Hillary the $250k "Inspirational Speaker"

[IdaBriggs]

I don't buy it. I've seen the woman talk (granted, in debates and on YouTube) and she just isn't that good.

I've heard inspirational speakers before. I've even paid for their books: Jack Canfield, Stephen Covey, Tony Robbins, John Grey, Wayne Dwyer, Deepak Chopra, Zig Ziglar, Mary Morrissey, Oprah Winfrey - the list is long. These people are inspiring in their wow! factor. I've heard the Dali Lama and Pope Francis can also give an amazing talk...

And none of them get a quarter million dollars for an hour long talk.

So, please understand, when I ask about "Hillary's Transcripts" for her "Inspirational Talks" to her very specific (Wall Street Only Rich People) audiences, it is because I am being a bit cynical.

At one level, I want to know what she was saying to them that made them happy to pay her that much money multiple times. I can only assume she was using "word of mouth" advertising, because I've never seen an advertisement discussing the advantages of what she'll bring to a meeting (it's called a "one sheet" in the business) and I would love to know "the secrets" she shared: was it how to attain wealth? Personal power? Leadership skills? Relationship advice? And what about the listeners? Do they have any testimonials they want to share about the transformative experience they all shared?

So, please, show us the transcripts!

But the deeper truth is more cynical:

I don't believe they were paying for her speeches.

Yes, I said it: I think it was protection money and some pre-bribery for access to power. I think it was a thin veneer of respectability on corruption.

And I think everyone knows it, but right now, no one can prove it beyond a reasonable doubt - we just know that she's just not that good at being an inspirational speaker, so the speeches were really something else.

I'd really like to see those transcripts to be proven wrong.

But I never will, and everyone knows it.

Don't we?

[hobbit709]

1. That sums it up perfectly.

[CorporatistNation]

19. The Entire Post IS SPOT ON! And Then There Is The Matter Of Believing ANYTHING That She Says When..

She does THIS...

MSNBC To the deniers... Watch THIS Video... It is not comforting to think that she may well be the Democratic Nominee...

Hillary really betrayed Andrea Mitchell... The entire context of this report was of a solemn nature... A Funeral so to speak...

Andrea Mitchell "I do not see this report as ...ANYTHING BUT... DEVASTATING!"

Chuck Todd "After this I don't think that she could get confirmed for Attorney General!"

Lots of FIBBING by Hillary here.. for more than a year!

[99Forever]

2. It graft, pure and simple. Bribes for favors.

Anyone who says differently is a liar or a complete and total starry-eyed idiot.

[highprincipleswork]

28. Graft, pure and simple, agreed. And the amount of people who support this. Truly unbelievable!

[madokie]

3. Anyone who can't see that for what it is is blind

and I'm not talking about in the visible light spectrum either

[hobbit709]

4. Hard to see anything with eyes wide shut.

[sorechasm]

5. 'But that's what they offered me!'

IOW: 'I'm just that damn good!'

Maybe she believes that she is. The 'crowds' at her campaign rallies beg to differ.

[hobbit709]

6. More actually, that's what her standard speechifying contract demanded.

[livetohike]

7. BFD. Other than the envious, jealous and wannabe

wealthy Sanders fraud team, no one in the real world cares what Hillary or anyone else makes for giving a speech.

[IdaBriggs]

9. What do you think the topic was, that her words of wisdom were worth so much? nt

[beachbum bob]

8. I wish I could get $250k....all sounds like

jealousy to me

[IdaBriggs]

11. She can't fill "large" venues when she's giving it away for free.

What do you think she was saying that was worth so much money?

[lakeguy]

13. and there it is...

when it's free few come.

in order to be able to charge 250k, there must be something worth that kind of money that she's not giving away at the free ones.

[EL34x4]

10. "I don't believe they were paying for her speeches."

You're not the only one.

[spinbaby]

12. This is Hillary's basic problem

She's a terrible public speaker uncomfortable in front of crowds. This is what ultimately will do her in: she seems fake and well-rehearsed, while Donald, in spite of his idiocy, seems genuine and spontaneous. People vote with their gut.

