• 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!

Material girl Michelle Obama is a modern-day Marie Antoinette

This is for the critics who are still complaining about the FLOTUS personal vacations. From the Chicago Sun-Times

"Michelle Obama adds Spain trip to 2010 vacation schedule"
By Lynn Sweeton July 27, 2010 9:22 AM



Of course, critics have questioned why so many "private" vacations on "official" business. Well, I don't think the FLOTUS could travel on a private charter plan regardless who how many would rather she did so. Again, her "status" all but requires it. Besides, let's say she did go private, commercial charter plane. Many people who still complain that she's spending tax payer money for a private plane when there's already gov't air transportation provided for the 1st Family...at the taxpayer's expense, of course, but it's how she's suppose to travel in her official public capacity as FLOTUS. She really can't win for losing here.

As I see it, if most of the things she and her daughter's buys comes from their own purse strings (other than air transportation costs), why should it matter where she goes or when? IT'S HER OWN MONEY for the most part. And let's be honest...

You [the critics] have all been so supportive of people having the right to go wherever they want if they can afford to do so using their own money. Well, as you've just read when it's a "official/private" venture, she pays her own way for the most part. Other than the air transportation issue which I really don't think she can get away from, where's the problem?

I think you are missing the point...deliberately or otherwise. Yes...its reasonable for the first lady to fly AF2 and be protected by the secret service. Some might question if 70 secret servicemen were minimal...but again...NOT the point...the point is...The One has called for all the little people to tighten up their belts in this time of economic duress...and then the one and his family have gone on 8 taxpayer paid romps. THATS the problem...that whole hypocrisy thing..."We are all struggling...we ALL have to suffer...and by ALL of course I mean YOU all...not us...mind you...we are still going to have private concerts and parties and 8 vacations and trot the globe...but..in this dire economic time ALL have to tighten up a little bit...

I agree with Crunch...they behave like they won the lotto...as 'leaders' go...The One blows.
 
Do you mean like they provide protection? :doh

Can you say "they can still provide said protection if Michelle and Barry are paying for it out of their own pockets while on a personal vacation"? :roll:

So I guess you don't understand how the secret service works.
Going on public transportation would require many more manhours to accomodate this plus disrupting travel for others at a public airport. It just isn't even reasonable. The same reason you can't just drive up and park in front of the White House any more.

Spend a buck to save a dime eh.
 
I think you are missing the point...deliberately or otherwise.

Oh, I get the point just fine...8 trips since June of this year. But let's look at them, shall we:

Note: All trips by the FLOTUS w/her daughters

Spring break: NYC

May 30th: Memorial Day weekend retreat to Chicago

Late June: LA

July 4th: Camp David (w/Pres.)

July 18-19: Acadia National Park in Maine

Aug 6-9: Spain

Aug 14-16: Gulf Coast retreat in Florida

Aug 19-29: Martha's Vineyard (w/Pres.)

Of all her trips only 1 is OUTCONUS, 2 were National holidays, 1 was for School Break (daughter's time away). The rest I'd call them standard PR/Presidential getaways.

So, when you stop and think about it there's really not that much the public can really complain about since these trips are either directly for their children, PR trips, or standard trips the President and 1st Family have taken since the days of the Kennedy's.
 
Oh, I get the point just fine...8 trips since June of this year. But let's look at them, shall we:

Note: All trips by the FLOTUS w/her daughters

Spring break: NYC

May 30th: Memorial Day weekend retreat to Chicago

Late June: LA

July 4th: Camp David (w/Pres.)

July 18-19: Acadia National Park in Maine

Aug 6-9: Spain

Aug 14-16: Gulf Coast retreat in Florida

Aug 19-29: Martha's Vineyard (w/Pres.)

Of all her trips only 1 is OUTCONUS, 2 were National holidays, 1 was for School Break (daughter's time away). The rest I'd call them standard PR/Presidential getaways.

So, when you stop and think about it there's really not that much the public can really complain about since these trips are either directly for their children, PR trips, or standard trips the President and 1st Family have taken since the days of the Kennedy's.

At a time of national belt tightening...when the nation is running an unemployment rate of 10% with actual unemployment around 20%...when homes are being foreclosed on still at a record rate...when all of the leading economic indicators are STILL being adjusted downward...no answers...but...LOTS of vacations! Not for the little people mind you...but for The One and company...well...in the immortal words of Bill Clinton..."He doesnt feel your pain..."
 
