cheezcake
Member
What are they saying in these speeches that justifies such a high price?
It's about prestige not content.
What are they saying in these speeches that justifies such a high price?
What are they saying in these speeches that justifies such a high price?
Spell out for me how this post sums up this thread. I'm dumb.This thread: I mean why should somebody go steal and break the law to get all they can when there's always some law where you can be legal and get it all anyway!
Partisanship is a hell of a drug. People will do as many mental backflips as necessary to convince themselves their candidate is near perfect, as soon as you concede a single fault its viewed as giving ammo to the GOP.
Big companies pay a ton of money for famous people to come and give talks, it's mostly a reflection of the fact that those companies have too much money (coupled with the fact that famous speakers are a pretty limited commodity).What are they saying in these speeches that justifies such a high price?
I don't think there are many people who believe Hillary is perfect or even the ideal candidate.
There's just nothing here that's even remotely disqualifying for being President of the United States, or even for being a valid progressive Democratic candidate, particularly in a year when she's running against Donald Trump.
Her voting record certainly is not perfect and she has kept some questionable company (including: Donald Trump) in the past, but for a politician with decades of service those are pretty mild offenses that at worst modestly dull enthusiasm, not really damning evidence that will lead to people voting for a (supposedly) human Cheeto.
What are they saying in these speeches that justifies such a high price?
That's the most hilarious thing about it though. we all know none of the candidates are perfect, we don't think to ourselves that they're perfect, yet any time a flaw is pointed out so many immediately try to twist it, deflect it or just straight up ignore it.
How come when other men in politics do it, it's totally fine? She's a famous and powerful person. Get over it.
The only people that I see still bringing it up are the butthurt Bernie supporters to boot. Bernie lost. Move the fuck along.
The University I work at just had Bill Clinton as our commencement speaker. I guess he owes me favors now?
The speaking fees aren't unusual or abnormal, but that's a problem with our system.
If you don't bribe a politician up front for a favor, you can offer them speaking opportunities if they do you favors while in office.
Hillary or anybody else, America should find this problematic.
Ummm. Which is worse? Hahaha. Don't get your point.
Getting paid millions when you weren't an employee? Guess it was for other services then.
But there is no way to verify the identity of this Guccifer 2.0 individual. The name is a reference to a Romanian hacker who pleaded guilty to hacking several prominent politicians and figures, including Presidents George W. Bush and George H.W. Bush, who went online by Guccifer.
There is also no way to verify the authenticity of the documents. The DNC would not comment on their veracity and the alleged hacker offered no proof that they were what they purported to be.
The character could even be an invention of the Russians to try to lay seeds of doubt and plausible deniability about their involvement in the hack. And it could be an individual looking to capitalize on the media attention for his or her own ends.
I updated the OP with the story from CNN posted earlier.
I would be curious to see who and what is actually true and what measures the DNC takes to tighten up their online security.
What are they saying in these speeches that justifies such a high price?
The speech is not that important, it is a donation and a form of access to somebody. Nobody has that much fame or is that good to get 200k for a speech, but usually they are well networked or in a position of power or close to a lot of power and influence.
Of course it is in the end nothing more than a bribe, but a legal form of bribe.
Like Larry the Cable Guy. Lots of power and influence.
You mean a guy that has to sell tickets to his event? I don't get what he has to do with this?
When is the purity test?
He's also does speaking engagements, through All American Speakers, and also charges upwards of $200,000 for his appearances. Which either demonstrates that some people are willing to pay that much just for speeches from famous people, or that Larry the Cable Guy is much more influential than I previously understood.
He's also does speaking engagements, through All American Speakers, and also charges upwards of $200,000 for his appearances. Which either demonstrates that some people are willing to pay that much just for speeches from famous people, or that Larry the Cable Guy is much more influential than I previously understood.
We shall see if she floats!
Wow I had no idea Larry the Cable guy was a thing.
What are they saying in these speeches that justifies such a high price?
You mean a guy that has to sell tickets to his event? I don't get what he has to do with this?
I updated the OP with the story from CNN posted earlier.
I would be curious to see who and what is actually true and what measures the DNC takes to tighten up their online security.
I'd give speeches at those rates too, but I'm a public employee and I don't think my union would even defend me from that firing. It's such an obvious conflict of interest even if it never influences my public work.
1) Hire a private consulting firm
2) Request security for all items
3) Lose all documents to the open internet
4) ???
5) Profit?
Idea for a major-network hourly drama series: The FBI hires Guccifer 1.0 to track down Guccifer 2.0. Old versus new, with recurring characters such as Bernie Sanders, Hillary Clinton, and I'm sure Trump would be more than happy to play himself.
If Watergate happened today no one would care.If the internet had been around during Nixon's time there wouldn't have been a need to break into the Watergate hotel.
If Watergate happened today no one would care.