2016 Postmortem

Motown_Johnny

(22,308 posts)

20. I don't care that they are part of the top 0.1%, I care how they got the money.

Reply to californiabernin (Original post)

Wed Feb 24, 2016, 01:10 AM

Feb 2016

Hillary making ~$21 million in speaking fees in less than 24 months is an issue for me.

If she were no longer running for office it wouldn't be an issue. Because she is, it is.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

46 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Does it bother you that the Clintons are part of the top 0.1%? [View all] californiabernin Feb 2016 OP

That they're rich doesn't brother me.... daleanime Feb 2016 #1

^^^ Kittycat Feb 2016 #3

Same here. nt californiabernin Feb 2016 #4

Unless they're in the arts or sports... dchill Feb 2016 #11

Exactly. +1! n/t RufusTFirefly Feb 2016 #14

+10000 eom Arazi Feb 2016 #18

Precisely! InAbLuEsTaTe Feb 2016 #43

This LittleBlue Feb 2016 #44

FDR was a 1%er workinclasszero Feb 2016 #2

I did not know he was statistically in that group. californiabernin Feb 2016 #10

Well I dont really know for sure workinclasszero Feb 2016 #13

Package deal was @$75K per year. Wilms Feb 2016 #15

Just about every good thing that happened for the average american came because of this rich 1%er workinclasszero Feb 2016 #21

Hillary is no FDR. Wilms Feb 2016 #27

And the Clintons stand for everything that FDR was against. Sen Sanders on the other hand rhett o rick Feb 2016 #30

Meta I guess but there was great mini series about the Roosevelt family on PBS recently workinclasszero Feb 2016 #17

nice try but that was a political speech and he was speaking AS president nt msongs Feb 2016 #25

Yes but he didn't get his money from graft. HRC is so unlike FDR. rhett o rick Feb 2016 #24

So Was Kennedy, Kennedy, Kennedy and Kerry Stallion Feb 2016 #39

It's not that she's part of that. It's that she protects the rigged game to fuck workers onecaliberal Feb 2016 #5

If This Does Not, It Ought To... CorporatistNation Feb 2016 #6

Darn, that-s what I was going to say! flor-de-jasmim Feb 2016 #7

FDR....under the bus. nt Cali_Democrat Feb 2016 #8

How much did FDR get paid for this speech? californiabernin Feb 2016 #19

since he was actually president at the time he did get paid...by taxpayers lol nt msongs Feb 2016 #26

Yep. He was in their pocket. n/t Wilms Feb 2016 #28

JFK & FDR? FrenchieCat Feb 2016 #9

How much did FDR get paid for this speech? californiabernin Feb 2016 #16

But her supporters don't care Politicalboi Feb 2016 #12

I don't care that they are part of the top 0.1%, I care how they got the money. Motown_Johnny Feb 2016 #20

It only matters to me because of how and where they got the money. Attorney in Texas Feb 2016 #22

No it bothers me that they are a couple of power at all costs middle of the road CBGLuthier Feb 2016 #23

Yes, because they put money first. CharlotteVale Feb 2016 #29

Here's a list of the top 10 wealthiest US presidents (adjusted to today's dollars) frazzled Feb 2016 #31

I am in 1% not .1% though Dreadpirate Feb 2016 #32

Interesting peers up there, aren't they? Hydra Feb 2016 #40

It is and Dreadpirate Feb 2016 #42

It's not the amount of the money, it's what you do to accumulate it. n/t Skwmom Feb 2016 #33

And, what you do with it once you have it. merrily Feb 2016 #35

True! n/t Skwmom Feb 2016 #37

Things they've done and said "bother" me. merrily Feb 2016 #34

Nope. That they are aggressively FOR the top 0.1% should bother everyone. JackRiddler Feb 2016 #36

I have a problem with them being there and how they got there Hydra Feb 2016 #38

Other rich candidates: 6chars Feb 2016 #41

What matters to me are the policies they espouse. Those are WRONG. eom Betty Karlson Feb 2016 #45

They cashed in on their public service. Legal, but sleazy and greedy, imo. Dems to Win Feb 2016 #46