Barack Obama Accepting $400,000 in Wall Street Speech Fee is Depressing

[No Excuses]

This has maybe depressed me more than Drumpf winning the election despite losing the popular vote badly.

 

Symbols are just as important as policy. And while I don't think Obama is a Wall Street shill in the way most of the GOP is, this is still pathetic to see the most influential left-wing leader in the country going the Clinton-Bush route of fat speech fees from the very people the left is supposedly railing against.

 

The GOP doesn't even shy away from being the party of the 1%. They do it in your face. Somehow the actions of top Dem leaders feels like much more of a betrayal because it's so two-faced.

 

In my lifetime, I really want to witness a type of populism where the "us" vs. "them is "the common person" against crooks in the financial industry. Yet the actions of some top-level Dem's and their complete lack of shame completely leaves the door open for the GOP brand of populism that pits one type of struggling worker against another, along ethnic and cultural lines.

[DCSaints_fan]

He'll probably never hold public office again, and can only have an indirect impact on policy, so I don't see the issue.  

 

What miffs me is when public figures/celebrities take large sums from universities, especially public ones.

[TradeTheBeal!]

I don't have an issue with it.  He's a private citizen and he can make his livelihood how he sees fit.  I also disagree with the notion that Obama is "left-wing".  He's left of the GOP, but that certainly doesn't mean he's left-wing.  

 

Now, if Sanders starts bagging six figures from a Wall Street...

[skinsmarydu]

We're both pretty pissed.  But not anywhere near Cheetoman-pissed.  That's caused some real damage around here. 

[Kilmer17]

I have no problem with anyone making money. 

 

But this is another example of why the Democrats struggle with claims of hypocrisy.   The way out system is designed and has evolved, Dems have to betray some of their "core" values to be competitive.  They have to raise obscene amounts of money.   They have to act in manners that are pro business etc. 

 

The GOP doesn't hide their coziness to money and power.  So they don't suffer the same consequences 

[Springfield]

So, what was his speech about?

[TradeTheBeal!]

4 minutes ago, Springfield said:

So, what was his speech about?

 

Liberal hypocrisy?

[DM72]

Oh, come on. You have one of the most popular presidents in recent memory who just happens to be one of the best public speakers of our time. You didn't think he was going to cash in on speaking appearances?

[No Excuses]

4 minutes ago, DM72 said:

Oh, come on. You have one of the most popular presidents in recent memory who just happens to be one of the best public speakers of our time. You didn't think he was going to cash in on speaking appearances?

 

I had hoped that he cared enough about the country to not become another politician cozying up to cheaters in the finance sector.

 

But he represents a good chunk of the country that has given up on ethics and morals. Do what's good for you, **** anything else. And in Obama's case, his credibility and whatever dead remains are left of the movement he started 10 years ago. 

[haithman]

I'd do pretty much anything for a 400 grand pay-day for an hour of work.

[twa]

The man has a family to feed.....move along.

[Burgold]

I don't know. This doesn't ping my radar. I never really complained about Clinton speaking fees, Bush speaking fees, etc. I'm not sure why this is a big deal. It's a manufactured controversy to me.

 

Obama never took an oath of poverty. He has the right to give a speech and be compensated for it. More, since he's out of office and not even a lobbyist this hardly smacks of conflict of interest. He's not beholden to interests. If he wants to speak let him speak.

[Momma There Goes That Man]

 

6 minutes ago, haithman said:

I'd do pretty much anything for a 400 grand pay-day for an hour of work.

 

My dad used to ask us when we were little if we would play this game and he would pay us $10 for every toe of his that we licked in between. There would always be negotiations etc His point was that some things aren't worth money and that we should have higher standards. He never let us do it obviously. 

 

My point was that he could have offered $1.00 a toe and found out really quick that I will do just about anything for a good payday and as a child from a poor family with no allowance, $1.00 a toe was a solid payday.

[No Excuses]

This is truly why Dems lose elections. It is kind of sad to read this thread and see so many of you seemingly okay with the disgusting revolving door between DC and Wall Street.

 

Oh well, a mans gotta cash in while selling out our democracy amirite?

[skinfan2k]

Obama is now worried about making money for himself and establishing himself as a brand.  I love that he is doing this. 

15 minutes ago, No Excuses said:

This is truly why Dems lose elections. It is kind of sad to read this thread and see so many of you seemingly okay with the disgusting revolving door between DC and Wall Street.

