• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

W.H. makes CEOs pay for lunch

They can afford to pay, what is the issue
Do you charge your well-heeled guests when you invite them over for lunch or tea or whatever?
 
This is why it's hard to take the wing-nutters seriously.

On one hand he's too extravagant.

On the other he's too cheap.

Maybe he should consult with the freeper nation before he makes any other lunch plans.

Naahhhaa, it's in their damn DNA, they'd just find something else to whine about...LOL...:lol:

With all this tallk about the hubris of Auto CEO's flying to washington in private jets. Isn't it rather a display of poor judgment for Obama to use your tax dollars to throw a cocktail party that includes $400lb kobe beef?


What sort of message does this send where on one hand we scolded about our fiscal responsibility and the bailout we must swallow, all while he is throwing extravagant parties...

http://www.debatepolitics.com/us-pa...my-since-great-depression.html#post1057903432
 
Do you charge your well-heeled guests when you invite them over for lunch or tea or whatever?

Lol

I have no issue with taxpayer picking up the tab as manners demand.

My dislike of CEO's overrules my love of etiquette in this instance tho
 
Last edited:
Does anyone ACTUALLY think that if someone's invited to the White House for a meal, and the government pays for that meal, that represents a "conflict of interest"?

Seriously?

That's one of the more asinine things I've heard come out of a superlatively asinine White House.
 
Lol

I have no issue with taxpayer picking up the tab as manners demand.

My dislike of CEO's overrules my love of etiquette in this instance tho

At least your honest about it. :thumbs:

See WillRockwell, its the left that hates CEOs. :thumbs:
 
At least your honest about it. :thumbs:

See WillRockwell, its the left that hates CEOs. :thumbs:

Meh, i have no need to lie.
I hate the CEO's of our banks (don't really care about American CEO's) and if hanging was re introduced they would be amongst the first who should be in line. Greedy bastards especially fred the shred

Besides, my opinion hardly matters as this is american taxmoney.
The rules and manners state in UK if the PM invites someone to lunch, taxpayers pick up the bill as we were the ones that extended a invitation - Same for Mayor, Minister or MP's.
 
Uh, no, what we hate is corporate leaders making huge bonuses when their companies are taking losses and getting government stimulus money.

Legal contracts suck dont they?


What we hate is corporations not paying their taxes, or worse, getting government assistance because they slipped a couple hundred thousand dollars into some slimeball Congressman's war chest.

Which companies are not paying their taxes? Oh I know:2wave:, I bet its the companies that get charged with tax evation right?

Only socialists are OK with failing companies getting government bailout money.
 
This is why it's hard to take the wing-nutters seriously.

On one hand he's too extravagant.

On the other he's too cheap.

Maybe he should consult with the freeper nation before he makes any other lunch plans.

Naahhhaa, it's in their damn DNA, they'd just find something else to whine about...LOL...:lol:
Actually, if you bothered to read the criticisms, it's not about being either too extravagant or too cheap....it's about being crass, boorish, and basically rude.

Glitzy cocktail parties while telling people to cut back and make "hard choices" is bad political theater. Inviting CEOs to a White House lunch and getting their Visa cards is bad political theater. Both are mis-steps that betray an amazingly tone-deaf political sensibility.
 
And when they give hopelessly lame excuses for it, it only makes it worse. These people are amateurs.
 
Does anyone ACTUALLY think that if someone's invited to the White House for a meal, and the government pays for that meal, that represents a "conflict of interest"?

Seriously?

That's one of the more asinine things I've heard come out of a superlatively asinine White House.

So you think they did it just because they felt like it? When no one would have likely bat an eye had the White House picked up the tab? They WANTED this to come out so that people could blast them? Okay.
 
So you think they did it just because they felt like it? When no one would have likely bat an eye had the White House picked up the tab? They WANTED this to come out so that people could blast them? Okay.

Two things I know:

1) It was a breach of etiquette.

2) The excuse given for it is transparently lame.

Beyond that, I'll leave whatever actual whys and wherefores to you and the cleanup crew, because it hardly matters.
 
So should we be checking the bank accounts of people we invite over for meals? I'm having a BBQ this weekend, and one of my guests makes a lot of money. I'm gonna ask the capitalist pig to pay for his own darned burger. I might charge him a portion of the water bill if he flushes the toilet. Rich jerk.

:rofl

Hey, you might be onto something here. :2razz:
 
There's a big difference between inviting guests over to my house for a mean and inviting guests over to someone else's house for a meal.

If it's someone else's house, I don't let the homeowner pick up the tab.

