Last edited by marduc; 11-04-10 at 06:36 PM.
Law Enforcement Against Prohibition
Drugs are bad, prohibition is worse
Trip to Mumbai | FactCheck.orgMatt Lehrich, White House Office of Media Affairs: The numbers reported in this article have no basis in reality. Due to security concerns, we are unable to outline details associated with security procedures and costs, but itís safe to say these numbers are wildly inflated.
Sorry, but you ain't gunna get an answer, nor should you.
As a citizen, I have every right to know what my tax dollars are being spent on. So do you.
From your link...
See? That wasn't so freaking difficult, now was it? All I wanted was a realistic idea of the cost... now I have it.So how much did those trips cost? In the case of some Clinton trips, we have figures from a 1999 report by the U.S. General Accounting Office — now called the Government Accountability Office. The GAO said that Clinton’s trips to Africa, Chile and China in 1998 cost at least $42.8 million, $10.5 million and $18.8 million, respectively — not counting the still-classified cost of providing Secret Service protection.Gibbs, Nov 4: Well, we have set the record straight with you guys. I’m not going to go into how much it costs to protect the president. Costs are comparable to when President Clinton and when President Bush traveled abroad.
Last edited by Whovian; 11-04-10 at 07:28 PM.
Also, back to the issue in the OP.
Whats sad about this is that this 200 million figure is probably going become a fact in some people's minds. Its amazing and sad how easily a lie is believe by those who want to believe it.
Last edited by tacomancer; 11-05-10 at 06:41 AM.
This is just the beginning buckle up:
Megaprogman is right. It doesn't matter what the actually cost will be now. Just look at the figures Whovian provided and see exactly who his numbers were definative for. Did he show the travel expenses for the other 3 Republican presidents who also travelled extensively abroad? No. He just showed those for former Pres. Clinton. So, now that those figures from the past are out there every trip Pres. Obama makes from this point forward WILL be heavily scutinized and for what?
He is the President of the United States! He has a job to do and part of that job is foreign relations. You either pay to have those foreign dignitaries come here or you go there. Either way, it's going to bare a price tag against the national Treasury. But what most people don't understand is that funding for these such trips have long been part of our UScode (law) since before FDR. He's going about doing the nation's business. Let the man do his job for goodness sakes! But I digress...
If you're going to attack the President for this type of spending, you'd better: 1) attack former President's, too; and, 2) attack those in Congress for their outlandish spending habits, as well, especially if you're going to use a sluggish economy for your rationale.
Last edited by Objective Voice; 11-05-10 at 10:58 AM.