Quote:
Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop
Yes, thanks for asking. The length of this conversation may be creating the impression that I care about this more than I do. The ownership of the company doesn't matter to me as much as the facts that Obama has to write a book for the one and just show up and give a speech for the other, and that the publisher is going to receive concrete value from selling copies of the book. YMMV.
|
Hmmm. So the associate who writes the brief the clerks read is worth more than the Partner who stands up and argues the case? Showing up and giving a speech is something I at least find a nontrivial delivery myself.
It strikes me the reaction to Obama' getting paid for speaking is an emotional reaction from people who have been listening to the HDS sufferers over the years. I understand the emotional reaction. Wall Street bad, associating with it in any way, evil. But that reaction falls apart under even very simple analysis or self-reflection because it simply isn't logical or sensibly applied. Obviously, you've persuaded no one here with any of your arguments, across the whole spectrum from Adder to Sebby.
But people cling to their vitriol.
I'm sure it's not the biggest issue in the world to you, but this is a theme that has been used to undermine good people and candidates for a while and it obviously elicits a strong (and, yes, emotional) reaction of disgust from many of us. So far I'm finding my emotional reaction easier to logically validate than yours.
Threaded Mode