You all are acting as if Michelle elected to have the SS with her. She doesn't have the option. Every time the president and/or his family moves it incurs costs to taxpayers. Should Obama "set an example" by staying in the White House for the remainder of his term? This may be the most nit-picky admonishment of Obama to date.

I've read that it doesn't look good because of how expensive it is as compared to the vaca the average American family can afford. Are we that lame? Didnt the Obama's make 7 figures off of a book? They've got the money. Why should I care how expensive their vaca is as compared to my family's? We're a nation of whiners.

 

How much of the chosen one's personal wealth was spent to pay for these trips?

Wouldn't this be inconsistent with how we have done things in the past? Why should this president "pick up the tab" when others haven't?

 

But The Chosen One ran on a platform of change didn't he?

You have to be a regular listener of Rush to get the gist of his comments.. They were jabs at some of the things Mrs. Obama said during the campaign...

Let it also be said that Michelle met with the King of Spain and his family, so this wasn't strictly a pleasure trip.

Let it also be said that Michelle met with the King of Spain and his family, so this wasn't strictly a pleasure trip.

Just to make it an "official" trip to justify spending tax payer money... Is she involved in policy making decisions concerning Spain???

As far as Rush, he likes to stirs up things and the point he wants to make is that the old main stream press are giving the elitist Obamas a pass.

 

Rush is making a point that they're black.

I don't disagree with them taking the vacation if they can afford it. What I do have a problem with is it costing tax payers $350,000. If they have the money then let them pick up the whole tab.

 

That's naive.

Really don't like Rush, however the President and his Family does (IMO) have a responsibility to our Country to set an example and to spend even their own money, much less the taxpayers money to take a vacation to Spain is a bit much during these times of such hardship on so many of our citizens.

 

 

How far do we take it? Do we say a President should not take a vacation until unemployment is at 2%? 1? 0%?

 

We're always going to have people struggling financially. That will never go away.

How much of the chosen one's personal wealth was spent to pay for these trips?

 

100% of the personal expenses including the equivalent of two first class tickets.

You have to be a regular listener of Rush to get the gist of his comments.. They were jabs at some of the things Mrs. Obama said during the campaign...

 

I'm open to adding context. Do you have a link?

cammando is correct that Limbaugh's comment has some context not described. He statement was a paraphrase of what the media and certain liberal politicians have implied about slave reparations and things of that nature. The caller's question, concerned why the media was not providing any coverage of the event, or the expense to taxpayers. Rush gave his sarcastic answer, as he has done thousands of times in the past.

 

I would not have said it, but on the scale of Rush sarcasm, its about a 3 on the 1-10 meter. It does continually amaze me that the "Huffing and Puffington Post" (as he calls it) listen everyday for barbs that they can take at Rush for the types of things he has been saying for nearly 25 years. Why is it news? Why does it shock your conscience?

 

A month ago, the CEO of BP took a golf trip to Pebble Beach while oil was gushing from his well (as it had been for several weeks at that point). The media HOUNDED him, so badly, I might add, that he has now resigned his position. As Zoot Soup says, we now have "Iran trying to get nukes, North Korea going crazy, an economic system on the brink, hemorraging jobs right and left" and the First Family is taking their 4th vacation in a month costing well in excess of other Presidential vacations, all at taxpayer at expense. Where is the media?

 

Concede the media double-standard, as Limbaugh's caller was bringing up, and we can move on.

 

The President and First Lady's wealth is totally irrelevant because this is on the taxpayer's nickel, and to believe otherwise, as Clyde says, is "naive."

That's naive.

 

I guess it was naive to think a couple hundred thousand dollars wouldn't be wasted so that she could enjoy a nice trip to Spain that was totally unnecessary at this time. Unbelievable that people want to complain about paying taxes, cutting taxes, governement waste, ect.. yet this is no big deal. What was I thinking, what's another $400k when the deficit is at a $1.5 trillion.

But The Chosen One ran on a platform of change didn't he?

 

That's a tired excuse and a tired, juvenile name.

 

Yes, he did. But you can't have it both ways. I hear all of the time of how people are "fearing for our country" and how (all of a sudden) we need to "pray for our country" because of the changes that President Obama is making. Then, in the next breath, that tired retort of "no change" comes out.

 

Really, it's inconsistent and the scientist in me is bothered by inconsistencies.

How far do we take it? Do we say a President should not take a vacation until unemployment is at 2%? 1? 0%?

 

We're always going to have people struggling financially. That will never go away.

 

Note I said "If they were taking their vacation in the USA, at least they could say they are helping out the economy in the area they were visiting but going to Spain? A bit much IMO at this time"!

 

Note where I said, at this time and going to Spain and nothing about taking a vacation!

 

It's all about perception when being in the spotlight and no one is more in the spotlight than the First Family. Most wouldn't be upset with a vacation in the USA but Spain at this time, really Clyde, the perception from the voters just might come back to haunt him.