We are a commune of inquiring, skeptical, politically centrist, capitalist, anglophile, traditionalist New England Yankee humans, humanoids, and animals with many interests beyond and above politics. Each of us has had a high-school education (or GED), but all had ADD so didn't pay attention very well, especially the dogs. Each one of us does "try my best to be just like I am," and none of us enjoys working for others, including for Maggie, from whom we receive neither a nickel nor a dime. Freedom from nags, cranks, government, do-gooders, control-freaks and idiots is all that we ask for.
Our Recent Essays Behind the Front Page
Wednesday, October 31. 2012
After the stress of jetting around the US to keep her personal gravy train rolling, where will Michelle Obama go on vacation soon after the November 6 election, when it will still be on the taxpayers' credit cards? For a clue, here's some snapshots from her photo book of her previous vacations.
Bonus question: If she and Barack have to pay themselves for their vacations, where will that be to?
Display comments as (Linear | Threaded)
That's a common misperception. The President and his family are responsible for the normal costs of travel, lodging and meals when on vacation. They are even responsible for the costs of their own meals at the White House.
Interesting link. How much of the cost of their date night in New York City very early in his term do you think the O's paid for?
The closest that document comes to addressing a trip like that one is this:
It is unclear how the White House designates travel that is not directly related to a governmental
or political function, because of traditional reluctance to address this matter. It appears that, in
most cases, such travel is treated as official, under the assumption that the President and Vice
President are always on duty. Vacation trips, for example, fall under the official travel category.
Somehow that doesn't seem to accurately describe dinner and a show.
Zachass returns with more zachassery. The president only pays the cost of a commercial airline ticket, not the full, much larger cost of one or two or three planes filled with friends, security, press, cars, communications, etc. The plush spas and hotels are courtesy of bundlers and such who, surprise, are often beneficiaries of taxpayer largess. At the White House, they have a large taxpayer stipend to pay for their personal living expenses. -- If you are in the Northeast, go back to bailing out basements rather than trying to sweep away the tide of Obama's abuses of office.
Bruce Kesler: The plush spas and hotels are courtesy of bundlers and such who, surprise, are often beneficiaries of taxpayer largess.
The president is responsible for lodging and other amenities.
Bruce Kesler: The president only pays the cost of a commercial airline ticket, not the full, much larger cost of one or two or three planes filled with friends, security, press, cars, communications, etc.
The president is responsible for friends. The president is not responsible for the costs of security, which is something required as part of the job. He pays what he would pay for the vacation if he wasn't president.
Deny, Deny, Deny all you want Zachass. Denials do not make it so.
Explain, please,for example, the Obama daughters being listed as "staff" on the manifest for one of the trips.
Are you angling for a seat on one of their vacation plans? Your hackery might qualify you.
Bruce Kesler: Explain, please,for example, the Obama daughters being listed as "staff" on the manifest for one of the trips.
Michelle Obama's daughters were listed only as senior staff for seating on the plane. The costs of her guests were not paid for by the government; however, her own costs were covered, as it was an official trip.
This is the same accounting that has been used since the Reagan Administration.
Here in Maine Dem operatives are paid to blog incessantly on conservative web sites, often hijacking the comments section on newspaper sites and other blogs. I hope Zachass has a good deal with his employer. Hate to think he is simply volunteering to type his talking points memos here...
Zachass, your Fox News citation does not say what you are saying it does. Here's a quote from it:
"The size of Mrs. Obama's traveling party is sure to invite comparisons to her vacation last August in Spain with Sasha and friends. The five-day trip to Spain's Costa del Sol stoked a bit of a firestorm about the wisdom of taking a glamorous trip with such economic hurt at home and raised speculation about who was paying the bill.
"Attempting to head off similar criticism this time, the White House said Mrs. Obama is allowed to bring guests with her on the plane because she's on official U.S. business, as the president is allowed on his official trips. All other costs regarding her family are to be paid for privately."
In other words, whatever the Obama White House says it is, it is! You may, obviously do, buy that. But, you are doing so on my dime, and other taxpayers.
You've gotta do better shilling than that to merit a ticket on Michelle's magic carpet.
Bruce Kesler: In other words, whatever the Obama White House says it is, it is! You may, obviously do, buy that. But, you are doing so on my dime, and other taxpayers.
The rules that govern trips by the president and family have been in place for a generation. In this case, it was an official trip, so Michelle Obama's cost was borne by the government. Her guests had to pay what it would have cost them to travel on their own.
No where does the Congressional Research say that Michelle's vacations should be covered by the taxpayers. What it does say is that Presidential vacations travel expenses largely are (commercial airfare paid versus the tens of millions of dollars they actually cost). And, it is the White House (fox guarding the chickens, anyone?) that determines if a trip is official or political. A follow-up report would be needed to examine whether Michelle's vacations with friends are "official." Given how Obama has stretched so many other rulings beyond reason or law, one could expect similar here.
Reading the fuller report ( http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/RS21835.pdf ), not the blog excerpt you presented:
"the White House decides the nature of travel on a case-by-case basis, 8 3 U.S.C. § 105(e) authorizes the First Lady to assist the President in discharging his duties and responsibilities.
9 See Fielding, “Guidelines for Travel by the President and Vice President,” pp. 5-9.
10 Ibid., pp. 6-7.
Presidential Travel: Policy and Costs
Congressional Research Service 3
attempting to determine whether each trip, or part of a trip, is or is not official by considering the nature of the event involved, and the role of the individual involved.
11 It is unclear how the White House designates travel that is not directly related to a governmental or political function, because of traditional reluctance to address this matter. It appears that, in most cases, such travel is treated as official, under the assumption that the President and Vice President are always on duty. Vacation trips, for example, fall under the official travel category."
