First Prev
of 7
Next Last
Oneal

Grand Rapids, MI

#1 Jun 15, 2013
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-250_162-57589236/... -$60-100-million

[A presidential trip to Africa this month could cost the government anywhere from $60 to $100 million dollars, according to the Washington Post ...

Read the article for the specifics. I'd just like to remind you all of just some of the "skin" that the American people were forced to put in the "game" thanks to Obama's Sequestration:

$75 million cut from the Aging and Disability Services Programs
$199 million cut from public housing
$96 million cut from Homeless Assistance Grants
$19 million cut from Housing for the Elderly
$175 million cut from Low Income Home Energy Assistance
$928 million cut from FEMAís disaster relief money
$125 million cut from the Wildland Fire Management
$86 million cut from Student Financial Assistance
$512 million cut from Customs and Border Protection
$232 million cut from the Federal Aviation Administration
Ending of White House tours for the American public.

Obama deemed these services and the jobs that went with them necessary to cut, yet the Obama's are OK with spending an eye-popping $60-100 million for an entirely unnecessary three-country tour of Africa.
Oneal

Grand Rapids, MI

#2 Jun 15, 2013
$16 TRILLION IN DEBT and the president who's contributed mightily to that number is currently packing the "Presidential Family Truckster" to head over to Africa - all on the taxpayers' dime. The same taxpayer who was told they could no longer tour the White House because we had to make cuts.

http://townhall.com/tipsheet/heatherginsberg/...

Rep. George Holding from North Carolina "For the cost of this trip to Africa, you could have 1,350 weeks of White House tours, which the White House has canceled indefinitely due to budget constraints.Ē

Holding also reiterated that the country is currently $16 trillion in debt, and yet here we are spending $100 million that we donít have. Remember back when the sequestration first went into affect the White House chose to do away with the tours. Well, apparently like we had all said before, this didnít have to happen. By simply looking at budgeting, and cutting extravagance, we could have avoided this.
Mark Luxford

Grand Rapids, MI

#3 Jun 15, 2013
A couple of points. First of all, why is he going to Sub-Saharan Africa? Because China is making great inroads at establishing relationships with African nations because they are rich in the natural resources that China covets. If we are going to try and keep China from gaining more power and influence on the African continent we have to establish strong relationships with some of those countries. To do that, to establish those relationships, a state visit is needed. We have long ignored Sub-Saharan Africa, and China has moved in to fill that vacuum.

Second, much of that cost is due to security concerns. Africa is a dangerous place; a fertile ground for Islamic terrorists.

Third, Michelle Obama will be splitting off from Obama's itinerary to attend a women's conference hosted by Laura Bush. That increases the need for adequate security.

Add it all up, and the trip, while certainly costly, will be important to furthering our foreign policy goals.
Oneal

Grand Rapids, MI

#4 Jun 15, 2013
Mark Luxford wrote:
A couple of points. First of all, why is he going to Sub-Saharan Africa? Because China is making great inroads at establishing relationships with African nations because they are rich in the natural resources that China covets. If we are going to try and keep China from gaining more power and influence on the African continent we have to establish strong relationships with some of those countries. To do that, to establish those relationships, a state visit is needed. We have long ignored Sub-Saharan Africa, and China has moved in to fill that vacuum.
Second, much of that cost is due to security concerns. Africa is a dangerous place; a fertile ground for Islamic terrorists.
Third, Michelle Obama will be splitting off from Obama's itinerary to attend a women's conference hosted by Laura Bush. That increases the need for adequate security.
Add it all up, and the trip, while certainly costly, will be important to furthering our foreign policy goals.
If a relationship with a continent who's countries are so poor and dangerous it takes tens of millions of dollars to stay safe when venturing into is so important, it would be far less costly and dangerous to simply invite the leaders of those nations to the White House. I don't think the Obama's strutting around Africa at the expense of the American people would alter what needs to be discussed on bit.

I suspect this is another "timely" distraction from the ongoing scandals that have soaked Obama over the last month. Create an outrage over something Obama's mouthpieces can at least spin into a positive and take the heat off the scandals that are proving indefensible.
Phil

Oxford, MI

#5 Jun 15, 2013
Oneal wrote:
$16 TRILLION IN DEBT and the president who's contributed mightily to that number is currently packing the "Presidential Family Truckster" to head over to Africa - all on the taxpayers' dime. The same taxpayer who was told they could no longer tour the White House because we had to make cuts.

http://townhall.com/tipsheet/heatherginsberg/...

