Originally Posted by arathbon

Not to defend who and what Palin is ( I don't particularly care for her) I do want to chime in.

1) $200,000 is not out of the ordinary for a popular or controversial speaker.
2) Just because someone is open to the possibility of reforming the health system doesn't mean they want to throw poor people out to die on the streets (this is a response to why they'd get a critic of the Canadian Health Care System to raise money for a hospital)
3) She got her Governor position simply because she had the guts to stand up to her own party when they were acting stupid, and she got the Vice-Presidential nod because the republican campaign was worried that McCain, who some consider further left than some of the more conservative Democrats, was in danger of loosing a significant portion of the Republican vote.

I don't think the issue is that she asks 200k as a speaking fee, the issue is why a charity event would pay that much for a speaker.

We're not talking about someone we're talking specifically about Sarah Palin who I highly doubt cares about poor people. Well that's not true, she probably cares about poor people who are pro-life, pro-war, pro-everything she is.

How is how she got her position relevant? I don't think anyone was debating that.

The woman's a tool and no one should be paying her to speak, least of all a charity.

Originally Posted by jamescw1234

Just to give a heads up, she's not being payed $200,000. I was watching CHCH news last night and one of the organizers said that it's actually much lower, but legally he's not allowed to say.

LOL ...

wow ... what a lame excuse!

Maybe not 200,000 ... but should she accept any money at all if its a fund-raiser!

And then she goes on to lecture people on 'morality' ...

One of the biggest hypocrites alive!

P.S: We all remember her 'daughter incident'

Originally Posted by lawleypop

Someone needs to teach me how to protest.

I'm either gonna hunger strike if she comes here, or threaten to kill myself.

No way in hell am I letting people to hear that wench ramble about nothingness.

Oh dear! Someone disagrees with my political opinions! I must prevent anyone from hearing what they have to say! Free speech? Nah! Not if *I* decide their viewpoints are not worthy to be heard by people who choose to hear them.

Religion you're next

[/sarcasm]

wow,what a waste

Originally Posted by lmasud

damn it...i was actually thinking of attending, but $200 bucks is a bit out of a students reach. I think it would be pretty funny to see a crappy speaker like her trying to convince a bunch of canadians why free health care is bad thing

It's only free if you don't pay taxes. And that's also just a plain bad attitude to have. Too often people no longer value their healthcare and do stuff like don't show up to appointments causing the doctor to loose money and wasting an appointment space. The entitlement doesn't stop there. People get VERY upset when they don't get every last possible test within a week. Guess what? We'd need a huge tax hike to have enough money to pay for the health infrastructure OR we'd need to look at reforming our health care system while maintaining the principle of universal care and coverage.

Originally Posted by arathbon

Oh dear! Someone disagrees with my political opinions! I must prevent anyone from hearing what they have to say! Free speech? Nah! Not if *I* decide their viewpoints are not worthy to be heard by people who choose to hear them.

Religion you're next

[/sarcasm]

Funny when people use sarcasm but don't detect it in other people's posts and then try to troll them.

Originally Posted by sew12

I don't think the issue is that she asks 200k as a speaking fee, the issue is why a charity event would pay that much for a speaker.

We're not talking about someone we're talking specifically about Sarah Palin who I highly doubt cares about poor people. Well that's not true, she probably cares about poor people who are pro-life, pro-war, pro-everything she is.

I bet you could find people in the US who would argue, for example, that Clinton only cared about poor people that supported his points of view and could care less about poor "rednecks".

My point is: There's no proof that she only cares for those who shares her viewpoints. Likewise for many people on both sides of the political divide. I don't think it's fair to single one person out, accusing them of selective caring without proof.

How is how she got her position relevant? I don't think anyone was debating that.

The woman's a tool and no one should be paying her to speak, least of all a charity.

she's such a tool. how she got to in to a position of power boggles my mind.

Someone asked. I answered.

But I do agree with you. I don't like her and I'd never go to see her speak. But I will defend people's right to hear what she has to say if they choose to.

Originally Posted by lawleypop

Funny when people use sarcasm but don't detect it in other people's posts and then try to troll them.

Sorry, but I have actually heard someone I know SERIOUSLY suggest that the government shouldn't allow her into the country to speak, so I guess I didn't notice your sarcasm...

Originally Posted by manaya

LOL ...

wow ... what a lame excuse!

Maybe not 200,000 ... but should she accept any money at all if its a fund-raiser!

I don't think its unreasonable for her to ask for a bit of compensation. She is flying down from Alaska, which isn't cheap, and if she were to do a different non charity event she could have made $200K.

