Well, not exactly. The price tag for President Obama's upcoming trip to Africa will be $60-100 million.
"Ah wunnerful, ah wunnerful," (Hat tip John Speedie)
http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/obamas-trip-to-africa-poses-special-challenges-enormous-costs/2013/06/13/29d9270a-cd29-11e2-8845-d970ccb04497_story.html
"Military cargo planes will airlift in 56 support vehicles, including 14 limousines and three trucks loaded with sheets of bulletproof glass to cover the windows of the hotels where the first family will stay. Fighter jets will fly in shifts, giving 24-hour coverage over the president’s airspace, so they can intervene quickly if an errant plane gets too close."
(Must be flying over Benghazi.)
And how about that planned safari (which was apparently scrapped when the Washington Post got a hold of this)?
"If ya ask me, he's just another typical Bwana. Go there. Carry this...."
It appears that the President and his staff don't have much regard for the security apparatus of the three African nations they are visiting. Would you call that a neo-colonialist attitude, perhaps?
"Ahhhhh....yeaaaaah."
And silly me. I thought there was a sequester in effect with the government cutting all those essential services to the bone. The cut in air traffic contollers is already causing long delays on airport tarmacs, right? Cuts in school lunches and all that. But no matter. You can't put a price tag on an American president being the first to visit Senegal.
Of course, there will be diplomatic receptions at the best hotels with lots of food and drink. And will those diplomatic and government officials ever eat and drink! (hat tip SoundBible.com)
Bon voyage, Mr President.
9 comments:
How about cutting out all the perks we cannot afford. The bullet proof windows, 14 limos, fighter protection, etc... After all the sequester means that we cannot have school children visit the White House but Obama and family gets $100 million in free perks. If they want an African trip let them pay for it themselves.
The President spends 100 million on a trip to a country that is not on the hot list (read Middle East and concerned EU states). Also, there is no money for the people of the U.S. to visit the "Peoples" house. Of course, there is the $1.3 billion to the enemies (Egypt, in their own words) of America.
I wonder how many American school children have been cheated out of a visit to the "Peoples" house.
Squid
Is he going on vacation? Or on official business? Findalis doesn't seem to know the difference, but then, she used to work in Washington. Maybe she learned a different way of thinking about these things.
We can say that no president of any party or persuasion should make foreign trips because its too damn expensive and doesn't accomplish much.
We can also establish that no sitting president may take a vacation because security costs too much.
But until either or both are written into law, don't make fools of yourselves blaming this president for taking overseas trips, like its some special policy innovation of his own.
@ Siarlys
Since when does Obama ever do business.
I can see the President but the rest of the clan too?
This vacation, at $100 MILLION, has got to be the most expensive any president has ever taken.
It demonstrates what a disengaged slaggard we have in the White House. In the middle of all the chaos in the Middle East and multiple crippling scandals throughout the administration, he decides to take the wife and kids for an extended vacation to Africa!
Since it is not his money, why not? To me, this is low class. It is like the guy who fills his pockets with shrimp while going down the buffet line.
It has been confirmed that Hassan Rouhani is the new "Moderate" president of Iran. He has been part of the Iranian negotiating regarding Nukes. At this point, it appears that Iran could be on a new path for its welfare. This is important. Iran is going to send 4000 soldiers to support Assad. Turkey is in turmoil. Assad is taking over the important city of Alippo and killing many who live there. Russia is going to support the Assad regime's efforts to destroy the rebels. The terrorist group Al Qaeda is connected to the Syrian Rebels and the POTUS is giving weapons to them.
And, the POTUS goes on vacation, unless his family is considered a part of his "business" trip.
Squid
Yeah, and JFK shouldn't have taken Jacqui on that trip to Paris, because the adoring crowds who were more impressed by her than him, plus the fact that she could talk to De Gaulle in fluent French meant nothing at all.
I haven't heard if he took the kids, but considering all the cost associated with one president going anywhere, the extra cost for airlifting a couple hundred more pounds is nothing.
Are you one of those anti-family radical feminists, or something?
Siarlys,
A couple of hundred more pounds?? They airlifted some 56 vehicles!! We are talking about 60-100 million bucks in a time of so-called sequestration.
I'm being generous in estimating how much more it costs to add two adolescent girls (allow 100 pounds each, no insult intended) to the payload already lifting off. I was responding to the petty sniping about whether he takes his family along and whether they enjoy themselves while they're there.
As to the 56 vehicles and all that, you have a good eye for security. Pretend the most important person leading the trip is someone you deeply care about... rather than the President of the United States, whom you don't. Say it was Mr. Devore, to indulge in unlikely fantasy. You've worked security in a fashion. What equipment and personnel would you want to take along to be sure of doing your job properly?
Now if you can outline a smaller net payload, and tell me as a professional with decades of law enforcement training and experience that that is sufficient, by all means, you have a case that the costs of this trip should and could be reduced.
But that's not really what you said.
Post a Comment