(04-25-2017 12:33 PM)UofMstateU Wrote:  

(04-25-2017 11:07 AM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  The kickbacks are rolling in nicely I see.

Yep.

"Thanks for not throwing us in prison for causing the financial collapse, and for blaming Bush to keep the pressure off of us. And thanks squashing the competition we were receiving from small community banks by passing Dodd Frank. Here's $400K.

Interesting take. I could see that.

Sent from my SM-J700T using CSNbbs mobile app

Why do we care? What is with the obsession of post-president Obama?

1g per "uh"

Good for him.

Good for him. Let the market decide what his speaking fees are worth.

(04-25-2017 08:15 PM)UofMstateU Wrote:  

(04-25-2017 02:28 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(04-25-2017 02:19 PM)UofMstateU Wrote:  

(04-25-2017 01:35 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(04-25-2017 12:30 PM)UofMstateU Wrote:  Man up.

So nothing. Thanks for the tacit confirmation.

Still not manning up I see.

Cant post an image correctly. Doesnt understand insurance deductibles. And wont man up.

Says the "man" who thinks that his employer didn't pay any of his health care costs when he claimed to only have a $250 deductible, a 90/10 co-insurance rate and a $15 copay for everything.

And I already told you that I was wrong in what I posted about deductibles as I was meaning to speak to the co-insurance instead and I already apologized for that twice...and yes, I do know how they work. So what's your excuse for not knowing how much your employer contributes to your health care costs when it's on your W-2.

As I explained in the other thread...the cost of health care has not changed that dramatically since the ACA. So you're paying a higher deductible now because your employer likely decided not to pay for all of your health care costs like they did before.

Again, if you were only paying $250, then 10% of the costs after deductible along with a $15 co-pay, your employer was paying for the rest other than what your monthly premium was. The doctors didn't magically provide you with free care!

Finally, I still don't know what question it is you supposedly asked that I am not answering!

He need to make his money before he is disgraced by the wiretap investigation.

Any one paying him to speak is a fool

Libs Shocked Obama Taking $400K To Speak At Wall Street Event…

Yeah, I can’t believe it either.

Quote:Some notable liberals are not happy with former President Barack Obama’s decision to give a speech at a Wall Street conference.

Obama will be paid $400,000 to give a speech at Cantor Fitzgerald’s healthcare conference this September, according to Fox Business. Some of Obama’s supporters are upset with the former president who often railed against income inequality and the business practices of Wall Street.

The Washington Post gave four reasons why Obama’s $400,000 speech is a bad idea. One of the reasons the article cites is that in President Obama’s 2006 book The Audacity of Hope he called arrangements like this a corrupting influence.

Vox reporter Matthew Yglesias wrote an article titled, "Obama's $400,000 Wall Street speaking fee will undermine everything he believes in." Yglesias argues that Obama should have turned down the speech.

Obama's $400,000 Wall Street speaking fee will undermine everything he believes in

http://freebeacon.com/politics/liberals-...ll-street/

(04-26-2017 04:22 PM)usmbacker Wrote:  Libs Shocked Obama Taking $400K To Speak At Wall Street Event…

Yeah, I can’t believe it either.

Quote:Some notable liberals are not happy with former President Barack Obama’s decision to give a speech at a Wall Street conference.

Obama will be paid $400,000 to give a speech at Cantor Fitzgerald’s healthcare conference this September, according to Fox Business. Some of Obama’s supporters are upset with the former president who often railed against income inequality and the business practices of Wall Street.

The Washington Post gave four reasons why Obama’s $400,000 speech is a bad idea. One of the reasons the article cites is that in President Obama’s 2006 book The Audacity of Hope he called arrangements like this a corrupting influence.

Vox reporter Matthew Yglesias wrote an article titled, "Obama's $400,000 Wall Street speaking fee will undermine everything he believes in." Yglesias argues that Obama should have turned down the speech.

Obama's $400,000 Wall Street speaking fee will undermine everything he believes in

http://freebeacon.com/politics/liberals-...ll-street/

Even the Libturds agree that Oblunder is a hypocrite. Talk the talk but don't walk the walk.

Maybe something good can come out of this and they get the money donated to Michelle Obama's 2020 presidential campaign bankroll instead.

Well, if Barry wants to match Bill and Hills income from paid speeches he is going to have to give 3,824 more speeches at $400,000 a speech.

Obama has a lot of ground to make up to match the Clintons

(04-26-2017 08:27 PM)Fort Bend Owl Wrote:  Maybe something good can come out of this and they get the money donated to Michelle Obama's 2020 presidential campaign bankroll instead.

that would be better than heavenly ham hand delivered on any day.....

(atheist on knees) please do that!

(04-25-2017 10:06 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  Why is this hypocritical?

https://youtu.be/q-z9jeCi3Bw

(04-26-2017 08:27 PM)Fort Bend Owl Wrote:  Maybe something good can come out of this and they get the money donated to Michelle Obama's 2020 presidential campaign bankroll instead.

That would be something, but not something good.

Not that this likely matters to you guys, but the speculation is that this money will be donated to his non profit foundation which will likely go to help fund his presidential library.

So it sounds doubtful that this will be going directly into his pocket.

(04-27-2017 09:13 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  Not that this likely matters to you guys, but the speculation is that this money will be donated to his non profit foundation which will likely go to help fund his presidential library.

So it sounds doubtful that this will be going directly into his pocket.

Link?

Why is his spokesman defending it if he isn't keeping the money?

Obama spokesman defends reported $400,000 Wall Street-backed speech

(04-27-2017 09:27 AM)usmbacker Wrote:  

(04-27-2017 09:13 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  Not that this likely matters to you guys, but the speculation is that this money will be donated to his non profit foundation which will likely go to help fund his presidential library.

So it sounds doubtful that this will be going directly into his pocket.

Link?

As I said, I heard it speculated by a couple folks yesterday...I don't remember specifically who. And this speech is not for a couple months anyway...so I'm sure we'll here the details eventually if that's the case.

(04-27-2017 09:45 AM)usmbacker Wrote:  

(04-27-2017 09:35 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(04-27-2017 09:27 AM)usmbacker Wrote:  

(04-27-2017 09:13 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  Not that this likely matters to you guys, but the speculation is that this money will be donated to his non profit foundation which will likely go to help fund his presidential library.

So it sounds doubtful that this will be going directly into his pocket.

Link?

As I said, I heard it speculated by a couple folks yesterday...I don't remember specifically who. And this speech is not for a couple months anyway...so I'm sure we'll here the details eventually if that's the case.

So it is pure speculation?

Pretty much like all the Trump stuff, yes. Speculation passes as news these days as well it seems.

(04-27-2017 09:27 AM)usmbacker Wrote:  

(04-27-2017 09:13 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  Not that this likely matters to you guys, but the speculation is that this money will be donated to his non profit foundation which will likely go to help fund his presidential library.

So it sounds doubtful that this will be going directly into his pocket.

Link?

Why is his spokesman defending it if he isn't keeping the money?

Obama spokesman defends reported $400,000 Wall Street-backed speech

He's defending it because he sees nothing wrong with it. That's why he says that even though he took money from wall street while campaigning, he still put tough regulations in place for them.

And that money went into his campaign...so again...not directly in his pocket.