First lady under fire for her glitzy Spanish vacation

[MightyB]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/yblog_upshot/20100805/pl_yblog_upshot/first-lady-under-fire-for-her-glitzy-spanish-vacation

You know, this vacation probably cost more than the President's annual salary. This stuff makes me so mad - like when the Pres. first got elected and they posted his vacation pics in Hawaii. We're in 2 wars and the worst recession in US history and we get to hear about how good he looks in his bathing suit while vacationing in Hawaii...

and now this. I really can't stand Michelle's "Stardom" anyway - this makes it worse.

"As the Chicago Sun-Times' Lynn Sweet reports, by the end of the summer, the first lady will have taken eight vacations. That includes a June trip to Los Angeles, where she and her daughters attended the NBA Finals, as well as an upcoming trip to the Florida Gulf Coast next weekend and a 10-day visit to Martha's Vineyard later this month with the president."

[MasterKiller]

What do you care how someone else spends their money?

[MightyB]

What do you care how someone else spends their money?

Round Trip on Air Force 1 (pilot and staff pay), Room and board for Secret Service, Security background checks on employees and staff...

Yeaaahhhh - I'm pretty sure were foot'ng the bill on this one.

[MightyB]

all in all - this little vacation could end up costing more to the US taxpayer than the President's yearly salary... and this is the 8th family trip she's taken :eek:

[MightyB]

not to mention, who the Frig is their PR person who's think'n this is a good idea??? I would've muzzled her 6 months ago. She is becoming a modern Marie Antoinette... "I say's let 'em eat cake"

[MightyB]

I voted for the guy - I'll probably straight ticket Repub on the midterms coming up and vote 'im out on the next Presidential.

I really just wanted universal health care - but then again, I liked Hilary's plan better.

[MasterKiller]

Your taxes paid for Bush to ride a Fighter Jet!! to an aircraft carrier and for 24-hour surveillance of his wh0re daughters in college, not to mention 24-hour paramedic escorts for Cheney.

Michelle gets a pass.

[MightyB]

Your taxes paid for Bush to ride a Fighter Jet!! to an aircraft carrier and for 24-hour surveillance of his wh0re daughters in college, not to mention 24-hour paramedic escorts for Cheney.

Michelle gets a pass.

Bush was an a$$hole - no doubt in my mind.

Michelle's front row seat still bothers me from a PR perspective... it's not good, not good tat all.

Pass denied.

[David Jamieson]

uh, first ladies do that.

all of them.

go as far back as you like.

I think there were maybe one or two first ladies that were somewhat frugal, but for the most part, most enjoyed the ride of being the POTUS's wife! lol

Michelle Obama is no different.

Besides, look at the last guy, he sold the wars to everyone and promptly took hundreds of days off, did lots of golfing etc.

It's the POTUS's wife and not the POTUS who's bopping around Barcelona buying shoes anyway.

what is Michelle supposed to do about the profit wars?

[MightyB]

PR - Public Relations. Public Opinion. Satisfaction Polling.

2 wars + a terrible economy + a wife that's being viewed as the modern Marie Antoinette = political suicide for the Democratic Party.

Perception is Reality.

[MightyB]

Her name has become a byword for ostentatious luxury by the super rich in the face of national problems and the hardships of the poor[1]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marie_Antoinette

[David Jamieson]

Her name has become a byword for ostentatious luxury by the super rich in the face of national problems and the hardships of the poor[1]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marie_Antoinette

yeah... dude, this is not news and it isn't outrageous.

just do a flip through the old history book and you'll find that during times of war or any other time that pretty much all presidents wives behaved in this manner. Maybe not Elanor Roosevelt, because she was a hardcore human being. But all the rest right up to and including the current have done this stuff.

One thing about Michelle though, she can pull off a dress from Target as well as something off the runways of Paris. And she does wear off the rack...unlike more than a few presidents wives.

anyway, this is just ammo for *****ing. It's meaningless. How else do you want her to be seen? as a shut in doing charity work for the poor of philidelphia day in and day out? she probably does more charity work than you and still can pull off a fashion trip to spain! lol

[solo1]

Family of Presidents get secret service protection whether they want it or not. Amy Carter got it until she finished college and the secret service insisted on her getting protection after college. No big deal.
Jenna Bush:after graduation, worked for Unicef, taught at an inner-city public school in Washington and wrote a book about a young woman with AIDS in Latin America. She is now a reading coordinator at a school in Baltimore and makes occasional reports on education for “Today.”
Barbara, worked at a hospital in South Africa, did educational programming for a museum and now leads a Peace Corps-type organization called Global Health Corps.
yeah sounds like real "*****s"

chelsea took a job at a hedge fund with a deep 6 figure "salary" and a part time gig at her fathers "library". so much for giving back.

