Obama takes the misses out for dinner. In NYC!!!! At the taxpayer expense

[OutHouse]

Originally posted by: ProfJohn

Originally posted by: Mani
Dude with all this fake outrage you will turn into a nervous wreck.

I'm not that outraged.

I just think it is ridiculous for Obama to fly off to NYC for a dinner date. This is the same guy who told CEOs that they would have to give up their private jets and trips to Vegas.
From a speech Obama gave back in Feb

This time, CEOs won't be able to use taxpayer money to pad their paychecks or buy fancy drapes or disappear on a private jet. Those days are over.

and

Our job is to govern with a sense of responsibility. I will not spend a single penny for the purpose of rewarding a single Wall Street executive,

From another speech Obama gave

?You are not going to be able to give out these big bonuses until you pay taxpayers back. You can't get corporate jets. You can't go take a trip to Las Vegas or go down to the Super Bowl on the taxpayers' dime. There's got to be some accountability and some responsibility.?

Maybe he should start by practicing some responsibility at home. Perhaps he should set an example for others to follow?

:thumbsup:

 

[Nitemare]

Wasting money is what politicians do best...

 

[tk149]

Originally posted by: Desturel

Originally posted by: eleison
"Spending money they do not have"... I guess its okay for the government to spend because they have a magic money printing machine.

Travel and security expenses are part of the President's travel anywhere. The president spent his own money on his food and entertainment. So your entire argument is based solely on how much it costs to transport a president from one location to another.

The security detail assigned to the president get paid a salary. This expense is incurred if the president is traveling to New York or taking a dump in the White House bathroom. So the security part of the equation is null. Take all of that money estimated out.

...snip...

In short, I can't understand why you believe extra money would need to be printed for this trip.

So the president's only security is the Secret Service, all of whom are on salary? No local cops (extra shifts)? No time spent by hourly employees at all? No time spent planning local traffic routes? No diversion of traffic away from the Presidential Motorcade? No background checks on the restaurant waiters or theater ushers? You're saying that security costs are equal regardless of whether the President is in the White House on tooling around NYC. Are you sure?

Y'know, they even divert trains carrying hazmat away from areas that the President will be in. I suspect that for Presidential visits, a lot of security measures are taken that we never hear of.

 

[jonks]

http://nymag.com/news/intelligencer/55679/

New presidents are allotted $100,000 to overhaul the White House residence and the Oval Office, and the Obamas hired Hollywood decorator Michael S. Smith (known, per his site, for mixing ?Old World classicism with very contemporary settings?). But the First Couple isn?t spending that money. They ?are not using public funds or accepting donations of goods for redecorating their private quarters,? says Camille Johnston, director of communications for the First Lady.

 

[jman19]

Originally posted by: loki8481

Originally posted by: jman19

Originally posted by: loki8481

Originally posted by: Phokus

Obama doesn't take extended vacations to the extent Bush does because he's not like your typical lazy silver-spoon-in-mouth republican douchebag like bush is. He's working his ASS off for this country.

<---------- topic

---------------------------> you

LOL, you're the one who brought up other threads about Palin spending money on clothing, and you're saying he strayed from the thread?

seems like a fair point to make, after how outraged partisans were over Palin's wardrobe budget and how much Cindy McCain's convention dress cost.

Bush traveling for vacation has more to do with this thread than that.

 

[James Bond]

Originally posted by: Citrix

Originally posted by: guyver01

Originally posted by: ProfJohn
Hey... if Obama wants to fly to Chicago or Hawaii for a few weeks vacation I am all for it.

But flying to NYC and back in the same night!!! Are you kidding me!!!!

as opposed to GWB taking 500 vacation days during his 8 years in office? that amouns to TWELVE WEEKS a year... who gets 3 months vacation?

the point of PJ's post... ZOOOOMMM RIGHT OVER YOUR HEAD!

Seems pretty relevant to me.

 

[NeoV]

what's truly sad is that if Obama had vacationed in New York for 4-5 days, idiots like PJ woudln't have anything to complain about, because then it would be comparable to one of Bush's 77 trips to Texas - but because it was only 1 day, it's a shining example of how two-faced Obama is......or something like that.

Yes, that did say 77 trips to Texas.

Nice info on the Pizza guy btw PJ - well read indeed.

Quite sure that you can't complain about any trip he takes to IL either - see the TX reference.

Let's get real folks - at 5pm every day, it was nap time for Bush - Obama is working until 9, 10, or even later - every day - is there even any comparison here?

Desperate much?

 

[Red Dawn]

Originally posted by: tk149

So the president's only security is the Secret Service, all of whom are on salary? No local cops (extra shifts)? No time spent by hourly employees at all? No time spent planning local traffic routes? No diversion of traffic away from the Presidential Motorcade? No background checks on the restaurant waiters or theater ushers? You're saying that security costs are equal regardless of whether the President is in the White House on tooling around NYC. Are you sure?

Y'know, they even divert trains carrying hazmat away from areas that the President will be in. I suspect that for Presidential visits, a lot of security measures are taken that we never hear of.

It's good to be Prez:thumbsup:

 

[Red Dawn]

Originally posted by: NeoV
Let's get real folks - at 5pm every day, it was nap time for Bush

The thing is the country would have been better off if Bush stopped working at noon.

 

[Desturel]

Originally posted by: tk149
So the president's only security is the Secret Service, all of whom are on salary? No local cops (extra shifts)? No time spent by hourly employees at all? No time spent planning local traffic routes? No diversion of traffic away from the Presidential Motorcade? No background checks on the restaurant waiters or theater ushers? You're saying that security costs are equal regardless of whether the President is in the White House on tooling around NYC. Are you sure?

Time spent planning a traffic route, diverting traffic, redirecting trains, setting up local security details, etc are all more expensive when traveling by rail or car than they are when traveling by private jet. The costs at the destination are equal no matter what method used to get to the end location.

So is what you are saying is traveling by jet is the cheapest and quickest way for the president to get from one place to another?

 

[cliftonite]

Originally posted by: Citrix

Originally posted by: ProfJohn

Originally posted by: Mani
Dude with all this fake outrage you will turn into a nervous wreck.

I'm not that outraged.

I just think it is ridiculous for Obama to fly off to NYC for a dinner date. This is the same guy who told CEOs that they would have to give up their private jets and trips to Vegas.
From a speech Obama gave back in Feb

This time, CEOs won't be able to use taxpayer money to pad their paychecks or buy fancy drapes or disappear on a private jet. Those days are over.

and

Our job is to govern with a sense of responsibility. I will not spend a single penny for the purpose of rewarding a single Wall Street executive,

From another speech Obama gave

?You are not going to be able to give out these big bonuses until you pay taxpayers back. You can't get corporate jets. You can't go take a trip to Las Vegas or go down to the Super Bowl on the taxpayers' dime. There's got to be some accountability and some responsibility.?

Maybe he should start by practicing some responsibility at home. Perhaps he should set an example for others to follow?

:thumbsup:

Does that mean he cant travel anywhere for some time off?

 

[eleison]

Originally posted by: Desturel

Originally posted by: eleison
"Spending money they do not have"... I guess its okay for the government to spend because they have a magic money printing machine.

Travel and security expenses are part of the President's travel anywhere. The president spent his own money on his food and entertainment. So your entire argument is based solely on how much it costs to transport a president from one location to another.

The security detail assigned to the president get paid a salary. This expense is incurred if the president is traveling to New York or taking a dump in the White House bathroom. So the security part of the equation is null. Take all of that money estimated out.

So all of this hoopla is about the cost of jet fuel vs. the cost of a train ticket. Of course you don't consider that before the president could board the train, the route would need to be secured as opposed to when he is traveling via his jet where only the beginning and end destination would have to be secured.

Not only that, but at least two compartments of the train would need to be sectioned off for the president meaning inconveniencing passengers that were set to travel on that day. This is an extra expense, believe it or not, as it is likely that a new trip would need to be scheduled for the customers that were inconvenienced by the president's travel plans. That extra expense can easily exceed the costs of jet fuel to New York. The last I checked, the operation costs per trip for a train was around 5000~6000 usd, but I don't feel like looking it up right now. If anyone cares to correct my numbers, please do.

Air Force One is a VC-25 IIRC which consumes around 3,400 gals of fuel for a trip to New York. At 170 cts/gal for fuel (from iata) that comes out to around $5780. This is about the same as the operating cost of a commuter train for a single trip. Of course you could get a better estimate by using the fuel consumption calculator.

Then there's the time factor. A trip from Union Station to Penn Station is about 3 hours. Driving from D.C. to New York by car can be anywhere from 4:30 to 8 hours depending on traffic (I've been on both sides of that equation traveling to NY). A jet from D.C. to NY is about an hour. The president saves anywhere from 2 hours to 7 hours one way by taking his jet vs. alternate options.

