| Online: | |
| Visits: | |
| Stories: |
| Story Views | |
| Now: | |
| Last Hour: | |
| Last 24 Hours: | |
| Total: | |
Hillary Clinton blames Bush for her rapacious speech giving
A couple of weeks ago we covered the antics of the rapacious, cash-vacuuming, (near) septuagenarian Hillary Clinton who shook down a Boys and Girls Club for $200,000 to speak at their fundraiser. This cause that fundraiser to be the lowest netting event in the history of the club and she bolted right after speaking so she wouldn’t have to deal with The Little People. A few years earlier former Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice, a true lady and class act, charged the same charity $65,000, gave most of her speaking fee back to the charity, and spent quite a bit of time with the members.
Obviously, this produced sandy-butt-crack syndrome among the masculine left wing harpies and feminine left wing men who populate Hillary’s campaign. So they did what they always do. They tried to divert attention from themselves to someone else.
Former President George W. Bush is under fire for charging $100,000 to speak to a group of veterans wounded in a pair of wars he started when he was in office, just the latest front in a political battle over speaking fees that has hit both sides of the aisle.
Members of the Texas-based Helping a Hero charity told ABC News that Bush charged $100,000 for his 2012 speech at a charity fundraiser for veterans who lost limbs in the Afghanistan and Iraq Wars. The former president was also given use of a private jet at a cost of $20,000 and former First Lady Laura Bush was paid $50,000 to speak to the group last year.
CNN also found a board member of the charity who was pissed off that President Bush charged anything. As it turned out, the net from Bush’s speech was $2.45 million. Not a bad return on investment. By contrast, Hillary’s rape of the Boys and Girls Club treasury only netted $106,000.
The spin being circulated by the Democrats and their owned media is that President Bush is very, very bad because he keeps the money he gets from speeches. Hillary Clinton, on the other hand, is not the Willie Sutton of the rubber chicken circuit but an philanthropist. After she uses friends in the non profit sector to pay her extortionate sums of money the charities can’t afford, Clinton doesn’t keep it. She donates it to the Clinton Foundation. This not only nets her a tax deduction but, as Sean Davis at The Federalist has shown, the Clinton Foundation uses most of its money to support the Clintons.
The fact that Hillary has stooped to the “blame Bush” defense shows this critique is hurting her. Her grotesque spectacle of monomaniacal fundraising is unique in the annals of the industry and we shouldn’t let her forget it.
The post Hillary Clinton blames Bush for her rapacious speech giving appeared first on RedState.
Source: http://www.redstate.com/2015/07/11/hillary-clinton-blames-bush-rapacious-speech-giving/
She wants to be like Bush, but nowadays nobody will let her lick it.