-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
Pres Obama now doing $400k speeches for Wall Street
- Thread starter Joel Was Right
- Start date
- Status
Miles Quaritch
Member
It's only ammo for people who will look for any little thing to criticise him. Those books will also be 'ammo' too, do you think they shouldn't write them?
Many people have already said even if he keeps every dime for himself he's still justified to do it and everyone who has a problem with it should shut up, are why Trump won, etc.
Isaac Otherworld
Member
Again. That used to be how life worked.
bankroll politician's campaign -> politician makes sure you don't get regulated, prosecuted and always votes/shapes legislation in your best interests -> after politician leaves office, reward politician with paid speeches.
¯\_(ツ
_/¯ not that complicated.EatinOlives
Member
Books?!?! Say it ain't so!
Neither Bernie
nor Warren
have written books!!
bankroll politician's campaign -> politician makes sure you don't get regulated, prosecuted and always votes/shapes legislation in your best interest -> after politician leaves office, reward politician with paid speeches.
¯\_(ツ
Ah yes, the myth that Obama let Wall Street run completely unregulated, how could I have possibly forgotten that thing that totally didn't happen? Silly me ¯\_(ツ
_/¯CrimzonSamurai
Member
Well, I mean they should shut up.
They're only why Trump won if they either bought his fake as hell populism or wrote in a certain other populist. Or voted for Jill Stein, I guess.
Conor_Fool
Banned
Well...it's still pretty hypocritical. Doesn't cancel out shit, it's just a bit disappointing. Hopefully he donates the majority of the funds to a good charity.
CrimzonSamurai
Member
bankroll politician's campaign -> politician makes sure you don't get regulated, prosecuted and always votes/shapes legislation in your best interests -> after politician leaves office, reward politician with paid speeches.
¯\_(ツ
Also not what has happened.
It's a health care conference sponsored by a Wall Street bank. If Obama was in the pocket of Big Pharma the ACA was not the deal they paid for.
excelsiorlef
Member
Yeah but they have a better PR department and don't have a certain popular politician making them more hated than racists and bigots.
nelsonroyale
Member
This isn't surprising. On the one hand if he is going to be doing speeches to these guys he should charge them a bunch, since they are the people with the money. On the other hand, I don't agree at all that somebody should be paid that kind of money for what is likely to be a generic speech...If they were actually getting what they paid for in these things, it would cross the line into cash for contacts/influence...Which I don't think this necessarily is in a specific sense.
Still, Obama wasn't really strong against the malpractices of Wall Street, so yeah this isn't surprising.
Also those saying he has go to pay the bills...He already has enough money to start him on his way, and he has got very good communication skills, which he can put into use to get an actual job. He has also got amazing networks. He doesn't actually need to do this for the money, unless his ambition is to be rich like Blair or Clinton.
Still, Obama wasn't really strong against the malpractices of Wall Street, so yeah this isn't surprising.
Also those saying he has go to pay the bills...He already has enough money to start him on his way, and he has got very good communication skills, which he can put into use to get an actual job. He has also got amazing networks. He doesn't actually need to do this for the money, unless his ambition is to be rich like Blair or Clinton.
Randolph Freelander
Member
I want to be there the day they tell y'all you've made enough, you have to do everything else for free (or not do it at all).
Massive Duck. C.M.
Banned
Seriously, I wish he'd turn his back on this shit-eating country and its "liberals" but he won't
Heavy's Sandvich
Member
surely fug obama too then?
EatinOlives
Member
I wasn't aware Obama was not allowed to make beyond a specific amount. Is this $400,00 OK or has he gone over your arbitrary income line? If not, why is it a problem now exactly? If so, what is said income limit and how did you even arrive at those figures?
Sony
Banned
Pre election vs. Post election. Doesn't take a genius to understand the implication of that.
No, apparently hatred of Wall Street is why Trump won.
ShironRedshift
Member
So purity tests are good after all? Excellent. Then I hope the Democratic party gets right back to telling anyone who thinks women shouldn't have the right to choose to have an abortion if that's their decision to fuck the hell off, considering how big of an impact being denied that right can have on the physical, emotional, and economic well-being of women across the country, even if that might mean losing some elections here and there since it's the right thing to do regardless. Same of course goes for laws and institutions that cause or result in homophobia, sexism, institutional racism etc. Glad to have you on board.
Or does this stance only extends to the things you're personally most passionate about and otherwise willing to compromise for the sake of winning, when it's something others may be passionate about but not you?
Just want to make sure we're clear on this, because personally I have no problem with so-called purity tests because some things definitely shouldn't be compromised, because it's extremely wrong to do so! That's a good thing in my view because we definitely shouldn't get in the business of selling out people's rights even when it might be convenient to do so or stop talking about this or that, especially since historically that doesn't work out that we'll! But if we go down that road, you have to be comfortable with the fact that you're opening Pandora's box at that point and don't get to close it again if that proves inconvenient. You've got to go in full-hog and accept the concerns of others as well and don't dismiss them with the same language you're criticizing here.
It's both or neither. Personally, I don't care much which you choose. But whichever one you do, be consistent with it because that's the type of thing that really sets me off. One set of rules one time, then changing them when it's not so fun anymore. Nope, one or the other.
That and on top of this, plenty of people have made legitimate critiques that don't even bring up the subject at all! And even among those that did, such as myself, we have in fact made a case for why this is silly nonsense outside of that as well. If you just choose to ignore that and pretend like that doesn't exist and choose to focus on some gotcha point instead of addressing all that like you said you were earlier in the thread... Well, that just says WAY more about you then it does me and just shows me I'm wasting my time if you aren't going to argue in good faith at all.
Seriously, "without anyone have made a convincing case"? Just get out of here with that noise. Talk about people disregarding stuff in bad faith, then go right ahead and do it yourself in the next breath. Cute.
mercenar1e
Member
Obama is at the end stage of money in politics. It's now time for him to reap the rewards for everything he did on behalf of corporate interest.
When does he open his foundation and start collecting checks from foreign governments?
When does he open his foundation and start collecting checks from foreign governments?
FinalStageBoss
Banned
That's nice tbh, get that money Obama. He earned it.
VendettaRed07
Member
Yeah I would like to know, and who with actually.
I mean it's almost as if it's possible to not like certain behaviors of politicians you like, and find something they are doing to be problematic hoping they correct it
We also used to have coal jobs. GUESS WHAT??!!
To expect a 55 year old to never engage in income-generating work ever again if he wants is ridiculous.
Why did JK Rowling have to write more than one Harry Potter book? She was already rich off the first.
Why does JJ Abrams continue to make movies when he's rich off of his current filmography?
Will you be absolutely outraged if Adele dares to release another album given her fortune?
Team Alucard
Banned
It's almost like the problem isn't the money but rather who is paying him.
I wouldn't have an issue with Obama getting 400k to speak in front of the Afscme, the HRC, or a university, but for a major financial services firm, yeah he deserves criticism.
I wouldn't have an issue with Obama getting 400k to speak in front of the Afscme, the HRC, or a university, but for a major financial services firm, yeah he deserves criticism.
Said who?
shinra-bansho
Member
That's because your pupils are made of dollar signs. Hiyo.
True Savior
Member
Disgusting. Always easier to defend causes than live by them.
FeenixRising
Banned
Y'all are mad at former President Obama for what again?
Getting paid?
This is the second thread some of y'all are complaining about what he's doing outside of office. I have a radical idea...
Let's take our frustrations out on the guy who is IN office?
No?
Whatever.
Getting paid?
This is the second thread some of y'all are complaining about what he's doing outside of office. I have a radical idea...
Let's take our frustrations out on the guy who is IN office?
No?
Whatever.
sankt-Antonio
Banned
No wonder our socitiey is out of wack if some of you think 400K for a talk is "reasonable".
Be it Obama or not.
Most sensible thing for him to do is to give that money to charity, imo one can't preach about social equality and then proceed to take that kind of money for a days work without loosing his credibility.
Be it Obama or not.
Most sensible thing for him to do is to give that money to charity, imo one can't preach about social equality and then proceed to take that kind of money for a days work without loosing his credibility.
CrimzonSamurai
Member
Yeah man, I mean, all those regulations Trump threw out when he got elected were surely in the best interest of big business.
fastford58
Member
Par for the course? Pretty sure Bill Clinton still makes huge bank doing speeches and such.
excelsiorlef
Member
Well only in this case if you think politicians actually compromising on social issues is the same ting as a retired politician getting money for speaking....
EatinOlives
Member
Politicians charge speaking fees when they're not out fundraising. I truly and honestly hope this is not news to you.
Randolph Freelander
Member
You don't fix income inequality by refusing money for your services. You fix it by proposing, championing, and implementing policies that change income distribution. President Obama -- or anyone -- getting paid what the current market supports is absolutely reasonable. It would be unreasonable to expect him to take anything less.
does a dictionary include 'hypocrisy'?
"fuck what you stand for! MAKE MONEY!!"
ShironRedshift
Member
Then explain. Who is he receiving money from and how is receiving money from that source inherently bad. Especially since it's just a matter of who apparently and not whether it actually even has any strings attached or not it what's done with it or whatever. Who is the source and how is receiving money from that source inherently compromising regardless of any other factors involved?
Edit: You edited. Why is getting money from a financial firm inherently a bad thing? How is that inherently compromising, especially when he already has money and isn't even running for office? How would he compromised exactly? Why it would at all have sway over him when he's done and all they care about is him speaking so they can brag to their investors about how they got a President to speak for them and what big-shots that makes them?
oneils
Member
He edited that pretty quick. Wonder what it means.
Also, I'm confused about the abortion posts. What's going on with the democrats these days? I have to assume that there are some core beliefs that won't be compromised.
CrimzonSamurai
Member
Mine does! it says:
Hmm, did Obama ever say taking money from Wall Street was wrong? No.
Did he say the undue influence of moneyed interest in politics was wrong? Yes.
Is this an example of taking money from said interests in order to affect political outcomes? No.
Hey! Look at that.
IrishNinja
Member
get that paper, obama - you earned it
shame some of ya'll here really want him to be your negro though
this is where purity tests get you, knocking a man's hustle after he's put in his time
he doesn't owe the party or anyone shit, and he's not a gun
i keep hearing this, but petty executive orders & failed attempts to dissolve obamacare aside - i'd put money on him having a stronger legacy in the white house than trump
shame some of ya'll here really want him to be your negro though
this is where purity tests get you, knocking a man's hustle after he's put in his time
he doesn't owe the party or anyone shit, and he's not a gun
i keep hearing this, but petty executive orders & failed attempts to dissolve obamacare aside - i'd put money on him having a stronger legacy in the white house than trump
VendettaRed07
Member
No it is not news. But I'd like to know how normalizing this sort of behavior in our current system has worked out for us so far. Nope nothing wrong has every resulted from the current dynamic of large financial corporations wining and dining influenctial politicians in various ways
Gee I wonder why there are climate deniers in congress. Is it because they are legitimately skeptical of the science or is it because they are paid or incentivized in various ways not to.
Hey, the way he got treated? I can't blame him for going "that's some good dough! Screw those racist bitches!".
I'd retract fully from politics as well, no TV, no Twitter and just read the news at my own pace, in my Mansion and during interviews just say "Donald Voter says:what?".
For crying out loud the man lampooned them with a video of the Lion King, only to agitate them more about this stupid piece of paper!
From now on and in this order:Family, Fun, Fortune.
How do you plan to fix this without winning elections?
- Status