[Blue_Adept]

14. It's like people here don't understand what the speaking circuit is like

Of course, we see plenty of people here that don't understand how to register and vote as well, so I can't say I'm surprised.

[Octafish]

15. What Hillary tells the BIG WIGs

She really is smart about it.

Hillary Clinton Speaks from Peter G. Peterson Institute on Foreign Aid

C-SPAN aired Secretary of State Hillary Clinton's remarks at the Peter G. Peterson Institute. Pete Peterson made billions as a private equity underwriter (PEU). He used $1 billion to establish his institute, focused on getting America's financial house of cards in order (without asking corporations or the rich to step up in any major way.)

[font color="green"]America believes government cannot do anything competently, thus the private sector is the answer. That goes for international development.[/font color]

SNIP...

That requires partners. Giants of philanthropy gathered in New York in 2009. This list included Bill Gates, Warren Buffet, Pete Peterson, George Soros, David Rockefeller, and Oprah Winfrey.

SNIP...

Clinton stated in her talk:

[font color="green"][font size="5"]Aid chases need, investment chases opportunity.[/font size][/font color]

[font color="green"]She mentioned the Clinton Foundation as a partner. President Bill Clinton privatized government functions during his two terms, benefiting multiple private equity underwriters.[/font color]

CONTINUED...

http://stateofthedivision.blogspot.com/2010/01/hillary-clinton-speaks-from-peter-g.html

And money trumps peace.

[Doctor_J]

16. So she is, in fact, the political reincarnation of Reagan. I think most of us knew that

Though some are deep in denial

[Octafish]

17. Hard to think clearly, as the rhetoric don't match the action.

For instance the great experiment in corporate fascism called Operation FUBELT:

The author was a Chicago Boy helping implement the scam for Pinochet:

President Clinton and the Chilean Model.

By José Piñera

Midnight at the House of Good and Evil

"It is 12:30 at night, and Bill Clinton asks me and Dottie: 'What do you know about the Chilean social-security system?'” recounted Richard Lamm, the three-term former governor of Colorado. It was March 1995, and Lamm and his wife were staying that weekend in the Lincoln Bedroom of the White House.

I read about this surprising midnight conversation in an article by Jonathan Alter (Newsweek, May 13, 1996), as I was waiting at Dulles International Airport for a flight to Europe. The article also said that early the next morning, before he left to go jogging, President Bill Clinton arranged for a special report about the Chilean reform produced by his staff to be slipped under Lamm's door.

That news piqued my interest, so as soon as I came back to the United States, I went to visit Richard Lamm. I wanted to know the exact circumstances in which the president of the world’s superpower engages a fellow former governor in a Saturday night exchange about the system I had implemented 15 years earlier.

Lamn and I shared a coffee on the terrace of his house in Denver. He not only was the most genial host to this curious Chilean, but he also proved to be deeply motivated by the issues surrounding aging and the future of America. So we had an engaging conversation. At the conclusion, I ventured to ask him for a copy of the report that Clinton had given him. He agreed to give it to me on the condition that I do not make it public while Clinton was president. He also gave me a copy of the handwritten note on White House stationery, dated 3-21-95, which accompanied the report slipped under his door. It read:

[font color="red"]Dick,
Sorry I missed you this morning.
It was great to have you and Dottie here.
Here's the stuff on Chile I mentioned.
Best,
Bill.[/font color]

Three months before that Clinton-Lamm conversation about the Chilean system, I had a long lunch in Santiago with journalist Joe Klein of Newsweek magazine. A few weeks afterwards, he wrote a compelling article entitled,[font color="green"] "If Chile can do it...couldn´t North America privatize its social-security system?" [/font color]He concluded by stating that "the Chilean system is perhaps the first significant social-policy idea to emanate from the Southern Hemisphere." (Newsweek, December 12, 1994).

I have reasons to think that probably this piece got Clinton’s attention and, given his passion for policy issues, he became a quasi expert on Chile’s Social Security reform. Clinton was familiar with Klein, as the journalist covered the 1992 presidential race and went on anonymously to write the bestseller Primary Colors, a thinly-veiled account of Clinton’s campaign.

“The mother of all reforms”

While studying for a Masters and a Ph.D. in economics at Harvard University, I became enamored with America’s unique experiment in liberty and limited government. In 1835 Alexis de Tocqueville wrote the first volume of Democracy in America hoping that many of the salutary aspects of American society might be exported to his native France. I dreamed with exporting them to my native Chile.

So, upon finishing my Ph.D. in 1974 and while fully enjoying my position as a Teaching Fellow at Harvard University and a professor at Boston University, I took on the most difficult decision in my life: to go back to help my country rebuild its destroyed economy and democracy along the lines of the principles and institutions created in America by the Founding Fathers. Soon after I became Secretary of Labor and Social Security, and in 1980 I was able to create a fully funded system of personal retirement accounts. Historian Niall Ferguson has stated that this reform was “the most profound challenge to the welfare state in a generation. Thatcher and Reagan came later. The backlash against welfare started in Chile.”

But while de Tocqueville’s 1835 treatment contained largely effusive praise of American government, the second volume of Democracy in America, published five years later, strikes a more cautionary tone. He warned that “the American Republic will endure, until politicians realize they can bribe the people with their own money.” In fact at some point during the 20th century, the culture of self reliance and individual responsibility that had made America a great and free nation was diluted by the creation of [font color="green"] “an Entitlement State,”[/font color] reminiscent of the increasingly failed European welfare state. What America needed was a return to basics, to the founding tenets of limited government and personal responsibility.

[font color="green"]In a way, the principles America helped export so successfully to Chile through a group of free market economists needed to be reaffirmed through an emblematic reform. I felt that the Chilean solution to the impending Social Security crisis could be applied in the USA.[/font color]

CONTINUED...

http://www.josepinera.org/articles/articles_clinton_chilean_model.htm

It's like a grand tragedy and grand theft America. The worst part, for us with open eyes and ears Doctor_J, is what they have done to un-do the Constitution.

[LongTomH]

27. (sigh!)....and of course, Pete Peterson is the zillionaire who wants to 'fix the debt' by.....

cutting the heart out of Social Security and Medicare.

Anyone see why I don't trust Hillary on Social Security???

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

18. Hillary is to "inspirational speaking" what a kazoo is to string quartet.

[hootinholler]

20. To think they were so broke when they left the white house

They had to live in a van down by the river!

It's terrific that she is such a great speaker she was able to make enough in speaking fees to save their cookies from having to only live on a Presidential Pension.

[speaktruthtopower]

21. The technical term is "put option"

on their regulatory risk.

[Seeinghope]

22. Oh come on! Dinner for two at the Clooney's for Hillary Clinton is worth $320,000.00

She is just so appealing to all of the rich people......I wonder why???????

[YouDig]

23. Hillary and people like her get paid for their knowledge and experience, not to give a ra-ra

inspirational speech.

[Vinca]

24. Let's be real here.

If someone is paid that much for a lousy speech, something is expected in return.

[anotherproletariat]

25. Must feel awful to be beaten by someone who didn't even have to use all of her leverage.

It was smart of her to save those in case she needs to extract something out of Trump in the general.

[KingFlorez]

26. Considering that she is one of the most accomplished women on the planet

I'd say that she pulls down those dollars for a reason. You might not think that she is a good speaker, but you don't get to dictate to other people what constitutes a good speaker. Your personal opinion isn't the rule of the world.

Sorry, Ida.

[waterwatcher123]

29. These fees are the perfect way to make a campaign contribution.

These $250,000 fees are simply campaign contributions that are both tax deductible for many of the organizations sponsoring these events and can be used by the recipient as they choose. They are far better as a way to get money to a candidate than to offer a campaign contribution.

[Merryland]

30. Someone postulated

that there ARE NO SPEECHES & that's why she can't/won't produce them. I think "speech" was a convenient line item for "bribe."