my daughter's wedding

[SwampG8r]

when my daughter gets married i will sponsor the wedding
i get to do that because i am the daddy
it is my pleasure
more than any other female human a daughter adjusts your thinking about women
i will spend what it takes to make her dream a reality on that day and anyone who feels they have a better way for me to spend MY money can kiss my shiny metal ass

i have quietly read the post in re chelsea clintons wedding
i am no fan of the clintons as many will know
and i can easily find fault with some action of the clintons to bitch and thrash about over
but putting on a dream wedding for their daughter is not it
i hope they spend as much as it takes to give her the wedding of her dreams

what is it anyway thats causing a whoopdeedoo?the expense?i think we can all admit that a sitting SOS and a former POTUS have money.
the pomp? are we so childish as to not believe that an acting SOS and a former POTUS might have rich famous friends that will attend?

i hope the clintons tell every one of you to bite their shiny metal asses and party on

[monmouth]

1. My dad once asked me what my dream wedding would be. I said

to elope. He said that was his dream too.....Sarc....

[JohnnyLib2]

2. This daddy understands that perfectly!

Excellent comment. :thumbsup: :thumbsup: :thumbsup: :thumbsup: :thumbsup:

[Raineyb]

3. The Clintons have been telling us to bite their shiny metal asses since 93.

THAT would be a huge part of what sticks in people's craw.

A lot of people would like to throw their daughters a dream (albeit less costly) wedding but they can't because their job has been moved overseas and they can't find a job or worse, are stuck working a minimum wage job while their expenses continue to go up. I suspect THAT would stick in people's craws as well.

What sticks in my craw is the worship for the bloody Clintons after what they did to the American worker who can't throw their daughter a dream wedding because they're not making a fucking living wage anymore.

[stray cat]

10. In others words it is simple jealousy and not a poor use of money?

[Raineyb]

12. You think ending up unemployed is about a poor use of money?

There is no reply for such an idiotic question.

[Darth_Kitten]

30. Maybe it is simple jealousy, but then maybe not all of us were Daddy's girls....

who got handed everything in life? Yeah, you do get a tad resentful. ;)

[alphafemale]

67. that'd be my guess.

"How DARE you spend YOUR money on something other than MEEE!!! WAH!"

lol

good lord

:eyes:

[Raineyb]

85. If that's what you got from the post then either you're incapable of reading

or you're just moronic.

[alphafemale]

91. If I'm a moron in your eyes i'm probably doing something right.

cuz envy's uglee

[emilyg]

11. Will you feel the same way

when Obama throws a glitzy wedding for his daughters?

[Raineyb]

13. Yes I would. I don't really cotton to Democrats running campaigns

on helping the people then doing more to help corporations than actual humans. Do you?

[emilyg]

18. At least you are consistent.

[JVS]

17. Amen

[SwampG8r]

42. this time they are right

even a stopped clock is right twice a day

[Raineyb]

61. No they most certainly are NOT.

It is beyond gross that they flaunt the money they made selling out the American worker in the face of the same workers who are unable to find gainful employment due to their policies.

Politics should NOT pay off like this. Public service is NOT supposed to be a stepping stone to riches later. If you can't see that YOU are the one with the problem.

And the Clintons can bite MY shiny ass.

[kiva]

4. You are a good daddy. n/t

[sufrommich]

5. You'll make a great father of the bride! My Dad always

said the same thing about having a daughter. I'm lucky to have him as a Dad and so is your daughter.

[elleng]

6. Agree! Mine (daughter's wedding) in a year, wish I could give her EVERYTHING she wants!

My gripe with the Clinton wedding gripes is that its all speculation! Someone (not involved) puts million bill out, and people go nuts! I think we have better things about which to go nuts!

[HipChick]

7. my daddy spared no expense on my wedding..

too bad the marriage didn't last.just over 8yrs..but its a wedding that we still talk about today..

[blueamy66]

41. mine too

I got the 7 year itch. But the wedding reception was the bomb.

I sometimes feel bad that my Dad had to spend so much..but I was in love...:crazy:

[kestrel91316]

8. BINGO. And I WANT her to have a lot of security posted. Do people

not realize or care just how huge a target she is for RW extremists??

[blondeatlast]

14. At least 30% of the guest list are going to be targets for extremists. Okay,

my figure is as much speculation as the "$2 million" but security will be a huge factor in this.

[Raven]

9. I don't necessarily blame the parents but I wonder about the kids.

I agree with you about wanting to give your kid her dream wedding.I didn't have a daughter but my son got married last year and I was prepared to participate fully. I watched as these kids established their realistic budget and discussed where they wanted the wedding to occur. They ended up having a charming, simple, country wedding because that was what they wanted. Their watchword was "it's not the wedding, it's the marriage that counts." Had we know heads of state and VIP's, they would have attended a simple country wedding and I think they would have loved it.

[NYC_SKP]

15. speaking of weddings...

there's this little matter of YOUR raccoon and MY yet-unwed dog, promises made, etc.

:P

[SwampG8r]

16. well he had a problem

with the lamb bones promised as bride price
a severe gnawing occured and then he forgot where they were
he also lost all the sugar cubes in a summer rain

he makes me question his committment

[renate]

54. that is so funny I sent the permalink to myself so I can enjoy it forever

:rofl:

That is poetry!

[JVS]

19. Dream weddings are only marginally less stupid than those super sweet 16 parties on TV

[Missy Vixen]

20. To you.

Why are there so many here bent on telling others what they can or cannot do to celebrate the events in their lives?

Why begrudge someone else an event they will enjoy reliving through the photos and video for years afterwards?

Does it diminish you one iota that Chelsea Clinton is getting married next weekend?

:eyes:

[pipi_k]

24. I'm just not seeing it...

Where, as you say, "Why are there so many here bent on telling others what they can or cannot do to celebrate the events in their lives?"


I mean, all I see is people giving their own opinions on the matter...not telling anyone what they can or cannot do.


Also, and I may be a bit cynical, but I think that a lot of the time it's not so much about parents wanting to "give their children a dream wedding" as it is about the parents not wanting to look like cheap bastards in front of their friends.

Or maybe even living out their own unfulfilled fantasies through their kids.

I don't even think they realize that there's a point at which the whole thing starts to look like a cheap and vulgar Hollywood production.


If someone needs a vulgar Hollywood production to "oooh" and "ahhh" over five or ten years from now...even if the marriage didn't last that long... then there's something wrong.


But hey...to each his (her) own. :shrug:

[Obamanaut]

27. Agreed. A marriage/divorce stat from 2008 shows about half of marriages

end in divorce.

With that percentage, spending a lot of money on a wedding is not a prudent investment. If the wedding couple want to spend (potentially waste) their money, good for them. Expecting parents to fork over a pile of dollars on a 50% chance is expecting too much.

Number of marriages: 2,162,000
Marriage rate: 7.1 per 1,000 total population
Divorce rate: 3.5 per 1,000 population (44 reporting States and D.C.)
Source: Births, Marriages, Divorces, and Deaths: Provisional Data for 2008, table A

http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/divorce.htm

[NotThisTime]

92. I had my dream wedding, paying for it all the while and 18 years later still married

The wedding isn't an investment, it is a down payment on what could and might be. If this is what Chelsea wants and money isn't an object then by all means let her pave her way, she seems to be a rather well adjusted young lady.

[AnArmyVeteran]

21. I hope she has a wonderful wedding.

But I know a couple who put a third mortgage on their house so they could give their daughter a great wedding. They spent $35,000 on her wedding and then within six months they lost their house and ended up virtually homeless. Doing something good for your children is fine, but not to the point where you destroy your financial life. Is one day of pleasure worth a lifetime of pain, payments and regrets?

I'm not saying that's what you will do, but there should be limits on what some people do. I personally believe spending $2 million on a wedding to be ridiculous. If it takes that much money to make someone happy, I sure wouldn't want to be married to them.

I wish your daughter a great marriage and wonderful life.

[Monique1]

22. Parents of the bride or groom

Do whatever you want - these are your children. If you have the money do want your daughter or son want to do. The weddings plans are all up to you and the families. I don't care - do what makes all of you happy. Not my business and not my family.

[AnArmyVeteran]

25. If you have the money is the key point.

To go deep in debt and lose one's house for one day of happiness isn't worth the rest of your life being unhappy, as I mentioned in my true account of parents who took out a mortgage on their home for their child's wedding.

I agree if you have the money, spend it to be happy. That's what it's for, but spending what you don't have is foolish and can lead to all kinds of horrible outcomes.

