its not hypocrisy because others believe they shouldnt do it,,lol

they have not told anyone that I know of not to take vacations(except in situations where their kids college needs to be paid for,,,lol, ,,which I doubt is the case with sasha and malia)

well, your not the presidents wife either. you don't have a 200 person entourage to pay for either. i expect the president and his family to put America first, then when things are better, then go be the queen of America all she wants.

I dont hold them to a different standard than I do myself. They are lawyers , probably accustomed to taking international trips, and they shouldnt have to STOP because they are the first family.

yes, they should... thats why obama was elected prez, to fix the country, not to be part of the problem. spending all that money overseas is necessary? do you think that some small town in Florida would like to have the money she spent going to europe? like i said, any money they spend here, OUR TAX DOLLARS, is better than spending it anywhere else.

She should be able to go anywhere and do anything she wants.

Just, do it like we have to.

On our own dime and not of the sweat and hard earned money of the peons.

If the Taxpayers have to foot a bill, politicians and their women should have a leash on and restrictions.

When Hussein said hunker down, it looks like he meant, BOW DOWN!

we agree to disagree...a vacation should be a vacation, not a forced outing at a destination of others choosing,,,


as I said, I have no place in America I particularly want to visit because I have seen all I have wanted to see. I dont feel obligated to spend my vacation here, this is my home country, a vacation is a chance to GET AWAY FROM HOME.

I chose great britain, she chose spain, more power to her, they worked hard LONG before their white house residency to deserve vacations whereever they wish to take them. IMHO

you keep saying you... you not the first lady. the taxpayers are not paying for you to go anywhere. your not the queen of America like she thinks she is
i have no problem with you going anywhere, as a matter of fact, come to houston, and i'll buy you a steak.

I firmly believe that if someone is doing their job and budgeting their money, they should vacation wherever they please,,,

what next, demanding the first family purchase only american made products?

they are still americans first,,,

I recently watched an interview with the former first Lady Mrs. Bush...She related that they have to pay for many expenses out of pocket, such as all food for example. Both personal and entertaining...I was shocked.

which one? i really liked laura, she was a classy woman.

yes, the taxpayers did pay for many of my trips as a child actually, since my mom was a government worker,, and she still EARNED that position, that income, and those perks,,,to go and to take us wherever she chose

the taxpayer expense for first family vacations is a necessity to keep them safe, not a reason to restrict their ability to enjoy themselves and travel where they wish(and could otherwise afford)

it would be different if they were from a low income situation and got in the white house taking these trips,, but they are lawyers and these are probably trips they have ALWAYS taken,, they shouldnt have to stop because there is now a taxpayer expense to keep them secure.

thats logical, the TAXPAYER expenses are a condition of security for the first family, much of their personal food still has to come from their personal budget.

yes, why should the presidential limo be a honda?
lets let russia make the AF 1
china is cheap, maybe we can but paperclips from there.
i here iran is selling enriched uranium. maybe they are having a sale?

if we dont buy theirs, they dont buy ours

Id love to shut down global economy and just restrict all american money to america,, but that is not how the so called 'free market' works and nothing I have heard the Obamas promote,,,

from washington post


'If Michelle and Sasha had hung out at home, not one more American would have a job, not one-hundredth of a decimal point would be added to the gross domestic product. Yes, her travel required a government plane and Secret Service resources, but that would be true wherever she went. It was true when George W. Bush made 77 visits to his ranch in Crawford and spent all or part of 490 days there during his presidency, according to CBS News' Mark Knoller, official tallier of presidential downtime. '


...very well put

i very seriously doubt by promoting american made products and services by our supposedly #1 american will shut down the global economy.

depending upon where the limits stop,,,do we prevent any american from traveling outside the us until the economy is 'fixed' ? if so, do we also prevent them from purchasing or owning anything that wasnt american made? IF we insist everyone stop spending any money that will leave america,, might it follow that those outside of america may decide not to spend money that will leave their country?

who decides where it will stop? America is part of a big world, and americans are free to spend their money anywhere in that big world that they choose,,,,

its actually a GREAT example, of how free market and global economy flourish,,

Well, That also included state dinners, visiting dignataries etc. It was an interview with Laura Bush

I would be surprised if Mrs Bush purchased the food for dignataries ,,,,but its not impossible,,,if thats policy , than its policy for all first ladies,,,,

I saw a good movie last night.

The American president (fictional) argues with a journalist in private, about elections and other processes.

"We want the truth," says the journalist.

"Bull!" Answers the President. "Nobody wants the truth. Internet, one click, bang, you got the truth. But nobody makes any decisions based on the truth. Especially in elections. Why bring it up then? It's a waste of breath."

Humans do more on faith, belief and fantasy, than on facts, solid opinions and decisions based on logical deductions. Once you realize that, life becomes two mini-notches easier to bear.

So... if the American President this, or the American president that, people who oppose the colors of the ruling party (or the ruling president's party) like in a football match, they will scream blue murder no matter what they do.

I find politics as related to some individual humans futile. It does not matter who the president is. It is one man or one woman. The president's symbolically representing a group, is powerfully affecting the nation, though. His being Black will incite fear, loathing and hatred on one hand, and love, protection and affection on the other. His being a Democrat will incite fear, loathing and hatred on one hand, and love, protection and affection on the other. Her being a woman will incite fear, loathing and hatred on one hand, and love, protection and affection on the other. Her being an MIT Ph.D. and a Harvard-educated lawyer will incite fear, loathing and hatred on one hand, and love, protection and affection on the other. His being an ex b-movie actor will incite fear, loathing and hatred on one hand, and love, protection and affection on the other.

No end. This is America. The celebrities' paradise, where they are God, but don't enjoy the privacy and unapproachability of the absolute celebrity, of God.

So what am I saying here. Nothing, actually, no opinion, I offer no solution, I propose no change. Just stating my observation.

Oh, I remember what I was going to say. Politics: The blood-sucking parasites on the mulitude. This is a literal translation, not some extreme sarcasm. Poli means many, multitudinous; and tic means a little blood sucking creature that burrows under the skin of warm-blooded creatures and feeds off their life supply, off their blood, and also carries the infectious microbes for typhoid fever.

Politics, is about many people. Not individuals. Politics is about how fragments of a society or whole nations battle it out for dominance. Individuals may play important roles, but only with the support of the polis, or of the demos. Hitler could not have done what he did had he not have some people support his endeavours.

So... Obama... who cares. As about an individual. But... Obama as Black? Yes!!! No!!! Obama as Democrat? Yes!!! No!!! Obama as a rich lawyer? Yes!!! No!!! Obama as a potentially destructive Muslim terrorist? Yes!!! No!!!

When we see shyyyt thrown on a politician, we must never forget that he or she has not done anything to deserve the shyyyt, when there is no real indication. (For instance, Watergate was a real indication that Nixon broke some very important rules.) We can let it go, must let it go, we must remain unfettered by it. It's not against the man, it's against what he represents.

Maybe it's not that he is Black that made the OP make that horrible statement in the beginning. Maybe it's his Democratness. Or maybe it's not his Democratness or his colour, but him being a Muslim. Or not even that... we don't know, we can't know what's up somebody's back alley. We can assume only one thing safely: If Obama was not President, then the guys and wymen who throw shyyyyt in his direction now, would never even notice him on the street.

I am sure that's how he and other celebrities handle this sort of angry outrage that happens no matter what.