Headlines are blaring with news this morning that Hillary Clinton's campaign Rasputin, Mark Penn, resigned yesterday. We'll have more on the pundit response to that later, but we were more amused this morning by The Wall Street Journal's response to some slightly older news: the release of Hillary's tax records last week. As many suspected, the girl is rich. And the Journal, whose average household income is more than $250,000 (more than twice that of most wealthy families) and who spends every day writing about billionaires, is offended. From their editorial page:
[The Clinton's] political status has given them access to wealthy folks who've helped make them rich. For example, Mr. Clinton raked in as much as $15 million working as an adviser and rainmaker for billionaire financier Ron Burkle's Yucaipa firm. We're not sure what advice Mr. Clinton gave but it must have been fabulous. The former President also took in $3.3 million in consulting fees from InfoUSA CEO Vinod Gupta, who has also helped fund Mrs. Clinton's White House bid. These are not opportunities that fall into every American's lap.
"We're not sure what advice Mr. Clinton gave, but it must have been fabulous"? Who wrote this, a blogger?
The Journal closes on another self-righteous note, regarding Hillary's wish to repeal the Bush tax cuts: "If the former first lady feels so strongly that she should pay more taxes, we suggest she lay off the middle class and instead write a personal check to the U.S. Treasury for the difference between the Clinton and Bush tax rates. She and her husband can afford it." Isn't that slightly ridiculous? They can't afford it — that number would be in the billions. Only someone like Rupert Murdoch could afford to write a check like that.
Clinton Tax Lessons [WSJ]