Rep. George Holding from North Carolina "For the cost of this trip to Africa, you could have 1,350 weeks of White House tours, which the White House has canceled indefinitely due to budget constraints.¬Ē

Holding also reiterated that the country is currently $16 trillion in debt, and yet here we are spending $100 million that we don’t have. Remember back when the sequestration first went into affect the White House chose to do away with the tours. Well, apparently like we had all said before, this didn’t have to happen. By simply looking at budgeting, and cutting extravagance, we could have avoided this.
You just can't make this stuff up! Unbelievable....
Phil

Oxford, MI

#6 Jun 15, 2013
Oneal wrote:
<quoted text>If a relationship with a continent who's countries are so poor and dangerous it takes tens of millions of dollars to stay safe when venturing into is so important, it would be far less costly and dangerous to simply invite the leaders of those nations to the White House. I don't think the Obama's strutting around Africa at the expense of the American people would alter what needs to be discussed on bit.

I suspect this is another "timely" distraction from the ongoing scandals that have soaked Obama over the last month. Create an outrage over something Obama's mouthpieces can at least spin into a positive and take the heat off the scandals that are proving indefensible.
There is always video conferencing. That is very cheap. Then we could all save money on transportation and entertainment.
SOS in Mesa

Scottsdale, AZ

#7 Jun 15, 2013
Mark Luxford wrote:
A couple of points. First of all, why is he going to Sub-Saharan Africa? Because China is making great inroads at establishing relationships with African nations because they are rich in the natural resources that China covets. If we are going to try and keep China from gaining more power and influence on the African continent we have to establish strong relationships with some of those countries. To do that, to establish those relationships, a state visit is needed. We have long ignored Sub-Saharan Africa, and China has moved in to fill that vacuum.
Second, much of that cost is due to security concerns. Africa is a dangerous place; a fertile ground for Islamic terrorists.
Third, Michelle Obama will be splitting off from Obama's itinerary to attend a women's conference hosted by Laura Bush. That increases the need for adequate security.
Add it all up, and the trip, while certainly costly, will be important to furthering our foreign policy goals.
His foreign policies have been great so far. LOL
Phil

Oxford, MI

#8 Jun 15, 2013
SOS in Mesa wrote:
<quoted text>His foreign policies have been great so far. LOL
Come to think of it his Domestic policies too! Yes we can! Yes we can! Forward! Forward!
To bad so many elected him before they read him.
Oneal

Grand Rapids, MI

#9 Jun 15, 2013
There's no defending this arrogant, disassociated decision by President Obama. It's either an incredibly detached and inept decision at a time when Obama himself has said we are too broke to spend, or it's as I suspect, yet another sleight of hand game being played by an administration that is about as transparent as kevlar, desperate to try and take the focus off it's paranoid and overreaching activities against American citizens.
Really

Wyoming, MI

#10 Jun 15, 2013
Mark Luxford wrote:
A couple of points. First of all, why is he going to Sub-Saharan Africa? Because China is making great inroads at establishing relationships with African nations because they are rich in the natural resources that China covets. If we are going to try and keep China from gaining more power and influence on the African continent we have to establish strong relationships with some of those countries. To do that, to establish those relationships, a state visit is needed. We have long ignored Sub-Saharan Africa, and China has moved in to fill that vacuum.
Second, much of that cost is due to security concerns. Africa is a dangerous place; a fertile ground for Islamic terrorists.
Third, Michelle Obama will be splitting off from Obama's itinerary to attend a women's conference hosted by Laura Bush. That increases the need for adequate security.
Add it all up, and the trip, while certainly costly, will be important to furthering our foreign policy goals.
Why all of a sudden is it so important? And if it requires a visit from State, then perhaps Mr. Kerry's department should handle it?? Of course, then the Obama's couldn't charge the taxpayers for this little jaunt of theirs. When a country is $16 Trillion in debt and counting, these expenses are unnecessary.
OhOhObama

Grand Rapids, MI

#11 Jun 16, 2013
It could be a trillion dollar trip, and the news would still defend him, heck 2,3,4 trillion.
Oneal

Grand Rapids, MI

#12 Jun 16, 2013
The left rode the anti-Bush bus for a decade, accurately stating he spent like a drunken monkey at the expense of the American people and ran up our deficit to record numbers. All true.

