• 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

Your Star said:
Well you could always become the first lady :2razz:
Click to expand...

gay.gif


That's an idea. :lol:
 
Objective Voice said:
Okay, granted, the cost FLOTUS and her daughter's trip to Spain likely wasn't all on their own nickle, but let's be honest here, folks. Can it ever be?

She IS the First Lady. As such, she has to have the Secret Service around to protect her and her daughter not only whenever she (FLOTUS) travels INCONUS but abroad. To those complaining about her travel and lodging arrangements, do you honestly believe she can travel first class like the rest of us? C'mon! Not since the days of Eisenhower have the President and the FLOTUS travelled by anything less than the most secure means at the taxpayer's expense. That said, we don't know if the FLOTUS wanted to travel via other means or if the Secret Service insisted that using AF1.5 was the best way to keep her and her daughter safe.

As to the lodging...it seems rather lavish, but again was it her idea, the Secret Service or the Spanish government's insistance? Are they staying there on the taxpayer's dime or did she pay out of her own pocket? How much of her shopping spree is out of her own pocket versus how much will the taxpayers pickup? And how often has this happened with former FLOTUS? Which brings us back to the same questions so many have repeatedly asked to those who apparently are upset about this:

"Where you that pissed off when Laura Bush, Barbara Bush, Nancy Reagon, Betty Ford or Patricia Nixon all took trips abroad on the taxpayer's dime? Or were you just upset when Jackie-O, Rosaline Carter and Hillary Clinton did it?"
Click to expand...



I was too young for some of these folk, but do tell me which one of these admins lectured us on economic personal sacrifice while the wife took 40 of her closest friends on extravagant trips....


I don't much care actually, I just thought the hypocricy of this administration was notable.
 
Objective Voice said:
Where'd you get the 72 Secret Service members figure from and the per room rate?
Click to expand...

VanceMack said:
"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.

Reports are calling the lodgings of Obama's Spanish fiesta, the Hotel Villa Padierna in Marbella, "luxurious," "posh" and "a millionaires' playground." Estimated room rate per night? Up to a staggering $2,500. Method of transportation? Air Force Two.

To be clear, what the Obamas do with their money is one thing; what they do with ours is another. Transporting and housing the estimated 70 Secret Service agents who will flank the material girl will cost the taxpayers a pretty penny."

Google is a wonderful thing...
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
It would be even more wonderful if supported what you said.
VanceMack said:
...rooms for 72 secret service members at 4k per room a night...
Click to expand...
 
pbrauer said:
That's a very subjective opinion and I think her selection of clothing is partially cultural.
Click to expand...

I never noticed they dressed like crap in Spain. That shirt is atrocious.
 
StandUpChuck said:
I never noticed they dressed like crap in Spain. That shirt is atrocious.
Click to expand...

It does have a vaguely peasant-y style to it, and might be cute on someone.
The pattern on it confuses me; I'd like to see it in some sort of native woven fabric, or some sort of, like... indian cotton, white, with indigenous patterns embroidered around the neckline by local seamstresses.
It's distressingly unflattering on Michelle O.
It must be difficult for her to find clothes that are flattering. She's so large. Her shoulders are so broad.
Nevertheless, I admire her moxie. She seems to enjoy life.
 
Reverend_Hellh0und said:
Oh wow, you quote media matters, to attack the author, instead of simply commenting on the topic.... YOU ROCK! :thumbs:
Click to expand...

Oh Wow Rev, I did comment on the topic:
pbrauer said:
I sincerely hope the FLOTUS has a great trip in Spain. She promotes positive living and the American dream of prosperity. (text ripped from the poll) :mrgreen:
Click to expand...
 
Does not bother me at all and hope they are having a wonderful time:)
 
Orion said:
Um... aren't you the same people who usually defend the rich from "unfair taxation" and the like? Why do you suddenly care what the Obama family does with their personal money?
Click to expand...

I have no objection to whatever they choose to do with their own personal money, as a Taxpayer I have every objection to using my Tax Dollars in aiding them to spend their own money.
 
liblady said:
rev, were you bothered when laura bush took trips? i'm betting not.
Click to expand...

I believe Laura Bush confined her trips to within the US, she evidently had no desire to become an International Ambassador for herself.
 
Reverend_Hellh0und said:
Aparrently this poster missed this, in a failed attempt at a strawman. :shrug:
Click to expand...

No the poster did not miss this, the poster assumed that interested folk might read the entire article.
 
BWG said:
It would be even more wonderful if supported what you said.
Click to expand...

Touche!

$2,500.00 per night (plus per diem and other expenses) for 72 people (PLUS MO and company) is MUCH more acceptable!!!
 
pbrauer said:
That's a very subjective opinion and I think her selection of clothing is partially cultural.
Click to expand...

Looks like an adaptation from the Moslem checkered rag head material.
 
jujuman13 said:
I hope not, because when it comes to sartorial elegance, IMHO black people's dress sense is superb.
Click to expand...

Well, everyone's an individual, but I must say, Obama always looks rather spiffy.
I doubt the Obamas dress themselves, however.
I'm sure they have stylists and image consultants.
Most first families do.
Most celebrities in general do.
 
jujuman13 said:
I hope not, because when it comes to sartorial elegance, IMHO black people's dress sense is superb.
Click to expand...

waaaaaaat??? Thats kind of a prejudiced statement...no...I dont mean in an attacking way but in a very generalized sense way...Saying "black peoples dress sense" is kind of silly...unless you think hoochie wear, pimp fashun, professional athletes hybrid businessman/pimp fushun, street chic, and getto wear is a fashinable 'dress sense. Seriously...dont make me go all People of Walmart on ya!

And dont get me wrong...some DO dress very well...as do some whites (while some dress the same redneck ghetto fabulous way as blacks). But that comment is a little like the Joe Biden bitchslap "hes a nice change of pace...an articulate clean black man" comment.
 
Barry and Michelle remind me of poor people that just won a powerball.... party hardy and spend like dunken sailors. Did they spend like this in the past?
 
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

Since many of you ask when there are stories about presidential vacation travel: Mrs. Obama always flies on a U.S. government plane; she pays personal expenses herself. Her friends are not flying with her. She will travel with "minimal" staff.
Click to expand...

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?
 
Objective Voice said:
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?
Click to expand...

If she is on official business then she should fly on US government transportation. If she is on a personal vacation she should either fly commercial and pay all expenses or if that isn't possible for security reasons, she should pay all costs of government transportation out of her own pocket..... that goes for Barry too.
 
Crunch said:
If she is on official business then she should fly on US government transportation. If she is on a personal vacation she should either fly commercial and pay all expenses or if that isn't possible for security reasons, she should pay all costs of government transportation out of her own pocket..... that goes for Barry too.
Click to expand...

You don't even have a clue how the secret service works do you?
 
Crosscheck said:
You don't even have a clue how the secret service works do you?
Click to expand...

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:
 
Crunch,

I'd agree with you if I were 100% sure our President (whether you like the man or not) and his family could be adequately protected using commercial transportation, but they can't. You folks seem to think "personal protection" measures are all that's required, but you forget about security in the air, i.e., a plane being hijacked or shot down. No commercial plane can do what AF1 and other secure U.S. aircraft can do that have been outfitted to protect the President and the 1st Family in that regard. Plus, if her security details is telling her - insisting! - that she can't travel via commerical air, what choice does she really have regardless of the reasons why she's traveling abroad?

So, while I agree with you in theory on this matter, it's just not practical when you look at the security measures as a whole that are required to keep the President and the 1st Family safe.

Sidenote: I realize we're in a different time and the circumstances of the day are different than they were just two short years ago, but I don't recall hearing this much criticism whenever Laura Bush travelled. Of course, the focus wasn't on rich -vs- poor (middle-class), jobs, the economy, etc., etc., and as such, I don't think the FLOTUS' travel itinerary made the evening news in much the same way as it apparently does today. Still, I wonder how many anti-Bush critics were this uptight when Laura Bush travelled domestically or abroad?
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom