Kellyanne Conway is currently 50 and looks about the same as above. Nancy Pelosi is.. holy shit.. 77! I had no idea she was that old. America, 70, retire them at 70, supreme court too. Lifetime appointments were for a different age. Modern medicine is keeping the bodies running well past the warranty on the brain.
A bit of apples and oranges isn't it? You've got an ex-president with no conflict of interest giving speeches, not a guy running for, or in office doing so.
You folks do understand that famous people give speeches in exchange for speakers fees, right? That there's a whole industry out there around this? For example Sully Sullenberger (http://www.celebrityspeakersbureau.com/talent/sully-sullenberger/) charges up to $100,000 per speech. Would you like to direct your same hate and vitriol toward him? How about good old Spicy (http://www.wwsg.com/speakers/sean-spicer/)? He's just day's out of the white house! The issue isn't giving speeches for payment. The issue is giving speeches for payment when the person paying you could potentially be getting favors from you later. That was the criticism of Clinton, which I think was fairly unjustified given the amount of far more blatant pay for play that goes on but is a valid underlying concern nonetheless. It absolutely doesn't apply to a former President or former President's press secretary. Subtleties, they're what life is made of people.
Obama returns to political fray for a Democratic Party cause - The ... https://www.washingtonpost.com/.../obama...democratic.../86e76f9c-64a1-11e7-8eb5-cb... Jul 9, 2017 Obama and His Movement Prepare to Challenge President Trump ... https://www.nbcnews.com/...obama/obama-his-movement-prepare-challenge-presiden... Jan 14, 2017 - Is somebody living in a cave that doesn't understand obama is still attempting to influence policy?
I'm attempting to influence policy. You're attempting to influence policy. Sean Spicer is attempting to influence policy. Paid lobbyists are attempting to influence policy. You do understand the difference between attempting to influence policy as a private citizen or company vs currently serving in a political office, yes?
"That was the criticism of Clinton, which I think was fairly unjustified given the amount of far more blatant pay for play that goes on..." How about a couple of examples?
Political Action Committees? Super PACs? I just think it's a little silly to get wrapped around the axle on Clinton getting $500,000 GS speech when she (and Trump) had hundreds of millions spent on their behalf by special interest groups of all colors. If you understand the underlying issue, that a person holding public office will be indebted to a special interest because they paid you an above market rate for a speech, then it's pretty silly to focus on a $500K speaker fee (especially when that is actually the market rate) instead of the hundreds of millions in PAC funds. If you're just reflexively screaming because...Hillary, then I guess it's all good.
Have you ever heard of revolving door politics? The paper of record has. The Trouble With That Revolving Door - The New York Times https://campaignstops.blogs.nytimes.com/.../the-trouble-with-that-revolving-door/?...0 Dec 18, 2011 You're trying to equate me attempting to influence politics on ET with the former president of the US attempting to influence politics while he's receiving this kind of money? You're off in nutsville.
Political Action Committees? Super PACs? Wait, you said pay to play. That's different from legitimately lobbying for your point of view.