18 Comments

1. Foobarista:

I’ve always wondered how politicians get so obscenely rich. Bill and Hill have never done anything in the private sector, and their government salaries wouldn’t let them save tens of millions. They get massive amounts of money from “speaking fees”, but one wonders what they’re talking about for it to be worth so much? They also get money from Bill’s book, but has anyone actually read it?

Feb 6, 2008 - 10:26 pm 2. Roger:

“They also get money from Bill’s book, but has anyone actually read it?”

The copy editor.

Feb 6, 2008 - 10:28 pm 3. chuck:

I believe Google and Apple made Al Gore rich, putting him on the boards and giving him shares, and Hillary was on the Walmart board for seven years or so. Speaking fees probably add to that, especially for those out saving the world who can charge high fees on account of their idealism, but you need access to good old capitalist cash to really make things go. There are probably lots of proforma jobs that influential people have access to. And, of course, there are always foundations, libraries, charitable works, books, and other monuments to the vanity of politicians which serve to cover the donation of money. Do you think the Clinton’s books sold enough copies to be worth the advances?

Feb 6, 2008 - 10:59 pm 4. non-partisan:

Does it occur to anyone that Huckabee doing so well on his shoe-string budget might have something to do with the GOP having no truly interesting or inspiring candidates?

Here’s some interresting fundraising info:
According to Jeanne Cummings on Politico, “only 3 percent of Obama’s donors have given the maximum $2,300 donation for the primary… In contrast, Clinton raised about half of her money from donors who gave the maximum.” (http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0208/8374.html)

–and yet exit polls show that Hillary’s voters are “down-scale” (poorer) Democrats. This isn’t so surprising; “down-scale” Republican voters put Bush in the White House, and look at what he’s done to improve their lives!

Feb 6, 2008 - 11:29 pm 5. Wellspring:

If I recall correctly, Clinton was one of the only Presidents to leave office richer than he entered it. A great many things that you’d think would be publicly funded actually come out of the politician’s pocket or his campaign fund.

I’d be fascinated to see their income documented.

Feb 7, 2008 - 4:56 am 6. David Thomson:

“–and yet exit polls show that Hillary’s voters are “down-scale” (poorer) Democrats.”

The Democrats have long been taking advantage of the least affluent citizens in the United States. These folks are easily fooled by the affluent leftists who ceaselessly manipulate them. What more can I add? This craziness has been going on for decades.

Feb 7, 2008 - 6:35 am 7. Charlie (Colorado):

He appears to be able to run a campaign on spit (sp?)

Feb 7, 2008 - 6:43 am 8. Richard Nieporent:

He appears to be able to run a campaign on spit (sp?)

Charlie, that is priceless!

Feb 7, 2008 - 6:50 am 9. David Thomson:

Excuse me, what is going on? I am being censored. My comments are being removed on the Dr. Helen blog. Is Pajama media deteriorating into simply another politically correct wasteland?

Feb 7, 2008 - 7:02 am 10. David Thomson:

I may have overreacted. The comment is back on the site. Oh well, such is life.

Feb 7, 2008 - 7:05 am 11. Roger:

David, be assured, your comments are not censored. We have a delay to avoid obscenities, racial slurs, etc. Even this will be removed in a few weeks when we go to another system, which automatically flags the f-bomb and so forth. I don’t particularly care about obscenity myself, although it usually is a mark of bad writing. But we are a business and our advertisers might get alarmed, as I’m sure you realize.

Feb 7, 2008 - 7:34 am 12. Insufficiently Sensitive:

Yes, Hillary, do tell us where you got that five million. Was it from Norman Hsu, and the Bundlers too?

Or did it come from all the ‘favors’ ol’ Billy did for all the crooks who kept him propped up in return for that vast wasteland of pardons at the end of 2000?

Feb 7, 2008 - 10:47 am 13. Lem:

Now that Romney is out let’s see if the Huskster can stop spitting.

I feel like going to sleep and waking up next Jan 21st.

Feb 7, 2008 - 12:34 pm 14. Lem:

McCain Feingold II

http://tinyurl.com/2d4vpx

Feb 7, 2008 - 2:12 pm 15. 1Banjo:

Huckabee has served his purpose — draining enough votes from Romney to put McCain at the top of the ticket — so he will fade back into regional obscurity. The man needs a job because the presidency of an obscure Baptist college is the only thing on offer just now. McCain will be able to buy whatever he needs from him with the promise of a cabinet or agency job.

Feb 7, 2008 - 5:01 pm 16. Barrett:

Huckabee is a smooth talking snake oil salesman who makes up 50% of what he says and believes as he goes.

The fact that he has gone this far is a testament to how gullible people truly are. A truly sad commentary.

Feb 7, 2008 - 8:31 pm 17. chuck:

The fact that he has gone this far is a testament to how gullible people truly are. A truly sad commentary.

How to make friends and win elections. You might consider finding a more suitable way to reason with them.

Feb 7, 2008 - 10:40 pm 18. Richard Nieporent:

Re: McCain Feingold II

“What I would challenge you to do is to put a lot of effort into trying to see whether there’s a legal way of throwing our so-called leaders into jail because what they’re doing is a criminal act,” said Dr. Suzuki, a former board member of the Canadian Civil Liberties Association.

Why doesn’t that surprise me.

Feb 8, 2008 - 7:22 am

Write a Comment

Name:	(required, displayed)
Email:	(required, not publicized)
URL:	(optional, displayed)
Comments: