WH: Taxpayers Will Fund Obama Bus Tour of Battleground States
@whiteheather39 (24403)
United States
August 4, 2011 11:44am CST
President Barack Obama’s upcoming bus tour through the Midwest states typically viewed as swing states during presidential election years will be paid for by the taxpayers, the White House says.
Obama will start the tour on Aug. 15 and will talk about strengthening jobs and the economy, the White House announced on Tuesday.
CNSNews.com asked Press Secretary Jay Carney, “Is that a campaign event or a presidential event?
Carney answered, “Negative. That is an official event.”
CNSNews.com followed, “So it is being funded by taxpayers in battleground states?”
Carney responded, “He’s the president of the United States.”
The generally accepted policies in place since the Reagan administration for incumbent presidents running for re-election are based on legal opinions from the Department of Justice and Federal Elections Commission (FEC), which say that taxpayers should cover the cost of official presidential travel while travel relating to the campaign will be reimbursed to the government through campaign funds.
http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/taxpayers-cover-obama-bus-tour-midwest-b
Do you think this is an official event or a campaign event and just using official event as a scam to get this funded by taxpayers? I thought Obama collected and has already collected an enormous amount of campaign funds. If taxpayer funds are used for campaign trips I do not believe it will ever be reimbursed.
As this is only a generally accepted policy not the law then how is this expenditure possible. I am pretty sure it will cost a hefty amount to cover BO and all his security personnel staying in the best hotels and other expenses.
What is your opinion?
2 people like this
11 responses
@ParaTed2k (22940)
• Sheboygan, Wisconsin
4 Aug 11
Another crime by the Criminal in Chief. More proof that his supporters don't give a crap how many crimes he commits.
He could rape their mothers, and they would be excited he chose her.
2 people like this
@whiteheather39 (24403)
• United States
5 Aug 11
Your analogy is awful but absolutely true. We know the Criminal-in-Chief (and his moll) are milking everything they can from "we the people" while on their crime spree.
1 person likes this
@dragon54u (31634)
• United States
4 Aug 11
I don't think it will ever be repaid, that is just more of OUR money down the drain. Did you hear that we are now borrowing 100% of our GDP? And that we just sent money overseas to bail out some countries in the EU? And he's going to spend MY money, YOUR money on campaign travel?!
I hope someone sets a watchgroup on this to make sure it is paid back, every penny of it. While I'm not at all sure that previous presidents have paid back what they should have, we're at the point where we can't afford to spend one cent more than is absolutely necessary.
2 people like this
@celticeagle (168115)
• Boise, Idaho
5 Aug 11
Why can't Obama fund it himself? We can't afford to pay his way. He gets how much a year for being president and we were sweating even getting our retirement money this month. Campaign event is what it is but they will call it what they like and not a thing we can do about it. It will cost alot. They aren't going to stay at Hotel 8's around the country.
1 person likes this
@RBBantiles (347)
• Philippines
5 Aug 11
President Obama in his youth was an organizer of slum dwellers. He can sleep anywhere, even on a bus seat, he is used to that kind of situation. All you need are some warm clothes and blankets and shelter over your head that will keep you from freezing. I don't know though if he will be allowed to do that by his security detail and by the requirement of maintaining the dignity of the Office of President. But he can certainly sleep in hovel-like facilities.
I think that's the prospect that's giving his opponents sleepless nights: President Obama returning to his roots, eating, sleeping, inter-acting, meeting with the underprivileged of America regardless of color, gender, race, economic station, and religious persuasion.
@whiteheather39 (24403)
• United States
5 Aug 11
RBBantiles Do you honestly believe that Obama would suffer such indignities. He is a narcissistic elitist. If he takes his family along as props there is no way Mrs O would even contemplate such torture for herself and children.
So I do not think his opponents have anything to worry about in that respect.
1 person likes this
@matersfish (6306)
• United States
5 Aug 11
That family isn't a family for long. It's going to soon be a broken shell, either seeking assistance from multiple avenues or homeless out in the streets.
For the sake of argument here--with myself only--I will assume that part of the reason this family is in debt is because they have a cousin they support and an aunt they've picked up the tab for. They purchased a house for the cousin and pay the note. They carry the aunt's insurance and help her out because she's disabled.
From the compassionate angle, they must keep doing it! Let anything go and people will suffer. Real live people will suffer.
But how can they keep going?
Nobody wants the family or its dependents to suffer. But if it isn't fixed, every single member of the family suffers to the point they're no longer a family.
What about this don't people in America understand?
Oh, never mind. I get it. A progressive, social justice type would look at this and simply say it isn't true. They would say the debt is a good thing and that the family should actually buy MORE property, take care of MORE people, and find MORE creditors willing to open a line.
No plan to ever bring balance. It's all about keeping the handouts and spending going.
You can't make this stuff up. You just can't. Humans have dreamed up some great fiction throughout history, but never anything this outlandish. Time travel novelists and space nuts say "WTF?" when they look at this logic.
@lampar (7584)
• United States
4 Aug 11
We are destined to doom in near future if this practice is allowed to go on indefinitely. We just have to forget about reimbursement from high level government official from abusing his privileges and office, it is not going to happen any time soon in our nation's history especially if he is the president. Scre* all of us up is part of the president job.
2 people like this
@kenzie45230 (3560)
• United States
5 Aug 11
Personally, I think that no active president should be allowed to campaign at all. Obama has never shut off his campaign mode since he entered the White House. His entire agenda is about satisfying those who will vote for him again and he cares not about anyone else.
I think that if he is campaigning, he needs to give back any salary from that time period.
And I think that any and all expenses on a campaign trip should be funded by him and not tax payers - his transportation, the salaries of staff he takes with him, and the security required.
@whiteheather39 (24403)
• United States
5 Aug 11
You are right. Since he entered the WH it has been nothing but blah, blah, blah he is all mouth and no action helping or supporting the USA just more detrimental garbage.
@matersfish (6306)
• United States
5 Aug 11
I was about half asleep the other night watching the news, but they were flashing up Obama's luxuries and leisure compared to Bush's.
In barely three years, Obama has racked up more rounds of golf and fundraisers and big-spending (on himself and family) than Bush did in 8.
Wow.
Seriously.
Even the biggest Obama supporter in the world should be telling the guy to calm down a little bit on the taxpayer dime.
While Obama's faithful pick up his talking points about corporate jet owners and wealthy, working Americans, they never even look at where the message is coming from.
Liberal/progressive politicians are master manipulators. They point you in the direction of an enemy and you never question the validity of their argument or the integrity of its carrier.
Obama is a HUGE spender. There's just no way around that. He spends, spends, spends, spends, other people's money. He is a spender.
Good or bad after it's all said and done, that's an undeniable fact. In an economy he's personally and repeatedly called the "worst since the Great Depression," he's outspent every single President we've ever had in history, and he isn't even through his first term yet. And I'm not talking about only some stimulus. I'm also speaking about the money Obama's spent on Obama.
What
The
PUCK!?
1 person likes this
@whiteheather39 (24403)
• United States
5 Aug 11
Very well said! You have described Obama's presidency to a tee. I am so sick of his constant TV speeches intending to intimidate us into allowing him to get his own way. His supercilious, holier than thou way of talking down to the American people makes me physically. Obama is the only living human being that I actually despise.
In his FIRST year of his presidency alone he has racked up the following:
INTERVIEWS: 158.
• This is a striking number of interviews and far more than any of his recent predecessors in their first year. Ninety of the sessions were TV interviews. Eleven were radio. The rest were newspaper and magazine. The number reflects the White House media strategy that Mr. Obama can best respond to questions in an interview setting.
DOMESTIC TRAVEL: 46 out-of-town trips to 58 cities and towns in 30 states
• Most frequently visited state by Mr. Obama: New York* (excluding Maryland & Virginia, which border DC and to which visits are more local than out-of-town).
• President George W. Bush made appearances in 39 states during his 1st year.
• President Clinton visited 22 states in 1993, his first year.
FOREIGN TRAVEL: 10 foreign trips to 21 nations (4 of them twice).
• Mr. Obama made more trips abroad in his first year than has any other U.S. President.
• Next most frequent foreign traveler during first year in office was President George H.W. Bush: 7 trips to 14 countries.
FLIGHTS ON AIR FORCE ONE: 160
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-6119525-503544.html
I shudder to think what these numbers have reached to date as these are only in his first year.
1 person likes this
@matersfish (6306)
• United States
5 Aug 11
Well, at least you didn't mess up the entire post like I did.
As to the interviews and trips, one might argue that his trips were needed to repair America's image.
But that one wouldn't be me, because I don't buy it.
According to Obama and his water-carriers, America was in a huge crisis, on the brink of disaster, and still really is (at least they say so when they want something).
But instead of knuckling up and getting things done, he opts for interviews, fake town halls, trips, entertainment TV spots, etc.
This is just who he is. Love him or hate him, agree or disagree with his policies - this is who he is as a person. He takes everything to the public and attempts to get the people on his side.
When it comes to rolling his sleeves up literally, he'll throw on the flag pin, take off the suit jacket, wear that same blue shirt his campaign tells him polls well, and he'll show a little blue-collar cuff and talk America's ear off about nothing.
When it comes to metaphorically rolling his sleeves up and getting something done, he won't. He'll insult people, walk out of the room, and expect Congress to do every single bit of the dirty work while he waves his dictator pen around, either singing or sending it back.
He's not a centrist. He's not a pragmatist. Those terms wouldn't fit.
Heck, I wouldn't even call him a progressive these days.
