\GoBillsInDallas/ Posted July 16, 2014 Share Posted July 16, 2014 http://www.buffalonews.com/city-region/university-at-buffalo/ub-paid-hillary-clinton-275000-for-speech-last-fall-20140716 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nanker Posted July 16, 2014 Share Posted July 16, 2014 You gotta know that they were dead broke when they left DC. Dead-flat-broke. So broke that they couldn't afford a moving van and she had to pack the damned dishes herself - in old wooden milk crates, packed them up on the backs of ten mules, and made the long trek on foot up to New York in hopes of finding employment and a means of sustenance for the two of them and their baby girl in swaddling clothes. It's a touching story. But at least now, she can laugh at it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Posted July 16, 2014 Share Posted July 16, 2014 It's tough pretending you're not part of the 1%, who you profess to be against. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted July 16, 2014 Share Posted July 16, 2014 You gotta know that they were dead broke when they left DC. Dead-flat-broke. So broke that they couldn't afford a moving van and she had to pack the damned dishes herself - in old wooden milk crates, packed them up on the backs of ten mules, and made the long trek on foot up to New York in hopes of finding employment and a means of sustenance for the two of them and their baby girl in swaddling clothes. It's a touching story. But at least now, she can laugh at it. So broke that, before they left the White House, she stole all the "W" keys from the computer keyboards to hawk on eBay. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azalin Posted July 17, 2014 Share Posted July 17, 2014 So broke that, before they left the White House, she stole all the "W" keys from the computer keyboards to hawk on eBay. I completely forgot about that. http://articles.latimes.com/2002/jun/12/nation/na-clinton12 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted July 17, 2014 Share Posted July 17, 2014 It's tough pretending you're not part of the 1%, who you profess to be against. I have a case I'm working on with a very wealthy lesbian ex-Berkeley professor (gee I wonder which way she leans) who wants to shelter her portfolio from taxes as she said "just like the Clintons did" http://www.nola.com/opinions/index.ssf/2014/06/with_clintons_and_taxes_watch.html And of course we will help her. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Posted July 17, 2014 Share Posted July 17, 2014 I have a case I'm working on with a very wealthy lesbian ex-Berkeley professor (gee I wonder which way she leans) who wants to shelter her portfolio from taxes as she said "just like the Clintons did" http://www.nola.com/opinions/index.ssf/2014/06/with_clintons_and_taxes_watch.html And of course we will help her. And let me guess: she says the rich should pay more in taxes, right? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ExiledInIllinois Posted July 17, 2014 Share Posted July 17, 2014 I have a case I'm working on with a very wealthy lesbian ex-Berkeley professor (gee I wonder which way she leans) who wants to shelter her portfolio from taxes as she said "just like the Clintons did" http://www.nola.com/opinions/index.ssf/2014/06/with_clintons_and_taxes_watch.html And of course we will help her. As with the Clintons, The Berk Lesbo, & the system here in lies the disease not cure. Limo Libs. And an all too willing system. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted July 17, 2014 Share Posted July 17, 2014 As with the Clintons, The Berk Lesbo, & the system here in lies the disease not cure. Limo Libs. And an all too willing system. I don't get into politics with my clients so I don't know. But she sure wants to reduce her tax bill and more power to her. As with the Clintons, The Berk Lesbo, & the system here in lies the disease not cure. Limo Libs. And an all too willing system. Let me ask you a question. Why should "rich" people (those making a mere $250k a year for a married couple) be forced to pay 60% more in capital gains taxes than you do? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted July 17, 2014 Share Posted July 17, 2014 Hillary Clinton's $275K Speaking Fee Comes with Diva Demands Former Secretary of State and almost-certain 2016 presidential candidate Hillary Clinton not only demanded $275,000 to speak at the University of Buffalo, her nine-page contract is filled with the kinds of demands that Pop Divas like Madonna are regularly mocked for. According to documents obtained by the Washington Post, on top of that mammoth speaking fee, Clinton's contract demands… …the university provide "a presidential glass panel teleprompter and a qualified operator," that Clinton's office have "final approval" of her introducer and the moderator of any question-and-answer session, as well as "the sets, backdrops, banners, scenery, logos, settings, etc," and that the topic and length of the former secretary of state's speech would be at her "sole discretion." Nothing about bathing in Evian water or a bowl of M&M's with the green ones removed, but there is this: The contract also required that the university pay a fee of $1,000 to have a stenographer transcribe Clinton's speech, but that the transcript be "solely for [Clinton's] records," and that the university was not permitted to tape the speech. Clinton has attempted to tamp down the uproar over her greedy cash grab from a number of public universities with the claim that she donated all of her speaking fees to charity -- the charity of course being the Clinton Foundation. That likely means she is able to keep the money close and still write it off as a charitable tax deduction. The rich get richer. Original Article Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Security Posted July 17, 2014 Share Posted July 17, 2014 She is a reason why women should not be allowed to vote. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ExiledInIllinois Posted July 17, 2014 Share Posted July 17, 2014 (edited) I don't get into politics with my clients so I don't know. But she sure wants to reduce her tax bill and more power to her. Let me ask you a question. Why should "rich" people (those making a mere $250k a year for a married couple) be forced to pay 60% more in capital gains taxes than you do? 1. Well you should if you ever want to see the problems that ill society @ least get 1/2 corrected. 2. Because they have a higher ability to pay. A "mere" $250k? Move to another place. I just saw a nice house in my area go for $49K, that's a 3 year car loan for some. @ that amount ($250k) and above, they are more "vested" in the societal system. They will attempt to make it work, AND pay for their happiness. And what's this: "than you do" jazz? We are talking about why a progressive taxes works best, not keeping up w/the Joneses or should I say the Clintons. That seems to be the problem w/the Berk Lesbo. Is she really marching to the beat of different drummer? Maybe in the bedroom... I wonder who taught you to talk like this, act like that? You ain't got to be so bad, got to be so cold. This dog eat dog existence sure is getting old. Got to have a Jones for this, Jones for that. This running with the Joneses boy just ain't where it's at. You gonna come back around to the sad, sad truth, the dirty lowdown. ;-P Hey, how else can I throw in a Boz Scaggs line! ;-P Edited July 17, 2014 by ExiledInIllinois Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Posted July 17, 2014 Share Posted July 17, 2014 As with the Clintons, The Berk Lesbo, & the system here in lies the disease not cure. Limo Libs. And an all too willing system. It has nothing to do with the system. It's all about hypocrisy. If you are rich and say that the rich should pay more, then you shouldn't be reducing your tax burden. And in some states you can opt to pay a higher tax rate, but the limo libs (cough Elizabeth Warren cough) don't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ExiledInIllinois Posted July 17, 2014 Share Posted July 17, 2014 It has nothing to do with the system. It's all about hypocrisy. If you are rich and say that the rich should pay more, then you shouldn't be reducing your tax burden. And in some states you can opt to pay a higher tax rate, but the limo libs (cough Elizabeth Warren cough) don't. Yes it is about the system. You are right, they shouldn't be reducing their tax burden. Don't allow it, give the choice for the hypocritical nature of SOME humans to kick in. What kinda of system allows such easily bent "honor" rules (to paying more in taxes) to exist? How will it ever wipe out the human urge to Jones (or should I say Clinton) with others. But... But manily you are right... People like the Berk, Warren, & Clintons et al should be held to task for their hypocrisy. If only this thread had more power. ;-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Posted July 17, 2014 Share Posted July 17, 2014 Yes it is about the system. You are right, they shouldn't be reducing their tax burden. Don't allow it, give the choice for the hypocritical nature of SOME humans to kick in. What kinda of system allows such easily bent "honor" rules (to paying more in taxes) to exist? How will it ever wipe out the human urge to Jones (or should I say Clinton) with others. But... But manily you are right... People like the Berk, Warren, & Clintons et al should be held to task for their hypocrisy. If only this thread had more power. ;-) If only the MSM would have the balls to expose it. With all the talk of Romney's effective tax rate, there was no mention of what Barry's effective tax rate and why he reduced his tax burden, if the rich should pay more. But it will be an issue for Hilly since she's likely not going to face a challenger significantly more wealthy, if at all, than she is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Koko78 Posted July 17, 2014 Share Posted July 17, 2014 Nothing about bathing in Evian water or a bowl of M&M's with the green ones removed, but there is this: This is off topic, but the actual story behind the M&M's thing is interesting. The band didn't actually care if they had brown/green/whatever M&M's in their dressing room, but they had that provision buried in their touring contracts to see if the promoters were actually reading/following the contracts and setting up the venue to the band's requirements. The band always knew that if they had a bowl of M&M's with the offending-colored ones left in, they needed to have their roadies thoroughly check the set-up so make sure it was correct and the music/stage show would come across to the audience as intended. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ExiledInIllinois Posted July 17, 2014 Share Posted July 17, 2014 This is off topic, but the actual story behind the M&M's thing is interesting. The band didn't actually care if they had brown/green/whatever M&M's in their dressing room, but they had that provision buried in their touring contracts to see if the promoters were actually reading/following the contracts and setting up the venue to the band's requirements. The band always knew that if they had a bowl of M&M's with the offending-colored ones left in, they needed to have their roadies thoroughly check the set-up so make sure it was correct and the music/stage show would come across to the audience as intended. What were they doing? Taking lessons from JaMarcus Russell's coaches? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Posted July 17, 2014 Share Posted July 17, 2014 This is off topic, but the actual story behind the M&M's thing is interesting. The band didn't actually care if they had brown/green/whatever M&M's in their dressing room, but they had that provision buried in their touring contracts to see if the promoters were actually reading/following the contracts and setting up the venue to the band's requirements. The band always knew that if they had a bowl of M&M's with the offending-colored ones left in, they needed to have their roadies thoroughly check the set-up so make sure it was correct and the music/stage show would come across to the audience as intended. Yep. And it was the brown ones they wanted removed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted July 17, 2014 Share Posted July 17, 2014 1. Well you should if you ever want to see the problems that ill society @ least get 1/2 corrected. 2. Because they have a higher ability to pay. To your bullet point 1. Bullet point 2. What makes you believe that someone making $250k in SF has a higher ability to pay than someone making $100k in Bum!@#$ Iowa? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ExiledInIllinois Posted July 17, 2014 Share Posted July 17, 2014 (edited) To your bullet point 1. Bullet point 2. What makes you believe that someone making $250k in SF has a higher ability to pay than someone making $100k in Bum!@#$ Iowa? 1. I figured as much. Too each their own. It is no secret you don't care about attempting to correct issues. So be it. Yes, pretty wacko of me. 2. Its Bum!@#$ Illinois/Indiana (Illiana if you must). To answer your question: It doesn't. If it is too hard to meet the requirement, that's what two feet are for. Maybe there are too many people in Cali anyway. Edited July 17, 2014 by ExiledInIllinois Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts