At some point he'll have made enough money.

[Bullseye]

I don't have to imagine anything ... the Clintons were dirt-poor when they left the White House. In fact, I believe they even had some debts ... those poor souls.

Yeah, that was heartbreaking, and no GoFundMe back in those days.

 

[Keridan]

Presidents aren't going to end up in ithe poor house. And, just so we're clear here, I'm pointing out the Obama's hypocrisy, not their money making capacity. IMHO, people should be allowed to make as much as their abilities allow, but the should criticize or demean others doing the same thing.

As I said, I get the point you were making. I also believe that you should be able to make what you can earn (through effort or name or whatever).

Obama did spend a lot of time demonizing the wealthy. I don't defend that behavior.

 

[JMR]

Harry Truman, the man was BROKE !! In fact he was so hard up for cash Congress initiated a pension for former Presidents.

Much of this was Trumans own fault. He was a terrible buisness man. This was long before former Presidents received fat book deals and lucrative speaking fees.

I wouldn't blame the Presidents for that. The Kardashians get fat book deals and lucrative speaking fees.

 

[JMR]

Such a good counter-point! Thank you.

I guess I meant in modern times, but you are right. I had forgotten about Truman. Back then, though, the President didn't make 2-4 mil for their time in office. As awful as he might have been at business, that would have given him a damn fat retirement during that time.

And that was before Presidents started profiting from the office. There are many Trump properties in Saudi Arabia for example.

 

[JMR]

Don't bet on it. Whatever Muslim had Obama's permission to handle the $1.7 billion in cash sent to Iran just before Obama was left the White House had no doubt been in touch with Obama's people beforehand to settle the kickback arrangements.

:roll:

 

[Keridan]

And that was before Presidents started profiting from the office. There are many Trump properties in Saudi Arabia for example.

He is a weird case in this instance. His fame and diversified investments make possible a whole new problem. Presidents put their money/investments in a blind trust. Ideally, this means they cannot guess what will bring them any significant income. but when you can have a whole delegation stay at "Trump Towers", you have a little advantage over the system.

Personally, I think Trump has abused that. I would like to see at least a minor investigation into this matter.

 

[yankintx]

Such a good counter-point! Thank you.

I guess I meant in modern times, but you are right. I had forgotten about Truman. Back then, though, the President didn't make 2-4 mil for their time in office. As awful as he might have been at business, that would have given him a damn fat retirement during that time.

I have no issue with former Presidents making a dime once leaving office. I wish I could, but no one is interested lol

I believe Reagan was the first former President to cash in with speaking fees. Nixon of course wrote books, all best sellers, but then again his WH tapes were best sellers as well, unsure if he recieved royalties haha

 

[Keridan]

I have no issue with former Presidents making a dime once leaving office. I wish I could, but no one is interested lol

I believe Reagan was the first former President to cash in with speaking fees. Nixon of course wrote books, all best sellers, but then again his WH tapes were best sellers as well, unsure if he recieved royalties haha

Haha ... I'm pretty sure royalties for the WG tapes would have let him die the wealthiest man of his time. Pretty sure you are right about that one.

I agree that I have no problem with them earning money out of office. They lead the country. Have you seen a display of the before and after shots? No one comes out of those 4-8 years without alarming grey hair and wrinkles. Let 'em reap some benefits.

My personal preference is that they retire from politics all together, but I also know a lot of them feel like they still have something to say, too.

 

[JMR]

He is a weird case in this instance. His fame and diversified investments make possible a whole new problem. Presidents put their money/investments in a blind trust. Ideally, this means they cannot guess what will bring them any significant income. but when you can have a whole delegation stay at "Trump Towers", you have a little advantage over the system.

Personally, I think Trump has abused that. I would like to see at least a minor investigation into this matter.

I think it deserves a major investigation. He has definitely profited from his DC Hotel, and having known investments in Saudi Arabia, and suspected investments in Russia, leads one to question his foreign policy decisions.

 

[yankintx]

Haha ... I'm pretty sure royalties for the WG tapes would have let him die the wealthiest man of his time. Pretty sure you are right about that one.

I agree that I have no problem with them earning money out of office. They lead the country. Have you seen a display of the before and after shots? No one comes out of those 4-8 years without alarming grey hair and wrinkles. Let 'em reap some benefits.

My personal preference is that they retire from politics all together, but I also know a lot of them feel like they still have something to say, too.

I believe that was part of the reason for giving former Presidents a pension. Truman was so poor he had to mooch a lift to Jfk's funeral !

Nixon got a bundle for the Frost interviews. There is a recent film on the subject, the name escapes me but fascinating story. If your interested I believe its on Netflix.

 

[Keridan]

I believe that was part of the reason for giving former Presidents a pension. Truman was so poor he had to mooch a lift to Jfk's funeral !

Nixon got a bundle for the Frost interviews. There is a recent film on the subject, the name escapes me but fascinating story. If your interested I believe its on Netflix.

Sounds like a good subject. I just did a quick search on Netflix and didnt' find it, but I have two small boys who keep things like Poke Mon coming up. If you find a name, I'd be grateful. I will also search again in the morning.

Interesting subject. Retired Presidents are a select group. It's sometimes incredible how their life changes.

 

[yankintx]

Sounds like a good subject. I just did a quick search on Netflix and didnt' find it, but I have two small boys who keep things like Poke Mon coming up. If you find a name, I'd be grateful. I will also search again in the morning.

Interesting subject. Retired Presidents are a select group. It's sometimes incredible how their life changes.

The film is titled Frost Nixon

And yes its on Netflix

Its worth a watch if you like politics and history

 

[eohrnberger]

Remember Obama's continuous attack on the rich? He, famously said "I do think at a certain point you've made enough money." So, I wonder when he and Michelle are going to reach that point. "

Typical progressive "rules for thee, but not for me" elitism.


Anyone wanna bet how many whataboutTrumps we'll hear?

'Typical progressive "rules for thee, but not for me" elitism. '

Yes, oh so typical and hypocritical.

Anytime a Democrat loses an election, it's fraud, demand a recount, it's not legitimate, there was voter suppression, etc. etc.
Anytime a Democrat wins an election and an opponent raises the same concern, 'they are destroying the integrity of the election'.

Yeah, right. Becoming so frequent, so over used, its losing its effect, which is good if you ask me.

 

[yankintx]

Sounds like a good subject. I just did a quick search on Netflix and didnt' find it, but I have two small boys who keep things like Poke Mon coming up. If you find a name, I'd be grateful. I will also search again in the morning.

Interesting subject. Retired Presidents are a select group. It's sometimes incredible how their life changes.

On a historical note, today is 22 Nov. It is 55th anniversaryof Kennedys death. I was raised in Mass, all my classrooms had a framed photograph of President Kennedy. Even my grandparents had a photo of JFK on the wall. Its hard to imagine ANY modern President being so revered.

 

[NeverTrump]

I understand the point of your comment.

But, can you imagine for a second how embarrassing it would be if we really had an ex-president in the poor house. Like, picture Reagan begging on a corner making international news.

Does jail count?

 

[Media_Truth]

He never made continuous attacks on the rich.

Why lie about that? What's the point.

I recall him publicly chastizing the GM executives for flying their luxurious corporate jet to their bankruptcy bailout hearings. Makes sense to me. It's Thanksgiving. Thanks Obama, for calling out these folks.

 

[marke]

:roll:

The problem with leftists is that they suspect everything Trump does is evil while they assume everything Obama did was without corruption. $1.7 billion dollars is a lot of money to be throwing at Iranian murderers with no names attached and no details of the transaction given. How was this transfer arranged and by whom? Who actually handled the money and where did it all end up? Are we so naive to think nobody in this transaction was doing evil with the money? Is it impossible that any American may have gotten a kickback from the deal, even Obama?

 

[Mycroft]

I think it deserves a major investigation. He has definitely profited from his DC Hotel, and having known investments in Saudi Arabia, and suspected investments in Russia, leads one to question his foreign policy decisions.

Yes, yes...this stuff always "leads one to question his foreign policy decisions". But when you do, you find that his foreign policy decisions are totally focused on "America First". Not on himself.

On the other hand, when Dems such as Hillary or Barak show clear evidence of profiting from policy decisions or when questions arise it's "you can't prove anything!!"

More of that leftwing hypocrisy.

 

[Media_Truth]

Yes, yes...this stuff always "leads one to question his foreign policy decisions". But when you do, you find that his foreign policy decisions are totally focused on "America First". Not on himself.

On the other hand, when Dems such as Hillary or Barak show clear evidence of profiting from policy decisions or when questions arise it's "you can't prove anything!!"

More of that leftwing hypocrisy.

I think the better description is "More rightwing conspiracy theories".

 

[Vern]

I can fix my English easily. You need to work on your feelings of inadequacy that turns you into a laughable buffoon.

bullseye, you were asked to back up your point. All you've done is post a tired and lying conservative narrative and posted "nuh uh" to people telling you its lie. Once again a conservative is befuddled by the concept of debate.

 

[Vern]

'Typical progressive "rules for thee, but not for me" elitism. '

Yes, oh so typical and hypocritical.

Anytime a Democrat loses an election, it's fraud, demand a recount, it's not legitimate, there was voter suppression, etc. etc.
Anytime a Democrat wins an election and an opponent raises the same concern, 'they are destroying the integrity of the election'.

Yeah, right. Becoming so frequent, so over used, its losing its effect, which is good if you ask me.

er uh Eohrn, maybe you can help. the OP has cowardly cut and run from even attempting to back up his point. Since you seem to enthusiastically believe it, maybe you can attempt to back it up. (this is a real longshot because Eohrn doesn't back up his own points.)

 

[Bullseye]

bullseye, you were asked to back up your point. All you've done is post a tired and lying conservative narrative and posted "nuh uh" to people telling you its lie. Once again a conservative is befuddled by the concept of debate.

Well, thanks for demonstrating how to stick to the point of the discussion and not indulging in personal attacks or demeaning language. You're my Idol, vern.

 

[Vern]

Well, thanks for demonstrating how to stick to the point of the discussion and not indulging in personal attacks or demeaning language. You're my Idol, vern.

Bullseye, you were asked to back up the premise of your thread. Why are you posting about me instead of even attempting to back up your point? oh yea, you cant hence you whine and deflect.

 

[Bullseye]

Bullseye, you were asked to back up the premise of your thread. Why are you posting about me instead of even attempting to back up your point? oh yea, you cant hence you whine and deflect.

I backed up the premise of the thread in the first post. As President, Obama criticized people for making too much money, now he and his wife are raking it in without pause.

 

[Vern]

I backed up the premise of the thread in the first post. As President, Obama criticized people for making too much money, now he and his wife are raking it in without pause.

I know I shouldn't laugh but you've not backed up anything. "dems hate rich people" is just another lying conservative narrative you obediently believe. Of course the out of context sentence fragment you posted proves "continuous attacks" to you but it proves nothing to people who can think for themselves. You're simply desperate to accuse democrats of being hypocrites so you can justify not holding republicans accountable for their flamingly dishonest hypocrisy concerning debt and deficits, healthcare, presidents playing golf, executive orders, acting presidential, underming our allies and embolding our enemies etc.