Obama takes wife out to NYC for an night

[Azure]

Originally Posted by Devils'Advocate

Actually, the POTUS can go on vacation for 1/3 of his time in office. Are you saying that Bush shouldn't have gone to all those baseball games?

BTW - where is the CP thread that has a title "Bush = Hitler". I found a "Bush = Churchill" thread, but no "Bush = Hitler". Not a one. Hrm. Odd that. Maybe that was above the people here. But making a mountain out of an anthill ain't above HOZ. Nosiree.

The threads from prior to 2005 are not in the database. Or I could find a lot of comparisons.

[Azure]

Originally Posted by Reggie Dunlop

Obama is Hitler for eating hamburgers with fancy mustard.

Originally Posted by Sowa

Can't argue with this.

Yeah, but Obama making a pit stop for a good ol' hamburger is all sorts of awesome.

[HOOT]

Originally Posted by Dion

You're right. Not everyone has to show god leadership when it comes to hard economic times. Forget the ones that are struggling and hop that plane to NYC. Good job!

I somehow doubt giving money to a good cause is going to create grief for him.

So those same Secret Service Agents wouldn't be going with him to the DC show?

I get it your family was effected by the economy but it doesn't matter that small amount of cash would have been spent one way or the other by that branch of the government. It is built into a budget to protect the President.

The gives up a lot of his freedom to become the President and deserves to have time with his wife just as everyone else. Like I said I bet this happens tax paying dollars or not, win or lose.

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by HOOT

Well luckily the President of the USA didn't get laid off so he still have the benefits of his job and the money to do so. Not everyone in the USA has put their life on hold because of what he happening.

He could have given the money to a charity but then I'm sure we would still be hearing what he should or could have done better with the money.



"Broadway show" being the key words.

Not when the money used for the trip not including the theatre tickets are paid for by the Taxpayers.

I don't care politically if this was Bush or Clinton or Obama or the ghost of JFK.

The bottom line is that we decry corporate executives using company money to travel by private jet to congressional hearings and called them greedy, yet as stupid as they were they used that portion of their company money and their company jets for business. When we read about CEO's abusing that power and money for private vacations we get angry.

We cry about all other forms of graft and call it corruption, we bitch about our politicians using the Canadian fleet of jets to take their families on vacation.

So why is Obama getting a free pass, if anything after getting elected and talking about stomping out corruption, he seems to be falling into the same habits. He as president should be holding himself to a higher standard.

This trip could have waited, the timing of it to me stinks, the fact that he gets a pass on this while we bitch about Corporate CEO's using their companies funds to do the same thing, or we bitch about the travel expenses of our own MP's make me wonder.

Are we supposed to judge Obama by a higher standing? Or a lower one because of his charisma?

[Azure]

Originally Posted by Devils'Advocate

So this memo here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_...August_6,_2001

Only exists in the mind of conspiracy theorists?

Honestly, you don't want to go down this road.

Back when Clinton was still President, the US interrogated one of the guys involved in the 1st attack on the WTC, and he said there was another attack coming.

So, do we blame Clinton or Bush?

IMO, we should blame the successive governments since Carter that have gutted the CIA to the point where they can't even collect intelligence by sending people into the field.

[Azure]

Originally Posted by HOOT

My problem is there is always going to be something the money could have been spent on that is better for the Nation than a night out in NYC. However, then what? Is the President and any other official going to have stay locked up in their houses because of it?

You can't expect that from any human being and I can almost guarantee you that Obama and Michelle would be making the same trip regardless of him winning or not.

Of course it sucks it cost him (or the taxpayers) a $1M just to go to a Broadway show but that is just the world we live in. He has to protect himself and his family and luckily his job allows him to do that.

Thing is, while it cost the taxpayers money....all Obama did is take $1M from the taxpayers and sink it into the economy.

Now, we can argue he should have gone to Detroit instead, but it doesn't really matter.

[Dion]

Originally Posted by HOOT

I get it your family was effected by the economy but it doesn't matter that small amount of cash would have been spent one way or the other by that branch of the government. It is built into a budget to protect the President.

And budgets are often changed to reflect the changes in the economy.

The gives up a lot of his freedom to become the President and deserves to have time with his wife just as everyone else. Like I said I bet this happens tax paying dollars or not, win or lose.

No one is arguing he can't have time with his wife. He has 3 1/2 years to take that trip to NYC. He's hurting his image by going now.

[jolinar of malkshor]

Originally Posted by jeremywilhelm

In all honesty, who really cares, 2 million dollars isnt even .1% of the money needed to turn the US of hindenburg disaster around. Whining about it proves nothing and only makes americans look more silly than we already thought they were.

This is the kind of attitude that makes all our taxes go up.

[Devils'Advocate]

Originally Posted by Azure

Honestly, you don't want to go down this road.

Back when Clinton was still President, the US interrogated one of the guys involved in the 1st attack on the WTC, and he said there was another attack coming.

So, do we blame Clinton or Bush?

