Bill Clinton still makes my stomach turn

[wolfwill23]

Bill Clinton and Rudy Giuliani attended a charity luncheon recently in NYC. The event was for Samsung's Four Seasons of Hope charity that raised over $200,000 for charity.

So 'Clinton was at a charity event, why does he make your stomach turn,' you may be asking. Here's a quote from the New York Post who origionally broke the story.

"The team lured the Clinton folks with flat-screen TVs and other top-shelf gadgets. Clinton even came out of his office to check out the goodies. The ex-president, who usually commands more than $100,000 a speech, agreed to attend, in exchange for fees and enough electronics to outfit his office, a package expected to total $20,000, said a source. Clinton's "foundation is receiving a charitable contribution," was all spokesman Jim Kennedy would say in an e-mail. Giuliani isn't getting paid."

This guy is class act all the way.

 

[nbcrusader]

While not a fan of Clinton, he is certainly not alone in the "honorarium" department.

 

[melon]

Your "honorable" current president had an income of around $750,000 last year. If I remember right, $500,000 of it came from the presidency. Hmm...wonder where the other $250,000 came from?

Melon

 

[wolfwill23]

Your "honorable" current president had an income of around $750,000 last year. If I remember right, $500,000 of it came from the presidency. Hmm...wonder where the other $250,000 came from?

Melon

Probably not from charities!

 

[anitram]

I thought it was a standard thing for ex presidents to get a speaking fee or something of the sort?

If I were Hilary, I'd have kicked Bill to the curb decades ago, but apart from that, he doesn't particularly offend me.

 

[wolfwill23]

I thought it was a standard thing for ex presidents to get a speaking fee or something of the sort?

Clinton usually gets around $200,000 or so per speaking engagment. However, this was for CHARITY and he still demanded to be compensated. I think that's kind of sick.

 

[verte76]

All big shots do get "honoraria", not just ex-presidents. But they're in a damn good position to rake in the big bucks. I like Guiliani, however, I'm sure he's taken his fair share of honoraria also. I deplore Clinton's moral lapses; however, I don't think this particular incident should be a slam on his character.

 

[verte76]

Clinton usually gets around $200,000 or so per speaking engagment. However, this was for CHARITY and he still demanded to be compensated. I think that's kind of sick.

Doh!! You've got a point.

 

[bonoman]

It's called making a living, get over it.

 

[BAW]

"The team lured the Clinton folks with flat-screen TVs and other top-shelf gadgets.

Well, this is a bit contradictory, isn't it? If the charity "lured" him with expensive gadgets and agreed to compensate him, how then is he "demanding" to be paid?

I think its kind of sick that anyone is paid six figures to stand in a room and give a speech but not many people would turn down that kind of money.

 

[wolfwill23]

It's called making a living, get over it.

Sure it's called making a living. I'm just making a comment on character. I think Bill Clinton is of low character and low morals.

 

[deep]

Don't say I never gave you anything.

 

[U2Bama]

I've been trying to determine how to afford one of those new Samsung big screen TVs at Best Buy or Circuit City. I guess I'll just go give a speech somewhere.

~U2Alabama

 

[FizzingWhizzbees]

LMAO @ deep's pictures.

I'd pay to hear you, Bama - just perhaps not six figures.

I'd mortgage my house (even though I don't own it) to hear Bill speak.

 

[MrsSpringsteen]

I don't think people should accept/demand anything for a charity event. I guess I'm just too idealistic

I also heard that Clinton didn't want to attend because Giuliani was going to be there, because of some sort of bad blood between them. I can't remember the details of their "feud"...maybe someone else here knows..

 

[ouizy]

other way around.

Giuliani did not want to go because he hates Clinton, but he claims he did not even know he would be there until that morning.

the whole thing is so stupid.

I am believing more and more that Presidents are hand-puppets.

Because of this I am blaming them for less and less...

 

[Lilly]

melon: the president is only paid $250,000 a year. so it's "where did that extra $500,000 come from???"





ouizy: good on ya for blaming the presidents less. they are controlled so much by their cabinet members, which i think is perfectly illustrated with the relationship between rumsfeld and bush.

 

[BVS]

I believe in 2001 the salary of the President was increased to $390,000 or maybe it's an even $400,000 .

 

[joyfulgirl]

melon: the president is only paid $250,000 a year. so it's "where did that extra $500,000 come from???"

They get a war bonus, don't they?

