Quantcast

Comments about ‘College tuition skyrockets, so does Hillary Clinton's university speaking fee’

Return to article »

Published: Wednesday, July 16 2014 4:05 a.m. MDT

Comments
  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Most recommended
IMAPatriot2
PLEASANT GROVE, UT

The main stream media and the Clinton machine are trying to re-label Hillary. Unfortunately for her/them a new package will still contain the old, liberal, arrogant, incompetent, and unwanted contents. Can't the Democrats do any better? I would seriously like a real choice in 2016.

mohokat
Ogden, UT

That's impossible she said they are broke.

cocosweet
Sandy, UT

What a terribly slanted article. Naming just democrats (except a one time mention of GW) and people stating they shouldn't charge a speaking fee (standard operating procedure for any speaker by the by, private or corporate). But wait! Aren't we a capitalistic country? Shouldn't we charge what the market will bear? Apparently if you are a democrat the rules are different for you.

sonofabronc
Boise, ID

I doubt she's broke. Her pant suit collection alone must be worth half a million dollars.

GaryO
Virginia Beach, VA

Hey Mohokat -

"That's impossible she said they are broke."

WRONG.

She said they WERE broke when they left the White House. And they were in fact several million dollars in debt.

But of course, they had OUTSTANDING credit, which is only reasonable, given the fact that grateful people around the world are willing to pay HUGE speaking fees to both of the them.

And now, they're about 40 million dollars in the black. Isn't America wonderful?

That's good old fashioned capitalism at work. It's too bad that modern "Conservatives" are opposed to that now too.

Wannabe free-booters at UNLV shouldn't get their hopes up about getting more free stuff from the Clintons.

Besides, you know it's the "Conservative" element that's behind the protest. Just like they protested Michelle Obama attending a high school graduation ceremony. They got their way, and Michelle did not attend, and the kids missed out on an opportunity of a lifetime.

The same thing can happen at UNLV.

Face it folks, a lot of self-described "Conservatives" don't do much good, do they?

Chris B
Salt Lake City, UT

GaryO,

Ya, they were "broke"

They also enjoyed a very high salary, several properties, and a retirement plan that only the rich greedy 1% get to enjoy.

They were "broke" and part of the rich greedy 1% the WHOLE time.

Even when they were "broke"

Hillary is out of touch with reality, crying about being broke when their income has been in the top greedy 1% bracket for 30-40 years, EVERY year.

Mark B
Eureka, CA

Would DN mention it if Donald Trump, Ted Cruz, the Koch brothers, Rick Santorum or Sarah Palin were suddenly able to hike their speaking fees? I'm thinking, nope.

Tekakaromatagi
Dammam, Saudi Arabia

@cocosweet:
"What a terribly slanted article. Naming just democrats (except a one time mention of GW) and people stating they shouldn't charge a speaking fee (standard operating procedure for any speaker by the by, private or corporate)."

The Republicans are the party of business and capitalism. But the Democrats SAY they are the party of the poor. That is why it is newsworthy.

RedShirt
USS Enterprise, UT

To "cocosweet" it isn't about capitalism. The irony that Bush is the lowest paid speaker only shows just how deep the greed runs through the Democrats. Bill Clinton already gets $200,000/yr for a pension from being President, Hillary gets $174,000/yr for being a Senator. That doesn't even consider any investment income or book deals or salaries from their foundation.

If the Clintons really knew about the plight of the middleclass, why are their speaking fees so high that only the rich can afford to pay for them?

Schnee
Salt Lake City, UT

A large chunk of their speaking fees ends up going towards the Clinton foundation (and certainly they aren't the only politicians who donate a lot of that kind of income to various charitable organizations). That's part of why these speakers tend to maximize the amount they can collect because it means more for the charity.

Howard Beal
Provo, UT

If I have to hear any GOP supporters go off on this, I'm going to be sick. Isn't this the free market at work?

GaryO
Virginia Beach, VA

Hey Chris B -

"Hillary is out of touch with reality, crying about being broke when their income has been in the top greedy 1% bracket for 30-40 years, EVERY year."

Well, if one is four million dollars in debt, then that qualifies as being broke, don't you think?

And Hillary wasn't "crying." She was just being matter-of-fact, and she had a smile on her face. That's hardly crying. Why should she cry? The Clintons are earning tons of money speaking and writing books.

They have a lot of fans . . . especially internationally.

Don't be bitter and jealous of successful individuals.

They definitely are NOT "greedy." Like Warren Buffet and Bill Gates, the Clintons are decent people, who realize that the highest earners should be paying much more in taxes.

Ranch
Here, UT

Somehow or other, Hillary Clinton is responsible for rising college tuition costs.

Okay.

Happy Valley Heretic
Orem, UT

Like Sean Hannity's Freedom Concerts where he gave 3% of the profits to vets while keeping 97% for himself.

TheProudDuck
Newport Beach, CA

I am aware of an entity here in Southern California that was considering Hillary Clinton as a speaker for an event (where other Presidents and national figures have spoken in the past), but couldn't justify her extraordinary expense, nor the conditions she wanted to place on interaction with Her Eminence.

Sadly, with our economy now running like a European ancien regime, with wealth riding less on what you can make and sell than whom you know, she is probably worth every dirty penny she's paid.

TheProudDuck
Newport Beach, CA

"If I have to hear any GOP supporters go off on this, I'm going to be sick. Isn't this the free market at work?"

Well, let's see: Colleges whose overpaid administrative caste's rice bowl is federally subsidized student loans pay unheavenly amounts for the benefits of access to a figure who can steer them and their alumni more government money. Yep, that's the epitome of how free markets work.

TheProudDuck
Newport Beach, CA

"And now, they're about 40 million dollars in the black. Isn't America wonderful?

That's good old fashioned capitalism at work."

That's *crony* capitalism at work, in the age of President Goldman Sachs, where staying on good terms with the aristocracy is what matters most.

There, fixed that for you.

Presidents should not get rich because of their service. Someone has proposed a 90% tax on the post-office earnings of public figures. I think that's a marvelous idea. You should already have your Mount Vernon before you presume to serve the public. You shouldn't get your Mount Vernon because your "service" has made your power valuable to wealthy men.

to comment

DeseretNews.com encourages a civil dialogue among its readers. We welcome your thoughtful comments.
About comments