IMO, we should blame the successive governments since Carter that have gutted the CIA to the point where they can't even collect intelligence by sending people into the field.

And all of those things are meaningless to this discussion.

I don't know how many times I have to repeat myself.

I'm looking for examples of threads against Bush that were as inane as this one. The best someone could come up with is "Bush went on a golf vacation prior to 9/11". I think that given the memo he was given just prior to his golf vacation that was worse judgement than "going to a play during a recession". It doesn't matter what happened in the decades prior. I think concern regarding a president going on vacation just after getting a memo about a determined terrorist attack is more newsworthy than a president going on a trip to New York during a recession.

[jolinar of malkshor]

Originally Posted by Azure

I'm not talking about the salary costs.

I'm talking about the cost to fly up there, the hotel rooms, the food, the traveling, the flight back....and then Obama flying up there with his own detail.

Salary is a fixed cost, like you said.....but that is not the only thing costing money on these missions.

Is it? I am sure these agents aren't giving their night to the president free of charge. Any activity out of the norm is going to cost over time.

[HOOT]

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

Not when the money used for the trip not including the theatre tickets are paid for by the Taxpayers.

It's unfortunate that the tax payers have to pay the protect of their President but someone has to. The money being spent to do so is very small compared to the problems going on down in the USA.

He took his wife on a trip out of town, it is not his fault he needs the protection. His job benefits include 24hr protection no matter where he goes, just like your job may include some type of benefit.

If it cost the tax payers $500,000 that is less than a half a cent per tax payer.

[Azure]

Like I already said, all the threads prior to 2005 are not in the database.

In case you didn't notice, but 2001-2004 were the pinnacle years for 'Bush discussion' here on CP.

I was here during that time, and I remember a LOT of political threads.

The off-topic section was insane leading up to the invasion of Iraq.

[Azure]

Originally Posted by jolinar of malkshor

This is the kind of attitude that makes all our taxes go up.

Yeah, thats the thing.

Then again, I think Obama doing this is on par with the way he's handling taxpayer money in general.

Or the way the government is handling it.

[Azure]

Originally Posted by jolinar of malkshor

Is it? I am sure these agents aren't giving their night to the president free of charge. Any activity out of the norm is going to cost over time.

I assume they have shifts.

Doubt anyone will work that much OT, considering what they're doing.

[CaptainCrunch]

In all honesty, who really cares, 2 million dollars isnt even .1% of the money needed to turn the US of hindenburg disaster around. Whining about it proves nothing and only makes americans look more silly than we already thought they were.

Can I use that in court after I walk by the companies petty cash draw and take a couple of hundred bucks so I can play a round of golf that night?

Sorry your honour, but really its only a minimal percentage of the companies income.

[HOOT]

Originally Posted by Dion

No one is arguing he can't have time with his wife. He has 3 1/2 years to take that trip to NYC. He's hurting his image by going now.

No one is going to remember this in 3.5 years. I don't think this is going to push anyone to vote Republican that wasn't going to before.

[HOOT]

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

Can I use that in court after I walk by the companies petty cash draw and take a couple of hundred bucks so I can play a round of golf that night?

Sorry your honour, but really its only a minimal percentage of the companies income.

He is far from stealing money from anyone. There is money set out for his protection and just like ANY President has done and will do he will use it by living his life within his job.

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by HOOT

It's unfortunate that the tax payers have to pay the protect of their President but someone has to. The money being spent to do so is very small compared to the problems going on down in the USA.

He took his wife on a trip out of town, it is not his fault he needs the protection. His job benefits include 24hr protection no matter where he goes, just like your job may include some type of benefit.

If it cost the tax payers $500,000 that is less than a half a cent per tax payer.

Again though.

If the president wants to take a trip to Camp David for a break, they already have the security and the marines there.

If they want to go to any of the other presidential retreats its the same thing.

Spending $500,000 for a night of theatre or more, to me right now is silly, especially since its taxpayers money.

It almost seems like the type of move that a monarch would make.

I honestly think his promise to his wife could wait. There are lots of options for presidential rest and relaxation that they can take advantage of.

Plus he knew that he was going to be hit with public scrutiny and the pitfalls of his role the minute that he took office, and a promise to his wife and his family is something that might have to be sacrificed.

But I get pissed off when I read about MP's spending 10000 of my money on airplane flights to Europe for themselves and their families.

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by HOOT

He is far from stealing money from anyone. There is money set out for his protection and just like ANY President has done and will do he will use it by living his life within his job.

Disagree, he spent extra money on his protection, this trip was not needed. Next time I read about a corporate CEO using his companies and shareholders money on lavish trips for himself and his wife, I'm sure to give him a pass.

I mean the guy works hard, puts in lots of extra hours and probably promised his wife a trip to rome.

[Dion]

Originally Posted by HOOT

No one is going to remember this in 3.5 years. I don't think this is going to push anyone to vote Republican that wasn't going to before.

That's the problem with politics. The elected people realise this and figure they can do whatever they please.

Than again, the RNC is probably storing this tidbit for the next election.