Jump to content

How much would you pay?


Guest zipperzone
This topic is 6011 days old and is no longer open for new replies.  Replies are automatically disabled after two years of inactivity.  Please create a new topic instead of posting here.  

Recommended Posts

Guest zipperzone

The New York Times reported yesterday that Pres Clinton had earned

7.5 million $$$ last year from speaking engagements. This became public knowledge because his wife had to disclose it in her run for the Senate.

 

This got me to wondering.

 

After the idiot Chimp is out of office in 2009 (as impeachment doesn't seem possible in the time he has left), how much money do you think GWB will command for speaking engagements? How much would you pay to hear him smirk and talk?

 

If he had to depend on that as his sole means of support (he doesn't as we all know) I bet you would find him sleeping in a cardboard box under a bridge somewhere.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest ReturnOfS

>Very funny! :)

>

>As I recall, zipperzone is a Canadian, which, in my mind,

>demented as it is, does not allow for him to call our

>president an idiot chimp! Idiot, though, would be okay! :)

 

As a citizen of the USA, I'll do it for him :-)

 

The pretendident is an idiot chimp

 

...... Then again I should take that back...

 

I don't want to insult chimps.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not only do I not want Bush making money from his status as an ex-President, I truly hope that he and his criminal gang all end up in the Hague being tried for crimes against humanity and being put away. It won't make up for all the unspeakable things he's done to the United States, but it might bring a measure of justice to the unfortunate people in other countries whose lives have been utterly ruined by this lying bunch of sociopaths. x(

 

And, as an aside, Clinton commands such high speaking fees because he is spellbinding. Whether you agree with him or not, it's impossible not to be impressed with his brilliance, his command of facts and information, and his almost unparalleled ability to communicate with his audience in a way that's articulate and understandable without being humorless or condescending. Bush, on the other hand, just makes you cringe whenever he opens his mouth.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest zipperzone

>Bush, on the other hand, just makes you

>cringe whenever he opens his mouth.

 

Hell - he makes me cringe even before he opens his mouth. And after he closes it, all I want to do is hurl.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

>After the idiot Chimp is out of office in 2009 (as impeachment

>doesn't seem possible in the time he has left), how much money

>do you think GWB will command for speaking engagements? How

>much would you pay to hear him smirk and talk?

 

Personally, I would not pay a dime to hear any politician talk regardless of party. However, I have worked for organizations that spend big money on this over the years. There is always an audience for these guys and it does not matter what they have done in office.

 

Alan Greenspan is pulling in the higest fees at $150,000 asking price from what I have heard. Morgan Stanley paid $250,000 for the "honor" of being the first group he spoke to after retiring from the Fed.

 

Each of the ex-president's should be pulling an easy $100,000 or more including Clinton and Bush 41. Bush 43 should get about the same. All this plus first class airfare (or private jet) and deluxe accommodations. These rates get discounted but their handlers don't like to admit such.

 

On personal experience working conferences with this level of speaker I have a couple of observations. The biggest jackass was Jimmy Carter. The man had so many demands it was not even funny AND he was moody. He treated "the help" very badly. Of late, the most gracious, polite, and most personable was Newt Gingrich. Newt spoke with everyone including the busboy like he was an equal.

 

I know that's hard to accept but when you spend time in a greenroom with these guys, and work with their handlers, you find out real quick who has class and character and who's an phoney asshole.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest rohale

>And, as an aside, Clinton commands such high speaking fees

>because he is spellbinding. Whether you agree with him or

>not, it's impossible not to be impressed with his brilliance,

>his command of facts and information, and his almost

>unparalleled ability to communicate with his audience in a way

>that's articulate and understandable without being humorless

>or condescending. Bush, on the other hand, just makes you

>cringe whenever he opens his mouth.

 

 

It's funny in a way, for a second I thought you were describing British Prime Minister Tony Blair. Apparently not, the description is about President Bill Clinton. On the other hand, the carefully chosen words could so easily describe the personna of Tony Blair. If only America had a Tony Blair instead of a Bill Clinton or a George W. Bush, the country just might have been better off instead of having to go thru the type of grind that the United States has endured since 1993 with two controversial leaders.

 

Ro

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, the description would apply to Tony Blair as well. But I'm not sure I agree that the U.S. would have been better off if he'd been our President. For whatever mysterious reason, he went along with the Iraq adventure, and it was clear that he KNEW that the intelligence about WMDs had been cooked, or was being cooked, to justify the war. And there have been other staggering botches, like the murder of the Brazilian immigrant on the tube by the police and the subsequent cover-up attempts. In some ways, the U.S. probably would have been better off if Blair had been President: it's not likely we'd have the insane spending and there would probably be a more sane domestic policy. In that sense, Blair more closely resembles LBJ than Shrubya -- LBJ's dragging the U.S. into a full-scale war in Vietnam under equally false and devious pretenses was a tragic flaw, but his domestic policies were brilliant and he was unparalleled in knowing how to play the political game. And he certainly wasn't stupid! If he hadn't succumbed to the Vietnam madness he would be regarded as one of the greatest American presidents, and would have commanded enormous speaking fees, too, after his term of office was over!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

In order to post in the Political Issues forum, all members are required to acknowledge that their post is in compliance with our Community Guidelines.  In addition, you acknowledge that it meets the following requirements: 

  • No personal attacks: Attack the issue not the person
  • No hijacking: Stay on the subject of the thread 

  • No bullying, hate speech or offensive terms/expressions

In addition, if the moderators feel someone is reporting content simply because if it’s political stance (such as but not limited to reporting it as off topic but not other off topic replies by those that agree with your stance), the reporting person may receive a warning as well.

Content that does not comply with the above requirements will be removed.  Multiple violations may result in a loss of access to this forum.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...