Originally Posted by Guest

This forum amuses me at times. Reps and Dems pointing fingers at each other and missing the points altogether. How does a former school teacher elected to serve the people come up with enough money to pay 3.5 million dollars in extortion. That is what the discussion should be about. In my opinion.

This was the first thing I said to my family, who live in IL, when I heard the news.

Originally Posted by Guest

This forum amuses me at times. Reps and Dems pointing fingers at each other and missing the points altogether. How does a former school teacher elected to serve the people come up with enough money to pay 3.5 million dollars in extortion. That is what the discussion should be about. In my opinion.

Why ? Everyone knows, or should know that he made a ton, a BIG ton of money after leaving office as a lobbyist, as many politicians do. He made a lot of money.

The thread itself was only intended to throw mud, thus any change would have been welcome.

It has absolutely not one thing to do wit our current world or politics, except maybe a discussion on the lobbyist trade.

He was very comfortable, and made some money in real estate as well, but the biggest chunk was as a lobbyist.

So you sort of distort the facts when you refer to him as an ex teacher.

Since you sort of "softly insulted" this forum 😀 I did just a quick check.

He lobbied....his firm collected 8 million from one company he worked for; he had a seat on the Chicago Mercantile Exchange, and got paid for the occasional speech.

He was well off, and despite what you think of this forum, although happy it amuses you, if he were just an ex teacher, that flag would have been waving strongly.

Originally Posted by Guest

This forum amuses me at times. Reps and Dems pointing fingers at each other and missing the points altogether. How does a former school teacher elected to serve the people come up with enough money to pay 3.5 million dollars in extortion. That is what the discussion should be about. In my opinion.

Today on Meet The Press, Chuck Todd said Hastert was worth half a million dollars when he was in congress. Today he is worth 12 million.

Of course he will soon be worth a lot less since he lost his lobbying job and had to resign the board of the Chicago Mercantile Exchange, plus all the legal fees he will conceivably have to pay.

It is the hypocrisy of these people that is jaw dropping. Newt Gingrich resigns in disgrace, Bob Livingston (R-LA) the replacement for Gingrich can't even step into the job because of marital infidelity with a co-worker, and now we find out that Speaker Hastert, the one selected for his squeaky clean reputation, was not so squeaky clean after all.

Meanwhile, Bill Clinton leaves office with an approval rating in the high 60%, the same Bill Clinton they impeached.

Originally Posted by Guest

Today on Meet The Press, Chuck Todd said Hastert was worth half a million dollars when he was in congress. Today he is worth 12 million.

Of course he will soon be worth a lot less since he lost his lobbying job and had to resign the board of the Chicago Mercantile Exchange, plus all the legal fees he will conceivably have to pay.

It is the hypocrisy of these people that is jaw dropping. Newt Gingrich resigns in disgrace, Bob Livingston (R-LA) the replacement for Gingrich can't even step into the job because of marital infidelity with a co-worker, and now we find out that Speaker Hastert, the one selected for his squeaky clean reputation, was not so squeaky clean after all.

Meanwhile, Bill Clinton leaves office with an approval rating in the high 60%, the same Bill Clinton they impeached.

Is this intended to be a defense of Pres Clinton ? Is this to suggest lack of hypocrisy with Pres Clinton ?

I ask only because as seems to be the norm, you speak of ONLY one political party implying something you know not to be true.

Dis associating Pres Clinton from personal hypocrisy, if that is your goal is beyond hopeless.