[Dorian Gray]

39. I agree with this

Not our business, really. Some of us want small ceremonies without the frills. Some of us want huge gala events. Nothing is "wrong."

[keroro gunsou]

71. agreed.

not my business either, but if they'd want to invite me... i'd still go. if only to wish the happy couple a long and happy marriage.... but if some famous people happen to be there, then, hey, gravy. :evilgrin:

[Roon]

35. my family made sandwhich bagels and held my wedding in a club house

It was a nice wedding, although I turned out gay.

[AnArmyVeteran]

37. I've been to lots of informal weddings and found them to be more fun.

I like everything simple and unpretentious. It always seemed to me it would be far wiser to spend money on a down payment for a couple's house rather than blow 20 to 30 thousand dollars on a wedding that last a few hours. I know I sure wouldn't ever marry a woman who was obsessed with having a wedding that cost a fortune. Oh yeah, and I can see why turning out gay might pose a problem after the marriage. I hope you guys are still friends. All the best...

[Roon]

38. Oh we are

We haven't talked in a few years, but we were always friendly. I need to call her, see how she is doing.

[SwampG8r]

43. was it the bagel sandwiches?

[Roon]

55. I really don't know

but my cousin whipped up a bunch for my wedding, they were nummers!

[SwampG8r]

57. ask around see who likes bagel sandwiches and who doesnt

could be the big breakthrough they have been waiting for

plain bagels or onion? soft or hard?with mayo or miracle whip?mustard?toasted?tomato?lettuce?
what if you could only have one?tomato or lettuce?
was the cheese foreign or domestic?
a lot of unanswered questions here!
or are there?

[Roon]

72. LOL

Believe me, I could use a bagel sandwhich right now

[SheilaT]

36. Bingo!

The Clintons can afford to spend however much they want on Chelsea's wedding. Good for them!

People are total idiots to go into serious debt -- a THIRD mortgage? WTF were they thinking?

When I got married I wound up with a small, at home wedding with just family and a few close friends. It was perfect! And we only spent the money we had in hand to do it.

The marriage did last 25 years, so we certainly got our money's worth.

[nadinbrzezinski]

50. They can afford it

and it will do wonders to the local economy.

Now the parents you know did something that was financially stupid.

If you can afford to put up a shindig that is at 10K, that is what you do. If you can afford (and there are more of this you never hear about) to do five million... well that money is now in circulation.

[PassingFair]

23. Spending 2 million dollars on a WEDDING when the country is in such sorry shape...

is stupid and obscene.

My father offered to buy me a ladder for my wedding.
It cost my husband and I $3,000 and we are still married,
21 years later (anniversary was the Thursday).
But then again, my father never signed NAFTA or fucked
a 21 year old intern at his office...so....we're just
poor folks who don't know any better. He just tried to
pay the bills and loved us.


There's no justification for such conspicuous consumption
in the face of such despair, spin it as you will.

[Darth_Kitten]

29. I'm not a fan of big weddings, no matter how much they may cost....

Most of them are just for show. :)

[PassingFair]

32. As you can tell...

neither am I!

:hi:

[Darth_Kitten]

33. But I'm bitter because I'm in between guys right now.....

;)

I say make it a small wedding and then go on a GOOD honeymoon (I love to travel)

[PassingFair]

34. I'll hold back with my criticism....

if you can manage to keep it under a mil....

[nadinbrzezinski]

52. I sugest you read Keynes on your time off

ideologically it don't make sense to you, but economically it is actually a good idea.

Paradox of Thrift, this is what you need to look at.

[Greyhound]

26. They already did. Did you miss that part?

I think it's what has so many so upset.

Do you remember Malcolm Forbes birthday party? The Harley-Davidson hot air balloon and the multi-million dollar price tag?

Now we see those that are supposedly "on our side" engaging in the very same "fuck you and your suffering, we're doing great" practices. It is completely symbolic, but symbols are important. Even the Robber Barons of the 19th century eventually figured out that rubbing people's faces in their opulence was a bad idea.

[dflprincess]

47. And I think what bothers many of us is that we know the Clintons would not have been able to afford

this had Bill not been president and done such a fine job of continuing the destruction of the working and middle classes. The family has been well rewarded for their efforts on behalf of corporate America and no longer need to worry about the "small people" or what we think.

