100k is a bargain. Clinton would have wiped them out. Just spent 7 days with some vets from the 82nd Air born at Fort Bragg. They sure seemed to like him more than Obama, Clinton, the other Clinton, and every other democrat I could lump onto the heap.
At least we're speaking the same language SM and I find that encouraging.
And no, I don't think a past President should ever accept a fee for addressing the groups.
I think we can respect each other's opinions.
Is it right for ANY president to be paid by the US military for a talk after their presidency has ended? Should all armed forces be honored for their service with a FREE presidential visit (well, former president)?
I don't think Bush should have special rules that just apply to him. And really, the bottom line was that he was invited by them for the talk. He reduced the fee he normally receives and the group reaped a large profit from the event. So, in their mind, it may have been worth it and I am not going to say it wasn't.
but I do understand how you feel Mike and why you feel as you do. I can see that side of it as well.
And, of course, that makes it right.
People pay for drugs too and junk food and sex - so that makes it alright.
Please, try looking for the morality here.....oh never-mind.
I have never seen such apologists - and you guys cry about Obama.
Yikes!
The group's members must not have thought it so horrible because they did agree to pay the fee.
According to the charity’s yearly reports to the IRS, it raised about $2,450,000, after expenses, from the 2012 gala where President Bush spoke. The following year, the gala netted the charity substantially less, about $1,000,000.
So he charged a group to speak yet he has done other things for free for vets. People want to keep finding things to rip him for so whatever.
I wasn't making any assumptions or conclusions about the wounded soldiers" attitudes or motives. That is another subject entirely.
I believe that the majority of Americans view the Iraq War as ill-advised - at the very best. I also think that most people view it as an abject failure.
It was based on bad intelligence or perhaps fabricated intelligence. At the very best it was cherry-picked intelligence.
But even if we assume that the Iraq War was a just war - should a former President charge a speaking fee to address wounded soldiers of war he got us into.....or any war for that matter?
I just don't get it - as I said I think it is unconscionable.
And I do respect your opinion Mike and understand where you are coming from.
There are often differences of opinion on the current events forum. That is not new. So we differ in opinion. Bush is doing what other former presidents have done. I'm sure all presidents who send our armed forces into battle has a hard time. I'm not a veteran of the Iraq War. I wonder how they feel about it. If they wanted him to speak, they must see him as someone they want to listen to.
I think it's deplorable/unconscionable for GWB to be charging a fee to address wounded soldiers that were injured he in a war he started....and particularly the Iraq War.
You can attempt to conflate or justify or mitigate his action with the general practice of politicians charging speaking fees but I think you are either not thinking it through or, if you are, you have a far different moral compass/sensibility than I have.
I truly wonder how he could even stand up there and look at those wounded soldiers unless he was there to apologize to them - without a fee, of course.
To follow up, I think lying and being wrong are two different things.
I'm not convinced he lied.
Looks like Bush is in good company in terms of charging for his speeches.
I have to hand it to the man. He lies us into war and then when the wounded come home he gets paid to speak to them. That's rich.
So just a hit piece about President Bush. Well done Richard.