If she was actually making $200K for this event I would be upset at the organizers for such a waste of money, not her. Assuming the amount she's being paid is small enough that the hospital can still raise decent money from the event I see no problem with it.


While I don't agree with her on many, if any of her positions, the hate she's getting here is a bit unfounded...

Originally Posted by A.Marlowe

I don't think its unreasonable for her to ask for a bit of compensation. She is flying down from Alaska, which isn't cheap, and if she were to do a different non charity event she could have made $200K.

If she was actually making $200K for this event I would be upset at the organizers for such a waste of money, not her. Assuming the amount she's being paid is small enough that the hospital can still raise decent money from the event I see no problem with it.


While I don't agree with her on many, if any of her positions, the hate she's getting here is a bit unfounded...

Ok if its a charity event, then most 'celebrities' (if tatz what she is) don't charge the organization for it.

Its just wrong ... and completely counter-productive. And compensation for flying from Alaska is nowhere near that amount. Also ... she will probably be arranged VIP suites in hotels and limos and what not!

Originally Posted by jamescw1234

Just to give a heads up, she's not being payed $200,000. I was watching CHCH news last night and one of the organizers said that it's actually much lower, but legally he's not allowed to say.

They're trying to cover their asses now. They did an interview withe The Spec the other day and when asked if they really had to pay her $200,000, the guy said "I can't say exactly, but it's around that ballpark".

Originally Posted by A.Marlowe

I don't think its unreasonable for her to ask for a bit of compensation. She is flying down from Alaska, which isn't cheap, and if she were to do a different non charity event she could have made $200K.

If she was actually making $200K for this event I would be upset at the organizers for such a waste of money, not her. Assuming the amount she's being paid is small enough that the hospital can still raise decent money from the event I see no problem with it.


While I don't agree with her on many, if any of her positions, the hate she's getting here is a bit unfounded...

I could be wrong, but I'm sure her flight/hotel, etc etc isn't coming out of this $200,000. That money goes right into her pockets. Someone (taxes, the organization? I don't know) has to pay separately for those other things.

I don't think this hate is unfounded. I mean, I really dislike her, but that's not what this is about. I think the hospitals are doing a serious injustice for themselves and the patients there. I think that $200,000 could have been spent on someone who could raise more money for the hospitals.

Contraversy does not equal support. There's a bunch of people on The Spec website that said "I'm cancelling my auto-donation from my bank account to the Cancer Centre. If they can afford $200,000 for someone who doesn't support our health care system, they don't need my donation". While that's sad, it was bound to happen by inviting this kind of guest. I don't think they are helping themselves by letting her speak there.

I'm sure there are tons of speakers, $200,000 or less, that could have raised much more money and brought more positive attention to the hospital.

I agree that $200K, or anything in that ballpark, is way too much to pay for a speaker. It seems like a stupid decision. I'm not arguing that. But to say she should get no compensation just because its a charity event seems off. Even if the compensation is just paying for her expenses.

If you don't support the decision to get her as a speaker, you're probably in the majority. I agree that its a stupid idea if they are paying her anywhere near $200K. However most of the attacks have been at her directly, not at whoever thought that it would be a good idea to get her for a charity event.

And lets be honest, there are plenty of valid reasons to not support our current healthcare system, its not perfect. Its better than the current American system for the average person, but that says so little as to be meaningless. People always lash out in blind defence when an American attacks our system, but the fact is there are a lot of flaws that we'll need to deal with at some point.

Originally Posted by A.Marlowe

I agree that $200K, or anything in that ballpark, is way too much to pay for a speaker. It seems like a stupid decision. I'm not arguing that. But to say she should get no compensation just because its a charity event seems off. Even if the compensation is just paying for her expenses.

If you don't support the decision to get her as a speaker, you're probably in the majority. I agree that its a stupid idea if they are paying her anywhere near $200K. However most of the attacks have been at her directly, not at whoever thought that it would be a good idea to get her for a charity event.

And lets be honest, there are plenty of valid reasons to not support our current healthcare system, its not perfect. Its better than the current American system for the average person, but that says so little as to be meaningless. People always lash out in blind defence when an American attacks our system, but the fact is there are a lot of flaws that we'll need to deal with at some point.

Well the point is that its not any American though ... its a very specific kind of American.

Thatz the difference

I don't think $200K is too much to pay a speaker, at least not one who's profile is so high at the moment. What I don't agree with is the fact that they are getting someone with a very weak base, and virtually no knowledge of how our system works to speak at an event like this.

I mean, really, what does one hope to achieve by going to this charity event. what do they hope to gain out of it?