Link: Obamas’ Christmas-Hawaii Plane Tickets Will Cost Tax Payers $3.7 Million

[bama2112]

Just the cost of flying them to Hawaii is 3.7 million. How many of you have jobs your company pays for you vacation? This idiot will get 20k for a speach after he leaves office. His legacy is he keeps funding the poor and giving to himself.
Why doenst he take that money and build a new school or hire new teachers.

http://www.judicialwatch.org/press-...taxpayers-3672798-in-transportation-expenses/

 

[Tidewater]

Just the cost of flying them to Hawaii is 3.7 million. How many of you have jobs your company pays for you vacation? This idiot will get 20k for a speach after he leaves office. His legacy is he keeps funding the poor and giving to himself.
Why doenst he take that money and build a new school or hire new teachers.

http://www.judicialwatch.org/press-...taxpayers-3672798-in-transportation-expenses/

I would like to see presidents stay on duty in Washington while president and, if they do need to go out and about in the country or the world, the decision to allow it made by an independent panel which would allow the President to go but not his family. The president needs to sit his happy backside down in the Oval Office. Or maybe he should "let us eat cake."
We have soldiers on the parapets of Afghanistan and Iraq, and we have cops and fireman, and rescue squad members on duty on Christmas day and they do not get to abandon their posts and stick the tax payers for $3.7 million for their vacations.
And while I am at it, why does the Secret service protect ex-presidents at all? Who was the last ex-president who was not a millionaire? They can afford their own security detail and why should I care more about n ex-president than I should about your grandmother?

This whole thing is very imperial and un-republican. The Founders would be appalled.

 

[Gr8hope]

"B-b-b-ut Bush" in 3-2-1........

 

[Bazza]

Maybe one day....if we are lucky....we will have a president who is already wealthy...one who understand budgets.......and does not need to milk the tax payer for all these unnecessary frills.

 

[cbi1972]

Maybe one day....if we are lucky....we will have a president who is already wealthy...one who understand budgets.......and does not need to milk the tax payer for all these unnecessary frills.

And recognizes limits to power.

 

[tide power fan]

Just think of the damage to the atmosphere, global warming he is causing if each of us flew to Hawaii in our private plane wow.

 

[bama_wayne1]

How much would it cost for 1 way tickets to Siberia?

 

[JBama_in_PCOLA]

I need to see what Bush did before I can give an opinion on this. If any other President did it, then they cannot complain.


Sent from my iPhone 6+ using Tapatalk

 

[Bamaro]

Just the cost of flying them to Hawaii is 3.7 million. How many of you have jobs your company pays for you vacation? This idiot will get 20k for a speach after he leaves office. His legacy is he keeps funding the poor and giving to himself.
Why doenst he take that money and build a new school or hire new teachers.

http://www.judicialwatch.org/press-...taxpayers-3672798-in-transportation-expenses/

This is ridiculous to complain about. I cant comment as to the accurateness of the 3.7M but I'm sure its not cheap. Yes, Bush43 did it, yes Clinton did it ... And yes the next one will do it (unless they are a billionaire and already have a personal 757). Its simply a cost of the times. Nothing wrong unless it is abused.

 

[bamachile]

This complaint cycles every year, regardless of who is in office. If the complaint is that we spend too much for official vacations for the POTUS, I will be glad to listen to the number-crunching analysis and following suggestions. Otherwise, this is just a random stat. Eye-catching to be sure, but still random.

 

[mittman]

It may be just me but it sure seems like the Obama's take far more, and far more expensive hiatuses than previous Presidents. I'm not just talking about when the president himself goes. Whether or not that is true, it has certainly gotten out of hand.

IMO there is no reason for Presidents to take destination vacations when we have a retreat just for them. I wouldn't mind investing in another one if it cut down on the total costs. In this day and time Presidential visits to foreign countries are almost useless.

Whether or not they have cost more with inflation included, there is an obvious appearance of taking advantage of the office. Taking the last few: Bush II traveled back and forth to his home in Texas, Bush I had Kennebunkport, Regan had his ranch in California. Those cost a lot, and they got some criticism for it.

