Trip to Spain.

My issue isn’t with her taking Air Force 1 and all the secret service. Of course she needs all of that. It’s not even the 300 or whatever ridiculous number of rooms that she requires at the Ritz Carlton. I read somewhere that the cost of just the rooms was $750,000. Really, does she need ALL of those rooms. I can’t imagine her security detail and a buffer zone requiring that much room. Well, maybe 300 rooms at a five star resort for her friends does get me a little bit.

What really galls me is that her husband is telling us to conserve. To, I believe he worded it – not “blowing our cash” in Vegas. It is good advice and such a quaint sound-bite that it’s almost charming. As our leader, no as the leader of the world that is tinkering on the abyss of economic disaster, he and his family should do the same. Louie and Marie Antoinette were spending money that came from the sweat and backs of the citizenry too. Right up to the point that their heads were cut off. Like the saying goes, “There are no bad soldiers, just bad leaders." Originally Posted by OliviaHoward

I don't really care what the President spends on 1st Family travel & entertainment (within some reason). (Nor do I care that he spends time filling out NCAA tournament brackets) It is expensive. They travel the world. They are the face of our nation. Great. I wish it was a different set of faces, but I'll get my chance in 2 years...

Ever hear the expression or advice, something to the extent of, "When times are the worst, you need to put a happy face on and show people that things are fine....?" We can't as a country shut down.

As for the Vegas thing, what pissed the Vegas mayor off was he pretty much singled Vegas out as wasteful or bad spending....

As for spending in general, even though on a micro (household) level the most prudent thing you can do with your money is be frugal, on a macro level the best thing that can happen is people start spending freely again: hookers, vacations, big screens, fancy dinners....that is what will really stimulate the economy...

What really galls me is that her husband is telling us to conserve. To, I believe he worded it – not “blowing our cash” in Vegas. It is good advice and such a quaint sound-bite that it’s almost charming. As our leader, no as the leader of the world that is tinkering on the abyss of economic disaster, he and his family should do the same. Louie and Marie Antoinette were spending money that came from the sweat and backs of the citizenry too. Right up to the point that their heads were cut off. Like the saying goes, “There are no bad soldiers, just bad leaders." Originally Posted by OliviaHoward

Word! I love hypocrisy. Kind of like Al Gore and the gang flying in on their private planes to chastise us about that Global Warming crap.

See below.

My issue isn’t with her taking Air Force 1 and all the secret service. Of course she needs all of that. It’s not even the 300 or whatever ridiculous number of rooms that she requires at the Ritz Carlton. I read somewhere that the cost of just the rooms was $750,000. Really, does she need ALL of those rooms. I can’t imagine her security detail and a buffer zone requiring that much room. Well, maybe 300 rooms at a five star resort for her friends does get me a little bit.

I'm kind of halfway in between you and Sydney. I think they should be able to have the vacation they can afford. But I do think in vacationing in Spain, there was a more frugal way to do it. For instance, I am sure there are resorts (even 4-5 star ones) that don't rise to the cost of the Ritz Carleton. Nor do I think they needed all those rooms. As I understand it, they took somewhere near 40 friends with them. Does the SS really need 350 rooms for security? I don't think so. Nor do I think the SS took 350 agents for security.

What really galls me is that her husband is telling us to conserve. To, I believe he worded it – not “blowing our cash” in Vegas (except maybe for Harry Reid LOL). It is good advice and such a quaint sound-bite that it’s almost charming. As our leader, no as the leader of the world that is tinkering on the abyss of economic disaster, he and his family should do the same. I think it is more of a moderated approach based on your income...see paragraph above. Louie and Marie Antoinette were spending money that came from the sweat and backs of the citizenry too. Right up to the point that their heads were cut off. Like the saying goes, “There are no bad soldiers, just bad leaders." Actually, WWII proved there were bad soldiers, too. I just think it's much easier to make a bad leader than a bad soldier. Originally Posted by OliviaHoward

Word! I love hypocrisy. Kind of like Al Gore and the gang flying in on their private planes to chastise us about that Global Warming crap. Originally Posted by pjorourke

Or the titans of industry flying into DC on their private jets to testify how frugal they were...

From Tudor

I'm kind of halfway in between you and Sydney. I think they should be able to have the vacation they can afford.

So how do you measure/define this? We all agree the security burden shouldn't be bourne by the family. Just on his presidential salary ($400 or 500K) alone, not to mention no housing expense, I think most of us would agree that as a private citizen he should be able to afford to send wifey and daughter away to Europe for a week and stay in 5 star hotels. I know plenty of people that make much less and vacation more...