[XOKCowboy]

65. I'll give you a +1 for that...

My sentiments exactly.

[Darth_Kitten]

28. Right, because life is about buying girls pretty dresses......

so they can play pretty, pretty princess on their wedding day.

Hell, there are (were) some girls out there who just wished Daddy could have contributed to their upbringing, but hey.....it's the wedding day party that's important.

[SwampG8r]

44. you make me laugh

you are both condescending and wrong at the same time
my god with powers of assumption like that you may be a demigod
you see right into the heart of my relationship with my daughter and boil it down to buy her a pretty dress
what an awesome person you are

[noamnety]

31. As long as you aren't signing legislation to prevent others from getting married

Or signing the so-called welfare reform act to keep poor people poorer while you accumulate insane amounts of wealth, I won't judge.

[LWolf]

40. If I'd had a Dad

who wanted to make my dreams a reality, or who cared one way or the other about what I did, or didn't do, or where I was, or what was going on in my life, perhaps either of my 2 marriages would have stood a better chance of lasting.

I don't now, and never really have, thought that weddings were something to dream about (I think the dream is what happens after the wedding, for the rest of our lives,) but I certainly think that you, and your daughter, have the right to choose how to approach a wedding. While I don't personally relate, I appreciate a father's love and support for a daughter.

The Clintons? They push buttons, whether they mean to or not. :shrug:

[SwampG8r]

46. if i had had a dad

who wanted to make my dreams a reality, or who cared one way or the other about what I did, or didn't do, or where I was, or what was going on in my life, perhaps i would have used the potential i have always been accused of harboring and made more of myself than a grill chef.
but i didnt so i made sure my kids did.

i have never been a fan or a admirer of either of the clintons
in office or out
i detest the dlc and all its evil minions
ask the fan club and i will wager they will confirm that i have at times been on their enemies list
hell during the primaries i think they put a contract out on me
but what ever i think about them i am big boy enough to understand that this is outside politics and into family
i know people will say everything is politics and to a point they will be right
it just seems petty to shit on the girls wedding out of what mostly appears to be jealosy

[LWolf]

58. I don't think you're wrong.

I'm just not surprised at the reactions.

[SwampG8r]

81. sorry if i came off rude

i guess i AM surprised by some of the reactions

[Cleita]

45. It seems a lot of the expense is on security and

feeding the many guests they will have. I suppose if they chopped their guest list in half or even two-thirds, the expense would drop exponentially. However, an ex-President, whose wife still has an important role in Washington as Secretary of State, is going to have a lot of friends. I don't feel the expense is inappropriate. I hope Chelsea has a fabulous wedding day and a happy marriage after that.

[Warren DeMontague]

48. The bitter butter battleaxe brigade isn't going to get it, but fuck 'em.

I say, congratulations, Chelsea. I hope you guys are happy.

[MrMickeysMom]

49. You mean this is a real issue?

I guess I don't care. Personally, stimulate the local economy and make sure you all leave the place in good order. I'm assuming the Clintons will spare no cost. Chelsea is a big hedge fund manager, and so they can really take lots and lots of pictures, have lots and lots of food catered, and then sell lots and lots of pretty magazines and books before the next big market collapse.

Just don't make the mistake of bailing her ass out.

[Withywindle]

51. I like your post, but I also think it's not wrong to think about 'ways and means.'

For the Clintons, $2 million is not really all that much money. They are extremely rich, that's just a fact. I don't really begrudge them throwing their daughter a nice wedding - all parents want to do that. I wish Chelsea and her husband the best, I really do.

But the wedding industry has spiralled so far out of control that you get middle-class and working-class people spending the kind of money that used to pay off half a modest-but-comfy house just a few decades ago. You get young people so invested in the idea of the "special day" that they don't think about the whole rest of their lives.

I love a good fairy-tale wedding. But hell, some of my friends who have gone through the wedding-planner wringer, I just want to tell them, have your ceremony on your front lawn with friends and family in a pretty vintage dress from a second-hand store, take the bulk of that money and spend it on a good PRIVATE honeymoon somewhere beautiful and unappreciated (and a box of sex toys), and invest the rest in some land.

[nadinbrzezinski]

53. Ah that is a perfectly good discussion

but what started this came from a story where ABC apparently talked to a wedding planner who went through his\her numbers. If the story is to be believed, they are not using a planner, and they are using local businesses.