Now, they've elected a president who is doing the exact same thing. No Hope & Change, just spending - at record levels.

Despite all the pompous rhetoric and lofty promises Obama has piled on in his never-ending self-promotion tour, he has done nothing to stop the spending.

Despite angrily canceling White House tours, dangerously cutting security and health programs, educational programs and putting thousands of people out of work because he didn't get his way with his own Sequestration invention, Obama has no problem golfing. partying, vacationing, and now racking up a 60-100 million dollar tab for an altogether unnecessary tour of Africa for he and his family.

Come on liberals, put your money where your mouths were. Tell us why you were so angry than, and so silent now?

Wiggley, you want to know why I call liberals fools - this is why. And I defy you to tell me why I'm wrong in doing so considering the evidence.
Rob

United States

#13 Jun 16, 2013
Oneal wrote:
The left rode the anti-Bush bus for a decade, accurately stating he spent like a drunken monkey at the expense of the American people and ran up our deficit to record numbers. All true.

Now, they've elected a president who is doing the exact same thing. No Hope & Change, just spending - at record levels.

Despite all the pompous rhetoric and lofty promises Obama has piled on in his never-ending self-promotion tour, he has done nothing to stop the spending.

Despite angrily canceling White House tours, dangerously cutting security and health programs, educational programs and putting thousands of people out of work because he didn't get his way with his own Sequestration invention, Obama has no problem golfing. partying, vacationing, and now racking up a 60-100 million dollar tab for an altogether unnecessary tour of Africa for he and his family.

Come on liberals, put your money where your mouths were. Tell us why you were so angry than, and so silent now?

Wiggley, you want to know why I call liberals fools - this is why. And I defy you to tell me why I'm wrong in doing so considering the evidence.
Because he has a D by his name. That was easy! If you got another one let me know.:)

Since: Mar 09

Grandville, MI

#14 Jun 16, 2013
Oneal wrote:
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-25 0_162-57589236/report-obamas-a frica-trip-could-cost-$60-100- million
[A presidential trip to Africa this month could cost the government anywhere from $60 to $100 million dollars, according to the Washington Post ...
Read the article for the specifics. I'd just like to remind you all of just some of the "skin" that the American people were forced to put in the "game" thanks to Obama's Sequestration:
$75 million cut from the Aging and Disability Services Programs
$199 million cut from public housing
$96 million cut from Homeless Assistance Grants
$19 million cut from Housing for the Elderly
$175 million cut from Low Income Home Energy Assistance
$928 million cut from FEMAís disaster relief money
$125 million cut from the Wildland Fire Management
$86 million cut from Student Financial Assistance
$512 million cut from Customs and Border Protection
$232 million cut from the Federal Aviation Administration
Ending of White House tours for the American public.
Obama deemed these services and the jobs that went with them necessary to cut, yet the Obama's are OK with spending an eye-popping $60-100 million for an entirely unnecessary three-country tour of Africa.
Just look at all the money he's saving!
So what if he spends $100 MILLION on a vacation!
He deserves it!
And you cant forget Michelle!
She hasnt had a vacation in weeks!
She deserves another one!
The sequester seems to be working well for the Obama's.
And thats all that matters.
Batch 37 Pain Is Good

Brighton, MI

#15 Jun 16, 2013
Mark Luxford wrote:
A couple of points. First of all, why is he going to Sub-Saharan Africa? Because China is making great inroads at establishing relationships with African nations because they are rich in the natural resources that China covets. If we are going to try and keep China from gaining more power and influence on the African continent we have to establish strong relationships with some of those countries. To do that, to establish those relationships, a state visit is needed. We have long ignored Sub-Saharan Africa, and China has moved in to fill that vacuum.
Second, much of that cost is due to security concerns. Africa is a dangerous place; a fertile ground for Islamic terrorists.
Third, Michelle Obama will be splitting off from Obama's itinerary to attend a women's conference hosted by Laura Bush. That increases the need for adequate security.
Add it all up, and the trip, while certainly costly, will be important to furthering our foreign policy goals.
GW Bush had it covered for 8 years and now the O is just getting to it? Come on!
Mark Luxford

Grand Rapids, MI

#16 Jun 17, 2013
Really wrote:
<quoted text>Why all of a sudden is it so important? And if it requires a visit from State, then perhaps Mr. Kerry's department should handle it?? Of course, then the Obama's couldn't charge the taxpayers for this little jaunt of theirs. When a country is $16 Trillion in debt and counting, these expenses are unnecessary.
I read a news story over the weekend about this trip and it said that the costs are not out of line with the costs of previous presidential visits.
Mark Luxford

Grand Rapids, MI

#17 Jun 17, 2013
Batch 37 Pain Is Good wrote:
<quoted text>GW Bush had it covered for 8 years and now the O is just getting to it? Come on!
I'll have to get back with you on that Batch. Bush may have made state visits to countries like Egypt and Morocco, but they are not Sub-Saharan countries. How many state visits did Bush make to countries below the Sahara Desert?
Jules

Grand Rapids, MI

#18 Jun 17, 2013
Oneal wrote:
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-25 0_162-57589236/report-obamas-a frica-trip-could-cost-$60-100- million
[A presidential trip to Africa this month could cost the government anywhere from $60 to $100 million dollars, according to the Washington Post ...
Read the article for the specifics. I'd just like to remind you all of just some of the "skin" that the American people were forced to put in the "game" thanks to Obama's Sequestration:
$75 million cut from the Aging and Disability Services Programs
$199 million cut from public housing
$96 million cut from Homeless Assistance Grants
$19 million cut from Housing for the Elderly
$175 million cut from Low Income Home Energy Assistance
$928 million cut from FEMAís disaster relief money
$125 million cut from the Wildland Fire Management
$86 million cut from Student Financial Assistance
$512 million cut from Customs and Border Protection
$232 million cut from the Federal Aviation Administration
Ending of White House tours for the American public.
Obama deemed these services and the jobs that went with them necessary to cut, yet the Obama's are OK with spending an eye-popping $60-100 million for an entirely unnecessary three-country tour of Africa.
From your link

"Obama's trip could cost the federal government as much as $60-100 million, based on similar trips in recent years."

Do you know what that means? Bush's trips there in 2003 and 2008, which had to have (based on their estimates) cost between $60-100 million. Funny, I don't remember the outrage from the Viagra crowd back then. Why now? LOL!
vox veritatis

Grand Rapids, MI

#19 Jun 17, 2013
Jules wrote:
From your link
"Obama's trip could cost the federal government as much as $60-100 million, based on similar trips in recent years."
Do you know what that means? Bush's trips there in 2003 and 2008, which had to have (based on their estimates) cost between $60-100 million. Funny, I don't remember the outrage from the Viagra crowd back then. Why now? LOL!
I don't recall Bush pushing a sequester, cancelling White House tours (among other things) in a childish snit to punish the public and telling Americans they need to sacrifice and cut back while he lived lavishly on the taxpayers dime. Got a link to where he did those things?
Phil

Oxford, MI

#20 Jun 17, 2013
I have two questions. Did Obama stop his Wednesday night parties? The second is, has anyone seen that poor dog lately? I sure hope he did not slip into a crockpot.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 7
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Grand Rapids Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
MI Who do you support for Attorney General in Mich... (Oct '10) 8 hr Go Blue Forever 125
Bengazi is back 9 hr Gville Jim 91
Grand Rapids man robbed at Nunica Rest Stop (Jan '09) 10 hr 8088AXE 3
Old things and places we remember from the Gran... (Feb '09) 12 hr James Minier 946
Back in Iraq. WMD's? oil? 14 hr Batch 37 Pain Is ... 38
'We Don't Have a Strategy' to Fight ISIS t 18 hr Batch 37 Pain Is ... 25
College football roundup: Ohio State starts the... (Sep '13) 19 hr Go Blue Forever 1,373
•••
•••
•••

Grand Rapids Jobs

•••
•••
•••

Grand Rapids People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

•••

Grand Rapids News, Events & Info

Click for news, events and info in Grand Rapids
•••

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]
•••