Or the titans of industry flying into DC on their private jets to testify how frugal they were... Originally Posted by charlestudor2005

And that pissed me off ten fold more than the trip to Spain. The titans were abject failures. I don't think the Obama administration is a success - at all, but only time will tell if the current administration is the same: hat in hand, on their private jet asking for billions or in the administration's case trillions.

I disagree Alt. Yes, put on a happy face, but living large is what got us into this mess, and it won't get us out. Penny pinching by everyone, including the government, is necessary. Belt tightening is I believe one of the terms the president has used. It seems to me that the Obamas have let theirs out.

The Obama vacation is a perfect example of "Do as I say not as I do". Yes, I believe private citizens should be able to take the vacation they can afford. The Obamas aren't private citizens. Lead by example. CT, to use another WW II analogy: Chruchill, the king and his family stayed in London where it was extremely dangerous. It would help Obama and the Democrats in general if the Obamas would practice what they preach.

What it must be like to have all that power and government cash laying about and not be able to spend it frivolously. I'll just bet if Mrs. Obama had vacationed here in The States just as fat, there wouldn't be quite as much flap.

Or the titans of industry flying into DC on their private jets to testify how frugal they were... Originally Posted by charlestudor2005

I don't recall them testifying about being frugal, but yes if they did that would fit. BTW, which group of titans were you referring to?

Usually when the titans of industry fly into DC, they are there to either 1) payoff their legislators or 2) serve as a background for speeches by committee members obstensively hearing their testimony -- i.e., political theater.

So how do you measure/define this? We all agree the security burden shouldn't be bourne by the family. Just on his presidential salary ($400 or 500K) alone, not to mention no housing expense, I think most of us would agree that as a private citizen he should be able to afford to send wifey and daughter away to Europe for a week and stay in 5 star hotels. I know plenty of people that make much less and vacation more... Originally Posted by atlcomedy

What it must be like to have all that power and government cash laying about and not be able to spend it frivolously. I'll just bet if Mrs. Obama had vacationed here in The States just as fat, there wouldn't be quite as much flap. Originally Posted by OliviaHoward

Actually, most folks don't give a rat's ass if some rich guy reaches into his own pocket and throws his money away on extravegance...it is HIS money after all.

But if you are the POTUS, or a senator, or a legislator, or a head of a Gov agency, or the BOD of a public corporation, or one of the significant officers or managers of the public corporation, or a fund manager, etc...you are a steward of other people's money. And a steward must be looking out for the other people's money with a fiduciary duty.

In times like these, when so many folks are struggling and out of a job, those stewards need to recognize that image is as important as their effectiveness.

How you quantify that?...I don't know. But I know it when I see it...and when I don't.

So how do you measure/define this? We all agree the security burden shouldn't be bourne by the family. Just on his presidential salary ($400 or 500K) alone, not to mention no housing expense, I think most of us would agree that as a private citizen he should be able to afford to send wifey and daughter away to Europe for a week and stay in 5 star hotels. I know plenty of people that make much less and vacation more... Originally Posted by atlcomedy

Let's not forget that the Obamas' income in 2009 was over $5.5 million and they paid $1.8 in taxes. I think they probably have sufficient reserves to pay for a European vacation, and can afford to do so.

And that pissed me off ten fold more than the trip to Spain. The titans were abject failures. I don't think the Obama administration is a success - at all, but only time will tell if the current administration is the same: hat in hand, on their private jet asking for billions or in the administration's case trillions.

I agree with this statement. I'm willing to give the administration a lot more than 1/2 of a first term before attempting to render judgment. All in all, I think he has done a fairly good job. My biggest disagreement is with the bailout, and even that was started by Bush II, and Obama increased the amount. It appears to me that both the Republican and Democrat administrations felt the bailout was a last resort, but was critical. I'm willing to defer to the economists on both sides of the aisle.

I disagree Alt. Yes, put on a happy face, but living large is what got us into this mess, and it won't get us out. Penny pinching by everyone, including the government, is necessary. Belt tightening is I believe one of the terms the president has used. It seems to me that the Obamas have let theirs out.

I think "living large" is a matter of perspective. Living large for me might be a $10,000 vacation (we spent about $2,500 this year). I don't think "living large" for me and the Obamas fit in the same pocket.

