If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(New York Daily News)   Jenna and Barbara Bush left speechless upon hearing Chelsea Clinton gets $75k per speech   (nydailynews.com) divider line 77
    More: Silly  
•       •       •

1130 clicks; posted to Politics » on 10 Jul 2014 at 12:36 PM (11 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



77 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2014-07-10 11:59:33 AM
Well, Jenna and Barbara Bush need to go make some speeches and charge for them.  I'm sure plenty of people would like to know how San Dimas highschool football rules...
 
2014-07-10 12:00:32 PM
The rights butt hurt about this is truly dizzying
 
2014-07-10 12:12:41 PM
"At $75,000 a pop, the 34-year-old mom-to-be is pulling down the same fees as former Vice President Dick Cheney."

Was Chelsea Clinton wrong about just about everything concerning the Iraq War II? The fact that anyone is willing to pay Dick Cheney for his opinion on anything is the real tragedy here. Clinton serves on the boards of several corporations including School of American Ballet, Clinton Foundation, Clinton Global Initiative, Common Sense Media, Weill Cornell Medical College and IAC/InterActiveCorp. Criticizing her for not doing "philanthropic work outside her family business" is on a par with criticizing a programmer for not working outside of that one company in Cupertino.

As for Jenna and Barbara, well, Jenna has also worked as a correspondent for NBC. She even interviewed Bill Clinton and Chelsea Clinton. Barbara does not seem interested in a media career, but she has done good work for UNICEF and marriage equality. The article makes no mention of how much either makes per speech, so subby was just pulling that out of his butt. But the article does say, that Chelsea Clinton's "speaking fees are on par with the GOP's former veep candidate Sarah Palin." Now that is wrong. There's no way Palin should be making that much per speech, yet the Post seems aghast that Clinton could make as much as a failed VP candidate who quit her post as governor of Alaska.
 
2014-07-10 12:38:25 PM
Jenna is probably getting a shiatload more from her Good Morning America gig
 
2014-07-10 12:40:22 PM
So much class envy.  So sad.  Just because someone makes money and does well, class warriors want to tear them down.  I'll pray for you, NY Daily News.
 
2014-07-10 12:43:24 PM
So rich people make 150% of the  average yearly US household income for a few hours of speaking.

Neat.
 
2014-07-10 12:43:30 PM
I think speaking fees are often crazy, but it's usually someone who has at least done something.

What does she even talk about?
 
2014-07-10 12:44:37 PM
"Chelsea Clinton, who merely lived in the White House for eight years..."

The silver lining of this article is that it lets you know you should stop reading in the first sentence.
 
2014-07-10 12:46:02 PM
Helps to have something to say.
 
2014-07-10 12:47:47 PM
though she gives most of her speeches for free.

This is an outrage.
 
2014-07-10 12:48:05 PM
I thought we weren't supposed to be jealous of rich people commanding large salaries.

If some entity pays Chelsea Clinton $75k for a speech, that entity believes her words are worth $75k. Is someone suggesting that we introduce teh soshalizums into speaking-fee negotiations such that a centrally-planned big government full of unelected bureaucrats picks winners and losers among Job Creators and the jobbers they creatify?
 
2014-07-10 12:48:17 PM
You'd think the invisible hand of the free market would regulate speaker's fees.
 
2014-07-10 12:49:38 PM
Who cares?
 
2014-07-10 12:59:55 PM

Jaden Smith First of His Name: "Chelsea Clinton, who merely lived in the White House for eight years..."

The silver lining of this article is that it lets you know you should stop reading in the first sentence.


What I got from the article is that the former Democratic POTUS Bill Clinton is so incredibly popular that people will pay vast sums of money just to hear his daughter speak. His Republican successor, not so much.
 
2014-07-10 01:00:45 PM
"Tried to care about money on some fundamental level, but couldn't. "

Shocker, someone who's been surrounded by wealth her whole life and has always had everything she could possibly want and married a wealthy hedge fund manager can't get worked up to care about money.
 
2014-07-10 01:01:27 PM

UberDave: Well, Jenna and Barbara Bush need to go make some speeches and charge for them.  I'm sure plenty of people would like to know how San Dimas highschool football rules...


I'm sure they can provide great insight into how a beer can can be made into a bong.
 
2014-07-10 01:02:09 PM
Well sure, but I bet the Bush sisters could drink Chelsea under the table.  So they've got that going for them, which is nice.
 
2014-07-10 01:02:14 PM
I kicked it with Barbara many moons ago and I must confess that she was a very pleasant gal.
 
2014-07-10 01:02:14 PM
Ultimately, her speeches are only worth what people are willing to pay for them.  If she's getting paid $75k, then that's what it's worth.  That being said, I don't understand why her experiences and wisdom are worth that much.  Say what you want about Bill Clinton, Hillary Clinton, and Dick Cheney, but they were deep in the trenches and their insight on the inner workings of the White House would draw the crowd that would justify a large fee.  Chelsea happened to have the right parents.

The only non-politician on that graphic, by the way, was Colin Powell, but he was also deep in the trenches.  And is the only member of the Bush administration to express regret over Iraq.
 
2014-07-10 01:03:53 PM
I charge speaking fees and every motherf*cker out there is indebted to me.
 
2014-07-10 01:05:02 PM

plewis: Helps to have something to say.


What experiences can she give us her expertise about? Being the daughter of Bill and Hillary, and having Rush Limbaugh call you an ugly teenager?
 
2014-07-10 01:05:25 PM

Dr Dreidel: I thought we weren't supposed to be jealous of rich people commanding large salaries.

If some entity pays Chelsea Clinton $75k for a speech, that entity believes her words are worth $75k. Is someone suggesting that we introduce teh soshalizums into speaking-fee negotiations such that a centrally-planned big government full of unelected bureaucrats picks winners and losers among Job Creators and the jobbers they creatify?


No, we're just supposed to hate the Clintons.  Because.

//I don't hate the Clintons, but the likliehood of me supporting a dynasty candidate for president is near zero.
 
2014-07-10 01:06:01 PM
So, this is where conservatives piss, biatch, and/or moan about people undeservedly being paid on basis of name recognition for their parents' merits, rather than achieving anything themselves?


i.kinja-img.com

/Oh, I understand. This is different because, reasons.
 
2014-07-10 01:09:22 PM

BMFPitt: I think speaking fees are often crazy, but it's usually someone who has at least done something.

What does she even talk about?


From what I understand, mostly she talks about human rights, eradicating disease, and for some reason, diarrhea (seriously?). She then takes questions about what it was like growing up in the White House, and what she thinks her mothers plans are for 2016. (Which kinda tells me, if Hillary drops out, Chelsea's 'speaking fees' will dry up rather quickly).

Also, many of her speeches are tied to fund-raising activities; so they pay her $75,000 and use her (name) to attract/entice donors.

Supposedly she gives all these fees to the Clinton family "foundation". *Shrug*.. Not like she needs the money, she's married to a guy that makes a couple million a year.

More power to her.
 
2014-07-10 01:10:13 PM
My daughter needs some money.  Now, either I can give it to her, or you can give it to her.  Which do you think would make happier, hmmmmmmm?

Wealthy people curry favor from other wealthy people.  Get over it.
 
2014-07-10 01:10:24 PM
I'd like to leave Barbara Bush speechless. And sweaty.

msnbcmedia.msn.com

I wonder what condition she'd be in.
 
2014-07-10 01:13:47 PM

Wellon Dowd: I'd like to leave Barbara Bush speechless. And sweaty.

[msnbcmedia.msn.com image 850x1277]

I wonder what condition she'd be in.


Probably speechless and sweaty.
 
2014-07-10 01:14:24 PM

EyeballKid: So, this is where conservatives piss, biatch, and/or moan about people undeservedly being paid on basis of name recognition for their parents' merits, rather than achieving anything themselves?


[i.kinja-img.com image 372x226]

/Oh, I understand. This is different because, reasons.


I dunno.  Would you think so badly of Chris Wallace if her weren't on Fox News?  I'll be the first to admit, being associated with Fox News immediately colors my opinion of someone, but Wallace seems to be the exception, rather than the rule, of being a decent journalist.
 
