Niles Gardner: Time for the White House to rein in Michelle Obama's out-of-control spending

A perfect example is Michelle Obama and her girls traveling to Martha's Vineyard four hours ahead of Obama on a separate plane and now Obama is headed back to DC this afternoon but the 'queen' is staying until tomorrow morning before she flies back to DC.  Is she going to cause problems for those people evacuating the Cape with her large entourage?   This Administration is truly tone deaf to the American people and what we are going through.

Obviously there is no shared sacrifice out of the Obama's as they feel entitled to all the perks they can find as President and First Lady.  Why does the American Taxpayer have to foot the bill for all the First Lady's vacations.  Who elected her?  Wonder if she like the Country now since they are living off the taxpayers as many are struggling to meet their bills.  This is beyond disgust that this pair have such little regard to Americans as they attempt to live like a King and Queen.

Time to send Obama and his Queen to the unemployment line in 2012.  Maybe they will decide to go live overseas since their time in the spotlight will be over and no longer will she be able to snap her fingers and a plane will be at her disposal.  She can go back to hating the United States.

Time for the White House to rein in Michelle Obama's out-of-control spending
By Nile Gardiner World Last updated: August 26th, 2011 

With the United States facing a national debt of more than $14 trillion, the largest since World War Two, wouldn’t it make sense for the White House itself to start trimming its own spending? A good place to begin cutting would be Michelle Obama’s rather generous vacation programme. Keith Coffler, who edits the influential White House Dossier, notes that Michelle Obama spent no less than 42 days on vacation over the past year – that’s one in every nine days: 

Her vacations, the cost of which are mostly borne by taxpayers, include trips to Panama City, Fla., Martha’s Vineyard, Hawaii, South Africa, Latin America, Vail, Colo., and her visit this week to her brother in Corvallis, Ore. 

The total does not include a nine day sojourn in Martha’s Vineyard that the Obamas will enjoy this month. Nor does it include a trip she made to Ireland and Great Britain in May, which I’m counting as official travel.

As Coffler points out, there is a significant cost to the public purse: 

Taxpayers pick up most of the cost of transporting the first lady and her extensive entourage – including Secret Service and her staff – to her various destinations. While she may in some cases pay some of the tab for her personal expenses and travel, the amount is dwarfed by the overall cost to the public. 

It is unclear what the total cost to the taxpayer actually amounts to. According to one estimate provided by the Daily Mail, the First Lady stands accused by sources inside the White House of spending “$10 million of US taxpayers’ money on vacations alone in the past year.” Judging by the amount of vacation time Michelle Obama has taken and the level of security and staffing that she has, this sounds like a plausible figure. It would be in the public interest to have the exact numbers provided by the White House so that Americans know precisely how much of their money is being spent on vacations.

There does appear to be an unhealthy sense of entitlement on the part of the First Lady, which seems in poor taste at a time when 14 million Americans are out of work, the housing market is collapsing, and the United States is facing the strong possibility of a double-dip recession. 

Perhaps Mrs Obama could take a few tips on austerity as well as humility from her British counterpart Samantha Cameron, who has just one assistant, in contrast to at least 17 personal staff for the First Lady, and doesn’t feel the need to travel en masse with an entourage at taxpayers’ expense. The vast majority of Americans are making significant sacrifices at this time of economic turmoil, and tens of millions are struggling even to make ends meet. It’s time for both the President and the First Lady to exercise a bit of fiscal responsibility, not least when they are spending other people’s hard-earned money. 

Source: Visit the London Telegraph to see pictures of Michelle on vacation in Spain

Hillary Clinton's U.S. State Department is Building .. Mosques?

Once again the Secretary of State Hillary Clinton is wasting our tax dollars. This time it is on building or refurbishing Islamic Mosques which is actually against Section 205.1(d) of title 22 of the Code of Federal Regulations which prohibits using USAID funds for “inherently religious activities." We would expect that an Islamic Mosque would fall in the "inherently religious activity" category but that doesn't seem to have stopped the State Department.

Has anyone seen an accounting of how our taxpayer dollars are being spent by Ms. Clinton at the State Department? Would bet a fairly high amount is spent on her pet projects like the Clintons did when they were in the White House. Trip to Africa comes to mind with the vast number of 'close' friends they took with them or their trip to China. Now that she is Secretary of State she can fund all kinds of projects like it is coming out of her checkbook, but it is our tax dollars. The Clintons have no more regard for our taxpayer dollars than the Obamas who are bankrupting this Country.

The next time you see a billboard with President Bush's face asking "Do you miss me yet?" feel free to say "YES!" We didn't always agree with some things he did like his plan for immigration, but we found him to be an honest man who believed in the inherent good of people. Problem is he extended that to Bill Clinton and Barack Obama who like nothing better than to trash Pres Bush. Also missing former Secretary of State Condi Rice who understood foreign affairs versus the current SoS Clinton who just wants to pass out money and play up to our enemies.

Guess we shouldn't be shocked that the good friend of Arafat's wife, Hillary, is using State Department money to help build and refurbish mosques. Something to remember if Hillary decides to run for President again.

U.S. State Department is Building… Mosques
Posted by Candace de Russy Aug 12th 2010 at 2:24 am

What else is the State Department larding out, at hard-pressed taxpayers’ expense, to facilitate “understanding” with the Muslim world?


What else, that is, in addition to Ground-Zero-Mega-Mosque Imam Rauf’s likely fund-raising gig in five, oil rich countries?

Just as it has greatly, very greatly, disturbed 68% of you registered voters to learn of plans to build a $100 million dollar mosque financed perhaps by the very ones who underwrote the 9/11 slaughter, it will likely disturb you to learn that the State Department has been hard at work – on your dime – rebuilding of mosques in foreign countries.

The Washington Times reports:

In April, U.S. Ambassador to Tanzania Alfonso E. Lenhardt helped cut the ribbon at the 12th-century Kizimkazi Mosque, which was refurbished with assistance from the United States under a program to preserve culturally significant buildings. The U.S. government also helped save the Amr Ebn El Aas Mosque in Cairo, which dates back to 642. The mosque’s namesake was the Muslim conqueror of Christian Egypt, who built the structure on the site where he had pitched his tent before doing battle with the country’s Byzantine rulers.

For those who think the Ground Zero Mosque is an example of “Muslim triumphalism” glorifying conquest, the Amr Ebn El Aas Mosque is an example of such a monument – and one paid for with U.S. taxpayer funds.

By what lights is U.S. citizens’ money being used to preserve and advance Islam? What of First Amendment considerations about the use of public moneys for religious worship? Our government claims murkiness on these issues but nonetheless forges ahead in constructing mosque abroad:

In July 2009, the Office of the Inspector General published an audit of U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) faith-based and community initiatives that examined whether government funds were being used for religious activities. The auditors found that while USAID was funding some religious activities, officials were “uncertain of whether such uses of Agency funding violate Agency regulations or the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment to the Constitution” when balanced against foreign-policy objectives.

Casting uncertainty to the winds, our government proceeded to rebuild the Al Shuhada Mosque in Fallujah, Iraq, in the anticipation of such benefits as “stimulating the economy, enhancing a sense of pride in the community, reducing opposition to international relief organizations operating in Fallujah, and reducing incentives among young men to participate in violence or insurgent groups.”

But here’s the rub:

Section 205.1(d) of title 22 of the Code of Federal Regulations prohibits USAID funds from being used for the rehabilitation of structures to the extent that those structures are used for “inherently religious activities.”

The Times is right: “It is impossible to separate religion from a mosque; any such projects will necessarily support Islam.”

Our taxpayer money should not be used to preserve and promulgate Islam. Nor should it be spent on a tour for Rauf that endows him with both access and the U.S. stamp of approval.

Source: http://bigpeace.com/cderussy/2010/08/12/u-s-state-department-is-building-mosques/

Tax Dollars at Work: US State Department is Building ... Mosques

Once again the Secretary of State Hillary Clinton is wasting our tax dollars. This time it is on building or refurbishing Islamic Mosques which is actually against Section 205.1(d) of title 22 of the Code of Federal Regulations which prohibits using USAID funds for “inherently religious activities." We would expect that an Islamic Mosque would fall in the "inherently religious activity" category but that doesn't seem to have stopped the State Department.

