Salt of the Earth Hillary Clinton wants $300,000 from you PLUS your vote

[whereisjustice]

The savior of the middle class wants your vote. And she'll only charge you $300,000 to hear why (oh why) you should vote for her.

The Washington Post used a Freedom of Information Act request to get an inside look at just what it takes to get Hillary Clinton to come speak at your university. First of all, there’s the matter of cash: a cool $300,000, which is apparently the “special university rate.” That is the answer UCLA received when it asked whether the public university could get some sort of discount. Undeterred by the price tag, the university moved forward with booking the former secretary of state. Yet the cash was hardly all the university had to put forward as booking the presidential hopeful involved a string of requests that kept organizers busy until she delivered he Luskin Lecture for Thought Leadership speech on March 5, 2014.

The university had decided to award the former secretary of state the UCLA medal. But in a clear example of how carefully Clinton’s people stage-manage her appearances, they asked that the medal be presented in a box rather than draped around her neck. Other demands included:

On the stage: lemon wedges, room temperature water, a carafe of warm/hot water, coffee cup and saucer
A computer, mouse, printer and scanner
Spread of hummus
Chairs with two long, rectangular pillows and two cushions to be kept backstage in case the former secretary of state “needed additional back support”

A teleprompter and “2-3 downstage scrolling monitors”
A special podium (her team rejected the podium that had been set up for her use)
Coffee
Tea
Room-temperature sparkling and still water
Diet ginger ale
Crudité
Sliced fruit
Approval for any promotional materials
Recording is permitted “for archival purposes” and only a two-minute highlight video can be uploaded to YouTube
“Prestaged” group photos so that Clinton doesn’t have to wait “for these folks to get their act together.” The former secretary of state “doesn’t like to stand around waiting for people.”

A Clinton spokesman refused to comment on the demands.

http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/2014/11/27/hillary_clinton_speaking_demands.html

Now admittedly, he's hardly as accomplished and important of a figure as Hillary, but just for reference:

Jimmy Carter
Fee: $50,000
Topics: Healthcare, Government & Politics, Retirement/Aging
Travels from: GA
http://www.inspiringspeakers.com/superstar-carter-jimmy.shtml

[msongs]

1. I'll do it for $25K. when do I show up :-) nt

[whereisjustice]

5. We should just get our candidates from India on an H1B and pay them, like $5K, and no benefits

these goddamn Wall Street shills are pricing themselves out of the market.

I believe that is what she would say. You know, the free market and all that.

[sabrina 1]

101. Lol, what a great idea, Globalization! Cheap labor. I like the H1B method, we are told it is

not costing any American a job.

[Phlem]

127. Nice.

[appalachiablue]

250. Absolutely, we must support corporate profits & globalization. But new H1-B Reps. are only for the

interim, until the final version Rep-robot is complete in 4 or 5 years, at most. And the cost for Rep-robots will keep coming down after the initial $3,000. After all, we have to stay 'competitive' in our choices and maintain cost effective measures. Splendid idea, truly the American Way anymore, just as corporations are people, robots are definitely people, for sure.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

6. Is that with or without the lemons wedges?

[SidDithers]

2. *sniff* *sniff* This post has a scent o pine to it...nt

Sid

[Hekate]

111. It certainly has a scent of something all right

[elleng]

3. she delivered he Luskin Lecture for Thought Leadership speech on March 5, 2014.

[HereSince1628]

4. But, BUT, this all goes to "her foundation" not her private accounts...

We were told yesterday that that makes a big difference

[840high]

43. In that case I'll spend $1.

[Codeine]

7. So? nt

[DeSwiss]

12. That's what he said.....

- No doubt Hillary will too.

[blkmusclmachine]

8. That's known as the "1%'er fee." Pay to play, boys and girls. PAY TO PLAY.

[JoePhilly]

9. Karl Rove is very concerned I bet.

[stevenleser]

10. News flash: There is a Speakers Circuit out there and some folks get a lot of money

It's based on demand for that speaker. This existed before Hillary came onto the political scene. It will exist after she exits.

No one is forced to hire any given speaker. I'm listed out there too. They got have gotten me to talk about the same topic for quite a bit less. They wanted Hillary.

This is a pathetic line of attack against her.

[Logical]

30. Is there anything Hillary has ever done wrong according to you? Nt

[BeanMusical]

74. She's a saint.

She's salt of the earth. And she's dangerous.

[LanternWaste]

204. Speaking fees are indeed, a most heinous and grievous crime; and it's time people knew...

Speaking fees are indeed, a most heinous and grievous crime; and it's time people knew...

[Logical]

216. Wonder why warren does not want them? nt

[840high]

44. Groan - zzzzzz

[stevenleser]

78. Exactly. Nothing to see here. Nt

[zeemike]

71. The price is based on whether you are in the big club or not.

And who is demanding her?...do they take a poll of the students to see who they want or is that decision made at higher levels? Tell us who these they are.

[stevenleser]

77. Nope, the price is based on demand. Sorry, it's not as exciting as your conspiracy

Theory.

[zeemike]

87. Then tell us who is demanding it.

The students?...they are the ones who are paying for it...did they demand it or not? Or do they have any say at all in who is paid the most and who is paid the least?
That supply and demand is bullshit unless the students are demanding it.

[stevenleser]

164. Do you really not understand this? Do you think attendees of speeches pay for them? Nt

[zeemike]

198. Do you really not understand that students pay tuition

And that is what pays for it?...

[merrily]

156. What "conspiracy" did zeemike supposedly allude to?

[NCTraveler]

238. "But smear merchants have to make a living!"

One of the funniest and most senseless things I have ever read here. Welcome back. Nice to see you jump right in attacking long-time duers. That comment is pure gold. Smear Merchants Abound!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[ND-Dem]

175. can you people debate anything without attacking others? in this thread alone, people have

Last edited Wed Feb 25, 2015, 01:08 PM - Edit history (1)

been called conspiracy theorists, old, ignorant, and implied to be both racist and sexist.

Yeah, it really makes me want to vote for Hillary, if that's the kind of politics her supporters do.

[ND-Dem]

100. students just *love* hillary. they all think it's worth $300K to hear her, and they're happy

for such fees to come from their tuition (indirectly of course).

cause she's *worth* it. if she gets it, she must be *worth* it.

[Thespian2]

88. that HRC

is nothing more than a money-sucking vacuum who kisses corporate ass any time she can? Sorry, that is a truthful, though pathetic, line of attack against America's leading corporate ass-kisser.

[stevenleser]

91. What a pantload. Nt

[Phlem]

131. I see your popular around here.

[stevenleser]

162. The ignorant tend not to like me, and I am totally OK with that. Nt

[Phlem]

220. Ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha,!!!

Yea that's it!

[Thespian2]

256. Can't image

why the ignorant would not like you? You are one of them. True progressive might not like you, but they let you spew nonsense anyway.

[BainsBane]

11. "You?"

Do you run a university speaker fund or an alumni organization? I sure don't. And when exactly has she asked for your vote? Last I heard, she hasn't declared her candidacy. Of course a number of people on this site, the overwhelming number her detractors, have been talking about her nonstop for the past several years. It's amazing how much venom people are able to muster toward a single woman. First a black man runs for president and now a woman may end up as a viable candidate for the presidency. So suddenly now for the first time, people of advanced age have decided that income inequality and money in politics is a problem. And naturally it has nothing to do living in a capitalist state or SCOTUS decisions on campaign finance. It's all due to a single woman who doesn't know to stay in her place. I see a lot of bullshit, and I buy none of it.

Now we'll hear a lot of nonsense about how people who project on to her all the ills of capitalism and American politics really care about policy. The problem with that argument is none of you discuss policy. It's all about your personal issues with her, which frankly say far more about yourselves than her.

[stevenleser]

13. Some folks just figured out there is a speakers circuit because someone they don't like is on it

So it's time to manufacture outrage about speaking fees!

[BainsBane]

15. They haven't just figured it out

They see a woman earns more than they do, and it infuriates them.

The problem with this personalization of political and economic problems is that it accomplishes nothing. It results in no understanding, no discussion of systemic issues or policy, just meaningless arguments about individuals. They won't engage with any of the issues leading to income inequality and the problems of the American political system. They pretend it all rises and falls with the victory or defeat of a single candidate. Everything is reduced to the lowest common denominator.

[sheshe2]

113. Well, since women here are indeed considered the lowest common denominator,

I am not surprised. We are less than nothing.

If and when Hillary runs, the trashing you see now will be X 1000. She will be dehumanized, demoralized as she is called every name in the book and then some. I find the hate leveled at our first Black President and the possibility of our first woman president unprecedented on a Democratic board.

[ND-Dem]

118. women here (at DU and in the US) are *not* "considered the lowest common denominator".

there are reasons people dislike Hillary and they have nothing to do with her being female.

you might notice that many who dislike her like Elizabeth warren, who's also female.

[whathehell]

137. Thank you! n/t

[merrily]

160. Amazing how fast calling "sexist" on every DU critic of Hillary got old and transparent, isn't it?

[ND-Dem]

178. and how old it's gotten, and how hopeless it makes me feel. what kind of solidarity can

you have with people who use personal attack to shame others for not supporting a political candidate who's (supposedly) on the same side?

this is not the party of Roosevelt, not even the party of kennedy and Johnson.

I'm not sure whose party it is anymore; it sure doesn't seem to be the party of the bottom 60% of the population.

[merrily]

182. Take heart.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=5767160

[Art_from_Ark]

174. I would love to see Warren as President

with a Congress full of Bella Abzugs to work with. They'd get things straightened out in a big hurry!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bella_Abzug

[KingCharlemagne]

209. And a few Shirley Chisholm(s) thrown in for good measure! :) - nt

[Art_from_Ark]

257. Oh, yeah, that would be something to behold

And it would drive the right-wingers totally nuts

[ND-Dem]

42. "for the first time, people of advanced age have decided that income inequality...is a problem"

= what a load.

[BainsBane]

82. Sure seems like it

They construct an ideal past when they imagine American was a land of milk and honey. They create a mythical version of past presidents like JFK, and refuse to consider any discussion of the capitalist state. They buy completely into American mythology and completely discount the idea that this country was founded as a capitalist state with its governmental structures designed to represent men of means. They talk about "corporatists" and the 1 percent and insist it's all new. The fact is this country was built on inequality. The very conception of freedom created in the colonial period and the early republic depended on the subjugation and ownership of others. The only people for whom the past was ideal was the white upper-middle class, not the working class, women, people of color, or LGBT Americans. That people can with a straight face pretend any of what they dislike is the fault of Hillary Clinton is absurd, which is why none of it is ever substantiated and instead relies on the kind of attacks one expects from a GOP hit squad. Economic inequality and money in politics are systemic problems endemic to capitalism. But people here don't want to discuss capitalism. They make it all about individuals, reducing everything to the lowest common denominator. For years now I have heard about how Clinton is the sire of Satan and how great American used to be, while many of those same people insist discussions of sexism and racism are "divisive," all while insulting Democrats--some of whom are gay, female, poor, or of color--as tools of the 1 percent, all because we don't share an irrational hatred for one woman. We have never been in the 1 percent or even the 50 percent, and we never will be. One of the ugliest comments I saw was by someone who told a gay man who has faced a lifetime of discrimination that he sided with the 1 percent and Goldman sacks because he supported Clinton. In addition to reeking of straight, white male entitlement, it was just plain idiotic.

[ND-Dem]

95. right because those people "of advanced age" never once complained about income inequality

before we had a black president or a female candidate.

what a crock.

I like the ageism too. but I guess old people aren't a protected class in the new democratic party.

[BainsBane]

151. I'm of advanced age myself

Last edited Wed Feb 25, 2015, 03:35 AM - Edit history (1)

My point was people have lived long enough to figure it out, except my guess (and it is just a guess) is that they have been fortunate enough that they only have recently begun to feel what many of us have experienced our entire lives. And I gave a series of reasons why it appears they do see the issue as new rather than systemic.

[ND-Dem]

159. Now you're trying to rationalize your BS charge: this time *you're* old, but unprivileged,

and you've always understood income inequality, but these other, "privileged" old people are just making noise now because of the black guy in the white house and the white woman trying to get into the white house.

No, people who are today "of advanced age" knew nothing of inequality, never complained about it at all.








But yeah, some of those privileged (white) people "of advanced age" did sell the poor down the river:

Bill Clinton’s welfare reform and chastity training for poor single mothers.

In 1996, President Clinton signed the law that did away with guaranteed income assistance for poor families with children and replaced it with Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF). The program provided states with federal block grants to support income assistance and other services for low-income families with children and included a “work first” requirement...Clinton’s Department of Health and Human Services Secretary, Donna E. Shalala, fully embraced the argument in a comment that stigmatized single mothers, telling Newsweek, “I don’t like to put this in moral terms, but I do believe that having children out of wedlock is just wrong,” In fact, the original bill “appropriated $250 million over five years for ‘chastity training‘ for poor single mothers.”

“I think it is the most enduring victory of the conservative movement,” Suri said, “the delegitimization of welfare.” Clinton recognized this dynamic and ran on opportunity, not on giving help to the poor.

http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2014/01/08/3122111/war-poverty-race-sexism/

[Hekate]

116. Brilliant rant, BB. Some will deliberately misunderstand you, but you got it right.

[ND-Dem]

139. yes, using ageist slurs to pretend people are racist and sexist is a brilliant technique.

The poster said:

"First a black man runs for president and now a woman may end up as a viable candidate for the presidency. So suddenly now for the first time, people of advanced age have decided that income inequality and money in politics is a problem.

And naturally it has nothing to do living in a capitalist state or SCOTUS decisions on campaign finance. It's all due to a single woman who doesn't know to stay in her place. I see a lot of bullshit, and I buy none of it."


I see a lot of bullshit too.

[Logical]

50. Okay Einstein, then why do all the Hillary haters all tend to like Elizabeth Warren? Sexist? Nt

[William769]

58. I'm no Einstein and I would yell you

But that post would get hidden.

[Logical]

218. Send me a PM! I am curious!

[BainsBane]

70. Warren isn't running

So that's a convenient excuse.

I don't think its conscious, but rather relies on the ease with which too many associate women with malice. It clearly isn't rational or based on policy disputes. I see stuff here one would expect from a GOP hit squad. It's all smear and no substance. That people so easily and completely place on her responsibility for systemic ills defies reason. The reactions are entirely visceral. One thing you all have succeeded in doing is moving people to support Clinton. So you can pat yourselves of the back for that.

[Logical]

217. Some people just do not like her.....

And you seem to think that does not matter but honestly it does!
Can they relate to her! Do they think she is a great liberal? Does she care for the average american?
If you dont like someone, why support them?

[ND-Dem]

97. because the hillary haters are all so old. according to the poster. though it doesn't make

sense.

[Hekate]

117. You deliberately misunderstand the poster, but that's a personal problem. nt

[ND-Dem]

120. please explain then her meaning then, because i didn't deliberately misunderstand anything.

"First a black man runs for president and now a woman may end up as a viable candidate for the presidency.

So suddenly now for the first time, people of advanced age have decided that income inequality and money in politics is a problem.

And naturally it has nothing to do living in a capitalist state or SCOTUS decisions on campaign finance. It's all due to a single woman who doesn't know to stay in her place.

I see a lot of bullshit, and I buy none of it."


Now what did I misunderstand, exactly?

[Hekate]

129. I don't dialog where there's no dialog possible

Have a nice day

[ND-Dem]

132. You mean you can't explain, because it's clear what the poster meant. She meant old

people never complained about inequality until Obama and Hillary came along.

It's an ageist attack on Democrats, and it's dishonest.

[msanthrope]

196. That one should ring a Bell. nt

[Hekate]

243. Ask not for whom the Bell tolls...

....it tolls for thee.

[betsuni]

68. Yes, it's personal and emotional.

They go on about what they KNOW she's going to do just like they do with Obama. How they're so sure and why they don't reevaluate their judgement after being wrong so often, I don't understand. Why spend all this time constructing diabolical fictional monsters from human Democrats? What an odd hobby.

[BainsBane]

84. Democratic monsters

and for more than a few a hero in the form of a homophobic, thieving autocrat, Valdimir Putin. The juxtaposition is too much to take and pushed me to supporting Clinton.

[ND-Dem]

99. you support clinton because (you perceive) some people see putin as a hero? i see why

the party is in trouble.

[BainsBane]

110. Yeah, that's exactly what I said

[ND-Dem]

114. do clarify then.

"Democratic monsters and for more than a few a hero in the form of a homophobic, thieving autocrat, Valdimir Putin.

The juxtaposition is too much to take and pushed me to supporting Clinton."

[whathehell]

144. "The problem with that argument is none of you are discussing policy"

Neither is she, except that of demanding $300,000 from a public university

to speak to students.

[BainsBane]

146. Maybe that's because there isn't yet a campaign?

and she hasn't yet declared her candidacy? Ever think of that? I know that the fantasy presidential campaign is the only thing some here care about, but we don't yet have a real presidential campaign. You'll just have to wait for that.

[whathehell]

150. Yeah, sure, that's why she's hired 200 economic advisors..

and I don't "have to wait" for shit.

If she's the democratic nominee, I'll vote for her, but, like millions of others,

I WILL be holding my nose.

[BainsBane]

185. Should you deicde you do care about issues

There are some videos of her discussing just that posted in the Hillary Clinton room.

Hiring advisers is not running a public campaign in which one debates issues with other candidates. No one should have to explain that to you

There is still a good chance that Bill has fucked up a potential campaign for her, which will no doubt be met with great applause around here.

[whathehell]

259. Your implication that I do NOT care about the issues is duly noted

and thrown into the garbage where it belongs.

Have a nice day.

[mcar]

203. Wish I could recommend a post

You said it perfectly.

[brooklynite]

14. Are you saying Carter wouldn't take more if he could get it?

And, why is Carter collecting a middle class salary for every speech he gives?

[BainsBane]

16. That's different

He deserves the money. Clinton doesn't.

[brooklynite]

17. Hypocrisy is always solved by "that's different".....

[BainsBane]

18. My point was sarcastic

but yes, in general I agree.

[ND-Dem]

54. he apparently gets way less than anyone else, including ex-vps and failed presidential

candidates and potential presidential candidates. and rudy Giuliani.

is that because he 'can't get' more? no one wants to hear jimmy, is that it?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=6275506

[brooklynite]

61. Perhaps so...

...what are you willing to pay him?

[ND-Dem]

65. I make minimum wage. I'm not willing to pay *anyone* diddly to give a speech. But if

I were going to hear one, I'd prefer jimmy to Hillary.

[BeanMusical]

81. And you're not alone, far from it.

[hunter]

19. With my sub-zero net worth and sporadic income, it's not going to happen.

But if it's Hillary Clinton vs. loser independent, vs. Green, vs. whatever, vs. Republican, I'll still vote for the competent Democrat.

I voted for Obama twice for President, even though he's right of me and not my cup of tea.

Would you prefer McCain or Romney?

Or, gods forbid, a Ralph Nader or Rand Paul?



I'd sooner vote for the dead corpse of Pat Paulsen.

[JEB]

20. What I have to do for $300,000

shows that I live in a different reality.

[Doctor_J]

24. work for five years

Then pay for my own ginger ale.

[JEB]

25. Probably take me 8 years

and I'd have to stick to tap water.

[Doctor_J]

21. what's crudite, and is it a deal breaker do you think?

[whereisjustice]

23. lol, because veggie platter is soooo middle class!

[GeorgeGist]

240. and here I thought it was ite ...

made from crud.

[whereisjustice]

22. Clinton doesn’t have to wait “for these folks to get their act together.”

God forbid she has to put up with the shit that 99% of us have to put up with.

[Hekate]

119. God forbid you should try to understand a tight speaking schedule

[ND-Dem]

180. i wonder who they are, those folks who take so long to get their act together, and where

that direct quote comes from?

[Kalidurga]

26. I don't get what the problem is here.

Is it the speaking fees or the lemon wedges?

[whereisjustice]

27. Or the two teleprompters and special podium. After all if you are going to save the middle class

you have to rule like royalty.

[Kalidurga]

28. I still don't get it

a lot of speakers use teleprompters and podiums. She has a preference, I don't see the problem with supplying her with what she wants within reason. I think her demands are reasonable.

[whereisjustice]

31. For $300,000 she can buy her own gd wedges. A rock star can be afforded arrogance. They are not

expected to work on behalf of an American public, 99% of whom will never know such pampering.

You can't elect someone to represent the middle class who lives like the princess and the pea.

[Kalidurga]

34. I am still okay with this.

Don't really care that you are not. Keep explaining though it's cute.

[whereisjustice]

45. Yes, of course, Goldman Sachs is OK with it too. I'm glad the lower classes keep you amused. Too bad

you need are vote.

[Kalidurga]

48. I gave up being afraid of the boogey man when I was eight...

It was about the same time I gave up being afraid of people trying to hurt my feelings or shame me or whatever it is you are attempting to do. I am not a fan of Hillary so I really could give a rats behind what her speaking fees are. I don't care that she is running. I hope she gets primaried. You can take your BS about me being amused by the lower classes and shove it though cuz I am the lower classes whateverthehell that means.

[Bobbie Jo]

75. !

nicely done.

[Hekate]

124. Thank you, Kalidurga

Someone here has a real bug up his posterior

[Kalidurga]

133. I am not Kali for nuthin nt

[Hekate]

138. heehee

Multifaceted goddess of unstoppable change, yet oddly enough called Mama-ji by her adherents.

[whathehell]

153. LOL!

[still_one]

29. That is in the ball park for most ex politicians.

Rudy Giuliani, former New York City mayor -- $270,000

Bill Clinton, former president -- $750,000

Al Gore, former vice president -- $156,000

George W. Bush, former president -- $110,000

Dick Cheney, former vice president -- $75,000

Mitt Romney, 2012 Republican presidential candidate -- $40,000-60,000

Howard Dean, Democratic National Committee Chairman -- $20,000

Wealthy candidates may use their personal finances for their campaigns, but right now Hilary is campaigning without actually being a candidate, while separate exploratory committees would be doing the fund-raising,”

Until their are actually public financing for campaigns, it takes a lot of money to run campaigns.

Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders generally do not take speaking fees, but they are the exception.

[Kalidurga]

32. Good to know

personally I am not a fan of Hillary for President. But, I am a big fan of Hillary as an invited speaker for the rest of her life or having her run for something else.

[whereisjustice]

37. well, fuck us, do you think she'll make her speeches to anyone who can't afford $300,000 or

should we just vote for her because, you know, it's predetermined and she can fuck over the middle class sho can't afford to hear how she's going to save the middle class?

Wall Street CEOs get $20,000,000 a year for driving corporations into the ground.

So what? Does that make it right?

As secretary of state - did she leave Iraq in a good place? Libya? Syria? Ukraine?

No. But we sure have the NSA spying bullshit under control, don't we?

[still_one]

38. It takes money to run in an election

[whereisjustice]

40. More correctly, it takes money to buy an election. And she's buying this one.

[still_one]

46. Name a politician who won that didn't have the financial backing in the last 30 years?

[ND-Dem]

66. "everyone does it"

[Hekate]

126. That's not an answer, that's a sulk.

[ND-Dem]

135. For someone who doesn't want to talk to me, you sure are talking to me a lot. I guess

you just like one-way conversation.

[whathehell]

161. and she's got plenty of it..I loved it when, after her 2008 run, she went around

trying to grub money so, in her words, she "could retire her debt" from the

campaign. I thought "Bullshit, lady, you and Bill are worth $300 million.

You can retire your own debt".

.

[Hekate]

181. Yes, she will. When the time comes she will speak in some big open venue and it will be free.

There will be a few concentric circles of rent-a-fences. A clear space around the podium. Secret Service on the roofs, if you look up.

Democratic volunteers will be given tickets (free) so they can stand in the next ring, and it will be packed with happy people. Everybody else, also free entry, will be as close as they can get, but in a crowd of thousands it won't be that close.

It's how I got to hear President Clinton when he came to our city. I was a busy political volunteer, and I got one of those tickets from the organizers. Free.

That evening, President Clinton went to a different part of town and held a fundraiser at a very rich person's home, where donors of a very different class than you or I (well, not you, you don't donate, and why should you) paid big bucks to eat dinner with him. I volunteered my time. They volunteered their money. He got re-elected.

My you are a bitter little person.

[ND-Dem]

188. "Clinton went to a different part of town and held a fundraiser at a very rich person's home,

where donors of a very different class than you or I paid big bucks to eat dinner with him."


"When the time comes she will speak in some big open venue and it will be free. There will be a few concentric circles of rent-a-fences. A clear space around the podium. Secret Service on the roofs, if you look up. Democratic volunteers will be given tickets (free) so they can stand in the next ring, and it will be packed with happy people. Everybody else, also free entry, will be as close as they can get, but in a crowd of thousands it won't be that close."


Yeah, ain't democracy (tm) great?

yeah, bitterbitterbitter.

[Hekate]

189. ...and obtuse

[ND-Dem]

190. ....name-calling

[ND-Dem]

52. so ex-president carter gets $50K cause of lack of demand, or what?

[still_one]

55. Maybe, or might be what he charges. Elizabeth Warren as an example usually doesn't take a fee

[ND-Dem]

57. what's this about then?

http://www.allamericanspeakers.com/booking-request.php?SpName=Elizabeth-Warren

[still_one]

67. You are right. However, as a Senator, Warren is prohibited from taking speaking fee

[whathehell]

157. "Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders generally do not take speaking fees"

Yes, that IS what we are looking for -- someone who is, as you say,

the "exception". Someone who is what Hillary is not, and that's "exceptional".

[ND-Dem]

167. however, it's apparently because sitting congresspeople have to donate their speaking fees

to some kind of charity.

it's not completely clear to me whether their personal foundations count as 'charity'.

[still_one]

199. I just figured that out, thanks

[Logical]

33. Hey, give her a break, she was in near poverty when she left the White House!!! nt

[whereisjustice]

93. So poor, her daughter had to work for $600,000 at NBC as a special correspondent to help

pay for the family jet.

[ND-Dem]

106. yeah, poor chelsea had to go out at a young age to support bill and hill. luckily she was

able, through grit, determination, and general decency, to work her way to the top in a well-paying job.

[whereisjustice]

121. "Hard Choices: Armani or Versace"

[merrily]

165. dead broke.

[Takket]

35. "A computer, mouse, printer and scanner"

I just had this rather amusing mental image of all those things being provided without any sort of connection between them, and the next speaking demands list reading "A fully operational internet connected computer with attached mouse, scanner and printer".

[jakeXT]

207. We found something

[Takket]

214. That looks like the setup

We had when I was in the school newspaper in the mid '90s lol

[earthside]

36. Saw a clip of her today at wherever she was speaking ...

... Clinton was asked whether she would like to host the Oscars or run for President.

And we got treated to that trumpeting cackle laugh of hers.

The 2016 contest is going to be almost unbearable for me.

[whereisjustice]

39. Yes, she's unbearable. Tone deaf, entitled 1%er who should run as a republican since she

wants to maintain the status quo.

[elias49]

122. I'm sorry but you made me laugh!

'trumpeting cackle' is so true.

[KingCharlemagne]

210. I'm no fan of HRC and will not vote for her in the primary, but I think

"cackle" has sexist connotations, commonly used to denigrate only women but very seldom men.

[earthside]

211. 'Bellowing'?

A term almost exclusively reserved to describe a man's laughter or verbal expression.
Not in a good way; that word has sexist connotations of male boorishness, but it is a good descriptive term that I rarely hear objection to.

Or how about 'guffaw'? Does a woman ever guffaw?

I'm stickin' with a 'cackle' because that is how it sounds to me.

The prerogative of 'political correctness' gets pasted on liberals for good reasons sometimes ... the effort by some to sanitize the language is extreme and intellectually enervating.

And even this little dialogue is an example of why the Clinton candidacy depresses me so much. Are we really going to have to endure another almost two years of speech police like we did in 2007-08?

[KingCharlemagne]

212. For me, HRC's laugh sounds like fingernails scraping down a

chalkboard. I only wish to draw attention to the perhaps-unconscious sexism that sometimes permeates and accompanies our word choices.

BTW: I think you meant 'pejorative' (and not 'prerogative'

[F4lconF16]

221. +1

Thanks for saying it. Much as I dislike Clinton, it's going to be a long primary filled with sexism, both conscious and unconscious.

[hrmjustin]

41. She is in high demand.

She is popular.

[whereisjustice]

47. So is Charlie Sheen. I'm pretty sure he gets high fees and wouldn't be a good president.

[hrmjustin]

49. But Hillary will be president and a good one imho.

At this point she very much looks like she will be the next president. Sean Penn is no Hillary Clinton.

[whereisjustice]

51. Hillary Clinton would be a horrible President. More poverty, more jobs to Asia, higher CEO pay, low

wages, more war, more torture, she really did one hell of a job as Sec of State didn't she? Iraq, Syria, Libya, Afghanistan - what a fucking mess.

[hrmjustin]

53. And if she is the nominee will you vote for her?

[earthside]

56. Does one get kicked out of DU if you say 'no'?

Of course, it is all theoretical right now.

Hillary Clinton isn't a candidate for anything currently.

[hrmjustin]

60. No you don't get kicked out.

[CAG]

64. No, but we'll send you a special "Jeb for President" sign for your lawn

[merrily]

169. It's a violation of DU's terms of service, so you take your chances. You also risk a hide.

The incessant requests for loyalty oaths are bullshit, at best, IMO. And I won't even say what I think of them at worst.

[SidDithers]

201. That would be a no...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=profile&uid=237557&sub=trans

Sid

[hrmjustin]

208. Interesting.

[CAG]

59. Do you hate JFK and FDR, too? As I remember, they were pretty rich. Can the rich not allow

themselves to be on the side of the middle class without giving away all of their money?

[whereisjustice]

69. JFK and FDR didn't charge $300,000 a speech during time of the worst income disparity in US history

and when Hillary starts quoting FDR, grab a jacket because hell has just frozen over.

Fuck the rich. They've had a good run at our expense. We saved their asses. Now its time for payback.

[stevenleser]

83. Since both died in office, it's not the same is it?

But of course you knew that.

Had JFK or FDR survived and had a post Presidency they would have probably made more in the equivalent of what money was worth at the time.

[whereisjustice]

89. wow - you are insulting JFK & FDR in order to buff up Hillary? That's very third way of you.

[Hekate]

142. Silly. Both JFK and FDR inherited their money from their fathers, grandfathers, and in the case of

...FDR, more ancestors than that. JFK's granddaddy was a rum-runner, a veritable crook. I don't know how the first Roosevelts made their pile, but I'm sure you would not be pleased.

Neither of them had the opportunity to charge speaking fees as ex-presidents/ex-officeholders because of being dead before they left office.

How on earth is that a slam against them or buffing up Hillary? Quite a stretch, that.

[stevenleser]

163. Silly and non-sequitur is the OP's m.o. where Hillary is concerned

That and manufacturing outrage.

[Hekate]

186. It's almost like he's got a meme-generator that flags words and riffs off them randomly

Actually, not just the OP but another poster in the thread too. Some kind of algorithm, wouldn't you say? Very clever.

[ND-Dem]

172. did truman inherit a wad from daddy too?

[BeanMusical]

191. :crickets:

[ND-Dem]

170. doubt it.

When Truman left the White House and returned to life as a private citizen in Missouri in January 1953, the U.S. did not provide any form of pension to former presidents. Truman had little or no income beyond his Army pension of $112.56 per month and bore all the costs of maintaining an office and staff himself, and it was largely due to his financial limitations that Congress finally enacted the Former Presidents Act (FPA) in 1958 to provide former presidents with pensions and allowances to cover office and travel expenses.

We couldn't find a source for the quote that has Truman declining offers of corporate positions at large salaries with the rebuff that "You don't want me. You want the office of the president, and that doesn't belong to me. It belongs to the American people and it's not for sale." However, even if he didn't use those exact words, Truman did express that sentiment regarding the acceptance of corporate positions in his 1960 book, Mr. Citizen:


I turned down all of those offers. I knew that they were not interested in hiring Harry Truman, the person, but what they wanted to hire was the former President of the United States. I could never lend myself to any transaction, however respectable, that would commercialize on the prestige and the dignity of the office of the Presidency.

In May 1971, towards the end of Truman's life (he died in December 1972), the House of Representatives was considering awarding the Medal of Honor to the former president. Truman quashed such deliberations by writing a letter, read to the House on 6 May 1971 by Rep. William J. Randall of Missouri, in which he maintained that the Medal of Honor was for combat bravery and that changing the requirements in his case would detract from the merit of the award:

I do not consider that I have done anything which should be the reason of any award, Congressional or otherwise.

http://www.snopes.com/quotes/truman/truman.asp

[stevenleser]

171. What you doubt is not the issue. Hillarys fees are not out of line with other

Politicians. Someone posted a list.

[ND-Dem]

173. they're nearly double the next front runner. i saw the list.

and this is what I doubt:

Had JFK or FDR survived and had a post Presidency they would have probably made more in the equivalent of what money was worth at the time.

since, as I said, Truman didn't die in office, nor did he make a lot of money in his retirement doing speaking tours and getting fake honorariums from corporations.

[bhikkhu]

62. It all sounds pretty ordinary to me

not that I'm on any kind of lecture circuit, but the cost is in the ballpark and "what the market will bear", which is fair enough. The "demands" are fairly plain, and make it easier for the people staging the event to know what is expected - nothing extraordinary, but what would make someone travelling in more comfortable.

I'm not a big Hillary supporter, but I see nothing wrong here, and the efforts in the OP to use it to smear her has a RW stink to it.

[Warren DeMontague]

63. I'd totally pay if Trey wasn't playing lead guitar

ANYBODY BUT TREY GOD DAMMIT

[whereisjustice]

73. Hillafarian pill heads paying $300,000 to hear her lip sync and pander...

she doesn't even know the words to the songs her advisers wrote for her.

[Warren DeMontague]

79. Well, we will have a primary season, won't we.

And then once we have a nominee, we will need to come together to support that nominee, whoever he or she may be.

[Cryptoad]

72. Papa Paul whores,,,,,

having a slow news day?

[DonCoquixote]

76. I may dislike Hillary, but

This is TAME compared to many riders, like Van Halen who wants a bowl of M & Ms with all the green ones removed.

[Warren DeMontague]

80. THE GREEN M&M IS THE BEST ONE!

Especially now that she's been "sexualized", hubba hubba

[msanthrope]

197. Great--now I have to remember that thread of fail. nt

[merrily]

168. Beastie Boys demanded removal of all the blue M &M's.

Said then young Horowitz: I know this is going to last only a few years, so what the hell?

Or words to that effect.

[obnoxiousdrunk]

85. OMG the horror !

[rpannier]

86. Most speakers of her notariety expect certain things. But I do have a question

What is Room-temperature sparkling and still water?
Still water?
Is that water from a still, from Stillwater, OK or water that doesn't move while in the glass
Is there a special kind of water called still water?

[whereisjustice]

90. Still water as in "don't make waves". A Democrat only a conservative would love.

[rpannier]

92. I wish we still had DUzy's cuz that is funny

[sabrina 1]

103. You're on a roll tonight! Lol!

[Beaverhausen]

94. Still water is not sparkling water.

[rpannier]

96. Ah

Thank you
I did not know that
I am now educated

Appreciate it

[ND-Dem]

104. still water is typically found in swamps. mosquitoes breed in still water.

[Beaverhausen]

140. Still water comes out of the tap.

Stagnant water is where mosquitoes breed.

You're welcome.

[ND-Dem]

141. If it's coming out of a tap, it's moving, not still. If it's moving through pipes, it's moving.

You're welcome too.



Water from a tap






Mosquito Heaven - Shallow, Still Water

[Beaverhausen]

145. Are you serious?

You don't know what still water is, compared to sparkling water?

[ND-Dem]

147. are you serious? you don't know what still water is? (sorry, i refuse to be so puerile as

to use the rofl icon)

I think you mean "distilled" water. Not "still water"

Sparkling water: carbonated water

[tammywammy]

152. Tap and other non-carbonated water is still water.

Still water also refers to bodies of water with little to no movement, but when discussing drinking water it means non-carbonated water either tap or bottled.

[stevenleser]

166. That's what passes as debate and a point from that crowd. Nt

[GeorgeGist]

241. Hipster speak. You and I would call it...

water.

[rpannier]

249. That's also funny

Disappointing though
I am not a hipster
I always thought I was Daddy-o

[Beaverhausen]

98. Are you under the impression that everyone attending the speech

Pays $300,000?

I'm trying to figure out why this is so repugnant to you.

[ND-Dem]

102. who pays for a speech given to students at a university? unless some private party made

a special fund to pay for speakers, students pay with their tuition, or the government pays when they support the universities with public monies.

so it's either coming out of the students' hides or the public's hide.

[Beaverhausen]

107. The university has a budget for speakers

All universities host speakers.

And they pay them.

And the speakers have a contract and a rider.

Jesus there is so much
Ignorance in this tread it's mind-blowing.

[ND-Dem]

115. Where do you think that budget money comes from? Unless it comes from some billionaire's

ass, it comes from tuition and student fees, or from the government, cause those are the two biggest funding sources for universities.

Or from the university endowment, which is donations from students, ex-students, faculty etc. held for interest.

[Beaverhausen]

128. Should universities not have speakers?

Is that your answer? Should they not bring successful, inspiring and informative people to speak to their students?

[ND-Dem]

134. Moving the goalposts now?

[Beaverhausen]

143. No I'm not.

You simply don't have an answer.

Like it or not, HRC is one of the most admired people in the world. There are people who want to hear her speak.

[ND-Dem]

148. you didn't answer the question i asked you.

[Hekate]

155. Poster pretends to not know that universities have major funders and endowments for such things

And the people who give that money know the uses to which it is put.

Poster pretends to not know that students pay little to nothing for their tickets, while members of the community pay $25/$30 and up. $150 ticket might get you to the backstage reception if there is one. But a "big" speaker is underwritten above and beyond what the box-office brings in.

Poster just wants to fight.

[tammywammy]

158. Students see speakers for free at my school.

Plus free parking. There is an option to buy $25 tickets and get really up close seats. My friends and I bought tickets to see Anderson Cooper and were on the third row! For other speakers we've just taken the free tickets.

[Hekate]

176. I did specify "little or nothing" for the students. UCSB has a terrific Arts & Lectures program....

... and the kinds of things my friends and I want to go see are usually not free for anyone. Still, $8 or $10 student rate isn't bad when you consider the cost of seeing a movie.

Ambassador Joe Wilson came to speak after his wife Valerie Plame was outed by the Bush-Cheney administration -- he went on a speaking tour to educate the public and frankly to raise money for her legal expenses, and he came by UCSB because he is an alumnus. I don't know what his speaking fee was, but surely the box office take didn't cover it. Students got in free; we members of the community probably paid $25, I don't remember. The 900 seat hall was packed.

[tammywammy]

179. I love the speakers they bring in at my school.

There's always a variety.

[Hekate]

183. Go as often as you can. It's great exposure for you.

[ND-Dem]

192. well, i suppose we'd have to check out each university individually to see exactly where

the money comes from, but for the record, I pretended no such thing, since I specifically mentioned university endowments.

so here's some data points:

Student activity fees are among the mandatory charges each undergraduate must pay to attend USC.

Jerry Brewer, vice president of student affairs at USC, said the decisions on who to invite as speakers and how much to pay them are made by student leaders of Carolina Productions, the organization that plans and carries out student programming at the university. Carolina Productions receives about $500,000 annually from activity fees for student programming, Brewer said.

http://www.greenvilleonline.com/article/20101107/NEWS/111070001/USC-speakers-reap-sweet-rewards-appearances

course that would only pay for one Hillary speech and a couple of speeches by cheaper speakers.

Sen. Stacey Campfield (R-Knoxville) filed legislation this week addressing the use of student activity fees at Tennessee’s public institutions of higher education. His bill (SB1608) requires student fees used for student organizations’ paid speakers to be distributed “proportionally based on membership to student organizations requesting such funding.”

http://advocacy.tennessee.edu/tag/student-activity-fees/

A portion of the Programs part of the fee is allocated by the UPSF Program Board. This board is responsible for allocating monies, primarily to registered student organizations, for the presentation of educational, cultural, and entertainment programs that have a broad campus appeal or contribute to the intellectual development of students. The board is made up of students, faculty, and staff who review all proposals to ensure effective use of the funds. The Student Government Association president appoints students to the committee each year.

http://tntoday.utk.edu/2014/01/30/student-fee-dollars-programs-services-fee/?utm_source=student-at-tn&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=sat-2014-02-06

All speaker honoraria and production expenses for the series are covered by the following: ticket sales; support provided voluntarily by student governments using their student activity fees to purchase large blocks of tickets for each of the lectures for free distribution to students; sponsorships directed to the series by our university and community partners; and the Donald L. Davis Lectureship Fund, an endowment created exclusively to support the series. No state funds, research foundation funds, tuition dollars, or general gifts to the university or UB Foundation are used to support the program.

http://www.student-affairs.buffalo.edu/special/tickets.php

[joshcryer]

123. Riders also tend to include weird requests.

To show that you are reading the contract.

http://www.thesmokinggun.com/backstage

[whereisjustice]

105. Hillary is selling future favors for $300,000. The 1% are buying future favors for $300,000. That's

how American Government works. At least for the Third Way.

Now GET OUT THERE AND VOTE FOR HER, DAMN IT.

Because, because... Hillary.