2014-07-10 01:17:53 PM
GrailOfThunder:

Supposedly she gives all these fees to the Clinton family "foundation".


Of which she sits on the board of directors with an expense account and undisclosed salary.
 
2014-07-10 01:18:08 PM
I dunno about speeches, but they could certainly get that for um, a film.

/which i would gladly watch.
 
2014-07-10 01:19:09 PM
I can't imagine what any of them would have to say that I'd want to hear
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=heNXA16-G1I
 
2014-07-10 01:20:52 PM
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/07/09/chelsea-clinton-speeches_n_5 5 71086.html

Apparently she gives all the $ from those speeches directly to the charity her family runs.
 
2014-07-10 01:27:42 PM

GrailOfThunder: diarrhea


diarrhea worldwide is the second biggest cause of death among children under 5

===*
TMYK
 
2014-07-10 01:28:39 PM

WHO

FARKING

CARES?!?!?!?!?!

Who cares how much Chelsea Clinton makes? So the people she makes appearances for get misled? Did she promise to work for $20 and some oral? Seriously, if she was hired by NBC, then that was THEIR decision. If she gets hired to speak(At $75,000 a pop), that's on whoever books her.

And then there's this nugget:  Chelsea is a big draw in philanthropic circles, and The New York Times reported Wednesday that her fees can go as high as $75,000 - though she gives most of her speeches for free.

free
free

free
free

As in, she speaks for no money MOST OF THE TIME.

And why does she earn more than Dick Cheney? Because nobody WANTS to hear that asshole speak.

What a P.O.S. "article", especially because the shiat they pull is more transparent than pure farking vacuum. They show their bias right in the article:

The former First Daughter has never run for office, held a public policy job or done philanthropic work outside her family business.That last bolded part is important because it is a non-profit charity organization. Most people aren't going to pay attention to that and just see that she hasn't had "any" experience in charity work, when in reality she has. Hell, the majority of her speeches being free is philanthropic work right there. I don't even particularly like or dislike Chelsea Clinton, but this kind of shiat makes me angry.

This is also down below all of the friggin sensationalist bullshiat:

Clinton hands over all her fees to the family foundation, according to a spokesman.

So fark you  New York Daily News. And subby? The word "Bush" is nowhere in there, let alone a specific reference to the very hot daughters.
 
2014-07-10 01:29:54 PM

The Lone Gunman: Would you think so badly of Chris Wallace if her weren't on Fox News?


Why would I think badly of an unemployed guy I hadn't seen on TV since the mid-80s?
 
2014-07-10 01:32:24 PM

The Lone Gunman: The only non-politician on that graphic, by the way, was Colin Powell, but he was also deep in the trenches


And I think by the article's rationale, Chelsea's speaking fess are worth more because he never lived in the White House, and doesn't do philanthropic work.
 
2014-07-10 01:33:12 PM

ikanreed: I don't hate the Clintons, but the likliehood of me supporting a dynasty candidate for president is near zero.


Even if the GOP nominates Santorum, who picks the Huckster as his man underneath?

I'd rather see Brian Schweitzer or Martin O'Malley or Al Franken or Liz Warren (especially her) or even Cory Booker run for (and win) the Democratic nomination - or anyone willing to actually stare down both the NSA and GOP. Given the choice between Hillary and pretty much any one of the current "rising stars" in the GOP, though, I pretty much have to go with Hillzapoppin.

Would I prefer to support a Democrat who isn't a Wal-Mart supporting hawk who can't even pander as successfully as Mitt Romney? You betcha. Would I support Hillary against RANDPAUL/Santorum/Huckabee/Trump/Palin/9iu11iani/Bachmann/Jindal/Romne y/JEB*/Issa/Blunt/McMorris-Rodgers...? Most likely.

*depending on how JEB runs his primary campaign, I may actually end up supporting it over than Hillary's. IF (and that's an if the size of M87) he actually makes a clean break with the fundies and doesn't spend all summer pivoting around his primary campaign, and Hillary's campaign is actually that bad. A nonzero chance, but I don't even know the scientific prefix for values that small.
 
2014-07-10 01:34:04 PM
I get $1million per speech but I haven't had anyone hire me yet.
 
2014-07-10 01:36:31 PM
The rich have all screwed people along the way to get to where they are.  Unless they're Democrats.
 
2014-07-10 01:39:46 PM

The Lone Gunman: EyeballKid: So, this is where conservatives piss, biatch, and/or moan about people undeservedly being paid on basis of name recognition for their parents' merits, rather than achieving anything themselves?


[i.kinja-img.com image 372x226]

/Oh, I understand. This is different because, reasons.

I dunno.   Would you think so badly of Chris Wallace if her weren't on Fox News?  I'll be the first to admit, being associated with Fox News immediately colors my opinion of someone, but Wallace seems to be the exception, rather than the rule, of being a decent journalist.


I knew it!

It's really Christina Wallace isn't it?
 
2014-07-10 01:40:50 PM

TheManMythLegend: I get $1million per speech but I haven't had anyone hire me yet.


Hey, don't hire him, I'll do it for $760,000!
 
2014-07-10 01:46:53 PM

TheManMythLegend: I get $1million per speech but I haven't had anyone hire me yet.


What do you have to talk about? I'll pay you 1 million if its interesting.


/iranian rials
 
2014-07-10 01:49:51 PM

Mikey1969: And why does she earn more than Dick Cheney? Because nobody WANTS to hear that asshole speak.


unconfirmedbreakingnews.com
"Are you kidding? We'd love to have Mr. Cheney drop by and talk with us."
 
2014-07-10 01:52:02 PM

nyseattitude: TheManMythLegend: I get $1million per speech but I haven't had anyone hire me yet.

What do you have to talk about? I'll pay you 1 million if its interesting.


/iranian rials


And a free trip to Jamaica!

/Queens
 
2014-07-10 01:52:22 PM

ScreamingHangover: GrailOfThunder:

Supposedly she gives all these fees to the Clinton family "foundation".


Of which she sits on the board of directors with an expense account and undisclosed salary.


If it's a charity, they HAVE to disclose salaries, don't they?
 
2014-07-10 01:52:44 PM

thehobbes: So rich people make 150% of the  average yearly US household income for a few hours of speaking.

Neat.


CAPITALISM PAYS PEOPLE WHAT THEY ARE WORTH.
 
2014-07-10 01:52:49 PM

Dr Dreidel: I thought we weren't supposed to be jealous of rich people commanding large salaries.

If some entity pays Chelsea Clinton $75k for a speech, that entity believes her words are worth $75k. Is someone suggesting that we introduce teh soshalizums into speaking-fee negotiations such that a centrally-planned big government full of unelected bureaucrats picks winners and losers among Job Creators and the jobbers they creatify?


No, you can be perfectly outraged when it's a republican. Fark has standards apparently.
 
2014-07-10 01:56:01 PM

ReverendJynxed: Dr Dreidel: I thought we weren't supposed to be jealous of rich people commanding large salaries.

If some entity pays Chelsea Clinton $75k for a speech, that entity believes her words are worth $75k. Is someone suggesting that we introduce teh soshalizums into speaking-fee negotiations such that a centrally-planned big government full of unelected bureaucrats picks winners and losers among Job Creators and the jobbers they creatify?

No, you can be perfectly outraged when it's a republican. Fark has standards apparently.


I'm a liberal, and I do find it pretty hypocritical that some liberals would say "these members of the owner class are better than those members of the owner class."

I guess that makes me a liberal.

/wait, what?
 
2014-07-10 01:58:14 PM

nyseattitude: TheManMythLegend: I get $1million per speech but I haven't had anyone hire me yet.

What do you have to talk about? I'll pay you 1 million if its interesting.


/iranian rials



I have a couple speeches.

"Why Dale Earnhardt Jr.;  Why Not?"

And

"White Oak or Red Oak, what cabinetry is right for you?"
 
2014-07-10 02:00:19 PM

TheManMythLegend: "White Oak or Red Oak, what cabinetry is right for you?"


I have a book on how to identify wood.
 
Displayed 50 of 77 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report