Has anyone seen an accounting of how our taxpayer dollars are being spent by Ms. Clinton at the State Department? Would bet a fairly high amount is spent on her pet projects like the Clintons did when they were in the White House. Trip to Africa comes to mind with the vast number of 'close' friends they took with them or their trip to China. Now that she is Secretary of State she can fund all kinds of projects like it is coming out of her checkbook, but it is our tax dollars. The Clintons have no more regard for our taxpayer dollars than the Obamas who are bankrupting this Country.

The next time you see a billboard with President Bush's face asking "Do you miss me yet?" feel free to say "YES!" We didn't always agree with some things he did like his plan for immigration, but we found him to be an honest man who believed in the inherent good of people. Problem is he extended that to Bill Clinton and Barack Obama who like nothing better than to trash Pres Bush. Also missing former Secretary of State Condi Rice who understood foreign affairs versus the current SoS Clinton who just wants to pass out money and play up to our enemies.

Guess we shouldn't be shocked that the good friend of Arafat's wife, Hillary, is using State Department money to help build and refurbish mosques. Something to remember if Hillary decides to run for President again.

U.S. State Department is Building… Mosques
Posted by Candace de Russy Aug 12th 2010 at 2:24 am

What else is the State Department larding out, at hard-pressed taxpayers’ expense, to facilitate “understanding” with the Muslim world?


What else, that is, in addition to Ground-Zero-Mega-Mosque Imam Rauf’s likely fund-raising gig in five, oil rich countries?

Just as it has greatly, very greatly, disturbed 68% of you registered voters to learn of plans to build a $100 million dollar mosque financed perhaps by the very ones who underwrote the 9/11 slaughter, it will likely disturb you to learn that the State Department has been hard at work – on your dime – rebuilding of mosques in foreign countries.

The Washington Times reports:

In April, U.S. Ambassador to Tanzania Alfonso E. Lenhardt helped cut the ribbon at the 12th-century Kizimkazi Mosque, which was refurbished with assistance from the United States under a program to preserve culturally significant buildings. The U.S. government also helped save the Amr Ebn El Aas Mosque in Cairo, which dates back to 642. The mosque’s namesake was the Muslim conqueror of Christian Egypt, who built the structure on the site where he had pitched his tent before doing battle with the country’s Byzantine rulers.

For those who think the Ground Zero Mosque is an example of “Muslim triumphalism” glorifying conquest, the Amr Ebn El Aas Mosque is an example of such a monument – and one paid for with U.S. taxpayer funds.

By what lights is U.S. citizens’ money being used to preserve and advance Islam? What of First Amendment considerations about the use of public moneys for religious worship? Our government claims murkiness on these issues but nonetheless forges ahead in constructing mosque abroad:

In July 2009, the Office of the Inspector General published an audit of U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) faith-based and community initiatives that examined whether government funds were being used for religious activities. The auditors found that while USAID was funding some religious activities, officials were “uncertain of whether such uses of Agency funding violate Agency regulations or the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment to the Constitution” when balanced against foreign-policy objectives.

Casting uncertainty to the winds, our government proceeded to rebuild the Al Shuhada Mosque in Fallujah, Iraq, in the anticipation of such benefits as “stimulating the economy, enhancing a sense of pride in the community, reducing opposition to international relief organizations operating in Fallujah, and reducing incentives among young men to participate in violence or insurgent groups.”

But here’s the rub:

Section 205.1(d) of title 22 of the Code of Federal Regulations prohibits USAID funds from being used for the rehabilitation of structures to the extent that those structures are used for “inherently religious activities.”

The Times is right: “It is impossible to separate religion from a mosque; any such projects will necessarily support Islam.”

Our taxpayer money should not be used to preserve and promulgate Islam. Nor should it be spent on a tour for Rauf that endows him with both access and the U.S. stamp of approval.

Source: http://bigpeace.com/cderussy/2010/08/12/u-s-state-department-is-building-mosques/

Big Journalism: Michelle, the Media and the Costa del Sol -- aka Taxpayer Funded Vacation

This video comes from Robert Kraft which was linked on Big Journalism in the comments section of their post on Michelle Obama's trip to Spain. This must see video shows the words of Michelle Obama on the campaign trail versus her actions as First Lady. She did a 180 and became an elitist she railed against during the campaign. Is she proud of America now since the taxpayers are footing the bill for her lavish vacations?

