I’m with those who say it depends on the content. If he goes there and just kisses their ass, then I have a problem with that. If he challenges them, even if in a deliberately non-provocative way, then it’s not only not wrong, but what he should be doing.
I’m not at all swayed by the money issues, because Obama already has enough money to be set for life. The idea that continually seeking money is a good thing is not once I share, unless that money is mostly going to help others (or to make more money which can then help others.) And, yes, that can include capitalism–that just gets offset by any profit that is not used to help others.
And, by others, I mean the people who actually need help, of course. Not, say, helping out fellow millionaires.
Yeah, but getting big corporate bucks isn’t going to corrupt the GOP much, because making life easier for our corporate overlords is what they’re about, anyway.
When the Dems are also taking corporate money, it reinforces the notion that the Dems are that way too, so the proverbial white working class might as well vote Republican because at least they’re for God and guns, and against gays. And of course it gives the BernieBros just one more reason to say, “see, there’s no difference between the GOP and mainstream Dems.”
And with a $65M book deal in the works, it’s kind of absurd to think that Obama needs the money.
I think Bernie Sanders made a bigger issue about it than the GOP. And it was because she was running for office subsequent to her paid speaking engagements. Obama isn’t running for any office.
It’s not the only thing keeping progressivism afloat – progressivism will survive on its own. The question is, will it endure as a more measured and thoughtful form of progressivism of Obama, or will the movement get hijacked by a modern day Huey Long or worse?
I don’t think Obama has inspired any more hatred than your average President. Too many he is revered as one the best. If there wasn’t an assassination attempt during his first term by some white supremacist group, I highly doubt they’ll waste their time now he’s out of office.
While I have absolutely no problem with Obama making money in any legal way that doesn’t harm other people, one can make a reasonable argument that there’s an element of hypocrisy that isn’t present when the GOP does it, since (most) GOP politicians do not promote themselves as champions of the economically disenfranchised against the super-rich. Similarly, it would arguably be worse for Mike Pence to be caught having an affair than for Joe Biden to do the same thing, since being an exemplar of Traditional Christian Family Values is part of Pence’s “brand,” in ways that it isn’t part of Biden’s.
You could make that argument, but others could make the argument that the presidency shouldn’t be a stage to be used for a multi-million dollar speaking circuit. Look, we all know that politicians always leave office richer than when they started in public service. But at some point, I think it’s a fair question to ask: just why does someone deserve or how does someone justify taking $400,000 per speech when perhaps less than one percent of the population makes that in a single year, and when it probably takes many years for the overwhelming majority of the voting population to make that money. It’s a frigging speech. That’s it.
Eh, why does someone deserve $20 million to throw a friggin ball around while it’ll take the average t-shirt and facepaint wearing fan many years to make it. It’s what the market will bear (though at least the guy throwing the ball directly helps generate a profit for those paying him, he’s got that).
Do I wish more of our former Presidents dedicated themselves to building houses for the poor and ensuring fair elections around the world, rather than live it up with celeb billionaires and headline mutually self-congratulatory shindigs at either or both Wall Street/Hollywood? Hell yeah. But not like I *expect *it. Obama’s failure to actually be the Socialist Revolutionary that his enemies on the Right claimed (and some delusionals on the Left wished) is not something that surprises me.
I don’t think he’s going there to say ass-kissing stuff or to say challenging stuff. I’ve always thought the whole point was, he – or any other ex-president – could go to one of these things, and say Blah Blah Blah, Blah BLAH Blah Blah, and collect a big fine check for it. And he can do it again, and again, and again and again, regardless of what he bothers to say, because what he says isn’t the point, was never the point.
The point is, when he’s in office, he knows that’s waiting for him later. The point is that he’s already on the payroll. The point is – wasn’t there a Bond villain who just had a standing offer in place, before he ever got arrested, such that anyone who helps him avoid jail time will get millions of dollars? That guy didn’t have to actively bribe anybody who wound up in a position to let him off the hook; it was simply understood, and someone simply took him up on it.
Right here in the real world, that offer is likewise always there, likewise always waiting for people to accept: leave a position of power and spend the rest of your life getting paid to speak or to serve as a ‘consultant’ or whatever – regardless of what you say, you’re not getting paid for what you’re saying now, they don’t care what you say now; you’re getting paid for not rocking the boat then.
I thought this was a dead horse that didn’t need to be beaten, is all.
The issue isn’t that Obama, or any other liberal, accepts large sums of money for their time and effort. If they’re offered it, they’re perfectly entitled to accept it. The issue is the hypocrisy.
Hypocrisy in demonizing the wealthy and the privileged, while embracing it in your own lifestyle.
Hypocrisy in complaining that women are paid less, while you pay your female staffers less than your male staffers.
Hypocrisy in campaigning for a $15 minimum wage, while you pay your staffers well below $15 an hour (how you doin’, Bernie Sanders?).
What makes this worse is that this is not a "Trump smear." This isn't something that is being propagated by conservatives. This is the "left eating one of its own."
We don’t own Barrack Obama. He served the people of the United States (and the citizens of the world) with dignity, honour and respect for the eight years he served as President of the United States. He is a private citizen now, and what he chooses to do with his time is really none of our fucking business. If we choose to condemn him for taking “money from the banks” then we all have the duty to “remove our own money from the banks” and put that money under our beds lest we accuse ourselves of hypocrisy. Obama is getting paid market rate for doing something that he is uniquely qualified to do. This isn’t fucking news. Not in an era where the current President of the United States has declared one of his properties the “Winter White House” and he is literally profiting from this to the tune of millions of dollars. For gods sake America get some fucking perspective.
What amazes me about this is that there are still some intelligent commentators out there who think Obama is different. What, refusing public financing before even getting elected didn’t tip them off that he was a typical politician? Him actually SAYING he was a typical politician didn’t convince them? I don’t ever want to see one of these delusional morons criticize Trump voters.
Served the citizens of the world? :dubious: . Guy who bombed a dozen countries?
And he is not an ordinary private citizen. He was criticised for not taking harder line on Wall Street by such crazy lefties as Nobel Prize winning economist Joe Stiglitz Stiglitz Says White House Too in Bed With Wall Street - Business Insider
Obama had a policy of not prosecuting Wall Street Bankers after the financial crises https://www.google.com/amp/amp.usatoday.com/story/31939695/ proffering up one lame excuse after the other. All the major official in charge of the decisions are now conincidentally I am sure working for Wall Street firms.