The Obama vacation is a perfect example of "Do as I say not as I do". Yes, I believe private citizens should be able to take the vacation they can afford. The Obamas aren't private citizens. So, this means they can't take the vacations they can afford? You want them to give up all freedoms because they are "public servants?" Would you carry this over to all public servants, too. And let's remember, Michelle, although she made a pretty penny before the WH, is virtually unemployed and unemployable. She has no income. Barak stayed behind. It was Michelle and one daughter. Lead by example. CT, to use another WW II analogy: Chruchill, the king and his family stayed in London where it was extremely dangerous. It would help Obama and the Democrats in general if the Obamas would practice what they preach. Yeah, well Barak stayed behind. I don't think it is fair to criticize Michelle and daughter due to Barak's job. At some point you have to separate out the individuals.

What it must be like to have all that power and government cash laying about and not be able to spend it frivolously. I'll just bet if Mrs. Obama had vacationed here in The States just as fat, there wouldn't be quite as much flap. Oh, I agree with this observation. But I don't think it is reason enough to keep them here. O, I think you're doing what the news people want you to do: react as if this were a big deal. It's not. Originally Posted by OliviaHoward

Actually, most folks don't give a rat's ass if some rich guy reaches into his own pocket and throws his money away on extravegance...it is HIS money after all.

But if you are the POTUS, or a senator, or a legislator, or a head of a Gov agency, or the BOD of a public corporation, or one of the significant officers or managers of the public corporation, or a fund manager, etc...you are a steward of other people's money. And a steward must be looking out for the other people's money with a fiduciary duty.

In times like these, when so many folks are struggling and out of a job, those stewards need to recognize that image is as important as their effectiveness.

How you quantify that?...I don't know. But I know it when I see it...and when I don't. Originally Posted by Rudyard K

Where's the smiliefor the guy with the violin playing the same sad song

You seem to have a selective ability to see. Republican Presidents have done all kinds of things on the nation's dime, even in bad times....but when Obama doesn't, it bad....

You seem to have a selective ability to see. Republican Presidents have done all kinds of things on the nation's dime, even in bad times....but when Obama doesn't, it bad.... Originally Posted by atlcomedy

And what vacations did Ronnie, Bush I & II take? If I'm not mistaken, mainly to family homes in CA, Maine & TX respectively? Clinton was very careful about that too: http://www.dickmorris.com/blog/2010/...gger-backlash/

And what vacations did Ronnie, Bush I & II take? If I'm not mistaken, mainly to family homes in CA, Maine & TX respectively? Clinton was very careful about that too: http://www.dickmorris.com/blog/2010/...gger-backlash/ Originally Posted by pjorourke

All of it is PR....what is the difference if it is foreign soil or otherwise...the point RK and others have tried to make is about belt tightening....the average American relates about as well to vacations in Spain as they do Orange County or Kennebunkport...what "belt tightening" do those domestic vacations reflect?

All of it is PR....what is the difference if it is foreign soil or otherwise... Originally Posted by atlcomedy

Well duh!!! ... domestic polls better.

Where's the smiliefor the guy with the violin playing the same sad song

You seem to have a selective ability to see. Republican Presidents have done all kinds of things on the nation's dime, even in bad times....but when Obama doesn't, it bad.... Originally Posted by atlcomedy

Geez, Atl. I didn't see anything in my post about republican or democrat...or liberal or conservative for that matter. My bet is, they hold all the positions I mentioned. You sure WTF didn't get hold of your computer and start rambling about things not said so there would be something to argue about?

Nevertheless, timing is everything. We can all bitch about cops sometimes too. But it was probably inappropriate to do so around a bunch of people who just lost a bunch of them in the WTC.

If you're not seeing that there is something pretty spectacular going on financially out there...you're just not looking around.

Just sayin' - Aspen and Vail are outragous. Worth it, but outragous.

Mrs. Obama paid for her 5 star accomodations, her friends paid for theirs. They had 70 rooms in all, not 300 or 400 - Secret Service would have gotten a per diem (and rooms in a 5 star hotel) whether they were in Spain or Seattle. She's got the staff, the secret service and they are going where ever she is. And no, I don't expect the first lady to stay anywhere except a 5 star hotel while traveling. C'mon, really??

The biggest extra expense was the jet. It wouldn't have cost as much as flying overseas, but would have costs, no matter where she went for a vacation with her daughter and best friends.

It just seems like there's so much to address in this country, this doesn't seem to be the best use of our collective imagination.