Daily Archives: February 24, 2013

Hillary Clinton to charge ‘$200,000 a speech’… which is more than her whole YEAR’S salary as Secretary of State

Hillary Billary Show Me The Money
Next gig: Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has signed up with a talent agency and is commanding $200,000 per lecture, each of which will only last between one and two hours

Now she has signed up to earn whopping fees on the lecture circuit

Daily Mail | Feb 20, 2013

By Meghan Keneally

Hillary Clinton has wasted no time cashing in on the lecture circuit as it was revealed today that she will be charging $200,000 per speech.

The massive fee means that she will be making more from a two-hour lecture than she did in a year as Secretary of State.

The announcement that Mrs Clinton has hired a top talent agency to represent her as she begins to give paid speeches following her departure from the State Department came earlier this week, but her $200,000 asking price was only reported on Wednesday.

According to Buzzfeed, that puts her in the same league as her husband former President Bill Clinton who is so in-demand that he can command the six-figure fee.

The volume of the sum is made clear when looked at in comparison to her salary for a year as Secretary of State, which was $186,000.

Hillary DevilHornsMrs Clinton is now represented by the Harry Walker Agency which is known for getting famous politicians and newsmakers plum gigs on the lecture circuit.

The venture is her first formal decision about what she is going to do now that she is no longer working, though she is widely considered to be the Democratic front runner should she decide to run for the presidency in 2016.

Her decision to attach her name to his particular New York-based agency comes as little surprise since her husband former President Bill Clinton has long been represented by the group since he left office in 2000.

The move was clearly a lucrative one, as he made $75.6million from 2001 to 2010 from speaking engagements, making $10.7million in just 2010 alone.

President Clinton is not the only big name with the agency, as his former Vice President Al Gore has been booking $175,000 gigs through their connections, and former New York City mayor and Republican presidential candidate Rudy Giuliani regularly brings in $100,000 per event.

Former vice president Dick Cheney, former Senators Olympia Snowe and Joe Lieberman, Obama campaign strategist Jim Messina and former Secretary General of the United Nations Kofi Annan are all represented by The Harry Walker Agency as well.

Her exact asking price has not been reported, but Politico asserts that she ‘will likely do some speeches for no fee for causes she champions, and expects to occasionally donate her fees for charitable purposes’.

While keeping mum about any future presidential plans, Mrs Clinton has said that she plans to write another book, this time about her work as Secretary of State.

Publishing house Simon & Schuster reportedly paid the former first lady an $8million advance on her first book, Living History, which she published in December 2000.

With any and all positions that she decides to take, she will have to weigh the optics of if it would look appropriate for a presidential candidate.

That said, another concern is shoring up a steady income, because it doesn’t come cheap to live like the Clintons and six-figure speaking fees will certainly help.

Though there were early reports that they might buy a house in the Hamptons area of Long Island, it appears now that they will hustle between their current residences in Washington, D.C. and Chappaqua, a quiet town in the suburbs of New York City.

She is also expected to either work with her husband’s Clinton Foundation or start her own, though no decisions about that have been made at this point.

The only thing that Mrs Clinton has publicly confirmed is that she plans to rest after a very taxing four years of traveling to 112 different countries.

As Mrs Clinton remains coy about her political prospects, her potential competitors are being very blatant in their fundraising attempts.

On the Republican side, both New Jersey Governor Chris Christie and Florida Senator Marco Rubio have raised significant sums for their campaign war chests in recent weeks.

Mr Christie attended a fundraiser in his honor at Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg’s California home, and Mr Rubio raised $100,000 by selling water bottles with his name on them, playing on his thirst-quenching gaffe during the State of the Union rebuttal.