At a time of national belt tightening...when the nation is running an unemployment rate of 10% with actual unemployment around 20%...when homes are being foreclosed on still at a record rate...when all of the leading economic indicators are STILL being adjusted downward...no answers...but...LOTS of vacations! Not for the little people mind you...but for The One and company...well...in the immortal words of Bill Clinton..."He doesnt feel your pain..."

So because your neighbor is unemployed you don't take your family on vacation?

You have any idea how many people's employment is dependent on the tourist business?

Perhaps because it is a democrat that gripes you more than the fact that the first family takes vacation....
 
So because your neighbor is unemployed you don't take your family on vacation?

You have any idea how many people's employment is dependent on the tourist business?

Perhaps because it is a democrat that gripes you more than the fact that the first family takes vacation....

No. I'll say this one last time...even though I know its a waste because nothing The One does will ever be fallible in your eyes...

He is a hypocritical douche precisely because as the leader of the country in a massive recession he preaches cutting back and scrimping and then does the opposite. That is and has been the ONLY objection to the numerous vacations. NOT that he has spent more time on vacation than Bush (and you didnt like it when Bush did it I recall) and not that he golfs a lot (I endorse that heartily)...but that he says one thing and does another.
 
Again to the critics, I hear you and understand your point. However, I just don't think those who are claiming that the POTUS, the FLOTUS or the 1st Family should pay their own airfare are thinking this thing through. As I said in a previous post, you just can't get the same security measures in place on a commercial plane that are already in place on the military aircraft our President and his family fly. Anything less would certainly put them in danger. So, whether you like the man or his wife is irrelevant. He his your President; you should want to know that when he (and his family) travels, they are receiving the best protection this country can provide.

Now, I understand the grips folks are having here. It's about appearance, towit: "The country's suffering economically...how dare you splurge at a time like this?" But it's these same people who have said time and time again that if you have money, you're entitled to spend it any way you want. And if the FLOTUS is spending her own money - NOT TAXPAYER MONEY, but her own money - for these trips, what's the problem?

Looks at the trips again...

Oh, I get the point just fine...8 trips since June of this year. But let's look at them, shall we:

Note: All trips by the FLOTUS w/her daughters

Spring break: NYC

May 30th: Memorial Day weekend retreat to Chicago

Late June: LA

July 4th: Camp David (w/Pres.)

July 18-19: Acadia National Park in Maine

Aug 6-9: Spain

Aug 14-16: Gulf Coast retreat in Florida

Aug 19-29: Martha's Vineyard (w/Pres.)

Of all her trips only 1 is OUTCONUS, 2 were National holidays, 1 was for School Break (daughter's time away). The rest I'd call them standard PR/Presidential getaways.

So, when you stop and think about it there's really not that much the public can really complain about since these trips are either directly for their children, PR trips, or standard trips the President and 1st Family have taken since the days of the Kennedy's.

Aside from the trips to LA, Maine and Spain, how many of you wouldn't have taken your family on any of the other holiday getaways if you could afford to do so? I mean, what's so unreasonable about taking your children on vacation over Spring Break, Memorial Day or the 4th of July? The trip to the national park I can kinda see...it's sight-seeing w/her kids. No big deal there. I can't say I totally agree w/her trip to Spain, but since there was some "official business" reportedly tied into it AND she's spending her own money for the most part, who are we to complain about it for any reason other than for appearance sake?

The public has been pushing for them to vacation along the Gulf Coast since the oil spill cleanup efforts went into full swing a month ago. It's a bit too late for such a trip to be on their calendar now (not to mention FL wasn't one of the states hardest hit by the oil spill - yeah, I'll critisize them for that), but atleast they'll finally go there as a family. And every President goes to Martha's Vineyard. So, again, other than apearances, what's the real problem here?
 
Again to the critics, I hear you and understand your point.



Aside from the trips to LA, Maine and Spain, how many of you wouldn't have taken your family on any of the other holiday getaways if you could afford to do so? I mean, what's so unreasonable about taking your children on vacation over Spring Break, Memorial Day or the 4th of July?

I don't think you understand our point at all, unless you think tax payer dollars are Barry's and Michelle's to spend on THEIR personal vacations. If they want to pay for aaaaaaaaaall of the expenses themselves.... wonderful, I would encourage them to take a permanent vacation.
 
