Spare Us Faux Neil Cavuto Outrage over Obama Giving Paid Wall Street Speeches
Here’s the deal: Former President Barack Obama is giving a paid speech to a Wall Street investment bank. He’s allegedly making $400,000. We are not here to argue about whether that is smart. We’re here to discuss faux outrage over how many outlets “aren’t” covering it.
Above, you’ll see a video. It’s Fox Business’s Neil Cavuto exclaiming that it’s not right that so few papers ran the $400k Wall Street speech story on their front pages yesterday. The issue is, of course, that the topic has been getting a lot of traction. . . probably far more than it deserves.
Cavuto’s main point of contention beyond the false idea that no one is talking about it, is that Obama is facing no criticism for hypocrisy because he’s a Democrat. Surely, it’s hard to remember what life was like in the pre-Donald Trump world, but only a few months ago, a Democrat named Hillary Clinton was being hounded by the press and politicians on both sides of the two-party spectrum about her paid speeches for Wall Street heavy hitters. Bernie Sanders called her on it, as did our liberal columnist Jordan Chariton. Even her own advisors admitted that the optics weren’t good.
Obama, too, is facing criticism. A lack of front-page condemnation doesn’t mean that people are unaware of — or dispassionate about — his speech.
Why is Obama giving speeches to bankers for $400,000?
— Lydia Polgreen (@lpolgreen) April 25, 2017
I don’t think Obama should be paid $400,000 to give speeches to banks because I don’t think anyone should be paid $400,000 for anything.
— Avery Edison (@aedison) April 25, 2017
The key difference between Obama and Hillary is he knows you wait until after being president to get paid $400k to give speeches to bankers
— Rob Beschizza (@Beschizza) April 26, 2017
The people criticizing Obama are, for the most part, liberals. They are doing what Cavuto, Charlie Gasparino, and others want them to be doing, too. They’re calling out the alleged hypocrisy in Obama’s decision to sometimes rail against Wall Street in office, then accept their money for an hour of work. They’re questioning why he’s making more than other former presidents or even Clinton. They’re certainly not ignoring it. But lets also not forget that many of these same critics from the left accused the former President of being too cozy with Wall Street. So he simply can’t win here.
Almost every major paper and online outlet has featured this story in the last couple of days, too, but there is something interesting about how they’re doing it. The New York Post is citing Fox Business. So, too, is the New York Times. Oh, and so is the Hill. Actually, every place writing about the $400k speech is citing Fox Business.
If your outlet is the one that got the scoop, you can’t be mad at everyone else for not having it! You should be grateful rather than engaging in faux outrage.
Everyone — Republicans and Democrats — get criticized for making speeches to Wall Street and for catering to those “fat cats.” So lets start getting outraged about something else. Something important and real, like the amount of time our Presidents spend playing golf?
Have a tip we should know? [email protected]