Check this out, folks.....
Now that this little piece of news is out, the collective response from Liberals will be:
INSERT THUMB.
From "Judicial Watch":
Obama Daughters are Michelle's 'Senior Staffers'
Michelle was caught
cheating on her expense report. What a show of arrogance!
This
information was obtained by Judicial Watch March, 2012. The administration had
to be sued to get this through the FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT.
Michelle
Obama listed daughters as 'Senior Staffers' to justify her expensive African
vacation and safari.
October 5, 2011, Judicial Watch said the U.S. Air
Force provided a C-32 ( a Boeing 757 ), modified by the military for the purpose
of flying big-wigs around the world, to fly the First Lady and her entourage to
and from Africa , at a cost of $424,142. Another $928.44 was listed as 'bulk
food' costs per meal for the192 on board meals for the 21 people who made the
trip. Lobster ain't cheap when you fly it around the world.
The Obama
daughters were listed on the manifest as senior staff. 'This trip was as much an
opportunity for the Obama family to go on a safari as it was a trip to conduct
government business,' said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. 'This junket
wasted tax dollars and the resources of our over extended military. No wonder we
had to sue to pry loose this information.' The nation is suffering with the
economy sputtering, the national debt soaring and Obama's economic rescue
policies not only failing, but actively making things worse.
Meanwhile,
the First Lady justifies an expensive trip to Africa to take a vacation and
safari with her daughters by saying it's 'official business' and even going so
far as to list her children as staffers. The level of arrogance and dishonesty
on display here is nothing short of shocking.
But, 'hope for change' -
when?
It's a true story. Check out these links and read it for
yourself:
http://www.judicialwatch.org/press-room/press-releases/judicial-watch-obtains-documents-detailing-the-cost-to-taxpayers-for-michelle-obama-s-family-trip-to-africa/press-room/press-releases/judicial-watch-obtains-documents-detailing-the-cost-to-taxpayers-for-michelle-obama-s-family-trip-to-africa/
2 comments:
First off let me just say; wow, thanks for trusting the "maturity" of your nonexistent commenters, LOL!
I know you're one of those folks suffering from Obama Derangement Syndrome (and in your case Liberal Derangement Syndrome as well) but a quick search of the web would have debunked all the LIES you have posted here. I thought you were a Catholic, isn't one of the Ten Commandments; Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbor?
Judging by this blog you're on your way to fire and brimstone for all lies, name calling and the general ugliness of your soul.
Burn in hell Hirota ...out!
The facts;
First off this "story" and I do mean story, is almost two years old, timely Hirota (I guess your venomous histrionics don't need to be relevant). Second any time a First Lady of the USA travels anywhere it's funded with government money, so when Laura Bush took her two daughters and an entourage to Africa for a safari, it too was government funded.
Further, the safari part of the trip was paid for by the Obamas. As for the girls being designated as "senior staff" just plain WRONG;
"The Obama daughters were not listed as Senior Staff -- that only designates the area of the plane where they were seated," says the official. "The Air Force categorizes the passengers by compartment on the plane."
Media matters;
"... to say that the trip "was as much an opportunity for the Obama family and friends to go on a safari as it was a trip intended to advance the administration's agenda in Africa" is absurd. The six-day trip was dominated by official events and meetings with world leaders. Mrs. Obama met with the South African president's wife, Nompumelelo Ntuli-Zuma; spoke to the Young African Women Leaders Forum; participated in community service events in Johannesburg; visited U.S. embassies and consulates; spoke at the University of Cape Town and met with students from poor communities; held a meeting with Archbishop Desmond Tutu; met with Botswanan president Ian Khama; and gave interviews to several news outlets, including NBC, ABC, BET, and CNN.
Lastly, Judicial Watch doesn't really explain how a meeting with Nelson Mandela, the former South African president and icon of the global struggle for racial equality, constitutes "tourism." Also, the other events Judicial Watch considers "tourism" -- visits to museums and historical landmarks -- are standard fare for visiting dignitaries. Laura Bush, during the same Africa trip noted above, toured museums and memorials dedicated to victims of apartheid and genocide.
So there's not a whole lot to undergird Judicial Watch's outrage, though that was never the point. Hatchet-jobs like these are less about good government than they are taking pot-shots at the administration. The First Lady's Africa trip was nothing out of the ordinary, but when you cherry-pick a few numbers and gin up the requisite amount of faux-righteous anger, you can turn almost anything into a damaging meme.
Judicial Watch left out a lot of key information, and what they left in they got wrong. But when you're trying to manufacture anti-Obama narratives under the guise of good-government watchdogging, accuracy isn't really a huge concern.
I have to admit.....I love when Liberals talk about the concept of hell....
That said, you make some great points. Thank you for those. Readers will decide for themselves...
But, to touch on a few things...
I generally don't adress a blogging audience (for the most part, these folks all have my personal email and send notes privately...something I welcome.)
And, of course, you are welcome to do that, too.
timothyhirota@sbcglobal.net
....not that that is worth mentioning.
Second, this simply paints a larger picture of the current administration.
Is the report old? Answer: does it matter? Or rather, WOULD it matter....to Liberals if Bush was still in office? (I suspect you know the answer to that. I never bother discussing the age of data, because BOTH sides are guilty of 'agelessness'. I recommend you follow that, lest you be seen as a hypocrite.
But, again, this points to a greater issue.
And, truly, the issue (for me, anyway) isn't even the "spending money like a drunken sailor" mentality of this administration.
Rather, it's about Liberals' hypocrisy in criticizing only the one side, while giving a free pass to the other.
VERY small case in point:
During the Bush administration, the President was constantly condemned for his vacation time; specifically, his rounds of golf.
Yet, those same people say nothing about the current President, even though he's been out for four times as many rounds as Bush had....in 8 years.
Again, small point, but typical.
If you've followed my blog throughout its history, you'd know that I go after ALL sides, irrespective of political affiliation. (Bush is on record as having received the highest nymber of "idiot of the week" awards from me.
THIS is what I don't tolerate....the hypocrisy.
As with many of your posted comments, psychiatrists call it "projection".
From "Obama derangement syndrome" to "Liberal derangement syndrome" to the age of the report thing, to the 'leaving out info' thing.
Hypocritical.
Which includes selective retention...
Best- and thanks again for weighing in...
Hirota: out.
Post a Comment