I don't think you understand our point at all, unless you think tax payer dollars are Barry's and Michelle's to spend on THEIR personal vacations. If they want to pay for aaaaaaaaaall of the expenses themselves.... wonderful, I would encourage them to take a permanent vacation.

I get your point fully. I just think it's retarded!

Look at it this way...

Suppose she did travel via commercial air. Would it be okay with you if she to take over the entire plane? Because that's likely what would have to happen in order to keep the plane secure. Of course, you guys would complain that she bumped passengers just so she and her security detail could "fly in style" overseas. Ok...rent a commercial jet you say? I've given reason why this wouldn't work either - security and defense mechanism not available on a private jet like AF2 (or whatever gov't plane she travels on) is readily equipped for.

My main point, however, is the woman had money and was successful in her own right before she married the man who is now our nation's 44th President. What makes you so absolutely sure she's spending taxpayer dollars and not her own money as the linked article I provided clearly states? And before you say it, I don't know with absolute certainty that she's not, but this isn't such a big deal for me as apparently it is for some Republicans mainly because it's not the first time a FLOTUS has taken a trip abroad whether for official business or not, and it certainly won't be the last. And as the First Lady, she's entitled especially considering she was on the trip w/her daughter.
 
Oh, I get the point just fine...8 trips since June of this year. But let's look at them, shall we:

Note: All trips by the FLOTUS w/her daughters

Spring break: NYC

May 30th: Memorial Day weekend retreat to Chicago

Late June: LA

July 4th: Camp David (w/Pres.)

July 18-19: Acadia National Park in Maine

Aug 6-9: Spain

Aug 14-16: Gulf Coast retreat in Florida

Aug 19-29: Martha's Vineyard (w/Pres.)

Of all her trips only 1 is OUTCONUS, 2 were National holidays, 1 was for School Break (daughter's time away). The rest I'd call them standard PR/Presidential getaways.

So, when you stop and think about it there's really not that much the public can really complain about since these trips are either directly for their children, PR trips, or standard trips the President and 1st Family have taken since the days of the Kennedy's.
I couldn't find where you showed how much the Obama's were spending of their own money for vacations. Could you point me toward that info?
 
Ah, yes... the impotent rage, teabrain talking point of the day...
 
Vancemack said:
Touche!

$2,500.00 per night (plus per diem and other expenses) for 72 people (PLUS MO and company) is MUCH more acceptable!!!
Still huffing and puffing I see.

Your Google still doesn't show secret service staying in $4,000 OR $2,500 per night rooms.

But I bet your just a 'hoot' at the company coffee bar in the mornings to those who don't know any better...LOL...:lol:
 
A few updates on the FLOTUS' trip to Spain per the linked articles below:

1. It was a first and foremost personal trip with two personal friends. (See item #4 below)

2. The "official" side of of the trip stems from the invitation the FLOTUS received from King Juan Carlos and Queen Sophia of Spain.

3. Here's an article from PoliticsDaily.com that discusses the expenses for the trip.

4. Finally, this article outlines in greater detail why the FLOTUS took the trip in the first place.
 
The partisanship in this thread reeks to high heaven.

There's outrageous spending on unwinnable wars, where BILLIONS of dollars are unaccounted for, but dang, let's get all riled up because of a stupid vacation.

I shake my head.
 
I couldn't agree more, Middle. That's why I posted the linked articles above. To me, the woman has no choice but to accept the protective measures her stature as FLOTUS affords her whether she wanted to or not. She didn't choose the hotel accomodations, she didn't choose the air travel, she didn't request the 70+ Secret Service detail that accompanied her and her daughter (nor her friends and their daughters who I'm sure were equally protected; you can't have friends of the 1st Lady travel w/her and not protect them, too.) Despite how this trip appears to many, it's really not that big a deal to me cause all the other expenses, i.e., air transportation, protection, etc., that she did not pick up personally are covered under the law:

H.R. 4539*, Sect 636:

No part of any appropriation contained in this Act may be used to pay for the expenses of travel of employees, including employees of the Executive Office of the President, not directly responsibile for the discharge of official governmentl tasks and duties; provided, that this restrictiono shall not apply to the family of the President, members of Congress or their spouses...

*As enacted by the 103rd Congress, January 25, 1994.
 
