it's good to be an ex dem potus

[notes1]

both the clinton's and obama's came from modest economic backgrounds. many of their voters were attracted to this, and related to their background. remember clinton saying, 'i feel your pain'. and, each of them have every right to leverage their knowledge/contacts/job history to enhance their financial situation, once out of office. would never begrudge them for that. it's america, at least for a while, we a capitalist economy.

the clinton's net worth is estimated to be in the hundreds of millions. the obama's already purchased a house in the 'swamp' for $8m and have now made an offer on a $15m second home. where else, the hamptons.

reagan went back to their home in CA and the bush's both went back to texas. clinton is from ARK and obama called chicago his home. don't hear about them spending much time there.

so, the dem presidents who related so well with the lower economic class of america, now seem much more comfortable with the hollywood, wall street, nyc upper crust folks.

when they give speeches, they still excoriate the wealthy, tell they rest of us to use less energy, they act like they can still relate to the least of us. and, amazingly, dems are still buying it. but in reality, the fly on private planes (with a huge carbon footprint), hob nob with the wealthy/the elites/the famous, and they love making money....lots of it.

they are entitled to make all the dough they can, but they are still hypocrites none the less.

[rascal]

Do you have the slightest idea of which neighborhood the Reagans lived in L.A.? Or do you happen by any chance to remember man-of-the-people Gerald Ford? Who retired to a swanky indeed part of Palm Springs? And whatever ANY retired Dem (or Republican) presidents ever obtained in unearned wealth, I assure you it was a drop in the bucket compared to the unearned wealth of the current president, whose most notable financial achievement was being the son of Fred Trump.

[Eduardo]

By "Ex Dem Potus" I assumed you were talking about Trump.

But yeah it's crazy how much these folks take in from speaking engagements, books, etc. Just goes to show the celebrity status they have taken on rather than "public servants."

Can't fault them for it like you said.

I'm not certain it's hypocritical. If anything, continuing to push liberal policies while they make a lot of money (showing they would be willing to pay higher taxes on it) is putting their money where their mouth is. You can't expect them to pay more than what they owe. But they are willing to owe more for the "greater good."

My biggest problem with Dems has always been their lack of charitable giving, always wanting the government to be the middle man, which to me is a terrible idea. Some are of course much better than others and I think Obama has been pretty good about that (though I'm too lazy to look it up). Before being elected, he was not... even though he already had some nice book income.

[notes1]

obama's proposed purchase is ocean front. i thought the entire coastline was going to be under water in the next decade or so. doesn't sound like a sound investment, for a very smart gut, to buy property that will soon be under water.

[Eduardo]

See, you're wrong again! He knows the surface will soon be uninhabitable and ocean floor property near land (with its resources) is going to be even more valuable than the moon properties some are dreaming about.