Michelle Obama, the modern embodiment of Marie Antoinette, living large on tax dollars. And make no mistake, this trip is on us, its not her money. the Left lost thier **** when Bush went to Crawford Texas, a property he owns out right. bush quit playing golf after the press reamed him about it, wheres the Bamster? playing golf. Nancy Reagan was slammed for new dishes in white house, they left out that the 1000 pieces for the first chinese delegation at the white House was donated by Lenox. Michelle can blast thru 375k for a vacation and everyone thinks its fine. The POTUS should live well and have AF-1 its a symbol of wealth and power, no big deal. Next up the Obamas desperately need a vacation so the family is going to Marthas vineyard for 10 days, whose paying for that? where are the questions about Michelle being in spain without her husband on his birthday? if it were Bush it would be on every news cast in America.
*****s? seriously?

[solo1]

yeah... dude, this is not news and it isn't outrageous.

just do a flip through the old history book and you'll find that during times of war or any other time that pretty much all presidents wives behaved in this manner. Maybe not Elanor Roosevelt, because she was a hardcore human being. But all the rest right up to and including the current have done this stuff.

One thing about Michelle though, she can pull off a dress from Target as well as something off the runways of Paris. And she does wear off the rack...unlike more than a few presidents wives.

anyway, this is just ammo for *****ing. It's meaningless. How else do you want her to be seen? as a shut in doing charity work for the poor of philidelphia day in and day out? she probably does more charity work than you and still can pull off a fashion trip to spain! lol


jamieson nice to have you back. Michelle Obama is a slag.

[hskwarrior]

PUT YA BIG GIRL PANTIES ON AND DEAL WITH IT!!!!!!!

CAN'T WE ALL JUST GET ALONG?:eek:

[MasterKiller]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/yblog_upshot/20100810/pl_yblog_upshot/first-lady-went-to-spain-to-spend-time-with-grieving-friend

According to the Chicago Sun-Times' Lynn Sweet, the first lady made the trip because she wanted to spend time with her best friend, Chicago physician Anita Blanchard, who lost her father this summer. Blanchard (who is married to President Obama's best friend, Marty Nesbitt) planned a Spanish vacation with her daughter and invited the first lady and her daughters to come along. Michelle, who missed Blanchard's father's funeral in July, agreed and brought along her 9-year-old daughter, Sasha. The first couple's older daughter, Malia, is away at camp.

According to Sweet, one other mutual friend came along with her own two daughters. And according to the White House, all parties paid for their own hotel rooms and personal expenses.

Speaking of the hotel: As The Upshot speculated last week, it was the Secret Service that booked the Obama group's rooms at the luxury Hotel Villa Padierna, in part because agents could guard the perimeter of the property much better than they could at rival facilities.

[BJJ-Blue]

If Marie Antoinette had had people like you liberals here as her subjects, she would have lived a longer life.

I had a liberal co-worker mention this today. He wasn't so much upset about the tax dollars spent, but he felt she should have vacationed along the US Gulf Coast instead. God knows they need the money alot more than a rich, Spanish luxury resort does.

[sanjuro_ronin]

Politicians live in their own little world, all of them.

[MightyB]

Politicians live in their own little world, all of them.

Agreed.

It was a bad move. Regardless of Race, Regardless of Politics, it's a bad move for the leader to be so far out of touch with his constituents. They should have known that this trip would be viewed this way... actually, it probably was a conscious decision. They knew that they would get back lash, and they didn't care.

Personally I do believe that this trip demonstrates how out of touch the White House and the rest of the ultra-rich are with everything. And this is the rich on both sides - repub or dem. We have a nation of starving people. We're in 2 wars. BP raped our gulf coast. Corporate America is in firm control. And, there aren't many good jobs left even for white collar skilled workers because we believe this "world is flat, recession" BS. Heck, the recession was just a good excuse to lay people off, cut benefits, export labor, and cut pay.

[David Jamieson]

Politicians live in their own little world, all of them.

smartin up moran! :p

[Hardwork108]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/yblog_upshot/20100805/pl_yblog_upshot/first-lady-under-fire-for-her-glitzy-spanish-vacation

You know, this vacation probably cost more than the President's annual salary. This stuff makes me so mad - like when the Pres. first got elected and they posted his vacation pics in Hawaii. We're in 2 wars and the worst recession in US history and we get to hear about how good he looks in his bathing suit while vacationing in Hawaii...

and now this. I really can't stand Michelle's "Stardom" anyway - this makes it worse.

"As the Chicago Sun-Times' Lynn Sweet reports, by the end of the summer, the first lady will have taken eight vacations. That includes a June trip to Los Angeles, where she and her daughters attended the NBA Finals, as well as an upcoming trip to the Florida Gulf Coast next weekend and a 10-day visit to Martha's Vineyard later this month with the president."

It is the same corruption that keeps continuing, because many fall for the label that describes their governments (governors) as Democratic. Yet, if a wife of a dictator in a so called Third World country that was not in good terms with the West, had done the same, then the controlled press here would be screaming their heads off about the injustice of it all, during hard economic times, etc.

Unfortunately, things keep happening that should wake people up, but many people don't wake up, even when they watch corrupt governments come and go, throughout their lifes;even when they are being taxed more and more out of their hard earned money; even when their freedoms are systematically being taken away.....So sad really.....

[Hardwork108]

Politicians live in their own little world, all of them.

But they are not masters of their world. They have their own masters who use them to do their dirty work for them. So, the masses end up blaming the politicians, because they are unable to see beyond the smoke screen.

Then they vote for new ones, leaders or Presidents, in a rigged game called "Free Elections". The new leader who has been selected long before the public became aware of him (or her), goes on to follow the same preset agenda as his predecessor.

The people put up with the "mistakes" because the chosen leader is still "new" and has "inherited" problems from his predecessor. So, he is given a chance. Once the people realize that the leader is no good, then they "vote" for an updated model....and so it continues, the sheep thinking that they have a say in their future, while being herded to their own imprisonment, and in many cases slaughter (see, the current wars on "Terrorism")........

[David Jamieson]

There is no "they".

[Hardwork108]

There is no "they".
:confused:

[Dragonzbane76]

There is no "they".

the simplest answers are sometimes the best. :)

[MightyB]

There is no "they".

actually there is... but I believe it's a collective process which we are all a part of and not necessarily a solidified organization.

"They" is the response to a tragic situation where the collective thought is "at least it's not me."

"They" is the misguided belief by the masses that somehow poor people are poor because something is wrong with them.

"They" killed Robin Hood.

"They" think that the problem with giving healthcare access to everybody is long lines... they have no problem with 70 million people going without.

[KC Elbows]

actually there is... but I believe it's a collective process which we are all a part of and not necessarily a solidified organization.

"They" is the response to a tragic situation where the collective thought is "at least it's not me."

"They" is the misguided belief by the masses that somehow poor people are poor because something is wrong with them.

"They" killed Robin Hood.

"They" think that the problem with giving healthcare access to everybody is long lines... they have no problem with 70 million people going without.

What about the they that make a stink about one person's spending while spending more so that the people who can't afford to spend at all will spend for them?

[BJJ-Blue]

"They" is the misguided belief by the masses that somehow poor people are poor because something is wrong with them.

We had been subsidizing being poor for decades. And whenever you subsidize something, you always get more of it.

[sanjuro_ronin]

Subsidizing isn't the problem, it is ONLY subsidizing and doing nothing else that is the problem ( one of many).
There are never quick solutions to big problems and throwing more money at something never works unless the money is going for a specific purpose.
Personally, if my country was in a huge deficit and I was in office, there would be no traveling abroad for vacations, sorry.
When we don't have money for luxuries, and a deficit means no money, then there are no luxuries.
Set by example.

[BJJ-Blue]

Subsidizing isn't the problem, it is ONLY subsidizing and doing nothing else that is the problem ( one of many).

But subsidizing and doing nothing gets those giving away the subsides alot of votes cast by those receiving them.


Personally, if my country was in a huge deficit and I was in office, there would be no traveling abroad for vacations, sorry.
When we don't have money for luxuries, and a deficit means no money, then there are no luxuries.
Set by example.

So true. It's not a question of whether it was legal, or if they have the money, or whatever. When you are telling average Americans to tighten their belts and make sacrifices, you better lead by example.

[Hardwork108]

So true. It's not a question of whether it was legal, or if they have the money, or whatever. When you are telling average Americans to tighten their belts and make sacrifices, you better lead by example.

They don't lead by example, because the country's leaders do not give two bits about the American people or Americanism. They all belong to power cults, and their sole loyalty is to the leaders of these cults, and no one else.

These power cults' agendas and scope of their agendas move beyond a single nation's affairs. Any references that these leaders make to Americans, using phrases such as "My fellow Americans"; "God Bless America"; "The Land of Liberty", and other bla, bla, bla, are for the ears of the duped masses.