The Clintons spent a lot of time in Martha's Vineyard. I believe that made the Secret Service happy because they could easily track who was on the island.

The Obama's seem to go everywhere.

 

[92tide]

It may be just me but it sure seems like the Obama's take far more, and far more expensive hiatuses than previous Presidents. I'm not just talking about when the president himself goes. Whether or not that is true, it has certainly gotten out of hand.

IMO there is no reason for Presidents to take destination vacations when we have a retreat just for them. I wouldn't mind investing in another one if it cut down on the total costs. In this day and time Presidential visits to foreign countries are almost useless.

Whether or not they have cost more with inflation included, there is an obvious appearance of taking advantage of the office. Taking the last few: Bush II traveled back and forth to his home in Texas, Bush I had Kennebunkport, Regan had his ranch in California. Those cost a lot, and they got some criticism for it.

The Clintons spent a lot of time in Martha's Vineyard. I believe that made the Secret Service happy because they could easily track who was on the island.

The Obama's seem to go everywhere.

do you consider hawaii to be a destination vacation for obama?

 

[mittman]

do you consider hawaii to be a destination vacation for obama?

They rent a villa there now when they go. It is not his home anymore. I don't think any of his family live there anymore. So yes I do. It is a good question though.

 

[92tide]

a wapo piece on presidential "vacations"

link

Presidents pay for their own and their families’ lodging, food and incidentals while on vacation, which may be why they generally prefer to stay at properties they own, as guests of wealthy friends or at the official presidential retreat at Camp David.

But since presidential vacations are always working vacations, taxpayers cover what it takes to keep the commander in chief working. Lodging and meals are an extra cost, but taxpayers pay the salaries of White House staffers and Secret Service agents whether the president stays in Washington or not, so a presidential vacation does not significantly increase personnel costs.

The biggest additional expense is the use of Air Force One and the support aircraft needed to haul all the equipment and ground transportation the president needs. The Congressional Research Service estimated that the cost of operating Air Force One is nearly $180,000 per hour. Ultimately, a presidential vacation can cost taxpayers an additional $1 million or considerably more than if the president had just stayed put in the White House. How significant this is within a $3.5 trillion federal budget is something voters can decide for themselves.

 

[Tidewater]

This complaint cycles every year, regardless of who is in office. If the complaint is that we spend too much for official vacations for the POTUS, I will be glad to listen to the number-crunching analysis and following suggestions. Otherwise, this is just a random stat. Eye-catching to be sure, but still random.

It might be different if we were running trillion dollar surpluses and had a few million to spare for things like this.
We cannot afford this, no matter if this a member of the donkey tribe or the elephant tribe. It has to stop.
I spent four Christmases in a row away from home in third world holes when I had young kids at home, pursuant to the orders of this republic. A president can rough it in the White House for Christmas.
It just seems that there is no check on the system. It smacks of "let them eat cake" superiority.
In fact, being allowed to take multi-million dollar vacations attracts exactly the wrong kind of leader to public office. I don't want a guy (or gal) there for the percs. I want a guy (or gal) there to serve. This does not look like service to me. It looks like, "Can you believe those rubes are paying for all this?"

 

[mittman]

a wapo piece on presidential "vacations"

link

I don't buy the line that it is more expensive to stay than travel for a second. If it costs that much to operate AF1 just to keep them at the ready, then we need to look at alternatives.

 

[92tide]

I don't buy the line that it is more expensive to stay than travel for a second. If it costs that much to operate AF1 just to keep them at the ready, then we need to look at alternatives.

where does it say that it is more expensive to stay than to travel

 

[92tide]

Eh, big deal.

apparently, it will be the demise of the republic

 

[Tidewater]

And then there is this gem:
Marie Antoinette takes a separate plane from the President to the same destination on the same day.


Not her first time.

Or her second.

 

[mittman]

where does it say that it is more expensive to stay than to travel

Oops,

Read this backards my bad:

Ultimately, a presidential vacation can cost taxpayers an additional $1 million or considerably more than if the president had just stayed put in the White House.