The cost of the trip is about equal to taking the train since the only mitigating factor is jet fuel costs vs. the costs of the entire train operation (the president doesn't own the train, he's buying space on the train). The cost of driving is cheaper, however the travel time is expanded to such a degree that it costs more in man hours than it would have to just fly there. Depending on what other things the president had to do that day, who's to say he could afford the extra time round trip.

In short, I can't understand why you believe extra money would need to be printed for this trip because it was done on a jet vs. a train.

In this economic times, when money is tight for the average citizen, why does Obama choose to visit NY using a jet. Lets assume the cost was minimal (sunk cost) which I don't agree with, it is still in bad taste. Lets also assume that he big on "green technology".. he is big on the environment, why does he use a jet to go on this date? It just flies in the face of everything he says. Oh well, we need clean coal technology, we need green energy... we need to get rid of SUV, we need to drive these little itty bitty cars.. oh by the way... today, I've decided I want to go on a date with my wife, I'll be leaving on a jet to NY which will waste 3,400 lbs of jet fuel.

To go on a "date" using a gas guzzling jet, surrounded by his entourage for no real official purpose in these trying times... Do you not find anything wrong with this? In normal times, I wouldn't mind so much.. but these are aren't normal times. It like rubbing salt into the wounds of people who are just barely making it.

 

[Red Dawn]

Originally posted by: eleison

To go on a "date" using a gas guzzling jet, surrounded by his entourage for no real official purpose in these trying times... Do you not find anything wrong with this? In normal times, I wouldn't mind so much.. but these are aren't normal times. It like rubbing salt into the wounds of people who are just barely making it.

Translation: If it wasn't Obama I wouldn't give a shit.

 

[dainthomas]

Originally posted by: eleison
In this economic times, when money is tight for the average citizen, why does Obama choose to visit NY using a jet. Lets assume the cost was minimal (sunk cost) which I don't agree with, it is still in bad taste. Lets also assume that he big on "green technology".. he is big on the environment, why does he use a jet to go on this date? It just flies in the face of everything he says. Oh well, we need clean coal technology, we need green energy... we need to get rid of SUV, we need to drive these little itty bitty cars.. oh by the way... today, I've decided I want to go on a date with my wife, I'll be leaving on a jet to NY which will waste 3,400 lbs of jet fuel.

To go on a "date" using a gas guzzling jet, surrounded by his entourage for no real official purpose in these trying times... Do you not find anything wrong with this? In normal times, I wouldn't mind so much.. but these are aren't normal times. It like rubbing salt into the wounds of people who are just barely making it.

Is he never supposed to leave home for four years because "these aren't normal times"? The guy's been working non-stop for four months (whether you agree with him or not) and he (the President of the United Freakin' States) just wanted a night out with his wife. I know I'm feeding the troll, but you just fail at reading:

The couple did not take the large 747 to New York, but flew a much smaller C-20 (G3). The press pool flew in a separate plane, identified by the military as a G5, followed by a staff in a third plane (G3). White House staff said the smaller planes were more fuel efficient.

Those are small corporate jets. Was he supposed to drive to NY in an up-armored Honda Fit? When there are so many valid things to complain about, why do you people choose this? It just causes people to completely ignore you when you have a legitimate point.

Can this thread die please?

 

[Red Dawn]

Originally posted by: dainthomas

Can this thread die please?

Uh no... It's a perfect example of the Republican mindset these days.

 

[fskimospy]

This does set a new mark for 'pathetic'. The right is so desperate for anything that will diminish Obama that they are screaming about him going to dinner. Guys, news flash: screeching about this doesn't make him look bad, it makes YOU look bad.

 

[daniel49]

Originally posted by: ProfJohn
Oh... I should point out that Obama paid for dinner and the theater tickets. We just paid for the security, and planes and helicopters and limos etc etc etc.

I'll bet he had the maitre d' turn the thermostat up to 80 too.
And for the First time Michelle Obama was proud of an american entree.

 

[jpeyton]

Originally posted by: Citrix

Originally posted by: guyver01

Originally posted by: ProfJohn
Hey... if Obama wants to fly to Chicago or Hawaii for a few weeks vacation I am all for it.

But flying to NYC and back in the same night!!! Are you kidding me!!!!

as opposed to GWB taking 500 vacation days during his 8 years in office? that amouns to TWELVE WEEKS a year... who gets 3 months vacation?

the point of PJ's post... ZOOOOMMM RIGHT OVER YOUR HEAD!

