Obama's cabinet has been cashing in and selling out so far

[Technocracy Timmy]

1. David Plouffe (2008 campaign manager and former senior advisor): now works for Uber.

2. Robert Gibbs (Press Secretary): now executive vice-president at McDonalds, lobbying hard against raising the minimum wage

3. Eric Holder (Attorney General): returned to his old corporate law firm, now represents same clients he was charged with overseeing

4. Timothy Geithner (Treasury): currently enjoys a lucrative gig at the private equity firm Warburg Pincus

5. Rahm Emmanuel (CoS): presides over one of the USA's most racist police departments, working as Chicago mayor to bust teachers unions

Possibly the worst of all though: Jim Messina, Obama's 2012 campaign manager and Deputy CoS, was working to re-elect the pro austerity UK Conservatives this year.

Credit to Guardian journalist Luke Savage.


Is it really a shocker to see how a populist demagogue like Trump can come along and swoop in to fill the gaps in working class voters than the Democrats are suppose to be representing? I understand the need to run candidates that are tailored for their respective districts, but when the national Party has his kind of reputation, it makes it incredibly hard to excite the progressive base in any and all districts across the country and to convince dispossessed working class people who don't vote that the Democrats have their interests in mind when sh*t like this is going on.

[Technocracy Timmy]

I mean, I get what you mean, but c'mon, can you really blame people for taking high-paying jobs? And we can all cherry pick. Look at Nicolle Wallace and Evan McMullin becoming fake ass MSNBC Republicans who claim to be GWB Republicans but instead bash Trump over stupid sh**t like Russia 24/7 instead of presenting their actual ideas.

The GOP have been the Party of wealthy business interests since Lincoln. That's been a 160 year constant and nobody is shocked when they engage in this kind of behavior. Democratic Party officials who preach about pursuing progressive policies that benefit the working class while in office only to then immediately give up after they leave office stain the Party with a horrible image. Their actions do subvert credibility the Democrats claim to have on these kind of issues. They muddy the water so much that nobody sees them as a legitimate alternative.

Now many operatives within the Party want to start targeting moderate Republican-Romney voters since they're the ones with money. It's understandable why people give up on politics and claim both sides are the same. And if all the Democrats are gonna be is a half assed version of the opposition Party then why should anybody vote for them?

[Technocracy Timmy]

The entire point of a career in government is to cash out and become wealthy at the end of it, for many. It is really hard to blame Obama officials for acting like the officials of any modern Administration.

Why should these people act differently? The entire point of getting in on this game is knowing that at the end of the road, people will offer you oodles of cash to use your influence and connections for their benefit.

Going into government with the motive to enrich yourself when you come out of the other end not only personifies the worst of the revolving door, but is a heinous incentive that lures in some of the worst possible people into government in the first place.

[Technocracy Timmy]

This happens after every administration, but it's a problem with the true leftist after the black man leaves office.  Very strange.

The implication here being the tired allegation that Bernie Bros are all Secret Trumpsters, right?

Or that many white leftists seem to have a problem now.  Just strange that many of those who are complaining about it are people who have worked in politics and themselves cashed out after leaving.  But I'm sure it is for a good reason.

Also, I never made a connection to Bernie Bros, wonder why you have to jump to that conclusion?

But let's assume that the journalist in question was a flagrant hypocrite on the issue. Say he worked for the Clinton administration then got a gig on Wall Street shortly before he would later find his calling in life as a journalist reporting on these stories.

Would his hypocrisy take away from the general point? It can't be healthy for a democracy if there's an incentive structure in place to go into government only to use the knowledge learned to enrich oneself personally after they depart; Obama himself has rightfully criticized the revolving door. And people concerned over this kind of perverse incentive structure in place aren't exclusive to the far left.

[Technocracy Timmy]

This happens after every administration, but it's a problem with the true leftist after the black man leaves office.  Very strange.

The implication here being the tired allegation that Bernie Bros are all Secret Trumpsters, right?

Or that many white leftists seem to have a problem now.  Just strange that many of those who are complaining about it are people who have worked in politics and themselves cashed out after leaving.  But I'm sure it is for a good reason.

Also, I never made a connection to Bernie Bros, wonder why you have to jump to that conclusion?

But let's assume that the journalist in question was a flagrant hypocrite on the issue. Say he worked for the Clinton administration then got a gig on Wall Street shortly before he would later find his calling in life as a journalist reporting on these stories.

Would his hypocrisy take away from the general point? It can't be healthy for a democracy if there's an incentive structure in place to go into government only to use the knowledge learned to enrich oneself personally after they depart; Obama himself has rightfully criticized the revolving door. And people concerned over this kind of perverse incentive structure in place aren't exclusive to the far left.

Or it's as simple as these people are qualified for the jobs they landed...

Incentivizing people whose sole or primary interest is to acquire skills to benefit themselves financially after they leave government office defeats the purpose of having public servants who are suppose to be in government to do well by the American people in the first place.

President Obama wouldn't have gone out of his way to criticize the revolving door while in office if he didn't feel that it was a genuine threat. And now that we're seeing how the conflicts of interests in the Trump administration have become depressingly normalized, it's fair to say that it is a serious threat.

[Technocracy Timmy]

^ I agree with that sentiment JerryArk; the hypocrisy by certain people (those old enough) who were reluctant to critize former Bush and Clinton cabinet members now going after only Obama is wrong. My own views on this subject are probably a tad bit harsher on Democratic administrations since I have lower expectations for those who work for Republican administrations, but that shouldn't be the case since either side engaging in this behavior is detrimental to our democracy regardless of their political affiliation. If Trump had this many conflicts of interests and was a Democrat it'd still be just as much of a threat to our democracy.

[Technocracy Timmy]

There's no case that either Holder or Emanuel are "selling out" or "cashing in." Holder returned to his old law firm, as you said, and has taken on policy work like leading Democratic efforts on redistricting for 2022. Becoming Mayor of Chicago isn't the same as becoming a lobbyist for Altria or ExxonMobile, either.

Rahm Emanuel's dislike for his own city's teacher union (threatening them not to strike, forcing them to take unpaid furlough days, etc.) calls into question if he even bothers to pretend to care about his own constituents.