So the numbers might even be off... and in their case... they are doing a small stimulus package for the local area. At 2M in an area with a bad economy, that is a hell of an injection.

And as you said, they can afford it.

A lot of the screaming comes from envy, and eat the rich mentality... never mind Clinton made his money only AFTER they left the WH... they were in debt when they left. And of course a very poor understanding of really basic economics.

I am at my whits end to understand how our population became this poorly educated, and I fear that if people are this ill informed in a political board... what about the general population? Now if it helps... this is an echo that's existed since oh colonial times, including the resentment of the landed elite. Could that ever result in a few revolts? I doubt that will happen these days any more.

[noamnety]

60. I am really tired of hearing how broke they were when they left the white house.

Poor poor paupers. When they left he was guaranteed an annual salary of almost 200K for life no matter what the economy does.

I wish I had those money problems.

[nadinbrzezinski]

62. And they were a couple million in the hole

for legal bills.

If Bill and Hillary had not managed to get a few book deals, and speaking circuit, they would have had to declare bankrupcy.

I know this matters little to the eat the rich mentality that runs amok here, or the fact that they were able to make money for whatever reason.

You may hate to hear it, but facts are stubborn.

Now the problem, perhaps, is how they made their money and then some. But facts are stubborn.

I know it is a hobby all across the political spectrum to hate the clintons. It just is.

I disagree with their policies while in the WH, and have called Clinton the BEST Republican President since Ike, but I also know facts.

If you cannot read facts, or understand them, that is really not my problem.

By the way, you know why Presidents get that pay? It used to be, that like Carter, once out of the WH they did not get employment generally speaking. There are very much so historic exceptions, like a certain US President who ended up in the USSC, but generally speaking, they cannot get a job after that.

But I am sure you don't care for those facts either.

What is good, is that Junior has not been able to cash in the same way Clinton did...

Now there are many reason NOT to like Clinton at the policy level... NAFTA comes to mind, but for essentially engaging in a fee for service economic exchange is not it. In fact, I wish more in his social class did that... and at two million... at that level... it is a cheap wedding. People round these parts have no concept.

[noamnety]

63. When the superelite are "broke" it's nothing like when normal people are broke.

When a normal person is broke, they don't have a network of people willing to put up the money for a 1.7 million dollar home as a "favor."

When a normal person is broke, they don't have a network that's willing to pay them nearly 2 million dollars for two days "work" (giving speeches).

When a normal person declares bankruptcy, they don't do it with the knowledge that their debts will be wiped out, but it's all good because next year they'll be getting another 200k, and the year after that, and the year after that.

A normal person does not pull in millions of dollars of pension money over the course of their life after declaring bankruptcy.

To pretend this is ANYTHING like being in poverty is distasteful at best, and betrays an inexplicable lack of understanding of what real poverty is.

[nadinbrzezinski]

64. Nobody loaned them anything

that is the point.

THey got out of the hole by writing a coupple books and going on the speaking circuit. And in a way they were lucky.

For purely accidental reasons I got to speak to Carter ONCE, yes across the table, with a plate of beans, tortillas and instant coffee, nothing fancy. And as he put it, he was and still is an outsider. The Clintons, for many resaons that you probably don't get either, are slightly better connected but not by much. What they have are far better political instincts and know where some skeletosn are buried.

This is what is funny. Carter comes from an ANCIENT clan that owned land since oh Colonial times, and you can find links for that family going back generations, as in part of the landed gentry. You cannot find the same for Clinton. So to your theory, Carter should have been able to cash up much more easily... you explain that one... or perhaps your theory is wrong. And you do not realize that Clinton grew up poor, with poor social connections.

Oh never mind... what is up for lunch? Some spleen at the Clintons with a side of mashed.

[noamnety]

68. Oh - you're right. McCauliffe just deposited 1.35 million to secure their home. As a favor.

And the Clintons themselves put up $350,000 cash for the house.

Funny how some people's broke = million dollar homes and hundreds of thousands of dollars of cash on hand, and friends willing to put up a million to help them out.

When the elite go broke, it means a tabloid story.

When the rest of us go broke, it means living in a shelter or in our car if we have one, having to visit food banks, doing without needed medical care.

