You are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

1
5

[–] tbkent 1 point 5 points (+6|-1) ago 

the problem isn't that he was paid to speak. the problem is that a wounded vets group pays their speakers 100 Gs. gotta be careful who you give your money to; it might end up in George Bush's pocket.

1
5

[–] TheCakeIsALie365 [S] 1 point 5 points (+6|-1) ago 

Bill Clinton spoke at one of their fundraisers free of charge. The charities lawyers justify it by saying having George speak raises an extra million dollars. Too bad they'll only be able to keep $875K of that. ($25,000 to pay for George's private jet on top of speaking fees)

0
0

[–] TicByte ago 

That's how marketing works. You have to spend money to make money. They're simply doing it on a bigger scale than what you may be used to. If you read the article you would have learned that the event netted $2.4 million dollars.

0
2

[–] TheCakeIsALie365 [S] 0 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago 

I don't care if they made $50 miliion they should have been able to keep every penny for the charity. $125,000 is a house for a disabled vet.