Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Lucrative part-time jobs pay off for Jim Talent [Kansas City Star Attacks on Behalf of democRATs]
The Kansas City Star ^ | Wednesday, March 20, 2002

Posted on 03/20/2002 5:46:08 AM PST by TroutStalker

When it comes to making money, political connections pay off. Last year, for instance, former U.S. Rep. Jim Talent raked in $320,000 for two part-time jobs while he waited to launch another political race.

One of those jobs, a Sunday story in The Kansas City Star reported, was at privately run Washington University in St. Louis. The former Republican congressman and current U.S. Senate candidate gained a lucrative contract of $90,000 for part-time teaching. The average annual salary for a full-time associate professor at the university is $67,000.

Talent's contract called for one class each semester of 20 students. And no heavy lifting.

The $90,000 wasn't enough. Talent also secured a part-time job with a Washington lobbying and law firm. He earned $230,000 even though federal ethics laws prohibited him from lobbying his former congressional colleagues.

Yet, even with that hand tied behind his back, he was able to lock in some clients for the firm who are, as luck would have it, heavyweight Republican contributors. In effect, their legal fees start looking a lot like campaign contributions. Unfortunately, in this case federal campaign contribution laws don't apply.

The former congressman explained that he thought he was getting an amount comparable to others' teaching salaries. He said he told the university administration how much he needed "to put food on the table."

Lots of Americans would say that is what is wrong with people who have been in Congress these days. They don't have a clue what average folks have to live on. With that kind of money, Talent's table must offer quite a spread.

Talent said he wanted to show students in his class "how a congressman really thinks." In the context of all this money, that is the truly scary part.



TOPICS: Editorial; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS:

1 posted on 03/20/2002 5:46:08 AM PST by TroutStalker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: TroutStalker
Earning money for your own account is a crime in the eyes of the Libs.
2 posted on 03/20/2002 5:49:55 AM PST by Eric in the Ozarks
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TroutStalker
Personally, I think it is just criticism.
3 posted on 03/20/2002 5:52:47 AM PST by Rodney King
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Rodney King
I wrote just meaning fair.
4 posted on 03/20/2002 5:58:07 AM PST by Rodney King
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: TroutStalker
And all that time he was a private citizen.
5 posted on 03/20/2002 6:10:44 AM PST by KC_Conspirator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TroutStalker
I'm rather amused that he got that much $ out of the left-wing loonies at WashU (my alma mater). More power to him.
6 posted on 03/20/2002 6:14:28 AM PST by mountaineer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Eric in the Ozarks
When is the last time these frauds at the Kansas City Star ever questioned Al Sharpton or Jesse Jackson on how they "earn" their money?

Cheap Shots are far easier - especially when no one shoots back. There is only ONE paper in most cities.

This is one of the major reasons that the print media is dying.

7 posted on 03/20/2002 6:15:18 AM PST by stlrocket
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: TroutStalker
The average annual salary for a full-time associate professor at the university is $67,000

For the mathematically challenged class envy worshiping editorialists at the "red" Star please look up "average" in a dictionary. Some people make more than the average and some make less. If you look close enough you might even find some leftists making more than the average and some conservatives making less than the average. No doubt you will admit you were wrong to attack Talent on the basis of this tainted charge to mute possible charges of bias.

They don't have a clue what average folks have to live on.

"Average folks" = the leftwing writers of this tripe who feel themselves entitled to the money evil conservatives earn through their own efforts.

Yet, even with that hand tied behind his back, he was able to lock in some clients for the firm who are, as luck would have it, heavyweight Republican contributors.

Isn't it likely these would be his clients since these are the people he interacts with? What would his success rate have been had he focused on the Star's editorial staff to drum up business for his employer?

I remember now why I dumped this rag fifteen years ago and say "not interested" immediately after they identify themselves during one of their frequent telephone solicitations.

8 posted on 03/20/2002 6:19:03 AM PST by What Is Ain't
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: stlrocket
I used to think the KC Star was a pretty good paper. Now, having moved to Missou, and seeing it every week, I'm thinking its not much better than the Star-Tribune of Minneapolis.
9 posted on 03/20/2002 6:27:47 AM PST by Eric in the Ozarks
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: What Is Ain't
I wouldn't spend my own money on the rag, but since my mother-in-law (yellow dog dem) pays for it, I'll read it as opposition research, although they are very predictable where they stand editorially.
10 posted on 03/20/2002 6:34:08 AM PST by TroutStalker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson