Today we learn that our "
Former president rakes in $7.5 million via the AP. I love these stories with no context.
For example, I seem to recall a dramatic rise in the income of one Ronald Reagan immediately after his eight years. (Lots of trips to Japan as I recall... (I'll research this and update).)
I just can't fathom the laziness (or is it mendacity?) of the press: particularly the AP. Would it have required a lot of effort to determine if these amounts for speaking are wildly at variance with those earned by his predecessors? Perhaps not. Therein may lie the point...
Adding context might point out the fact that there is NO STORY HERE.
(Sorry if someone already caught this...)