Results 21 to 30 of 60
Thread: Quick we need a distraction.
-
06-15-13, 01:58 PM #21
Re: Quick we need a distraction.
Millionaires out of everyone? I just wanted to make sure I was reading this correctly. If Obama is spending millions of dollars for his trips, and with all the secret service, pre-planning, and lead time it takes to make sure he's safe, I'm sure the numbers are high. But spending that on the poor gives them all $1-2 dollars. I only point that out because the liberals in here will be far more aggressive and condescending that I am.WickedTribe liked this post
-
-
- Join Date
- 07-24-06
- Location
- Colorado
- Posts
- 5,025
- Post Thanks / Like
- Blog Entries
- 6
-
-
06-16-13, 01:55 AM #25
Re: Quick we need a distraction.
Let me expound on my previous post. If this is true, then yes it would be an excessive amount to spend. But this reminds me a lot of a similar accusation that wasn't true.
Obama's Trip Does Not Cost $200 Million a Day - NYTimes.com
-
06-16-13, 02:12 AM #26
Re: Quick we need a distraction.
Remember though... this IS the POTUS. The guy needs the most sophisticated, up to date, modern airplane money can buy. Military fighters worth hundreds of millions and the expert pilots to fly them, and all the fuel that goes with it. He needs to carry a small army of staff around, all of whom have to have a place to sleep and food to eat, not to mention their salaries. Then he has a small army that goes ahead of him, sometimes weeks in advance, to plan logistically every step he makes. The whole thing is a monumental effort. Its a wonder he goes anywhere.
Now, if they're eating caviar and Live Maine Lobster every night, that's a bit excessive. But otherwise, his "tab" gets pretty high, pretty quickly. It's not a partisan thing.
The demands of the job do entail that the POTUS sometimes be required to travel quite a bit. It's understandable. Or course, if the POTUS is taking his jet to New Orleans for beignets every morning, then we have a problem. But for official trips? Several million is a bargain.
I think the point DG is making is that during a time when the President thinks the country needs to suffer for the GOP allowing the sequester to go through, its looks bad to see these kinds of numbers when it could all be avoided if the POTUS gave government agencies the ability to shift funds around to make the necessary cuts. I believe that's called leadership.
-
06-16-13, 02:16 AM #27
Re: Quick we need a distraction.
-
-
-
Thread Information
Users Browsing this Thread
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Bookmarks