Carson is done.

[about_average]

Sanders' net worth is between $525,000 and $750,000. That's probably a pauper by candidate standards.
http://moneynation.com/bernie-sanders-net-worth/

 

[Boxlicker101]

She still a woman. And nobody running for office is a pauper. I don't know enough of her history to know if she was born rich or got there on their own.

I don't disagree with your statement but Cruz and Rubio are front runners.

She was not born rich, but her family was reasonably well off. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carly_Fiorina

In this regard, she is much like Hilly, except she worked for her wealth rather than getting tons of money in speaking fees.

 

[Boxlicker101]

Sanders' net worth is between $525,000 and $750,000. That's probably a pauper by candidate standards.
http://moneynation.com/bernie-sanders-net-worth/

FWIW, here is a list of candidates giving the net worth of each. Rubio is probably the least wealthy of the group. http://www.forbes.com/sites/afontev...-millions-to-marco-rubios-debts/#6d8f00984070

"The party of rich old white men," you say?

 

[Sean Renaud]

Bernie is at the low end of US government but that doth not a pauper make. Carly was born further up the ladder and is even farther up now. Still that's not a reason to criticize her on this particular issue.

She was not born rich, but her family was reasonably well off. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carly_Fiorina

In this regard, she is much like Hilly, except she worked for her wealth rather than getting tons of money in speaking fees.

Thank you for doing the leg work. I admittedly wouldn't have done it myself. She was born more than "reasonably well off" but yes she like Hilly worked her way up. Speaking is a job and deserves no less respect than the path Carly took.

 

[sr71plt]

To limit Hillary Clinton's life's work to speaking engagements would be the same as limiting Carly Fiorina's to failed CEO work.

 

[Boxlicker101]

Let's put it this way: If Silly Hilly loses in her bid for POTUS, will organizations still be handing out speakers' fees of half a million dollars?

 

[sr71plt]

Or will Trump pay her $50,000 to come to his next wedding as he did his last one?

 

[Aglaopheme]

Let's put it this way: If Silly Hilly loses in her bid for POTUS, will organizations still be handing out speakers' fees of half a million dollars?

Yes, they will. Clearly, they don't think she is silly.

 

[Boxlicker101]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Boxlicker101 View Post

Let's put it this way: If Silly Hilly loses in her bid for POTUS, will organizations still be handing out speakers' fees of half a million dollars?

Yes, they will. Clearly, they don't think she is silly.

Hopefully, we will find out in about nine months. I would not say she won't be paid to speak, but it won't be for anywhere near for the fees she now receives.

 

[Aglaopheme]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Boxlicker101 View Post

Let's put it this way: If Silly Hilly loses in her bid for POTUS, will organizations still be handing out speakers' fees of half a million dollars?




Hopefully, we will find out in about nine months. I would not say she won't be paid to speak, but it won't be for anywhere near for the fees she now receives.

Yes she will, just as she has been long before she threw her hat in the Presidential ring.

 

[BotanyBoy]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Boxlicker101 View Post

Let's put it this way: If Silly Hilly loses in her bid for POTUS, will organizations still be handing out speakers' fees of half a million dollars?




Hopefully, we will find out in about nine months. I would not say she won't be paid to speak, but it won't be for anywhere near for the fees she now receives.

Where do you come up with this shit? LOL

Losing her bid for POTUS doesn't de-value her her long established political career, invalidate her views on politics in any way nor does it negate the fact that she's the closest thing to royalty the US currently.

She might not get anywhere near the money from Wall St. shes's getting now but Universities, PAC's and organizations the nation over will still throw HUGE sums of money at her.

Going to prison is about the only thing that will be cramping HRC's style. Good luck with that.

 

[Boxlicker101]

Where do you come up with this shit? LOL

Losing her bid for POTUS doesn't de-value her her long established political career, invalidate her views on politics in any way nor does it negate the fact that she's the closest thing to royalty the US currently.

She might not get anywhere near the money from Wall St. shes's getting now but Universities, PAC's and organizations the nation over will still throw HUGE sums of money at her.

Going to prison is about the only thing that will be cramping HRC's style. Good luck with that.

That's pretty much what I said. Currently, she gets from 200 to 250 grand from a college or U and more than twice that from a Wall Street firm. If she has no clout, those firms will want little to do with her. She may continue to get good money from ed. institutions until the end of the 2017 school year, but after that she will just be somebody else "in the dustbin of history."

That's a prediction, and I can't prove it, but read here what other former secretaries of state etc. make: http://qz.com/441327/yes-hillary-clintons-speaking-fees-are-high-but-only-compared-with-other-women/

 

[sr71plt]

For the record, she didn't make more from Goldman Sachs. the $600,000 plus fee was for three separate speeches. I think that's obscene, but I think what pro sports figures and college sports coaches get paid is obscene too. As Hillary said about the Goldman Sachs fee, "It's what they offered." So, go after them--it's what they thought she was worth. The problem is that that it's most likely what they thought she was worth to maybe have in their pocket, not for a speech.

Incidentally, if she went to prison, I doubt she'd be devalued as a speaker (a martyr speaker) after she came out of prison. Ask Martha Stewart about that.

 

[Sean Renaud]

Where do you come up with this shit? LOL

Losing her bid for POTUS doesn't de-value her her long established political career, invalidate her views on politics in any way nor does it negate the fact that she's the closest thing to royalty the US currently.

She might not get anywhere near the money from Wall St. shes's getting now but Universities, PAC's and organizations the nation over will still throw HUGE sums of money at her.

Going to prison is about the only thing that will be cramping HRC's style. Good luck with that.

The Bushs are closer to Royalty at this point by any fair standards. Whether or not Hillary would have got her foot in the door initially without Bill is unlikely even where we were in the 80's but she's not second generation president. She's one half of a power couple. Chelsea if/when she decides to run will be much closer to royalty.

And besides I would probably rank both families below the Kennedys.

 

[sr71plt]

Yeah, I did a "hey what?" on the thought of the Clintons as the U.S. version of political royalty too. Bushes now, Kennedys before, Rockefellers and Roosevelts before that.

On the Clintons and "foot in the door," I rather think that Bill would never have gotten his foot in the door without Hillary pushing behind him. I think she's the buzz saw of the family.

 

[BotanyBoy]

The Bushs are closer to Royalty at this point by any fair standards. Whether or not Hillary would have got her foot in the door initially without Bill is unlikely even where we were in the 80's but she's not second generation president. She's one half of a power couple. Chelsea if/when she decides to run will be much closer to royalty.

And besides I would probably rank both families below the Kennedys.

True...all of it.

But she's still pretty up there and far more active than any Kennedy.

 

[JackLuis]

Carson couldn't beat Carly in New Hampshire? 2% to Carly's 4%. That's humiliation!

 

[NOIRTRASH]

Uncle Ben is done.

 

[Sean Renaud]

True...all of it.

But she's still pretty up there and far more active than any Kennedy.

You do recall that the Governator is a Kennedy right? I mean by marriage not by birth but he clanned up.

And I don't deny that Hillary has family power only that when you speak of dynasties that it's about being born to reign and Hillary was not.

 

[sr71plt]

I didn't hear a single comment from commentators last night on Carson. It was like the Crux people were right--that he was home, in Florida, doing his wash.

 

[Boxlicker101]

You do recall that the Governator is a Kennedy right? I mean by marriage not by birth but he clanned up.

And I don't deny that Hillary has family power only that when you speak of dynasties that it's about being born to reign and Hillary was not.

There is also a Kennedy who is a member of Congress from MA.

 

[sr71plt]

There is also a Kennedy who is a member of Congress from MA.

And our ambassador to Japan.

 

[urguyscott]

It's funny that the people who shout the loudest about black candidates or a female candidate are the same ones who speak out against the black candidate and female candidate on the Republican party. And the worst are the media. The media and that includes such political BS from the elite and from MSNBC and FOXX think they have the right to choice for us who runs and who doesn't.