[onenote]

248. If you didn't know it before, you know it now: your OP is complete bullshit.

Apparently, that's nothing new for you .

[Hekate]

108. What misleading Bullshit. There's backers and there's voters, and they're not the same.

And those "demands" ? God how awful for a speaker to want some refreshments. How heinous for a woman of a certain age to want a few pillows for her comfort. Unbelievable that a short woman might need a "special" podium.

Sliced fruits and vegetables, coffee and water. Why, the Queen should be asking for champagne and caviar!

Don't worry, dear OP, neither YOUR vote nor YOUR money is being asked for. And a good thing, too, because you weren't planning on doing that anyway.

[Agschmid]

130. #accurate...

Don't worry, dear OP, neither YOUR vote nor YOUR money is being asked for. And a good thing, too, because you weren't planning on doing that anyway.

[ND-Dem]

184. she's 5'7". not exactly 'short' for a woman. she's a couple of inches taller than the US average

for women. (Height is partly class-determined, btw, and the upper classes tend to be taller than average)

https://www.google.com/?gws_rd=ssl#q=how+tall+is+hillary+Clinton

most podiums these days are adjustable anyway.

[onenote]

226. Its even more bullshit than that. Her speech was funded by a University endowment

it was given as part of a lecture series to an audience of around 1800. Student tickets were free. Other tickets, a portion of which went to fund university scholoarships and research programs, ranged from $100 to $500 (Clinton didn't get any of the ticket proceeds). There was a reception for those buying the high priced tickets, but Clinton wasn't part of the reception.

In other words, this wasn't a campaign event and even if it was, it was pretty cheap for those attending.

The OP probably doesn't want these facts out in the open since they pretty much blow up the OP's bogus messaging.

[olddots]

109. the truth hurts

[JEB]

112. Salt of the Earth. Worth watching.

&list=PLt5DobM_Kn6GJh7ImMn1VscQWxJ46A_CV&index=1

[DeSwiss]

125. +1000

Around 1993, Massachusetts Institute of Technology linguistics professor and political commentator Noam Chomsky praised the film because of the way people were portrayed doing the real work of unions. He said, "The real work is being done by people who are not known, that's always been true in every popular movement in history...I don't know how you get that across in a film. Actually, come to think of it, there are some films that have done it. I mean, I don't see a lot of visual stuff, so I'm not the best commentator, but I thought Salt of the Earth really did it. It was a long time ago, but at the time I thought that it was one of the really great movies—and of course it was killed, I think it was almost never shown."

More

[JEB]

136. Yep, blacklisted.

If I recall correctly, many actors were actual mine workers. The film has a power and meaning I don't find in too many contemporary films.

[ND-Dem]

177. I think most of the people in the film were non-professionals. But Grandpa Walton was in it.

The film was called subversive and blacklisted because the International Union of Mine, Mill and Smelter Workers sponsored it and many blacklisted Hollywood professionals helped produce it. The union had been expelled from the CIO in 1950 for its alleged communist-dominated leadership.[2]

Director Herbert Biberman was one of the Hollywood screenwriters and directors who refused to answer the House Committee on Un-American Activities on questions of CPUSA affiliation in 1947. The Hollywood Ten were cited and convicted for contempt of Congress and jailed. Biberman was imprisoned in the Federal Correctional Institution at Texarkana for six months. After his release he directed this film.[3] Other participants who made the film and were blacklisted by the Hollywood studios include: Paul Jarrico, Will Geer, Rosaura Revueltas, and Michael Wilson.

The producers cast only five professional actors. The rest were locals from Grant County, New Mexico, or members of the International Union of Mine, Mill and Smelter Workers, Local 890, many of whom were part of the strike that inspired the plot. Juan Chacón, for example, was a real-life Union Local president. In the film he plays the protagonist, who has trouble dealing with women as equals...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Salt_of_the_Earth_(1954_film)

[JEB]

225. Thanks for the info.

[zeemike]

149. I watched it some time ago.

And it was a powerful movie...will watch it again tomorrow thanks for reminding me.

[cantbeserious]

154. HRC - An Economic Royalist At Heart

eom

[Jamastiene]

187. Pillows and chairs and water, oh my.

THE HUMANITY! How can she stand such lavishness? And the nerve of her to ask for lemon wedges too.


Of all the things you could have chosen to complain about Hillary Clinton, THIS is the thing you chose? Really? Has anyone ever informed you that you don't pick your battles very wisely? They need to.

[Scuba]

193. I don't mind her getting paid for speaking, but I sure mind the quid pro quo.

[brooklynite]

194. What quid pro quo

She'q on the speaking circuit. Meeting organizers invite people like her because it brings in a crowd.

[Scuba]

195. Bwahaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa! Sure, Goldman and Citi pay her to fill seats. Yeah, that's it.

[onenote]

247. Do you think there was a quid pro quo for her speaking at UCLA

as the keynote in a lecture series that is funded by part of an $100 million contribution made to the university three years earlier and that was attended by 1800 people. Some of the tickets were set aside for students (who got them for free); some were set aside for sale to faculty for $100. Others were sold to the public for $250 or $500 (with a portion of the ticket price donated to UCLA scholarship and research programs).

Oh, and her fee was donated to the Clinton family non-profit foundation.

[Scuba]

252. Don't kid yourself. There's always a quid pro quo.

[onenote]

253. what was Kofi Annan's?

He spoke the year before.

And Howard Dean? Marian Wright Edlelman? Madeleine Albright?

They all were speakers paid by the Luskin Lecture endowment.

[Dawgs]

200. I wonder what Bernie would demand.

[Hekate]

242. Tap water in a paper cup, a crust of dry bread, a hard bench, a light shining in his eyes.

He's a saint and has taken a vow of poverty and excoriation of the flesh.

[Godhumor]

202. No problem with this what so ever

She is a high demand speaker.

It is always exciting to see what we're supposed to be outraged about next.

[ladjf]

205. IMO, it's unfortunate for Democrats and Americans in general that

Ms. Clinton has more or less been appointed as the Democratic candidate. She is , at best, a run of the mill, hack politician. But still, any Democrat would be better than any of the Republican candidates.

Our political process rarely favors the best qualified.

[SidDithers]

206. *THUD*...

And another outrage widget hits the shop floor.



Sid

[Savannahmann]

213. By comparison.

Using the same website for Former President Carter. You could spend $30,000 and get twelve martial artists to do a demonstration titled G0! the group is called The Art of War.

http://www.inspiringspeakers.com/feature-Art-of-War.shtml

Fee:$30,000

Expertise: Entertainment


Travels from: United States

So for one tenth of the money, you would get twelve martial artists, who have spent years studying. Twelve people who put in as much time as Former Senator Clinton and Secretary Clinton spent in elective/appointed office.

[randome]

215. Where is reality, whereisjustice?

Last edited Wed Feb 25, 2015, 12:26 PM - Edit history (1)

[hr][font color="blue"][center]If you think childhood is finished, you didn't do it right the first time.
Start over.[/center][/font][hr]

[onenote]

219. When you have to distort to make your point, you probably don't have a point worth making

Last edited Wed Feb 25, 2015, 06:43 PM - Edit history (1)

Let's consider the title of the OP: "Salt of the Earth Hillary Clinton wants $300,000 from you PLUS your vote"

Reading that, you might reasonably conclude (and be shocked) that Clinton is charging individuals $300,000 to hear a campaign speech.