Aspartame in Milk Without a Label? Big Dairy Petitions FDA For Approval

.
Two powerful dairy organizations, The International Dairy Foods Association (IDFA) and the National Milk Producers Federation (NMPF), are petitioning the Food and Drug Administration to allow aspartame and other artificial sweeteners to be added to milk and other dairy products without a label.The FDA currently allows the dairy industry to use “nutritive sweeteners” including sugar and high fructose corn syrup in many of their products. Nutritive sweeteners are defined as sweeteners with calories.This petition officially seeks to amend the standard of identification for milk, cream, and 17 other dairy products like yogurt, sweetened condensed milk, sour cream, and others to provide for the use of any “safe and suitable sweetener” on the market.

They claim that aspartame and other artificial sweeteners would promote healthy eating and is good for school children.

According to the FDA notice issued this week:

IDFA and NMPF state that the proposed amendments would promote more healthful eating practices and reduce childhood obesity by providing for lower-calorie flavored milk products. They state that lower-calorie flavored milk would particularly benefit school children who, according to IDFA and NMPF, are more inclined to drink flavored milk than unflavored milk at school.
Read More

GMO cows pushed as Frankensolution to milk allergies

naturalnews.com | Feb 23, 2013

LON_FrankenCow(NaturalNews) Milk from dairy cows contains the protein s-lactoglobulin (BLG) which is not present in human milk. As it is a major milk allergen, an attempt at decreasing BLG by genetically modifying cows has gained much attention recently. According to researchers in a recent study, “analysis of hormonally induced milk from [these calves] demonstrated absence of BLG and a concurrent increase of all casein milk proteins.” It is believed that if bred in sufficient numbers, this type of genetically modified cow could one day provide milk for allergic infants and adults.

When will the madness stop?

In what seems like an attempt to distract us from the true dangers of milk, popular media and scientific sources like the one above are focusing our attention on the rare condition of milk allergies in an attempt to justify genetically modifying cows. Yet, only four percent of people are allergic to cow’s milk and doctors claim that most babies eventually outgrow this allergy. It remains clear; however, that the complications of milk consumption continue well into adulthood. It is reported that nearly 50 percent of the world’s population is lactose intolerant after childhood and that symptoms include bloating, pain or cramps, gas, diarrhea, and vomiting. If someone feels ill after consuming a dairy product once, they probably do not have lactose intolerance. However, if symptoms persist after continued dairy consumption, then the likelihood toward lactose intolerance is much higher. Humans do not have the enzymes to properly digest milk proteins like BLG and casein, it is no wonder why most people suffer after drinking milk.

In addition to these deleterious effects of drinking cow’s milk, it is important to note that all of American milk is genetically contaminated by bovine growth hormone (rBGH) to increase production unless it is clearly labelled “NO rBGH.” Monsanto Co., the manufacturer of rBGH, has influenced U.S. product safety laws permitting the sale of unlabeled rBGH milk. rBGH increases the rates of 16 different harmful medical conditions in cows, and there is substantial scientific evidence that it may increase antibiotic resistance and cancer rates in humans. The product is already prohibited in Canada, Japan, Australia, New Zealand, and in the 27 countries of the European Union and the Codex Alimentarius, the U.N.’s main food safety body, concluded there was no consensus that it’s safe for human health.

Whether considering GMOs or undigestible proteins, the risks associated with drinking processed cow’s milk far outweigh any benefits that may be gained from consuming it. Years and billions of dollars have been spent to indoctrinate our nation into thinking that “milk does a body good” and that our main source of calcium should come from it. Yet, it is commonly recognized that the best sources of calcium are green, leafy vegetables like spinach, kale, okra, and collards. Culinarily speaking, cow’s milk can easily be substituted with coconut or almond milk; both of which provide a creamy texture and are usually quite tasty depending on the brand.

Sources for this article include:

http://www.cnn.com
http://www.pnas.org/content/109/42/16811
http://www.preventcancer.com/consumers/general/milk.htm
http://www.organicvalley.coop
http://usatoday30.usatoday.com

About the author:
Eric is a peer-reviewed, published researcher. His work on heart disease and autism has been accepted internationally at various scientific conferences through organizations like the American Public Health Association and Australian-based Baker IDI Heart and Diabetes Institute. Visit his blog. Track his work on facebook. Read Eric’s other naturalnews.com articles.