Link
Material girl Michelle Obama is a modern-day Marie Antoinette on a glitzy Spanish vacation

Quote(Sacrifice is something that many Americans are becoming all too familiar with during this economic downturn. It was a key theme in President Obama's inaugural address to the nation, and he's referenced it numerous times when lecturing the country on how to get back on its feet.

But while most of the country is pinching pennies and downsizing summer sojourns - or forgoing them altogether - the Obamas don't seem to be heeding their own advice. While many of us are struggling, the First Lady is spending the next few days in a five-star hotel on the chic Costa del Sol in southern Spain with 40 of her "closest friends." According to CNN, the group is expected to occupy 60 to 70 rooms, more than a third of the lodgings at the 160-room resort. Not exactly what one would call cutting back in troubled times.)

Although I am by no means what might be called an 'Obama fan", even Obama fans must see the incredible differences, between what Obama calls for the rest of America, compared to how his wife spends and spends and spends US Taxpayer funds on her own hedonistic pleasures.

There are so many real issues to discuss and debate, why twist off on the irrelevant/silly issues?
 
A woman who eats vegetables out of her own yard and advocates for people to do the same thing is equivalent to "let them eat cake?"

I guess my mom is Marie Antoinette. Someone really needs to invent the anti-crazy pill.
 
Some of you really are clueless as to the workings of the USSS. The best way to describe them is "Institutional paranoia." Did you know that in security matters that even the President can't sidestep most of the USSS security provisions? FLOTUS couldn't charter a private plane for international travel if the President authorized it with an official order signed in blood from his daughter's pinky finger. If the USSS sees something as an unnecessary security risk, that's it. End of discussion. The USSS makes every possible concession to try and allow the First Family as much freedom and lee-way as possible. But with security matters, when it comes down to nut-cuttin' time, they win - every time. Also, from the USSS perspective, it is far more cost-effective to use an aiplane that is already known to be secure than it is to procure, outfit and secure a private plane.

Technically, the plane she took is not AF2. It's only AF2 when the VP is aboard. Otherwise it's tail number 80002. Just as with AF1, it is only AF1 when the President is aboard. Otherwise it is either tail numer 28000 or 29000 (there are two).

And 70 agents sounds about right to me. 3 shifts of 8 hours, that leaves a maximum of 24 agents on duty at any given time. Not all of them are on personal protection detail. That's usually about a dozen (probably a few more in this case since one of the kiddos is with her). The rest are there to either go ahead of FLOTUS and determine the best security strategy for each location that FLOTUS visits or to be a liaison with the foreign security forces or to make sure that secure comm links have been established. Some of them scout the safest and fastest routes of egress in case the worst happens. Some of those 70 agents have probably been in-country for several weeks preparing for the visit. When you start whittling away agents for this duty and that duty and this responsibility and that responsibility, it doesn't take long for 70 agents to be the bare minimum.
 
Some of you really are clueless as to the workings of the USSS. The best way to describe them is "Institutional paranoia." Did you know that in security matters that even the President can't sidestep most of the USSS security provisions? FLOTUS couldn't charter a private plane for international travel if the President authorized it with an official order signed in blood from his daughter's pinky finger. If the USSS sees something as an unnecessary security risk, that's it. End of discussion. The USSS makes every possible concession to try and allow the First Family as much freedom and lee-way as possible. But with security matters, when it comes down to nut-cuttin' time, they win - every time. Also, from the USSS perspective, it is far more cost-effective to use an aiplane that is already known to be secure than it is to procure, outfit and secure a private plane.

Technically, the plane she took is not AF2. It's only AF2 when the VP is aboard. Otherwise it's tail number 80002. Just as with AF1, it is only AF1 when the President is aboard. Otherwise it is either tail numer 28000 or 29000 (there are two).

And 70 agents sounds about right to me. 3 shifts of 8 hours, that leaves a maximum of 24 agents on duty at any given time. Not all of them are on personal protection detail. That's usually about a dozen (probably a few more in this case since one of the kiddos is with her). The rest are there to either go ahead of FLOTUS and determine the best security strategy for each location that FLOTUS visits or to be a liaison with the foreign security forces or to make sure that secure comm links have been established. Some of them scout the safest and fastest routes of egress in case the worst happens. Some of those 70 agents have probably been in-country for several weeks preparing for the visit. When you start whittling away agents for this duty and that duty and this responsibility and that responsibility, it doesn't take long for 70 agents to be the bare minimum.

thanks for the voice of reason.
 
Back
Top Bottom