Bruce Kesler: President and Vice President are always on duty.
Michelle Obama is not the president. When she takes vacations, she pays what she would pay if she were not the first lady, as well as her guests.
These are the same rules followed by, for instance, the Bush Administration.
Zachass, as usual, you miss the point and then try to obscure it. A trip to Africa by Mrs. Clinton or Mrs. Bush, when their husbands were president, is not the vacation trips elsewhere that Michelle has taken on the taxpayers expense. The cost of the US planes, security, communications, lodging for them, etc. runs into the tens of millions of dollars.
Take a trip to the point Zachass, or in your case a long walk on a short pier.
I have better and other things to do than waste any more time on you. BTW, are you wearing your Obama mask tonight, or isn't that necessary to recognize you?
Bruce Kesler: A trip to Africa by Mrs. Clinton or Mrs. Bush, when their husbands were president, is not the vacation trips elsewhere that Michelle has taken on the taxpayers expense.
Um, you brought up the Africa trip, which involved between five to seven official events most days. She even met with Nelson Mandela, though this was considered a personal visit.
As for her vacations, the First Lady pays what she would pay if she were a private citizen; that means first class airfare for herself and for her guests, costs of lodging for herself and for her guests, costs of food and amenities for herself and for her guests. She does not pay for security and other working government personnel.
Bruce Kesler: The cost of the US planes, security, communications, lodging for them, etc. runs into the tens of millions of dollars.
Usually just hundreds of thousands. It's not an insignificant sum, though. But she's not a prisoner of the White House. She can travel if she wants.
Zachass, I suggest, again, you look at the Congressional Research report http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/RS21835.pdf which counts tens of millions of dollars, indeed totals of several hundred millions.
Then, get off my plane, preferably while airborne.
The Obamas will be rolling in the $$$ for the rest of their lives - they'll be able to afford whatever they want. Just imagine all the Goldman Sachs funded speaking engagements he'll get....
I've wondered if his money spigot doesn't get shut off once he's off no more use to the people who fast tracked his career.
not unless it's replaced by a .45 barrel in the mouth and a trigger pulled shortly after to silence him.
His handlers need him quiet, and he does seem like the little kid who will go run and whine about being denied his candy...
Agreed. Presidents and Congress critters used to retire from government to rock on their front porch or work their "real" job in relative obscurity. After all, they were just like you and me, but no longer. Now, they are part of the American Royalty and suck up tax payer money even while they make huge money writing (largely stupid) books and giving (largely boring) speeches.
Is this a great country or what?
Maybe she'll go to Nekker Island, as long as it's on taxpayer money.
Then, she'll enjoy living on her $300,000,000 estate in Hawaii that Penny Pritzker is purchasing for them. Obama can get Hank Haney to coach him in golf and give well-paid, vague speeches in China. It will be a great life, as long as Michelle doesn't have to associate with the likes of Carla Bruni or the Duchess of Cambridge- who know what a poseur she and her husband are!
To both questions: As far away from each other as is humanly possible.
I fear Dee-troit already has enough rats. I think they should go live with their buddy Hugo Chavez in Caracas.
Bruce Kesler: I suggest, again, you look at the Congressional Research report http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/RS21835.pdf which counts tens of millions of dollars, indeed totals of several hundred millions.
Yes, we provided the link in our first comment. It does add up. Michelle Obama's Spanish vacation cost the U.S. about $470,000, most of which went towards transportation and lodging of the Secret Service and flight crew.
In other words,, the vast majority of the government's cost is due to security concerns. For vacations, the First Lady pays what it would cost her as a private citizen.
Zachass, no you provided a link to an excerpt from the report at a blog. -- No, having a private air force fleet in order to take a vacation, at the cost of tens of millions of dollars, is not trivial, and repeatedly doing so for vacations with friends as opposed to really official trips is outrageous.
Your bird(sh*t) won't fly any more than your dog will hunt.
Bruce Kesler: no you provided a link to an excerpt from the report at a blog.
Look at the very first comment on the thread.
Bruce Kesler: No, having a private air force fleet in order to take a vacation, at the cost of tens of millions of dollars, is not trivial, and repeatedly doing so for vacations with friends as opposed to really official trips is outrageous.
The cost is due to security. The First Lady and guests pay what they would pay if they were private citizens, including travel, lodging and amenities.
Do you think the First Lady should be able to take vacations? Do you think she should be financially responsible for security?
Zachass, I think that -- particularly in a time of deep recession when so many millions of Americans are suffering and so many millions more scrimping -- Michelle's lavish vacations, well in excess of any prior First lady, even Jackie, are in exceedingly poor taste and exhibit the regal disdain and exploitation for which she will long be known. -- Add to that her thousand dollar blouses and shoes and designer-loaned or purchased outfits. -- Add to that the multifold increase in catering costs that have been added by the Obamas to White House catering costs, and that with a crony profiting no less. ( http://washingtonexaminer.com/cronyism-seen-in-relationship-behind-white-house-dinners/article/2512295#.UJJbboWhA-O )
Zachass, maybe the Obamas are your ideal of governance, but you may have also appreciated French royalty before the revolution.
Anyone who claims their trips are 'borne by the government' is being disingenuous. Where do you think the government gets the money to spend on those trips??? It's always on the taxpayer's dime (don't even try to imply that private individuals help out because the love the President, they're getting it back, and more, with cronyism and influence - again at the taxpayer's expense). Wake up and smell the coffee, people!!
Not sure that I could make a good bet where they will go; But, I HOPE that they permanently move to that pre-paid house in Hawaii.
Not concerned a wit where the 1st Freeloaders go after this debacle of a presidency. What worries me is the 69+ million Zachasses who voted for this Affirmative Action Asshat... where in the world can we send them?