The reason people pay exorbitant sums to the likes of Panetta to "speak" and "consult" is to gain access to his network.

I thought that was why people paid 4 bucks for coffee at Starbucks....

But hey, what do "I" "know"?

Can you explain how giving speeches and consulting equates to lobbying?

The reason people pay exorbitant sums to the likes of Panetta to "speak" and "consult" is to gain access to his network.

And yet CEO's are worth precisely what people are willing to pay them.

Oh, I'm sure Panetta provided $28,000 in perceived value. Just not for the speeches.

Perhaps Tee Ball?

That said, I’ve heard Leon Panetta speak and, frankly, it wasn’t worth $28,000 — his apparent going rate.

And yet CEO's are worth precisely what people are willing to pay them.

Can you explain how giving speeches and consulting equates to lobbying?

All this hand wringing seems a bit over the top given the lack of substance in the story itself.

The change is that Obama actually seems to think that this is a bad thing which should be changed. The fact that he is unable to do so with a wave of his hand may give the slow kids something to whine about, but is does not have much significance beyond that.

Umm, he has absolute control of 5000-plus political appointees. Surely, there's a Democrat who is simultaneously capable of running CIA and hasn't taken tons of money from interest groups. If Obama really cared, he'd find one. But, in reality, he just wants to talk about the issue while doing business as usual.

The change is that Obama actually seems to think that this is a bad thing which should be changed. The fact that he is unable to do so with a wave of his hand may give the slow kids something to whine about, but is does not have much significance beyond that.

Or shut up about it.

This is typical of liberal hypocracy. Under the sensible Bush administration policies, conflict of interest was a prerequisite for governmental appointment--not a disqualification.

This position shows that Hussein is woefully out of touch with the American people.

I bet Panetta eats arugula at every meal with all that cash he's raking in!

The full article, however, notes a couple cases where the companies in question were doing some lobbying work. Are you sure Panetta's possible influence on the government wasn't used?

For me, that's the only question. Speaking for a fee is not, by itself, anything resembling unethical.

Oh, never mind.

Hopey Changitude.