All such leaders, in most countries in the world, care about is the well being of their puppet masters. Citizens are seen as sheep, who are lied to, exploited, robbed, controlled, and used as cannon fodder, whenever it suites the REAL leaders of these power cults.

Yet, people carry on hypnotized by all the political "movies" that are presented to us on a daily basis, not unlike the mumbo jumbo that is the commercialized world religion, that has been pushed down people's throats, sometimes literally, ages.

So, yes "Obama is different" and "Obama stands for change", or whatever else his handlers and masters thought would help him get elected, to further their agenda, which is what G.W. Bush and Bill Clinton (both of whom are utterly dishonest and corrupt psychopaths)were doing before him.

And this will continue until people wake up to the reality of the world they live in..........

[solo1]

actually there is... but I believe it's a collective process which we are all a part of and not necessarily a solidified organization.

"They" is the response to a tragic situation where the collective thought is "at least it's not me."

"They" is the misguided belief by the masses that somehow poor people are poor because something is wrong with them.

"They" killed Robin Hood.

"They" think that the problem with giving healthcare access to everybody is long lines... they have no problem with 70 million people going without.

interesting how that number just keeps climbing and climbing. 70 million? I saw the reports of the thousands showing up in Atlanta for vouchers to apply for section 8 government housing and couldnt help but think thisis the best these people can do? they have maxed out on thier lifes potential, start riots over government housing? then it dawned on me this is what nationalized health care will look like when its rationed.

[MightyB]

interesting how that number just keeps climbing and climbing. 70 million? I saw the reports of the thousands showing up in Atlanta for vouchers to apply for section 8 government housing and couldnt help but think thisis the best these people can do? they have maxed out on thier lifes potential, start riots over government housing? then it dawned on me this is what nationalized health care will look like when its rationed.

yawn - bull$hit -

the problem isn't rationing healthcare then is it? The problem is a system that isn't designed to handle the number of people that need healthcare.

Basically "rationing healthcare" is happening by default in the current system then isn't it? Because some people don't have access (no insurance) they're denied quality healthcare in America.

[BJJ-Blue]

yawn - bull$hit -

the problem isn't rationing healthcare then is it? The problem is a system that isn't designed to handle the number of people that need healthcare.

Basically "rationing healthcare" is happening by default in the current system then isn't it? Because some people don't have access (no insurance) they're denied quality healthcare in America.

No one who works and can afford healthcare is denied it. It's a fair system right now in that the producers in society have better access to healthcare than the consumers.

Keep in mind, we don't even know how bad it's going to be yet. That's because even the very people who voted for it are just now getting around to reading it! :eek: The CBO just last month said their cost projections were off and that its really going to cost DOUBLE what they projected! And since we are in debt up to our ears, where is that money going to come from?

[MightyB]

where is that money going to come from?

We'll need to send CPAs to Congress. It's there... it's just very poorly spent.

No one who works and can afford healthcare is denied it. It's a fair system right now in that the producers in society have better access to healthcare than the consumers.

Wow - I don't know where to start with this guy... wow - Social Darwinism anyone??? You believe rationing health care only to the rich is the best healthcare policy? That we should stick with it... that is, until - god forbid - you get downsized. Then it's "oh snap", this system's FUBARed.

[David Jamieson]

meh. Your sin taxes should go up. smokes and booze are too cheap in the states as it is.

tax the crap out of that stuff so that people will ease up on the abuse of it and tax benefits can be had from it that can be routed into the healthcare that apparently no one in the richest country in the world can afford. LOL :rolleyes: :p

[BJJ-Blue]

Wow - I don't know where to start with this guy... wow - Social Darwinism anyone??? You believe rationing health care only to the rich is the best healthcare policy? That we should stick with it... that is, until - god forbid - you get downsized. Then it's "oh snap", this system's FUBARed.

I didn't say a word about "The Rich". I'm just a working guy, and I have good health insurance.

But yes, I'm for letting Darwinism run its course in regards to those who refuse to work.

[BJJ-Blue]

meh. Your sin taxes should go up. smokes and booze are too cheap in the states as it is.

tax the crap out of that stuff so that people will ease up on the abuse of it and tax benefits can be had from it that can be routed into the healthcare that apparently no one in the richest country in the world can afford. LOL :rolleyes: :p

You are aware that "sin taxes" are skewed such that poor people pay a much higher percentage of their income in sin taxes than the rich, right? And statisitcs show that as you go further down the economic ladder, the percentage of those who drink and/or smoke goes up. I just wondered if you realized you are advocating taxes that are a bigger burden on the poor than on the rich.

As for "taxing the crap out of it" so usage goes down, I have a question: Since you say increasing taxes on something will curtail it, how come you do not feel that lowering taxes will stimulate growth? Does it only cut one way?