What's the point of ProJo's post? That he'd rather have Obama take a few weeks off instead of 1 night off?

The hilarious part of this whole "debacle" is that nothing Obama is spontaneous. He has so many handlers, he knows how the press will react to everything he does before it happens. He didn't make the NYC trip for political purposes, but he knew exactly how right-wingers would spin this and is cherishing reactions like that of ProJo. The GOP is the quintessential chicken with it's head cut off right now.

 

[eleison]

Originally posted by: dainthomas

Originally posted by: eleison
In this economic times, when money is tight for the average citizen, why does Obama choose to visit NY using a jet. Lets assume the cost was minimal (sunk cost) which I don't agree with, it is still in bad taste. Lets also assume that he big on "green technology".. he is big on the environment, why does he use a jet to go on this date? It just flies in the face of everything he says. Oh well, we need clean coal technology, we need green energy... we need to get rid of SUV, we need to drive these little itty bitty cars.. oh by the way... today, I've decided I want to go on a date with my wife, I'll be leaving on a jet to NY which will waste 3,400 lbs of jet fuel.

To go on a "date" using a gas guzzling jet, surrounded by his entourage for no real official purpose in these trying times... Do you not find anything wrong with this? In normal times, I wouldn't mind so much.. but these are aren't normal times. It like rubbing salt into the wounds of people who are just barely making it.

Is he never supposed to leave home for four years because "these aren't normal times"? The guy's been working non-stop for four months (whether you agree with him or not) and he (the President of the United Freakin' States) just wanted a night out with his wife. I know I'm feeding the troll, but you just fail at reading:

The couple did not take the large 747 to New York, but flew a much smaller C-20 (G3). The press pool flew in a separate plane, identified by the military as a G5, followed by a staff in a third plane (G3). White House staff said the smaller planes were more fuel efficient.

Those are small corporate jets. Was he supposed to drive to NY in an up-armored Honda Fit? When there are so many valid things to complain about, why do you people choose this? It just causes people to completely ignore you when you have a legitimate point.

Can this thread die please?

IMHO, everyone needs a vacation every now and then. That being said, some people I know haven't had a vacation in years. Actually, in this crises, some people I know are working even more hours and forgoing vacations in order to avoid being laid off. People are struggling.

Having a "date" with your wife. Does that necessary mean flying on a gas guzzling jet to NY? Some of the people I work with, a "date" with there wife means hiring a baby sitter and going to a nice restaurant in the city. Now a days, it can also mean just leaving early from work for a nice dinner with the family at home to save money.

Yes, IMHO, everyone needs a vacation. Does that mean everyone needs a "date" which involves boarding a jet to NY for the evening? Everyone is tightening their belt. Everyone is sacrificing. Why isn't the President?

 

[feralkid]

Originally posted by: eleison

Originally posted by: dainthomas

Originally posted by: eleison
In this economic times, when money is tight for the average citizen, why does Obama choose to visit NY using a jet. Lets assume the cost was minimal (sunk cost) which I don't agree with, it is still in bad taste. Lets also assume that he big on "green technology".. he is big on the environment, why does he use a jet to go on this date? It just flies in the face of everything he says. Oh well, we need clean coal technology, we need green energy... we need to get rid of SUV, we need to drive these little itty bitty cars.. oh by the way... today, I've decided I want to go on a date with my wife, I'll be leaving on a jet to NY which will waste 3,400 lbs of jet fuel.

To go on a "date" using a gas guzzling jet, surrounded by his entourage for no real official purpose in these trying times... Do you not find anything wrong with this? In normal times, I wouldn't mind so much.. but these are aren't normal times. It like rubbing salt into the wounds of people who are just barely making it.

Is he never supposed to leave home for four years because "these aren't normal times"? The guy's been working non-stop for four months (whether you agree with him or not) and he (the President of the United Freakin' States) just wanted a night out with his wife. I know I'm feeding the troll, but you just fail at reading:

The couple did not take the large 747 to New York, but flew a much smaller C-20 (G3). The press pool flew in a separate plane, identified by the military as a G5, followed by a staff in a third plane (G3). White House staff said the smaller planes were more fuel efficient.

Those are small corporate jets. Was he supposed to drive to NY in an up-armored Honda Fit? When there are so many valid things to complain about, why do you people choose this? It just causes people to completely ignore you when you have a legitimate point.

Can this thread die please?