 

Oh well, a mans gotta cash in while selling out our democracy amirite?

 

Umm, they ran a terrible candidate against the most polarizing figure in recent history.  Joe Biden would have smoked Trump.  

Trump said the right things to attract mid-america with jobs, a old white guy and getting a black out of the whitehouse

[killerbee99]

Have no problem with him making his money, as long as they tax the **** out of it.... lol

[Zazzaro703]

1 minute ago, skinfan2k said:

Obama is now worried about making money for himself and establishing himself as a brand.  I love that he is doing this. 

That's exactly what no excuses said, he is out for himself instead of for the people. 

 

This is the drum ive been trying to beat on here for awhile, this shouldn't be a republican vs democrat thing and should be a people vs the crooks in power thing. I just focus on the democrats because people don't want to see it and you all have the republicans and their nonsense covered quite well. People are so focused on how bad the republicans are that they don't see the exact same hypocrisy on the left and if anything it's a little worse and exactly why the middle went to the right enough to elect Trump. No Excuses is 100% right, hypocrisy like this is why you lose elections and will continue to. The top on the left is also out for themselves and not for the people.

[killerbee99]

Also, don't presidents get like a million dollar a year stipends for life? 

[Springfield]

Wait, he hasn't even given the speech yet?

 

He could walk in there and mother**** the Wall Street execs for all we know.  Of course he's more diplomatic than that, but basically, we don't know what he's going to say.  What if he says stuff that the libs  agree with?

[TradeTheBeal!]

O could easily give a speech that outlines the importance of banking regulations and donate his fee to charity.  In fact, that would be totally in character for him.

[Hersh]

Ya know when people mockingly call something a first world problem? Well this is a giant first world problem. Getting paid to give a speech doesn't mean the speaker is going to kiss the *** of the people in the room. Hell, I'd love to be at an organization that brought in serious intellectuals from any political party. 

 

I'm sorry, but him giving a speech being as depressing as Trump getting elected??? If there is anything to be depressed about it's that it's for only $400,000. 

 

This doesn't detract from Obama's character at all. If you think it does, I can't imagine you think anyone has any character. 

[Sacks 'n' Stuff]

1 hour ago, No Excuses said:

I had hoped that he cared enough about the country to not become another politician cozying up to cheaters in the finance sector.

 

But he represents a good chunk of the country that has given up on ethics and morals. Do what's good for you, **** anything else. And in Obama's case, his credibility and whatever dead remains are left of the movement he started 10 years ago. 

Come on now. I'm not pumped about the idea but this is a little hyperbolic.

[BRAVEONTHEWARPATH93]

In the grand scheme of things, no big deal. 

 

I love Barry but we always knew he was king of corporate democrats 

[skinfan2k]

34 minutes ago, Zazzaro703 said:

That's exactly what no excuses said, he is out for himself instead of for the people. 

 

This is the drum ive been trying to beat on here for awhile, this shouldn't be a republican vs democrat thing and should be a people vs the crooks in power thing. I just focus on the democrats because people don't want to see it and you all have the republicans and their nonsense covered quite well. People are so focused on how bad the republicans are that they don't see the exact same hypocrisy on the left and if anything it's a little worse and exactly why the middle went to the right enough to elect Trump. No Excuses is 100% right, hypocrisy like this is why you lose elections and will continue to. The top on the left is also out for themselves and not for the people.

 

 

His duty is over to the american public.  He was a public servant for the past 20+ years.  Give him a break.  The democrats screwed up the foundation he layed down.  Why should he care?

[No Excuses]

If a gross revolving door didn't already exist between Wall Street and DC, this would be a nothing burger.

 

Except that's not the case. 

 

I would love for a political party in this country to give the middle finger to Wall Street and start campaigning on real reform. 

 

If you guys think optics don't play a huge role in this, you are sadly mistaken. The Dems lose any and all credibility on financial and labor reform when their top leaders are bumping uglies with the very people they criticize.

 

If you don't see why this a problem, you are part of the issue.

Just now, skinfan2k said:

 

His duty is over to the american public.  He was a public servant for the past 20+ years.  Give him a break.  The democrats screwed up the foundation he layed down.  Why should he care?

 

He didn't lay down any foundation. He should ask the Clinton's how it turned out for them and the Democrats as they cozied up to Wall Street and Big Business.

 

With every major Dem leader becoming a corporate ass kisser, they become more and more of a boutique party centered around social liberalism with no core economic message.