[David Jamieson]

You are aware that "sin taxes" are skewed such that poor people pay a much higher percentage of their income in sin taxes than the rich, right? And statisitcs show that as you go further down the economic ladder, the percentage of those who drink and/or smoke goes up. I just wondered if you realized you are advocating taxes that are a bigger burden on the poor than on the rich.

As for "taxing the crap out of it" so usage goes down, I have a question: Since you say increasing taxes on something will curtail it, how come you do not feel that lowering taxes will stimulate growth? Does it only cut one way?

look to canada for the model of sin tax success.
smokers and drinkers come from all walks fo life. It's unhealthy to drink too much or to smoke at all. Tax it. Boom revenue!

people who are poor don't have to be unhgealty and neither do people who aren't poor. however, as part of their choice to do so, then they should foot some of the bills they are gonna heap on everyone else when they take a public option to go to hospital for treatment of their liver, lungs or kidneys after their years of conspicuous consumption. :)

[BJJ-Blue]

look to canada for the model of sin tax success.
smokers and drinkers come from all walks fo life. It's unhealthy to drink too much or to smoke at all. Tax it. Boom revenue!

I'm confused, is smoking illegal up there? Or is it just like down here where the Government gets to decide where you can smoke, not the private property owners?


people who are poor don't have to be unhgealty and neither do people who aren't poor. however, as part of their choice to do so, then they should foot some of the bills they are gonna heap on everyone else when they take a public option to go to hospital for treatment of their liver, lungs or kidneys after their years of conspicuous consumption. :)

Drinking is not unhealthy, if done in moderation. Matter of fact it's actually good for your heart to have one glass of red wine a day. Plus, why is it the Government's business if you take care of yourself? It's called having choices. If they got the hell out of people lives and didn't try and take care of everyone, they wouldn't have to take people's rights away and tax the crap out of them. I know it's a novel idea, but what ever happened to you taking care of your business and me taking care of mine?

[solo1]

meh. Your sin taxes should go up. smokes and booze are too cheap in the states as it is.

tax the crap out of that stuff so that people will ease up on the abuse of it and tax benefits can be had from it that can be routed into the healthcare that apparently no one in the richest country in the world can afford. LOL :rolleyes: :p

and david what happens when the taxes are so high on these "sin" products that the market dries up? I know you guys pay a fortune for smokes and alcohol there has to be a point where folks stop buying it or go underground to get it. Under the cigarette legislation a few years ago cigarette scompanies agreed to fund a massive pool of money to cover costs of hopsitalization etc etc along with agreeing to finance anti smoking advertising and company sponsored anti smoking campaigns, what other industry in the world is expected to: 1. give more money to the federal government in taxes then they themselves earn on a product and 2. are being forced to spend money to dissuade the use of thier products? the answer is none. there is a point of diminshing returns. But then what?

[solo1]

look to canada for the model of sin tax success.
smokers and drinkers come from all walks fo life. It's unhealthy to drink too much or to smoke at all. Tax it. Boom revenue!

people who are poor don't have to be unhgealty and neither do people who aren't poor. however, as part of their choice to do so, then they should foot some of the bills they are gonna heap on everyone else when they take a public option to go to hospital for treatment of their liver, lungs or kidneys after their years of conspicuous consumption. :)

DJ how is this a model? what would happen to those businesses IF the taxes were reduced by 50% how much more would be bought? and why is it the business of the government if people smoke and drink who made them the arbitor of a persons behavior? I get cranked up here listening to the wretched whining and pontificating on smoking and drinking when the the same law makers are all moral reprobates, thieves, liars, philanderers and general scumbags. Heavy taxing of a product only leads to the consumers giving up on it. At this point Canada seems to be taking advantage of Canadians laissez faire demeanor. but arn't things changing? isnt there a push to de centralize the health care system, lower taxes and a hard press on immigration. I just see our countries willingness to try out some European models only to see them in time as wretched excesses by the government, burdensome to the citizens and are the citizens are demanding wholesale changes. didnt the Supreme court of Canada make statements recently regading implementing a mortgage interest deduction?

[MightyB]

here's something fun that I think can relate to sin taxes.

OK- so we've started moving to fuel efficient vehicles. You know - to save the environment and cut down on dependence on foreign oil.

Anyway- Michigan uses a fuel tax to pay for road maintenance and construction. Less fuel is being consumed (stay-cations plus fuel efficient vehicles). So guess what now is being discussed in Lansing? A "Road Use" tax to make up the revenue short-fall caused by people consuming less fuel. Sooooo - who does that hurt the most?