IMHO, everyone needs a vacation every now and then. That being said, some people I know haven't had a vacation in years. Actually, in this crises, some people I know are working even more hours and forgoing vacations in order to avoid being laid off. People are struggling.

Having a "date" with your wife. Does that necessary mean flying on a gas guzzling jet to NY? Some of the people I work with, a "date" with there wife means hiring a baby sitter and going to a nice restaurant in the city. Now a days, it can also mean just leaving early from work for a nice dinner with the family at home to save money.

Yes, IMHO, everyone needs a vacation. Does that mean everyone needs a "date" which involves boarding a jet to NY for the evening? Everyone is tightening their belt. Everyone is sacrificing. Why isn't the President?

Good grief!

:roll:

 

[jhbball]

lol FAUX OUTRAGE. RAWR.

 

[JSt0rm]

Originally posted by: eleison


IMHO, everyone needs a vacation every now and then. That being said, some people I know haven't had a vacation in years. Actually, in this crises, some people I know are working even more hours and forgoing vacations in order to avoid being laid off. People are struggling.

Having a "date" with your wife. Does that necessary mean flying on a gas guzzling jet to NY? Some of the people I work with, a "date" with there wife means hiring a baby sitter and going to a nice restaurant in the city. Now a days, it can also mean just leaving early from work for a nice dinner with the family at home to save money.

Yes, IMHO, everyone needs a vacation. Does that mean everyone needs a "date" which involves boarding a jet to NY for the evening? Everyone is tightening their belt. Everyone is sacrificing. Why isn't the President?

ohh sniffle...I'm so sorry boo hooo.. CRY MORE BABY WAAAAAAAAAAA

 

[ericlp]

Originally posted by: Hacp

Originally posted by: ericlp

Originally posted by: ProfJohn

Originally posted by: her209

Originally posted by: tk149
Obama is demanding that Americans tighten their belts, yet spends taxpayer money on extravagant trips. I suspect the White House is on par with a 5-star hotel or better. It's not like he's hurting. Is this not hypocritical?

Obama should have brought Broadway to the White House is what you're saying?

No, Obama should have taken his wife to a show in DC or waited till he was in NYC on official business and then taken her to see the show.

Why??? When you become president and you want to go to NYC for the weekend or day trip or whatever are they just gonna say well you can't go because there plenty to do in DC and cost's too much? Suck it up. The president should be able to go wherever and whenever he wants to ... I hope he takes weekly jaunts around the nation for the next 3.5 years just to piss you off. And why couldn't he? Maybe he'll take the entire family?

Dude... I bet bush went out a few hundred times and spent the same amount of money and no one cared why? Cause NO ONE gave a shit what bush did...That's why.

If you condone this behavior, I invite you to send half a million to the IRS. I'm sure the government will be happy that you paid Obama's tab. Otherwise, us taxpayers don't want our hard earned money wasted just so Mrs. Obama can see a Broadway show.

Can you send 10 Trillion to the IRS for the mistake Bush made going to Iraq?

Thanks, as soon as you do I'll be more then happy to send half a mil.

That's just for starters. How about it cost 50 times more then this when bush took his pathetic wife out to the Beijing Olympics. Why did he have to spend 50 million dollars for he and his wife to go plus 200 security and god know who else? Couldn't he just wait for the Olympics to come to America?

You guys got a real hard on for this shit. I agree it cost us tax payers A LOT of cash every time the president leaves but... That's the way it goes, there are a lot of crazy fools out that want to knock him off. Security isn't cheap. Get over it!


Use your brain and think before you post.

 

[Napalm]

Originally posted by: ProfJohn
Oh... I should point out that Obama paid for dinner and the theater tickets. We just paid for the security, and planes and helicopters and limos etc etc etc.

Are you suggesting that the american taxpayer should not fund security for its President? Or simply that if you do fund it that the President should get your permission before using it? You Repulicans are getting pretty pathetic.

 

[Rainsford]

First of all, this is the quite possibly the worst example of faux outrage I've ever seen in P&N. As far as I know, this is what Presidents DO with their free time, all of them, the only thing unique about this situation is ProfJohn's selective outrage about it.

But ignoring the huge amount of precedent, I can't really see a big problem with it. Being President is a hugely stressful job that doesn't allow for much free time at all. If the President needs to spend a few tax dollars kicking back and relaxing with his wife so we have a cool and relaxed commander in chief when it's time to meet in the situation room, I'm all for it.