Really. I really like this line from the article:
I believe that would be the Palin half of the equation, Therin.
Cel-e-brate good times, come on!
[/Kool And The Gang]
Jeez, get a room, you two.
Er, just not the Oval Office.
They will try to make money off of anything.
Oh, I thought we were talking about the 8/28 rally–which had [del]millions[/del] [del]500,000[/del] 87,000 participants.
I would’nt give either of them a wooden nickel!
And the lesson we learn today is that neither Glenn Beck nor Sarah Palin think there’s anything wrong with making a paycheck off of the deaths of 2977 American deaths. From the article: “Tickets range from $73.75 to a high of $225.”
I’m not sure about Sarah Palin, but Glenn Beck is donating his fee to the “Special Operations Warrior Foundation.”
If Glenn Beck and Sarah Palin were to go down on each other, it would mean ten blessed minutes in which the rest of us wouldn’t have to listen to them…
I’d pay somewhere between $73.75 and $225 to see that.
Not me. My gag reflex has a low threshold.
Tax write off then. How noble.
The ONLY reason he would be doing that is to avoid a lot of shit about having this shindig on 9/11. According to the person who set this up, the 11th was purely coincidental (:rolleyes:), because an earlier date wouldn’t work. I suspect Palin stuck her tits in the works because she saw an opportunity to appear on 9/11 and pretend to be caring about anybody but herself.
Beck got trapped by his own stupidity. Palin is working on building a following. That translates into even more money down the road.
His speaking fee. I am sure he gets a piece of every ticket sold though. Her to. They are ghouls.
What does this mean?
It sounds like you don’t understand what a tax write-off is, but perhaps I am misunderstanding you.
If someone donates money to a non-profit organization, it’s generally true they can deduct that money from their gross income.
They are thus not taxed on the income… but of course, they don’t keep the income, so that seems fair.
Choosing to keep the income would always result in more money, though. Even if we imagine a giant, 80% tax rate, a guy who earns $1000 and keeps it pays 80% tax and keeps 20%, or $200.
If he donates his $1000, then he keeps nothing. Zero.
So it certainly does seem “more noble” to donate a fee to a worthy nonprofit, since it results in keeping no money at all. Earning and keeping the money, with no tax “write off” would put money in his pocket; donating it does not.
So I don’t really understand your point at all.
No, he doesn’t. Where did you get this idea?
It’s pretty standard for any entertainer to get a piece of the take at the door. I admit I am speculating. Even if I am wrong, money is fungible so the fact that he is donating it doesn’t make the fact that he is profiting off 3000 deaths any less ghoulish.
A quote from Palin at the event:
True frontier gibberish.
Yeah, but it’s time-tested frontier gibberish.
“revreh!” [/Blazing Saddles reference]