 

[Lilly]

re-election

 

[Lilly]

ah here we go:

Dear Yahoo!:
How much is the president of the United States paid?
Jack
Hemet, California

Dear Jack:
We knew the presidential salary had been $200,000 for a number of years -- a relatively paltry sum considering the state of executive compensation these days -- but we were unsure of the salary our current president is drawing. We seem to recall hearing something a few months ago about a raise for our country's commander in chief.
We searched on "presidential salary," and on the first page of search results we received several relevant web sites and one amusing anomaly.

According to a CNN article dated July 16, 1999, the House voted earlier that week to increase the next president's salary to $400,000, which means George W. Bush, our 43rd president, makes twice as much as his predecessor, President Clinton.

After a little more research, we found a table that should put to rest any doubts that our country's former presidents are struggling to make ends meet. The National Taxpayers Union provides a Presidential Pension Graph that shows estimated pension benefits of former presidents. Bill Clinton stands to collect $7.29 million, the most of any living ex-president, while Ronald Reagan's pension is just over $2.5 million.

 

[deep]

I don't think people should accept/demand anything for a charity event. I guess I'm just too idealistic

I also heard that Clinton didn't want to attend because Giuliani was going to be there, because of some sort of bad blood between them. I can't remember the details of their "feud"...maybe someone else here knows..

You live in NY and you don't remember?

Rudy was running against Hillary for the US Senate.

He made all kinds of (personal) attacks on Hillary.

Then it came out that he was cheating on his wife, the mother of his children. His wife would not move out of the Mayor's mansion so he could move in with his mistress. So he moved into a flat with two gay men.

Well the 2000 campaign was about "restoring honor and dignity".
The GOP threw Rudy into the abyss. Got Lazio? to replace him, he loss.

Rudy was washed up in the GOP at that time. Much like Newt, or Livingstone in the GOP.

Then, 911 happened and like a phoenix he rose from the ashes.

I am going from memory and believe this is a reasonable recounting.

 

[Atticus Finch]

Didnt The Mayor Mister Rudy G solve the crime epedimic in Time Square during his tenure?
I remember reading this and how the public loved him.
And then he got Cancer of some sort.
And as far as infidelity on his part, that seems it would be a non-issue against Mrs Rodham-Clinton and make The Mayor to be more in vouge with New York's moral climate.

Atticus.

 

[MrsSpringsteen]

You live in NY and you don't remember

No, I don't live in NY, but that sounds about right..

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tm...&u=/nypost/20030619/cm_nypost/shakyfriendship

 

[filledeperle]

originally posted by Atticus Finch

I remember reading this and how the public loved him

No, New Yorkers didn't love him. I don't know by what you mean by "love", but it sounds to me that you meant that he was this beloved leader, and he wasn't, Giuliani was far from loved.

I can't say what all New Yorkers thought of him, but based on the atmosphere during his term, basically no one really cared about him, and some even found him rather annoying. Sure, he did a few things that people appreciated, like the low crime rates, but no one was in awe of him. After 9/11, definitely, the mood towards him changed since we needed him then. We needed any leader who's any ounce of strength would help us during then. Most New Yorkers did respect then, but I think that most were eager to see him go after eight years.

...and make The Mayor to be more in vouge with New York's moral climate

Moral climate? Are you kidding?

Perle

 

[verte76]

My two sisters lived in NYC the whole time Guiliani was mayor. They did not like him for most of his time in office. They did feel like he redeemed himself after 9/11, when they were looking for leadership like other New Yorkers. Considering what they think of the current NY mayor they might not mind having Rudy back.

 

[wolfwill23]

The first year Giuliani was mayor, the murder-toll in NYC was 1,946. His last year in office, the murder-toll in NYC was 642 (these numbers according to his book). Stats like that are no accident. He cleaned up the city. He cleaned up Times Square. He cleaned up the city's homeless problem (although this past year's homeless numbers are supposedly the highest in 20 years.) And he cleaned up the Seaport.

Love him or hate him, I wish he was the mayor of NYC now.

 

[filledeperle]

Yeah. I wonder if he would've handled the financial crisis better than Bloomberg.

Perle

 

[Diane L]

I also heard that Clinton didn't want to attend because Giuliani was going to be there, because of some sort of bad blood between them. I can't remember the details of their "feud"...maybe someone else here knows..

This story was proven false. It was the New York Post trying to stir up trouble again, and that's no surprise, seeing how it's owned by Murdock's "fair and balanced" News Corporation.

I still like Pres. Clinton much, much better than the current inhabitant of the White House. And I'm a little bit tired of feeling like I should apologize for that fact. The man's moral character isn't what it should have been, true, but I believe those of us who aren't big corporate honchos were better off under him than the current regime.