their own party more than anything.

Partisans find themselves abandoning their supposed principles to defend shit like taking hundreds of thousands of dollars from Goldman Sachs and operating a homebrew e-mail server while acting as Secretary of State.

People who are normally big-government-will-work-if-we-just-get-the-right-people-in-there fanboys find themselves lamenting how all politicians are liars and we can't expect any better.

Another generation of youth becomes cynical.

It's no surprise Bernie got an astonishing 84% of the youth vote. They're not ready to settle for Hillary. Yet.

 

[coloradoatheist]

I don't have the disdain for the Republicans because they are pro business. But Hillary talks from all sides of herself.

So if the Taliban were just "pro-business", whatever you think that means, they would be OK for you?

Yes and no. I wouldn't vote for them either for their other principles. But the problem is not having any principles.

 

[KeepTalking]

I will agree, but I don't think Hillary deserves any respect, she's a politician with no backbone. That's why Trump is liked because people don't think he will talk out of both sides of his mouth.

With a small adjustment of the gender specific pronoun, that same thing can be said of virtually all politicians.

Yes, but this election has been about trying to get rid of them, hence Trump's popularity. But Bernie represents what people want from the Democratic party. What does Hillary represent that people want?

She represents the moderate Democrat, and the establishment wing of the party. She represents women and minorities interests. She represents 3 appointments to the supreme court. She represents immigration reform. She represents renewable energy efforts. She represents a lot of things to a lot of people. I prefer Bernie, but would vote for Hillary over any of the Republican candidates.

What does Ted Cruz represent?

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Politicians like Hillary hurt their own party more than anything.

Yes, the billions raised by the Clintons for the Democratic Party has just been stifling the Democrats. I would agree that Clinton, being a right-leaning moderate doesn't help the progressive cause, but of course, the right-wing media has been defaming her for so long as being a socialist that her actual stances are rarely ever critiqued by the right.

Partisans find themselves abandoning their supposed principles to defend shit like taking hundreds of thousands of dollars from Goldman Sachs and operating a homebrew e-mail server while acting as Secretary of State.

Funny... because which partisans here are condoning Clinton and the Wall Street speaking fees?

It's no surprise Bernie got an astonishing 84% of the youth vote. They're not ready to settle for Hillary. Yet.

Settle is the right word. The best of the options available. Who won't appoint justices like Alito, Scalia, and Thomas.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

I will agree, but I don't think Hillary deserves any respect, she's a politician with no backbone. That's why Trump is liked because people don't think he will talk out of both sides of his mouth.

It isn't Clinton has no backbone, she really lacks much in the way of principles.

The reason people like Trump is because he doesn't care what the establishment thinks of him, pure cult of personality. They think support for him is a middle finger to the establishment, regardless what Trump actually thinks or proposes (when he rarely makes the effort to say what he would actually do... other than build a wall that Mexico would somehow pay for, love to see how that contract is written). Trump is like simply for his attitude and this idea that a billionaire is somehow an outsider of the system.

With a small adjustment of the gender specific pronoun, that same thing can be said of virtually all politicians.

Yes, but this election has been about trying to get rid of them, hence Trump's popularity. But Bernie represents what people want from the Democratic party. What does Hillary represent that people want?

An established candidate that can be elected President and would put forth good nominees for the Supreme Court. Her positions are not considered radical by anyone but those who have been taught to hate her. She is a safe bet.

 

[dismal]

Yes, the billions raised by the Clintons for the Democratic Party has just been stifling the Democrats.

Yes they raised a ton of money.

Now pause.pause.pause. it's time to get on with spending it to convince us they're the ones to protect us from all the money flowing in politics and the greedy investment bankers.

Do you think that was enough pauses? I'm not sure how stupid Democrats assume the American people are.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Yes, the billions raised by the Clintons for the Democratic Party has just been stifling the Democrats.

Yes they raised a ton of money.

Now pause.pause.pause. it's time to get on with spending it to convince us they're the ones to protect us from all the money flowing in politics and the greedy investment bankers.

You said she was bad for the Party. Clearly the Clinton's ability to raise capital for the party has been a huge asset. Bill Clinton is still an asset to the Party in being able to give stump speeches for candidates. You have to just accept the Clintons are popular and an asset to the Democrat Party. Doesn't mean they are progressive (despite what AM Radio has said for decades), just that your statement that she is a liability to the party is incorrect.

Do you think that was enough pauses? I'm not sure how stupid Democrats assume the American people are.

Ted Cruz (R) was elected as a senator. William Jefferson (D) was re-elected to the House after having money found in his freezer by investigators. George W. Bush (R) won an election in '04. Progressives don't want Hillary, but we want what counts as a Republican magnitudes less than her.

 

[KeepTalking]

Politicians like Hillary hurt their own party more than anything.

Partisans find themselves abandoning their supposed principles to defend shit like taking hundreds of thousands of dollars from Goldman Sachs and operating a homebrew e-mail server while acting as Secretary of State.

You say "partisan" as if you are not one from the opposite end of the spectrum. I have actually voted for Republican candidates at the state and local level, and for Libertarian, Independent and Green party candidates at the national level as well. I have eyes and ears though, and I see the same people complaining about speaking fees supporting shit like Citizen's United. I note that those people are just as sincere as the politicians they admonish as liars.

People who are normally big-government-will-work-if-we-just-get-the-right-people-in-there fanboys find themselves lamenting how all politicians are liars and we can't expect any better.

Who says "we can't do any better"? We can and we should do better. That does not mean, however, that I can't point out that most politicians make their living from lies, especially when one politician is being singled out for it. Hillary is not unique, not even in her party, but definitely not among politicians in general.

Another generation of youth becomes cynical.

Wow, kids can be cynical. You are just full of stunning insights these days. I'm from Gen X, I cut my teeth on cynicism, it's not all that far removed from skepticism.

It's no surprise Bernie got an astonishing 84% of the youth vote. They're not ready to settle for Hillary. Yet.

If it becomes Hillary v the Republicans, I think a good many of them will suddenly be willing to settle.