There has not been one real honest debate from either party on TV. Let's face it the two people are more honest and more qualified then Obama, Trump, Sanders or most of the others. Unlike the two democrats and most of the republicans they are not owned by anyone. Clinton is corrupt and is truly the whore of wall street. Sanders is a commie who can't show any nation that have been successful with a one party system and a two class system. (Every Communists and Fascist country has a ruling class that is more royalty then anything else. They are corrupt because they are responsible to no one and the wealth is divided. All for the leaders and none for the slaves.) And he is owned by many of the far left that backed Obama and made him their puppet.

In addition our country is not a real republic in that we allow a small minority to decide who will run for office and who will not. What right does the two states that just had their primaries (and they are no longer real primaries because people can vote for any party they want (and in most democratic states as many times as they want). And the Democrats don't even have a candidate running this time. Both say they are Progressives. One is communists and the other fascist. Both believe in a one party system where they the rich rule along with their royalist elite while the rest of us are taxed and starved. Hey it works in China and N.K. and the far east so it must be a good system.

If we really wanted an honest election, the press would cover all candidates equal and not spend the majority of their time on giving us their stupid options, but digging into each candidates supporters, what they stand for, giving them a real round table debate and not a set up for drama like these fake debates both parties have held. A single primary will be held and no votes counted until the last poll has closed. Those who live east of the Atlantic Coast know how they call elections before we even have a chance to vote.

Then the people in all states will have a say in who runs for each party as members of that party. No cross overs. That is for the main election. And that election will also have all its votes held till the last poll closes. And the only people who say they are against voter i.d. are those candidates who can not win an honest election. They insult the minorities by saying they are too stupid and poor to go to the DMV and get an I.D. B.S. That is racists.

Let's face it the U. S. is the Constitution. That is who we are. If you don't support the Constitution and do not respect the flag (it is the symbol of our nation, not like the flag of a ruling party like the communists, etc). Sanders and Clinton refuse to even wear a pin of the flag and you know Obama hated the U. S. so much and had to be forced to show respect for his office. You can not be a socialist, a communists, a royalist, a fascists, or any sort of petty dictatorship and still be an American. If you belong to any organization that is based on race, hate, etc and anti freedom than how can you be an American?

Under the present administration the world has step closer to the dark ages since World War II. A strong free world willing to come to the aid of those oppressed instead of kissing the boots of the slave holders and murders like we have been doing is the only way to human rights and civil rights.

So we allow the press and a small number of people to decide for the majority of this country who will rule for us under us. So far we have lost freedom of the press, it committed suicide and freedom of speech, for we have to be politically correct or we will be punished. I always thought such "politically correctness" was what Hitler and Stalin wanted for the world.

Give us the right to choice our own candidates and an honest vote.

 

[JackLuis]

It's funny -

So we allow the press and a small number of people to decide for the majority of this country who will rule for us under us. So far we have lost freedom of the press, it committed suicide and freedom of speech, for we have to be politically correct or we will be punished. I always thought such "politically correctness" was what Hitler and Stalin wanted for the world.

Give us the right to choice our own candidates and an honest vote.

While I laud you passion, however I think you should read more history and gain a broader view point that might support such passion. First I would point you to Eric Hoffer's "The True Believer" Hoffer discusses the reasons people fall behind such 'cult Heros' and why they are so passionate about their 'Faiths'. It's freely available on the net.

"The Riddle of the Rhine" is another good book, though dated it points out that Military-Industrail-Corporatisim was fully developed in Germany in 1914 and some of the consequences of such a cabal. Project Gutenberg has a copy of this ~1920ish book for free.

And then "Who Financed Hitler," which lays out how that MIC cabal was successful in sending millions of people to an early grave to satisfy the greed of the "Dark Lords"

Lastly I suggest listening to D.D. Eisenhower's farewell address, it's on YouTube.

Also you should research the rise of advertising since WWI and the history of propaganda, easy on the web. That study will allow you to understand the way the Dark Lords have diluted the field of journalism to the point that it became public relations fluff.

 

[RoryN]

Citation of his withdrawal?

CNN, NBC, ABC, FOX, PBS, Drudge Report, Google, Yahoo!...