Shockingly, Michelle Obama has even semi-lost Maureen Dowd as you can read in the link from the Big Journalism article:

Michelle, the Media and the Costa del Sol
Posted by Frank Ross Aug 7th 2010 at 5:05 pm

You know things are tough all over when even the media start noticing what’s wrong with this picture:

But while most of the country is pinching pennies and downsizing summer sojourns – or forgoing them altogether – the Obamas don’t seem to be heeding their own advice. While many of us are struggling, the First Lady is spending the next few days in a five-star hotel on the chic Costa del Sol in southern Spain with 40 of her “closest friends.” According to CNN, the group is expected to occupy 60 to 70 rooms, more than a third of the lodgings at the 160-room resort. Not exactly what one would call cutting back in troubled times.

Reports are calling the lodgings of Obama’s Spanish fiesta, the Hotel Villa Padierna in Marbella, “luxurious,” “posh” and “a millionaires’ playground.” Estimated room rate per night? Up to a staggering $2,500. Method of transportation? Air Force Two.
Hard to see how anybody could object to that, right?

Naturally, the hacks and non-entities are circling the wagons and attacking Glenn Reynolds for this picture, but even Soros-funded stooges must know that the game, very soon, will be up.

After all, when you’ve semi-lost Maureen Dowd…

We have all the economic problems in the Gulf States with the resorts losing millions of dollars due to the Gulf Oil Spill and Michelle Obama jets off the Spain with an entourage as large if not larger than the President. Shocked she didn't take the limo but then Obama needed that in Chicago for his fundraising trip and to celebrate his birthday without his family. There is something really wrong with this whole deal. Mother and daughter vacation? No way -- was this all about Michelle sticking it to the American people because she could. Now the family is going on another weekend jaunt this time to the Gulf -- too little to late as they are going to Florida not Louisiana where the resorts are really hurting. Are they going to Florida to support No Party Charlie Crist and toss the Democrat candidate Meeks under the bus?

If Congress wants to do something worthwhile -- restrict the travel of the President's wife and family overseas on vacation.

Any First Lady should not be using AF 2, the back-up, to the President's plane. She doesn't need all the communications equipment, etc. on AF 1 that is there for the President to be in constant touch unless she is person running the Government instead of Obama and she is the one who needs to stay in touch.

When Democrats and those people who didn't want to be called racist elected Obama, who did they elect for President - Barack or Michelle? Why else would she need AF 2. Has anyone asked for a passenger list for AF 2? Did her friends really travel separately or was this mainly a lavish vacation for Michelle and the USSS who protect her. Why so many agents to protect the wife of the President? A lot of questions that Mr. Transparency Obama will never deem fit to allow his puppet press secretary Gates to answer.

How Much is Obama Family Costing the US Taxpayers for Travel and White House Parties?

UPDATE: Would bet the trip is going to cost more than they are estimating in this article because it doesn't look like the cargo plans that brought over the USSS SUV's is counted in the price and they have not taken into account that it cost $500,000 to $1M for the Obama date night in New York so staying at this posh hotel has to cost much more. Seeing her sight seeing in Sparin while many of us are pinching pennies is beyond disgusting. Now we learn they closed a public beach to those who are on a holiday with their own money. Obvious she wants to be Queen but her time clock is ticking when they will no longer occupy the White House. Even though former Presidents get good benefits, we won't be picking up the tab of their using Air Force planes as taxi's as then they will have a budget. Even Clinton had to get a cheaper office then he wanted because he was too cheap to supplement what the Feds were giving him.

Current law says that a President and his family has USSS for 10 years after they leave office (Dems put that law in place) -- want to bet it is changed for Obama?

Spanish police close public beach for Michelle Obama's £250,000 Spanish holiday
By Mail Foreign ServiceLast updated at 9:49 PM on 6th August 2010

Michelle Obama today faced a fresh wave of attacks over her lavish break in Spain with 40 friends, which could easily cost U.S. taxpayers a staggering £50,000 a day.

The First Lady has been lambasted for her extravagance at a time when the economy is still struggling. One blogger went so far as to brand her a modern-day Marie Antoinette.