These are two very different beasts, not comparable at all. Not even the same species. To pretend it's the same thing is insulting and very out of touch.

[nadinbrzezinski]

74. THe wilffully ignorant will remain such

you just simply have a spleen for the rich. Well here is a clue... thse guys are the NEWLY RICH... Clnton comes (not so much Hillary) from very poor Scotch Irish origins, but you carry on.

So when is the revolution? And I mean the REAL revolution?

ANd I am being serioius here, and who is leading it? The RIGHT WING POPULISTS, or the LEFT WING POPULISTS? I mean if that is what you want... a message board is not the place.

Me, as a Historian I get it. And I will say something that you will not like. But this rage and populist rage (justified in some respects) can get really uggly and both RIGHT WING (read tea party roots) and left wing populists can and have gotten into a few revolts during the history of this country. So when does the shooting start? And are you gonna tar and feathers the rich?

I am serious.

I am getting ammused at this point, at all the dog whistles on both sides.

Oh and on a true historic note... that is the only way you will get REAL reform... but who is leadhing with the pitchforks?

Me, have a good wedding, and SPEND DOUBLE in it... yep, you heard me right. But that is why economically I WANT then to spend as much as posisble, and get separated from their money... even if it may not pass the DU ideological purity test. Economnics... I guess it is even more alien to people here than I believed until now. When actual terms that have meaning (Trickle down) become dog whisltes separated from the actual meaning. SCARY.

So when is the revolt starting? I am serious. WHen is the shooting starting? The feathers. the home spun... the buying coffee instead of tea... when is that starting? In a modern equivalent of course.

[noamnety]

75. If you are calling me ignorant, that's a personal attack and against DU rules.

It's also just weird and misplaced.

It's not willfully ignorant to state the obvious - that the superelite rich (new or old) is simply playing in a different field than the rest of us, and that their definition of "oh woe is me we're broke" is not anything to do with real poverty.

I can't even imagine why we are disagreeing about that, or why you are challenging me to some sort of revolutionary tar and feather overthrow simply because I've stated a truth that you apparently find uncomfortable to acknowledge.

[nadinbrzezinski]

76. Because this is the subset of what you are saying

If the rich are that different then we should get rid of the rich. THis is a populist strain goingb back to oh the 17th century.

THe difference is... people back then risked the noose. These days we work up our spleen on a website... and that goes for both sides in the populist arena.

As I said, YES I DISAGRE WITH YOU THAT CLINTON WAS NOT BROKE WHEN THEY LEFT THE WH. THEY GOT A MONEY ADVANCE FOR HILARY'S BOOK FROM RANDOM HOUSE, which SECURED THAT LOAN. BUT TECHNICALLY THEY WERE BROKE. THEM ARE THE FUCKING STUBBORN FACTS!!!!

AND THESE ARE THE FACTS THAT PEOPLE HAVE A HELL OF A TIME COMPREHENDING.

SO ONCE AGAIN, WHEN IS THE REVOLUTION STARTING?

Now I feel much better...

[noamnety]

78. And without the book advance they'd have been living in their car?

You won't admit it because it doesn't serve an agenda for you, but you and I (and everyone else) know they weren't going to be living in a shelter if Hillary hadn't gotten a book advance.

That's because they were broke in the bookkeeper sort of way that they rich can be broke on paper without really having to worry about their future at all, because they knew Bill would be pulling in a million every 5 years in pension alone, without any book deals or speaking gigs at all.

If you think the book advance was what kept them from living in poverty or having the worries of normal people living in poverty, it reveals something about your standpoint.

Your definition of broke isn't anything to do with real poverty. You believe my pointing that out is evidence that I don't think the distribution of wealth in this country or globally is acceptable.

The counterpoint to that is if you refuse to acknowledge that they were not poor by any reasonable definition, perhaps that is evidence that you think the distribution of wealth in this country or globally IS acceptable.

Furthermore, it says something about your worldview if you honestly believe they had less wealth than a blue collar worker when they left the white house.

[nadinbrzezinski]

79. What agenda?

Look in the mirror.

That said, no they would not because a POTUS that just left the WH is a SECURITY RISK if you do that.

But they were BROKE... them are stubborn facts.

You have an agenda though... and you cannot even see it.

She got an advance... and she even wrote about that in her book and has spoken about it. HIs advance finally got that resolved.