The White House is our house. If this is unofficial business, then the guests or Obama himself should pick up the tab for the meal.

With the beer for Crowley and Gates, Obama should have covered the tab himself.

Personally, I don't see why the President doesn't have pay for ALL of his own food and meals.

I would prefer to see this policy enacted for any non-diplomatic state dinners. Only diplomatic situations constitute state business that may warrant the schmoozing of a free meal.

I'd prefer to see this policy enacted for discussions with anyone, and enacted for the president himself for all of his and his family's meals.

**** them, nobody's buying me every meal.
 
Personally, I don't see why the President doesn't have pay for ALL of his own food and meals.
For the most part, the President has to do exactly that.
 
I don't see why the President doesn't have pay for ALL of his own food and meals.

I couldn't imagine making a PM pay for his own meal, he is head of Government.

Only him and Queen should get it free of charge imo.
All the other ministers can bugger off and pick up their own tab.
 
Actually, if you bothered to read the criticisms, it's not about being either too extravagant or too cheap....it's about being crass, boorish, and basically rude.

Glitzy cocktail parties while telling people to cut back and make "hard choices" is bad political theater. Inviting CEOs to a White House lunch and getting their Visa cards is bad political theater. Both are mis-steps that betray an amazingly tone-deaf political sensibility.
Thanks for proving what I just said.

Makes no difference how you get there, as long as you end up with 'bad political theater'.

Wrap it with the verbiage as you will, but it still regurgitates as whine.
 
I couldn't imagine making a PM pay for his own meal, he is head of Government.

Only him and Queen should get it free of charge imo.
All the other ministers can bugger off and pick up their own tab.

I did say that if the purpose is diplomatic relations, then the schmoozing of a free meal would be warranted.

If it's a PM just showing up to say high, **** him. One of the two should pay for it.
 
I did say that if the purpose is diplomatic relations, then the schmoozing of a free meal would be warranted.

If it's a PM just showing up to say high, **** him. One of the two should pay for it.

LOL
Fair enough, i happen to agree.

But doesn't matter either way, it'll be public money either way seeing we pay him his wages
 
With the beer for Crowley and Gates, Obama should have covered the tab himself.

Personally, I don't see why the President doesn't have pay for ALL of his own food and meals.

You do know that Presidents are responsible for paying for their own food while in office, don't ya?
 
As long as we are mixed capitalist society there will always be a relationship between corporate America and the White House. Personally, I think Obama should be looking to successful, powerful CEO's for advice. Or at least have some type of open dialog with them. It's responsible, intelligent, and business savvy CEO's that are going save this country's economy, not the President or his current policies.

Besides, I just find it in very poor taste to make them pay for their meals after being invited to have dinner. And the reasoning behind it I find quite weak. If Obama were flying them to Cancun for dinner and entertainment...yeah, I'd see a possible hint of impropriety. But having them in for lunch?

Either he places way too much value on being in his presence or he has the whole "grease the skids" thing messed up entirely.

It's just kind of dumb if you ask me. I think there is a solid reason for the President to be calling on CEO's like this, if for nothing else than possible advice. The price of a steak and some iced tea is worth the trade off. If anything the White House should have made it a VIP, invite only luncheon with "tickets" that had to be purchased. That would have seemed a bit more acceptable than running their credit cards during the meal.

Uggh. :roll:

You know I didn't make a big deal over the DVD's, I kind of flinched at the last minute gift shop toys, I cringed at the idea of the ipod for the Queen, and with this I'm just scratching my head. Who plans these things out?
 
You do know that Presidents are responsible for paying for their own food while in office, don't ya?

Yeah. I learned it after celticlord pointed it to me out a few posts back. Are you repeating it for a reason?
 
Yeah. I learned it after celticlord pointed it to me out a few posts back. Are you repeating it for a reason?

OPPS...sorry, must have missed that...:3oops:

Lerxst said:
Besides, I just find it in very poor taste to make them pay for their meals after being invited to have dinner. And the reasoning behind it I find quite weak. If Obama were flying them to Cancun for dinner and entertainment...yeah, I'd see a possible hint of impropriety. But having them in for lunch?
I don't have any problem with the White House providing guests with lunch or dinner as long as people don't bitch about it, trying to make something out of nothing just for a jab.

I have looked for more information on this, but so far all the articles I've found (mostly blogs) are referring back to the Politico article.
 
Yeah. I learned it after celticlord pointed it to me out a few posts back. Are you repeating it for a reason?

I didn't have any idea this was the case. Interesting.
 
Back
Top Bottom