And her critics will be further annoyed when they learn that the president's wife had a Spanish beach closed off today so that she, her daughter and their entourage could go for a swim.

Spanish police cleared off a stretch of beach at the Villa Padierna Hotel in Marbella after the Obamas had finished a busy day of sightseeing.
_____

Why is Michelle Obama walking so far ahead of her daughter on this mother/daughter trip?
With Michelle Obama and their youngest daughter in Spain on a lavish vacation, Obama in Chicago for fundraising, and their oldest daughter at overnight camp, how much money is the taxpayer spending just on USSS alone for this family this week? Are the Democrats reimbursing the Air Force for Obama's travel to Chicago for fundraisers? Legitimate questions that need answers.

We are not expecting answers anytime soon as taxpayers have yet to find out who was on the Air Force One plane that scared New Yorkers last year with their flyover dubbed later as photo op. The date night trip for the Obamas to New York City was estimated to cost about $500,000 to $1M of our tax dollars. That means the trip to Spain is going to far exceed that cost so his wife can take another vacation. Do the Obama's have something against the White House that they want to travel so much? A recent trip for 59 minutes to Ohio cost the taxpayers $500,000+ in cost for an Obama speech.

Amid all these trips including the one for the Olympics, Obama freezes pay for government employees (active and retired) and social security recipients but he didn't freeze the cost of healthcare which went up resulting in a net loss of income. Now we find out while the Obamas use Air Force planes like a taxi service, they went Government employees to use mass transportation.

White House Urges Federal Workers To Travel Less, Use Mass Transit"

President Barack Obama wants federal workers to cut down on business travel and commuting by car as he seeks to reduce heat-trapping emissions produced by the federal government.

The White House was announcing Tuesday that the government will aim to reduce carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gas emissions from indirect sources like employee driving by 13 percent in 2020, compared with 2008 levels.

(snip)

Employee travel and commuting account for the biggest category of what the White House calls indirect sources of pollution, so the main way to limit them will be encouraging employees to travel less for business and to use mass transit for their commutes. Other sources of indirect pollution are waste disposal and energy that is lost through inefficient electricity transmission.

Obama wants Federal employees to cut down on trips while his wife vacations in Spain and he is in Chicago on our nickle? We have a suggestion for Mr. Obama and his wife -- stay home and quit traveling on our nickle for a date night to New York, a 59-minute stay on the ground in Ohio for a speech, vacation in Maine where a separate plane brought the dog and more staff, separate vacation trips for Obama and his wife, and the list goes on. Now we learn instead of using a motorcade that would have taken 12 minutes longer, he uses Marine One. When does Mr. No Transparency work? Oh wait, he doesn't like that word when applied to him.

How much did Obama's trip cost when he used a helicopter instead of a motorcade to give a speech?

President Barack Obama left the White House this morning for a six-mile trip to a sign factory on the Maryland-D.C. border. But instead of taking the presidential motorcade, he took Marine One – the presidential helicopter.

A quick search on Google maps shows the drive would have taken at least 20 minutes, but the helicopter trip took just eight. And, according to one unofficial estimate, it was the 300th trip Obama has taken in Marine One since taking office 20 months ago.

(snip)

Still, “It would be very helpful to the taxpayers if there was a distinct White House travel budget and everybody could look at it,” Schatz added. “Is it really a state secret to know how much is being spent on his travel?”

That last paragraph is the money quote. There seems to be no distinct travel budget for the White House. As taxpayers, it looks like we have no right to see how much the Obama's are spending on travel for their weekend getaways, vacations, and political funding raising trips not to mention the short on the ground stay of Obama making speeches. Are the Democrats reimbursing the Air Force for political trips like this current one to Chicago where he was doing fundraising for the unethical Democrat Illinois Treasurer and mob supporter running for Senate? One thing is definite -- there is no transparency with Obama on anything.

US President Barack Obama (L) waves as he arrives to speak on behalf of Senate Candidate Alexi Giannoulias at the Palmer House Hilton in Chicago, Illinois, on August 5, 2010
Guess you could sum up Obama as he would rather travel and golf than work in the White House which leaves all of us with the question, "Who is doing his work as the President in his absence?"