Hillary Clinton Defends High-Dollar Speaking Fees

[ravdin]

It's interesting that you would say this about Hillary, but I didn't see any criticism of Mittens or 'W's million dollar a plate dinners.

Could it be because there is no such thing as a million dollar a plate fundraising dinner?

 

[uke2se]

I don't see anything particularly wrong with it. Nor do I see anything particularly wrong with pointing out that it may generate criticism of her down the road if she does run for President. Given all the money her husband has generated in speaking fees, it would have been smarter for her politically to ask that the money she made from her speeches be donated to charity.

I'm sure she appreciates your campaign advice.

 

[Darth Rotor]

Uh, if them folks are willing to pay her a load of money to come and talk, what reason would she have for turning them down? It's almost like free money.

Milk that cow while the udders are full.

 

[jj]

Could it be because there is no such thing as a million dollar a plate fundraising dinner?

Well, then, all those reports of him giving private speeches to extremely rich people, wherein he goes on about the "47%" are all false, then?

 

[ravdin]

Well, then, all those reports of him giving private speeches to extremely rich people, wherein he goes on about the "47%" are all false, then?

No, I'm saying that you are exaggerating the admission price (as if it needed exaggeration to make a point). If you know of any million dollar a plate fundraisers I'd like to hear about it. The admission price to the event you're referring to was $50,000.

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/man-who...itt-romneys-47-percent-remarks-comes-forward/

I'm sure of course that you would have the same criticism for any presidential candidate hosting exorbitantly expensive fundraising dinners for wealthy donors.

http://www.businessinsider.com/chec...fundraising-dinner-with-george-clooney-2012-5

 

[Howie Felterbush]

How much extra is it if you want food on the plate?

 

[ravdin]

How much extra is it if you want food on the plate?

$475K for the chicken, or $475K for the salmon. That's like two of Hillary Clinton's speeches, what a bargain! You can order one of each if you're really hungry. That plus $50K to rent the plate for the evening would add up to the million that jj claimed.

 

[Howie Felterbush]

I'll just eat at Waffle House.

At least the people there are talking about something that actually makes sense.

Scatteredsmotheredcovered!

 

[Francesca R]

Well, then, all those reports of him giving private speeches to extremely rich people, wherein he goes on about the "47%" are all false, then?

Are you criticising those? You are OK with Hillary Clinton's speech. You think it is simply the free market, and you imply that is fine.

So why would you expect anybody to criticise the compensation involved in "Mittens" speeches? Why does your post look like you would like to?

In other words, do you have any issue one way or the other about paid speeches to politicians? Or do you just seek to bring partisan hackery to the thread, no question of evaluating things on their merits or lack thereof?

Thanks in advance.

 

[Francesca R]

I don't think Hillary would be getting that kind of speaking fee if it wasn't expected that her chances of becoming the next President were pretty good

I bet she would.

 

[Francesca R]

Given all the money her husband has generated in speaking fees, it would have been smarter for her politically to ask that the money she made from her speeches be donated to charity.

Has she made any statement about what she does with the fee? Not that she has to.

 

[jj]

Are you criticising those? You are OK with Hillary Clinton's speech. You think it is simply the free market, and you imply that is fine.

It's interesting how you repeatedly reverse the context of comments. In the process, you build a straw man via inappropriate extrapolation, and reject the obvious point that the people complaining about Hillary here did not complain about Mittens and his minions.

More I won't say, but your misconduct is evident to the casual reader at this point.

 

[jj]

No, I'm saying that you are exaggerating the admission price (as if it needed exaggeration to make a point). If you know of any million dollar a plate fundraisers I'd like to hear about it. The admission price to the event you're referring to was $50,000.

You're correct, I was exaggerating the admission price, but I admit I didn't realize by quite how much.

I have to say that was a pretty cheap political dinner compared to some private dinners I've caught wind of, though.

 

[jj]

I'm sure of course that you would have the same criticism for any presidential candidate hosting exorbitantly expensive fundraising dinners for wealthy donors.

http://www.businessinsider.com/chec...fundraising-dinner-with-george-clooney-2012-5

That, of course, is a straw man, since I haven't criticized any of them for this particular behavior, it was going on when our country still worked, and has been pretty much since campaigns cost money to run. This whole thread is an attempt to dishonestly tar Hillary for something that is utterly, totally, and completely unremarkable.

And the person suggesting she give the money to charity is engaging in a form of political extortion, trying to sabotage her obviously upcoming campaign.

If you're asking the obvious question, it's Warren/Sanders 2016 as far as I can see to date.

 

[jj]

Hillary Clinton represents the Wall Street wing of the Democratic Party, which is pretty much indistinguishable from the Wall Street wing of the GOP.

Finally something I can agree with.

 

[Brainster]

Has she made any statement about what she does with the fee? Not that she has to.

In the interview she notes that she has given some speeches for free, but otherwise at least as far as the clip linked gave any indication, the money has gone into her bank account (aside from 1/2 for taxes). Again, nothing wrong with that other than as a political calculation.

 

[Francesca R]

It's interesting how you repeatedly reverse the context of comments.

Er, no. Pardon me, you reversed it. You brought up Mitt Romney events.

What do you have to say about what you brought up? Do you have a problem of any sort with the compensation paid for Romney speeches? If so, why do you have no such problem with Clinton speeches? Kindly clarify. After all you brought this up. Nobody else.

the obvious point that the people complaining about Hillary here did not complain about Mittens and his minions.

That is a straw lady and it will be disregarded. My question is about your views. Which, all of a sudden it seems, you wish to hide from critical scrutiny.

Do you approve of acts purely on the basis of the political persuasion of the actor?

 

[Foolmewunz]

Hey, she could just Gingrich It! Speak for free and then have the organizers of the event browbeat all the attendees into order fifty copies each of It Takes A Village.

Until she's a candidate, I'd think the Free Market Mavens would approve of her earning her keep and not going on food stamps. Would I prefer that she didn't do so? Yeah. But when you consider that those same organizations would probably hedge their bets if they were able to buy favor, I can't see where anything this transparent is even near as serious as the Supremes interpretation of corporations' rights to spend their money. But that's just me.

So does this make Hillary worse than other candidates? Here's a short list of some potential candidates for 2016 who are represented by speakers' agencies:

Hillary Clinton, Jeb Bush, Ted Cruz, Joe Biden, Rick Santorum, Beau Biden, Andrew Cuomo, Chris Christie, Rand Paul....

In fact, that is 100%. I couldn't find one who's not listed. Now, if the difference is whether they get $20,000 or $200,000? Maybe Michelle Bachmann just needs to have an appeal to a larger cross-section than Hillary does (Bachmann commands 20K a speech).

 

[Francesca R]

Maybe Michelle Bachmann just needs to have an appeal to a larger cross-section than Hillary does (Bachmann commands 20K a speech).

Probably. I can see Clinton selling out an event over here, for example, and Bachmann speaking to an empty room.

 

[Brainster]

Are you criticising those? You are OK with Hillary Clinton's speech. You think it is simply the free market, and you imply that is fine.

So why would you expect anybody to criticise the compensation involved in "Mittens" speeches? Why does your post look like you would like to?

In other words, do you have any issue one way or the other about paid speeches to politicians? Or do you just seek to bring partisan hackery to the thread, no question of evaluating things on their merits or lack thereof?

I would just add that the speeches he seems to be talking about (note in particular the 47% speech) were campaign fundraisers where the beneficiary was Mitt Romney for President, not Mitt Romney's bank account. Not that there would be anything wrong with either, but there are strict laws regarding the former especially in terms of conversion to personal use (federally prohibited, although some states allow it for their own races).