Public Officials...

[3blackrings]

D or R, you have got to be fed up with the rich. Could this Woman relate to the poor? I doubt it. Anyone with any conscience
could not justify a 1/2 million $ vacation with other people's money. What are we going to do about these things?


Watchdog Group Discloses Cost of First Lady’s Vacation
By PETER BAKER
Michelle Obama’s summer vacation to Spain in 2010 cost taxpayers more than $467,000 in transportation and security expenses, according to a watchdog group that obtained federal records.

http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/04/26/watchdog-group-discloses-cost-of-first-ladys-vacation/

 

[Lerxst]

D or R, you have got to be fed up with the rich. Could this Woman relate to the poor? I doubt it. Anyone with any conscience
could not justify a 1/2 million $ vacation with other people's money. What are we going to do about these things?


Watchdog Group Discloses Cost of First Lady’s Vacation
By PETER BAKER
Michelle Obama’s summer vacation to Spain in 2010 cost taxpayers more than $467,000 in transportation and security expenses, according to a watchdog group that obtained federal records.

http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/04/26/watchdog-group-discloses-cost-of-first-ladys-vacation/

You can't fully blame a government official for spending that amount of money to take a trip. The Secret Service are the ones who dictate how and when they'll travel, the article even mentions that. Flying the jet the SS insists on for security reasons, the costs of the aides, etc. are all part of the government's involvement in the trip. I'd be more interested in seeing what the bill for her plane ticket(s), lodging and meals were on that trip... minus the dozen or so other people who tagged along.

The article also mentions that she reimbursed the government for her trip, but that it didn't cover the costs. Assuming she reimbursed them for the amount of her personal expenses, should she also be responsible for paying for all of the "baggage" the government requires her to bring along? That would be like driving a truck for a company but having to pay for the gas out of your own pocket.

PS - These "watchdog groups" are usually full of it. They take a fraction of the story out of context, without any knowledge about the events or situations surrounding a fact and then publish it as "truth" for the public to see.

 

[3blackrings]

Ummmm, yeah, you can. Who needs to go to Spain with their friends? That's a luxury. Watchdog groups or not. Did it happen or didn't it? It's all over the Net. It doesn't seem limited to R or L oriented news sources. Go ahead. Defend rich Psychopaths.

 

[barbad0s]

Sure it defies "sharing is caring". But there are lots of compelling reasons out there for acting like a dick. That's why so many people do.

There's no point in asking "how is it justified". Try giving away all your personal comforts to charity except for what you need to barely survive. The only difference here is the scale. You can argue that they are the ones who have been given power and assigned responsibility and so they should be frugal and think outside themselves, but certain constructs of social conformity also exist, and no human or human group can easily ignore, oppose, or thwart them all successfully, even if it's for the sake of equality and sympathy for the masses.

 

[3blackrings]

There's no point in asking "how is it justified".

Why?

Try giving away all your personal comforts to charity except for what you need to barely survive.

Rush Limbaugh style assassination of argument by extreme, not relevant observation. It's not even close to what the result of her/them not going to Spain would be. I don't know what, if anything, would be the result of them not going, but it wouldn't be due to them living like the rest of the country.

You can argue that they are the ones who have been given power and assigned responsibility and so they should be frugal and think outside themselves,...

Is that wrong? They have been given responsibility, and they swore to uphold the Constitution, which doesn't include mucking about with the horsey set...unless you're already part of it, then of course it's you're entitlement to all the finer things.

...but certain constructs of social conformity also exist, and no human or human group can easily ignore, oppose, or thwart them all successfully, even if it's for the sake of equality and sympathy for the masses.

And the First Lady is the worlds trendsetter! She could do anything she wanted and millions would follow. Just say no, eh?

 

[barbad0s]

Why?

Because you already know it isn't justified. Of course you know it's wrong and so does everyone else. And that it's always been going on throughout human history and it's unlikely you can do anything about it, especially through discussion on an internet forum. Lots of people want power, and the people that usually get it are the ones that want it enough to step over everybody else. Usually the ones that want to save the world don't also have the ability to get the power to do it. Those people are usually meditating on mountaintops and posting on INFJ forums.

 

[Lerxst]

Unless it's changed (and I'm not that up to date on the figures) the President of the United States earns $250,000 a year, not counting additional benefits. That puts him and his family out of the range of most "average" families right from the start. A trip to Spain, even first-class with a friend or two, while her husband earns that salary isn't outrageous. The six figure number the government inflates that to in the name of national security is the outrageous part.

I'm saying the government is the f***ed up part here, not the individual's expenses.

 

[3blackrings]

Because you already know it isn't justified.

I don't understand. Don't ask why because I already know the answer? You have to start somewhere.

...and it's unlikely you can do anything about it, especially through discussion on an internet forum.

This is where you're wrong. Information exchange is the best way to inform and affect change. Just ask the Russians:

“In keeping silent about evil, in burying it so deep within us that no sign of it appears on the surface, we are implanting it, and it will rise up a thousand fold in the future. When we neither punish nor reproach evildoers, we are not simply protecting their trivial old age, we are thereby ripping the foundations of justice from beneath new generations.”


“We didn't love freedom enough.”


"At what point, then, should one resist? When one's belt is taken away? When one is ordered to face into a corner? When one crosses the threshold of one's home? An arrest consists of a series of incidental irrelevancies, of a multitude of things that do not matter, and there seems no point in arguing about one of them individually...and yet all these incidental irrelevancies taken together implacably constitute the arrest.”


“It is unthinkable in the twentieth century to fail to distinguish between what constitutes an abominable atrocity that must be prosecuted and what constitutes that "past" which "ought not to be stirred up.”


― Aleksandr I. Solzhenitsyn, The Gulag Archipelago 1918-1956

And I couldn't find the quote, but he wrote about how people were made to distrust each other, out of fear of being dragged out of your bed at 3:00 A.M., or in a Train Station in the middle of the day with people watching and never being heard of again. He said you could scream for help and people would be scared to help. This was targeted at people talking anything anti-government. You didn't know who to trust, therefore you didn't talk at all. Therefore you were suppressed. It's all about talking openly. Like I am now. They couldn't do that. And at least two people read. Even if they disagreed, I don't care.

And I don't buy into conspiracy theories FYI. Too many unreliable humans involved to keep it a secret. This isn't any conspiracy. How this got from MO to here? Michelle Obama is not Joseph Stalin. Government running rampant is a sign of...what exactly? Something serious. This country is in trouble. So is the rest of the world. We can do something about it though. I think the thing is, it's so complex and deep that it's so hard to get a 50,000 ft. view of it. Right? In small instances, it seems like it can be ignored. But step back and look and the mind reels. We forgot already that the war was a lie. Nobody got all that pissed about it anyway. Even the Artists didn't. At least from what I saw compared to '62-'75. Prove me wrong and I will feel better. Entropy. We as a species have come a long way really quickly. Look at the Crocodile. Unchanged in 65 million yrs. or more. Are we a shooting star? I'm starting to ramTHCble blog-like, of which I don't do. I should shut up and watch Frasier.

 

[barbad0s]

Well I do agree with you and your reasons to be concerned. But honestly, I don't care about the future of humanity or the world past my lifetime. I'm only nice when I'm alive now because being nice gives me endorphins. I don't care if that means I'm an unempathetic bitch for saying it somehow, or am jaded or defeated and weak for being like this, but those are my honest feelings, and that's how I can be apathetic about it, and how I can let go. Perhaps people don't get as pissed off about it because they share the same feelings as me, and they are just in denial.

 

[3blackrings]

You don't value what you have?

 

[barbad0s]

Yes I value what I have, but I'm betting on having it until I die, and that it's not worth my worrying about while I still have it. If I lost my freedom, life would be shit but at least it won't be boring. I'll find a way to survive somehow. Or not, and be tortured to death by govt officials. Who really knows?

 

[3blackrings]

Nobody knows the whole 50,000 ft. version of it. It's too complex and there are those that know this and exploit it.

 

[Quiet]

Its a complicated issue because government trips are often diplomatic/strategic in nature and they do require a lot of security, bells, whistles because of the nature of their person.

I think information relating to government costs regarding things of this nature should published on their official webpage, so that the public can be aware of how their money is being spent. This will also help the governemnt to be more transperant and accountable, which is essential in a democracy. In general I think all data, costings and contracts should be made available for public perusal. The government only exists to serve the people.

This is an idea I got from Zindell's sci fi novels, 'Requiem for Homosapiens'. I would like to live in a society where people in positions of power and authority- government, officials etc- are paid a very minimal income but also have all their basic needs and living requirements taken care of. More of a honour system, where there people in power are revered and respected for their integrity, effectiveness and service to the people. Under no circumstances should anyone in a position of power also have money. Money and power should be as separate as possible in my opinion. This would ensure that people want to be in positions of power for the right reason- which is the honour of being able to serve the public and take responsibilty for the state of affairs.

People can still chase money and be rich (if they are so inclined), but they should be unable to hold positions in government. The kind of society where you respect people for you they are, what they have been able to achieve, what they have contributed, and not for what side of the fence they happened to be born in. And under no circumstances should any member of the government be allowed to own/ have shares in media. We need as much separation as possible between money, power and media and much more emphasis on honour, integrity, respect, transperancy, communication, efficiency and democracy. People need to get off their asses and start contributing, holding their governments accountable and understand that they are not separate from the government.

 

[3blackrings]

[MENTION=4956]Asarya[/MENTION]

I couldn't agree with you more. I've often thought the best people for the job might be people who wouldn't want to do it. Somebody not attracted to power or fame or money, but someone attracted to learning, simplicity, humility, integrity. And that's exactly the people that aren't there. The rich today in America are treated like royalty. Enough money to usually be above the law. I think there's the 1% and then there's the .1%.

 

[MindYourHead]

No, I'm not fed up with the rich. They don't owe me anything. Most gained their wealth through hard work and wise investing. They started productive businesses and invested earnings back into the business that in turn provides employment for others.
Why does the First Lady have to relate to the poor? Just because she can take an expensive vacation doesn't mean she loses all empathy towards others.
Would it be better if she vacationed by sleeping under a bridge for a week? How would that improve anything for the poor?

Unless it's changed (and I'm not that up to date on the figures) the President of the United States earns $250,000 a year, not counting additional benefits. That puts him and his family out of the range of most "average" families right from the start.

It was increased to $400,000 in 2001.
That was the first raise since it was set at $200,000 back in 1969.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/President_of_the_United_States

 

[MindYourHead]

I couldn't agree with you more. I've often thought the best people for the job might be people who wouldn't want to do it. Somebody not attracted to power or fame or money, but someone attracted to learning, simplicity, humility, integrity. And that's exactly the people that aren't there.

I agree with this. But unfortunately, it is not going to happen.
I wish we could go back to the time when a farmer for example would hold an elected office and then return to the farm when their term was up.

 

[the]

D or R, you have got to be fed up with the rich. Could this Woman relate to the poor? I doubt it. Anyone with any conscience
could not justify a 1/2 million $ vacation with other people's money. What are we going to do about these things?


Watchdog Group Discloses Cost of First Lady’s Vacation
By PETER BAKER
Michelle Obama’s summer vacation to Spain in 2010 cost taxpayers more than $467,000 in transportation and security expenses, according to a watchdog group that obtained federal records.

http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/04/26/watchdog-group-discloses-cost-of-first-ladys-vacation/

IDK what are you going to do about it besides bring the typical "awareness" which never does anything really.

 

[3blackrings]

[MENTION=1355]MindYourHead[/MENTION]

Would it be better if she vacationed by sleeping under a bridge for a week? How would that improve anything for the poor?

Yeah. I give up.

 

[muir]

And I don't buy into conspiracy theories FYI. Too many unreliable humans involved to keep it a secret.

Many 'conspiracy theories' are not a secret

Also there is often documentation proving the conspiracies and sometimes there are even admissions by the conspirators themselves, its just that it is not published in the main stream media (but it becomes fun reading between the lines of the mainstream media when you get a handle on the big picture) and most people do not go to the effort to question the consensus reality that is forged by the perceptions peddled in the mainstream media

For example one of the main 'conspiracy theories' at the moment is that there is an east coast elite in the US who influence government and the CIA through think tanks such as the council on foreign relations and that they want to create a global government.

One of their attempts at creating global governance apparatus was the League of Nations followed by the UN. The Bolsheviks (eg Trotsky) were funded and supported by this elite (international bankers) who believed that they could do business with the Bolsheviks and looked forward to the Russian markets opening up to trade, but Stalin took power and blocked their efforts.

One of the most prominant 'conspirators' is David Rockefeller who is patriarch of the Rockefeller family, served as part of his familiy affiliated bank, the Chase bank, which owns a sizeable portion of the shares of the 'federal' reserve bank which controls the US money supply and sets its interest rates. Here's what he said in his 2002 autobiography:

"For more than a century ideological extremists at either end of the political spectrum have seized upon well-publicized incidents such as my encounter with Castro to attack the Rockefeller family for the inordinate influence they claim we wield over American political and economic institutions. Some even believe we are part of a secret cabal working against the best interests of the United States, characterizing my family and me as internationalists and of conspiring with others around the world to build a more integrated global political and economic structure – one world, if you will. If that's the charge, I stand guilty, and I am proud of it."

So there you have it....right from the horses mouth, so to speak

There is a conspiracy and its not really a matter of opinion

 

[3blackrings]

[MENTION=1871]muir[/MENTION]

Their first attempt at creating global governance apparatus was the League of Nations followed by the UN. The Bolsheviks (eg Trotsky) were funded and supported by this elite (international bankers) who believed that they could do business with the Bolsheviks and looked forward to the Russian markets opening up to trade, but Stalin took power and blocked their efforts.

Is this basically your statement?: The U.N. is run by banks. The LON became the U.N. which attempted to fund the Communist Party of the Soviet Union because they wanted to do business with them, but Stalin, maybe during one of his party purges, killed it.

I'm pretty sure that's true. Is that what you meant?

So there you have it....right from the horses mouth, so to speak

I've read about the "New World Order". It makes me nervous, mainly because of it's membership. Lots of wealthy people that have mismaneuvered our country to where it is. The .1%. Sometimes I wonder if the ultimate aim for them isn't for a third worldish America with them as Royalty. When someone can devastate lives and walk away from it, sometimes with aid from the taxpayer, there's an issue.

Yet despite the glaring evidence some people still say things like 'i don't think there's a conspiracy'

At this point I don't see much of a conflict to be honest with you. I assumed people can read my mind. My bad. I'm thinking of the unproven, controversial type. And I won't go into the definition of that.

Well there is one and someone expressing their opinion online that they don't believe in it is not going to change the reality of it

Again, I think maybe a misunderstanding...which I think is how many bad tings happen. Sucks.