If you want to argue that perhaps two not previously published authors got such large advances (Due to name recognition) being wrong, you will have many a writer nod at you, including me.

But them are the facts... live with them, or not, I don't give a fuck what random people do on the internets with facts and "facts."

The web was supposed to incrase knoweldge, but all it's done is keep populations (especially in the US) quiet, and the enquirer has moved on line with steroids.

[noamnety]

80. Your agenda appears to be defense of

the amassing of wealth, with one of the methods of defense being obfuscation - pretending that obscene wealth isn't wealth at all because someone can demonstrate "on paper" that they aren't wealthy at all for a brief few months - during which they somehow managed to scrape up 300k in cash for a house worth nearly 2 million.

When people start trying to portray the wealthy as not so different from how the rest of us live, it's a form of propaganda.

My agenda? Calling people on it when they pretend there's not an obscene and alarming amassing of capital by a very small group of people, and calling people on it when they attempt to portray those obscenely rich elite as teetering on the edge of poverty.

You act like there's a problem with me pointing out that they are absolutely in a different class than the rest of us and their being broke has an entirely different meaning than what it means for an average person to be broke. You are playing shell games with their wealth by looking at a small gap between scheduled massive checks rolling in - or pretending that for some reason we "shouldn't count" her 8 million dollar book advance or his 12 million dollar book advance as wealth.

[nadinbrzezinski]

82. No, that is not my agenda

I have repeatedly said that I am all for rising marginal tax rates from 15% to at least 70%... THOSE are the actual taxes involved in supply side (trickle down) economics.

Now how is that for amasing of wealth?

Now my other side of my agenda is quite simple:

WORDS have meaning... specific meanings, and as a writer I like PRECISION in the language.

I am also in favor of actual Facts, not "facts."

Oh and I do believe in Keynseian Economics... a term I fear you should go research... and just how much Keynseian economcis IS NOT for the amassing of wealth. I am also for not Local, not National, but WORLD WIDE unions, with the prospect of 40 hour weeks, living wages, and a month vacation, wiht global access to both healthh care and universal education all the way to college, perhaps even Ph.D

So exactly how is that pro amassing of wealth?

Here is one practice I'd love to see in the US... not that I expect this to happen without systemimc POLICY CHANGES... the lowest paid worker makes only 40 times less than the top CEO, instead of the currently, what was the last stat I read, 3000 times differential? How exactly is that for ammasing wealth?

You see, you go on ONE couple, who have said, repeteadly, they did not need those tax cuts, instead of looking at the POLICY LEVEL. And by the way congrats, this is how people are kept distracted from real issues. IN the whole scheme of things this wedding is an itty little thing in the great scheme of things.

So tell me, how exactly am I for the amasing of wealth.

[noamnety]

86. Well, you are certainly distorting "facts"

to portray a very small gap between incoming huge amounts of money as if a bookkeeping gap between giant checks counts as "being broke."

So if your agenda isn't to use that as a propaganda technique to portray the wealthy as not having too much money ... the alternative that I see is that perhaps you have a vested interest in trying to erroneously portray the Clintons for some reason as not being part of the crazy wealthy elite. Whether that comes from blind party loyalty or blind loyalty to the Clintons, I can't guess. But clearly there is a reason you want to portray these people as being broke when the rest of us can see very clearly that they aren't.

I look forward to your next condescending post stating that I just can't understand why they were in poverty because I'm not a historian like you, or haven't studied the right sort of economics like you to get why they were poverty stricken. It must be horribly difficult for you having to deal with dullards like the rest of us. :)

[nadinbrzezinski]

87. Ah we cannot read I see

I have never said they have little or no money. But that is ok, aparently you read that.

What I said is that THIS WEDDING is a small simulus packet to the local economy where the wedding is happening. That is Keynes. I have also said that them spending it gets it back into the general economy and away from investment accounts, where IT MAKES SENSE TO PARK IT at the rate it is taxed. Why Supply Side does not work.

But carry on...

Spleen for the Clintons woith a side of mash... care for some gravy?

Oh and the pay differential is not my imagination... it is real... so let me get it straight. You'd rather have it still to where I make 7.75 bucks and the CEO of Wallmart makes 3007.75 bucks in the same hour... (Granted in the Walton's case it is actualy more like a few million, but I am going average here)... that is better than me making one buck to them making 40?

And you'd rather have them oh keep their money parked in investments and speculations instead of getting taxed at 70% and turn around and invest it in their plants... like oh I don't know the 1930-70s... the tax rate was anywhere from 90% all the way to Kennedy, who lowered it to 70%, and it was until Nixon that it came back down to the 50's.

Now carry on, wait for the next outrage while some of us WORK to try to change things at the POLICY LEVEL, where a MORE JUST society can emerge.

So who will be the next one you will pour your spleen over? As in who will be the next distraction?

[noamnety]

88. Thanks for not disappointed with the condescension.

Busted. Yes, the royal "we" cannot read. lol.

I've no idea what the rest of your post is based on. I've stated clearly that a) the Clinton's were not poor when they left the white house, and b) that I have a problem with people amassing obscene amounts of capital.


The assumptions you've made about my wanting CEOs to make thousands of dollars an hour and taxed at a low rate are not logical based on what I've posted.

[nadinbrzezinski]

89. They were technically and realistically broke

but that's ok.

I guess I am defending them

And if you did not get the rest of it, you will continue to be distracted. The rest of it has a name. POLICY.

And at this point I have to conclude that it is well above the average American.

[Raineyb]

66. +1 Someone who gets it! n/t

[XOKCowboy]

69. Thank YOU! You'd think they were living on Beenie Weenies when they left office...

Geez there's a reason people spend almost a BILLION dollars to run for President.

[Raejeanowl]

56. Oh, Dear

Too many dollars wasted, debt incurred, and competitive drama fomented on "fairytale princess" weddings, one-day anachronistic fantasies demanded by otherwise accomplished and independent young women, horrify me on multiple levels.

This is a chauvanistic social ritual that should have been deep-sixed decades ago. The entire whoop-dee-doo wing ding circus has no bearing on the chances of success or level of commitment in the marriages that follow. It's just a big money-waving (although I wouldn't use the word "money" in private, but a synonym for the male sex organ), showing-off party. You can call it envy if it helps to make you feel less foolish.

But hey, I suppose the Clintons are entitled to throw their money away as they see fit, and perhaps it will do the local economy a small amount of good.

[SwampG8r]

84. i bet you are a hoot at parties!

[backwoodsbob]

59. they have the money...they can spend as they see fit

all I know is my first wedding was her *dream* wedding.300 guests..VERY expensive dress....12 ushers in tuxes...an expensive band and full bar and a 5 layer wedding cake and a champaign pyramid and the works at the reception...we got divorced.

My second wedding...me in my best OWNED suit and her in her best dress wed at her brothers house by my ordained uncle and a party after with friends and music from the stereo with the speakers carried onto the back porch,a bbq dinner of burgers and hot dogs...we are still married and happy.

I think the entitlement mentality of the whole thing is what has so many upset.

[mstinamotorcity]

70. Anyone who wants to play politics

with C. Clinton's wedding is utterly in poor taste to me. Chelsea is not responsible for any of her parents short comings,even though she may be the benefactor. She is entitled to her day just as any other bride-to-be. For families who this cannot be possible this may seem over the top and by my standards it is. But to be wealthy and your only child to be married would make any parent go over the top if they can afford it. This is Chelsea's day and she is having it her way.All mom and dad are doing is signing the checks. I wonder if she is going to turn into Bridezilla,love to see a clip of that.

[Spagettio]

73. I think if most of us were millionaires we would buy rolls royce instead of Honda Civic

I'm with you.

[SwampG8r]

83. best reply on this whole damn thread

welcome to du

[Ilsa]

77. I don't begrudge them doing this for their daughter. I hope they have

a wonderful time and build some beautiful memories.

[Gormy Cuss]

90. You can spend your money any way you choose -- on a house, on lottery tickets, on a big Cinderella

wedding that some little girls think is still important when they're big girls getting married. You aren't a public figure connected with the party that is supposed to be looking out for the little guys. That's the difference that like it or not does matter to many. People will judge the Clintons over the lavish details of the wedding even if in reality the true costs aren't out of line with other weddings of people with their means.

I really don't care one whit about how much is spent on the wedding, but the hit piece "estimating" the costs at two million was done specifically for that reason -- to cast the Clintons (and by extension the White House) in a bad light.

Mission accomplished.