Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Too Hot for Swamp Gas' started by diehardgator1, Jun 19, 2013.
Ignoring one, while complaining about the other does make a hypocrite though.
If the liberal MSM did their job and exposed this act of greed, perhaps the 47% who haven't got a clue will realize the Obamas are simply elitists pilfering US taxpayers.
But most of them are dumber than dirt.
Justifying either by the actions of somebody else is what then
Do you think three different two bedroom suites totalling close to $10k per night for a woman and two kids is a reasonable burden for the taxpayers to bear?
the only way this can ever be sorted out is for there to be a way to see what previous admins spent on travel and vacations-since I doubt that ever happens- we will just ........
The point as I see it is the OA purposely targeted areas for the sequester that would hurt (see WH tours, air traffic controllers, etc.) rather than plenty of areas of govt fat to make a point.
Ice queen makes a good point. Take the wife and kids occasionally but good Lord before this administration is over I bet we spend 50± million on the wife and kids.
mb- I think your numbers are a tad low- a BIG tad
you guys never quite answer this. What makes the Obamas "simply elitists pilfering US taxpayers" but no previous presidents who took the same trips?
I tell you what river- produce what other prez's spent on family vacations and I will be with you
I don't have a problem with people thinking the cost of Presidential travel is too expensive. I have a problem with people thinking it's a problem only when it isn't "their guy" doing the traveling.
You have to start from a place of thinking that there is something different about this prez that makes him less deserving than predecessors.
12 hours later bill, and river still hasn't provided anything. Big surprise huh.
But the non-surprise is that fred tossed out a badly-hidden race card. Now THAT was predictable.
Michelle and the girls in Europe, an excellent advertisement for America. More pics at:
evidently a lot of you are way to locked into partisanship and forget some basic things.
1. Heads of state(U.S. as well as those of foreign countries) are representing their country. to have a head of state stay at a dump is to make that head of state(and the head of state's country) a laughing stock to not just other heads of state but people of other countries. In other words, heads of state are expected to stay at quality hotels, etc. and to do otherwise is a major diplomatic gaff. I would guarantee that if Obama. Michelle, the kids, their entourage were to stay at some foreign country's version of a Motel 6 you'd be bashing him, his family, etc for not representing the U.S. well and that he and the family and entourage would better represent the U.S. by staying at a top hotel(that other heads of state or previous POTUS's stayed in)/
2. security of the POTUS and family accompanies the POTUS and family to foreign countries. A lot of the 'entourage' aren't likely to be secret service protection detail. But some would be. In any case the security of a head of state is better achieved and maintained at top hotels that have history of hosting heads of state
3. I challenge any of the posters bashing Obama,Michelle, etc in this thread to name a single POTUS of the U.S. who attended a major conference in a foreign country who stayed at a dump of a hotel in the foreign. Or who stayed in anything less than a suite at such hotels.
you all are really pathetic in your partisan sniping
They can't help themselves - it's like Spot chasing cars.
They don't need to stay in a dump. Nobody is calling for that. But five million dollars for a week in Ireland? Seriously.
$3300 a night for Michelle's suite which had two guest bedrooms, and the girls both get their own rooms in addition to that?
The problem is that they are over the top with these expenses and don't seem to care a bit.
I did not see one person ask that they stay in a dump.
I did not see one person say that they should not have security
I did not see one person say that they wouldn't represent America
What we are saying is that it is lavish and unecessary expenses that make us mad. Please name another fist family that traveled so luxuriously overseas on vacation while the nation was wallowing in a recession and suffering from a seaquester that was passed (and the idea of) their president?
You know I could get by in my business wearing flip flops and with a 1990's era pick-up, dents, scrathes, etc., but it is in my interests to show my customers that I am solid enough to afford a nice looking vehicle and to show them that I respect both myself and them enough to make the effort of polishing up. Anyone in business should get this.
Absolutely correct. But the Rolex and the lifted, tricked out truck tell me my 'builder' might be taking me for a fool.
there is a line as to what is acceptable and what is deemed lavish. unfortunately it seems to fall along partisan lines these days.
BTW your hero worship is a little weird IMO.