He's a pure campaigner. He doesn't know what he's doing in office; he only knows that he needs to keep his image up for election. That's all his entire presidency has been about - reelection.
@BalthasarTheRat (656)
• United States
5 Aug 11
Is this for campaign purposes? Well, duh!
The funniest part is the "policy since the Reagan years" to not campaign on the taxpayers' dime, because everyone since and including Reagan HAS done this. George HW Bush was the one who really took the "policy" to heart and limited himself and guess what?: He was the only one not serve two terms!
This just happens to be one of the most blatant examples of abusing the priveledge of office as a running incumbent. Usually a President will hit a couple important campaign stops either when running or when supporting his party's candidates (let's not forget that is all done on our dime as well), but doing so as part of a "legitimate" trip.
This trip screams campaign and is just a middle finger to the face of the Republican Party. This is a quick reminder to his opponents that he is not going to go quietly and he will use every advantage of incumbency to hold his office.
I'm totally in favor of a President never leaving Washington during their term, given the communication abilities of the modern age. Other than that extreme though, we'll never be able to stop this misuse of position. Even then, giving well covered press conferences or restoring "fireside chats" with a "town square" twist will always ensure the incumbent President has too high of an advantage in election exposure.
Love,
The Campaign Rat
@whiteheather39 (24403)
• United States
5 Aug 11
Thank you an excellent response. I think Obama qualifies for more than just this example of abusing the privilege of office. He has made a very profitable career of milking his presidency for each and every benefit legally or illegally.
@RBBantiles (347)
• Philippines
5 Aug 11
Battleground states are where supporters of both parties are very strong and are about even. If the President will shed more light, he might win swing votes, just a few, proportionally speaking, to his side. If his program of government is just a lot of bull, by the same act, he will in turn repel the same swing votes, again very few, to the opposite side to bury his political party and dim his hopes for a second term. Instead of bemoaning one's ill fortune, it should be seen as a Godsend by the opposition.
As to the Tour Bus being a political or an official exercise... Well, it's the nature of the American system that the President is at the same time a head of state, a statesman, and a politician in chief. The White House may undertake this event, or any other event, as an act of state and of a statesman, but others are bound to interpret it as an act of a politician in chief. And vice versa. The President's job description and the US system of government may need to be changed to prevent the brouhaha and ensuing confusion.
1 person likes this
@ParaTed2k (22940)
• Sheboygan, Wisconsin
5 Aug 11
The law states that taxpayer money cannot be used to fund campaigns. Yes, the president uses government assets to travel, but traditionally, the campaigns are billed for the use.
Obama and his staff feel they are above this law... and his mindless supporters bow to this royalty wannabe attitude.
1 person likes this
@whiteheather39 (24403)
• United States
5 Aug 11
I think Obama and his entourage will have the most luxurious bus available, make multiple stops to relieve the torture. I think BO is not using Air Force One as another political move to show the people how thrifty he is and not to rub the voters noses into his normal luxurious choices. He will try to impress all the people that are out of work (and all the other problems that his administration has caused) that he too is not over spending. However he would not be able to reach all the rural areas any other way than by bus as I do not think a limo cavalcade would come across too well.
1 person likes this
@RBBantiles (347)
• Philippines
5 Aug 11
To me, rather than a royal tour, it would seem that the bus tour by President Obama is more like a marathon and torturous travel on the back roads and byroads of America so that he can reach out to the poor citizens.
People with pretensions to royalty and their handlers I think will prefer planes for luxury or at least convenience, for speed, isolation, safety, inaccessibility and the like. That would have been Air Force One in the case of President Obama. But a bus tour? The bus is the mode of transport of the poor. It is slow and light years away from the comforts offered by Air Force One, and unkind to the butt as well. But you know, it is also where Rosa Parks sparked the Civil Rights Movement.
Infinitely cheaper than Air Force One, it too can enter practically any community by the main roads or the backwoods. Symbolic too, and with a lot of association and identification with ordinary citizens. Very accessible, why, any one can stop it for an ordinary, Jeffersonian type of town hall meeting and/or brainstorming. I think there ought to be more of this kind of sortie into America's byroads, battleground states or not.
I think the Obama kids will enjoy it, it's like a picnic. I just don't know how Mrs. Obama will take it.
Unfortunately, this will cause a lot of headaches to his political rivals (and his security detail as well). But at least they can say, to his credit, that he is not taking undue advantage of his perquisites in office by using Air Force One in this tour. Don't you think so, Friend ParaTed2k?
@jazzyrae (1745)
• United States
4 Aug 11
He should be funding his capaign with his supporters ... Oh wait he dosn't have any and I'm not sure about the other heartland states but I know he will not win Oklahoma!!! I thank god that we know who not to vote for down here
@whiteheather39 (24403)
• United States
5 Aug 11
That is really good news. I hope other states think the same way as Oklahoma!
1 person likes this