Of course, the facts are much different.

A year ago, Clinton was paid $300,000 to deliver the Keynote Speech at the Luskin Lecture for Thought Leadership at UCLA. She delivered her remarks (not a campaign speech) to an audience of around 1800 people. That would work out to $167 per person, which would be a pretty cheap fundraiser if it had been a campaign event. Of course, it really didn't cost $167 per person. Student tickets were free. Tickets for faculty were $100 and there were reserved/premier reserved seats that cost $250 and $500, a portion of which was for scholarship and research programs at UCLA. There was a reception for the Premier Reserved ticket holders, but Clinton did not (and was never scheduled to) attend.

But there's more: the $300,000? That didn't exactly come out of the attendees pockets, or even the University's. It came from a multi-million dollar endowment created by the Luskins as part of the $100 million they donated to UCLA in 2011. I don't know how much Bill Clinton was paid in 2012 as the initial speaker or how much Kofi Annan was paid for his 2013 appearance at the second annual Thought for Leadership Lecture. Nor do I know how much other speakers who appear as part of the regular Luskin Lecture series (including Howard Dean, Marian Wright Edelman, Madeleine Albright), but presumably they were paid for their appearances as well -- after all, that's the point of the endowment.

Sort of paints a different picture than the OP and its hit-piece story.

[Beaverhausen]

236. Thanks for the facts

[Hekate]

244. Oh, facts. OP and Echo are impervious to them; it must be their superpower.

Thank you, onenote. Your post was helpful.

[betsuni]

255. Thank you!

So many dumb comments in this thread. Like a stupidity contest.

[wyldwolf]

222. Your concern is noted.

[Historic NY]

223. That fee pales in comparison to some celebrity fee's....

http://www.businessinsider.com/celebrity-public-appearance-fees-2012-11#youve-seen-how-much-has-been-stars-charge-19

[wyldwolf]

224. Al Gore, $100,000-150,000

[bigwillq]

227. All celebrities have "riders" of some sort

Some have extravagant demands. Others not so much.

[onenote]

230. One more time for clarity 's sake: the $300,000 was paid out of an endowment. Tickets were free

for students. Faculty tickets cost $100 and there aalso were reserved seating tickets that cost $250 or $500, which included a tax-deductible contribution to support scholarship and research programs at the University. Attendance was around 1800 people (or $167 per person if everyone had been charged, which they weren't). Actually pretty cheap as far as political events go (although this wasn't a politcal event, as evidenced by the fact that Clinton herself didn't attend the post-lecture reception).

The endowment that paid Clintno's speaker fee was set up for the specific purpose of sponsoring lectures. (The Luskin Lecture series, funded by a portion of the Luskin's $100 million donation to UCLA).

If the OP knew this, then he/she is dishonest for not disclosing it.

If the OP didn't know this, then he/she should have done his/her research before posting.

Either way, the OP's characterization of the event is bullshit.

[ND-Dem]

237. ...The speech was a fundraiser. Tickets cost $100 and up. Attendance was about 1800 because

they chose to hold it in a 1800-person venue.

The term “the one percent” is taking on a new meaning at UCLA. After hours of waiting in line, a stampede and a ticket lottery, only a limited number of students – or about one percent of the student body – will have the chance to hear Hillary Clinton speak in Royce Hall.

UCLA will be able to advertise Clinton’s visit to prospective students and their families, telling them that students at this prestigious institution had the opportunity to hear Clinton, a potential future president speak, free of charge. Except they’ll probably leave out the fact that thousands of students were left without tickets after waiting in line for hours...

But the lecture’s organizers missed an opportunity to engage a less restricted segment of UCLA’s student population. Given the availability of a facility such as Pauley Pavilion, the lecture could have easily been able to accommodate a much larger portion of our community.

Jean-Paul Renaud, spokesman for the College of Letters and Sciences, which runs the lecture series, told the Daily Bruin that Pauley was not suited to house a lecture. He said that Royce is a more intimate setting for the Clinton lecture, while Pauley is usually reserved for basketball games and other large-scale events.

Royce’s capacity is about 1,800 seats. That can hardly be described as intimate.

Furthermore, UCLA’s arguments about intimacy are nonsensical when fundraising is a key function of the event.

Filling only half of of the almost 14,000 seats in Pauley and charging each individual $15, for example, would raise more than twice UCLA’s most optimistic goal for the Royce event.

Promoting an event centered around exclusivity for wealthy donors is a disappointing move by the university.

The fact that so few UCLA community members will actually be sitting in Royce Hall means that hosting the event at UCLA was little more than a guise for an opportunity to cozy up to donors posing as an educational opportunity for students.

http://dailybruin.com/2014/03/05/julia-mccarthy-royce-hall-venue-for-clinton-speech-is-mistake/

[onenote]

246. Correct. A fundraiser for UCLA, not Clinton.

Last edited Wed Feb 25, 2015, 07:28 PM - Edit history (1)

It would have been nice if more students (around 25 percent of the tickets were allocated for distribution to students for free) could've attended, but even if it had been held at Pauley (capacity around 13,000) it wouldn't have been possible for every student (enrollment is over 40,000) to attend, let alone faculty and staff. It would be nice if every student could attend every UCLA basketball game too -- but it doesn't work that way. As it was, however, UCLA did provide live streaming of the lecture to another 1500 or so students at an overflow location (Ackerman Ballroom).

As for cozying up to donors -- just to be clear, it was the University, not Clinton, that was cozying up to donors -- no one did or had to donate a nickel to Clinton to attend the lecture and the reception for those that bought the premium reserved seats at $500 was with University officials, not Clinton.

[mylye2222]

233. Yes. A real "middle class hero"!!! LMAOF!!!!

[KamaAina]

235. Um, okay, Hil

[whereisjustice]

254. +1

[OKNancy]

239. dragging up an article from Nov. of last year I see

in a never-ending quest to make a mountain out of a molehill.

Most of us know the difference.

Here is the original article from the Washington Post ( also from November)
http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/plans-for-ucla-visit-give-rare-glimpse-into-hillary-clintons-paid-speaking-career/2014/11/26/071eb0cc-7593-11e4-bd1b-03009bd3e984_story.html

Her UCLA fee, like those at other universities, went to the Bill, Hillary & Chelsea Clinton Foundation, the family’s nonprofit group.

[hifiguy]

245. Does one have to her as YRH (Your Royal Highness)?

Kiss my ass, Hillary.

[whereisjustice]

251. Because we need overpaid Wall Street shills stumping for overpaid Wall Street CEOs, Hillary

has no problem with the "boys club" as long as she gets her outrageous paychecks from the "boys club".

[akbacchus_BC]

258. How come they always refer to the middle class but

never refer to the working class? Is the working class not an entity to be addressed? I find it in poor taste that the working class is being ignored!