Price tag for Michelle Obama's Spain trip revealed.

Josh_R

Registered User
Jan 29, 2005
5,847
458
578
Akron, Ohio
#1
Michelle Obama's Spain vacation cost taxpayers nearly $470G, watchdog group claims
Published April 26, 2012
FoxNews.com

Aug. 8, 2010: First lady Michelle Obama greets Spain's King Juan Carlos, as her daughter Sasha watches. (AP)
First lady Michelle Obama's 2010 trip to Spain cost taxpayers nearly $470,000, according to a conservative watchdog group that obtained Secret Service records from the overseas excursion.
That trip, which the first lady took with her younger daughter Sasha, drew widespread criticism at the time -- as the visuals of the first lady in an elegant Mediterranean setting clashed with the still-struggling U.S. economy.
Judicial Watch, which filed a Freedom of Information Act request, claimed Thursday that documents show the trip cost at least $467,585.
Those costs are split between Secret Service expenses and expenses for the flight and flight crew.
Secret Service costs totaled nearly $255,000, according to Judicial Watch.
Based on Pentagon estimates of flight costs, another $199,000 went toward the flight from the United States to Mallorca and back. On top of that were various expenses for the 15-person flight crew. They stayed at a local motel at a cost of roughly $10,000, according to Judicial Watch, in addition to money spent on rental cars and food.
A representative from the first lady's office has not yet responded to a request for comment from FoxNews.com.
At the time of the Spanish getaway, the White House described the vacation as a private trip and said the first lady and others would be paying their own expenses.
But while the first lady is not technically an elected official, any trip away from Washington comes with inevitable costs borne by the taxpayer -- such as Secret Service protection. The same was true for previous first ladies.
Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton invoked the recent scandal involving the General Services Administration's costly conference in the Las Vegas area in chastising the president's family for the trip.
"The American people can ill afford to keep sending the First Family on vacations around the globe," he said in a written statement. "There needs to be greater sensitivity to the costs borne by taxpayers for these personal trips. It is hypocritical for President Obama to fire GSA officials for wasteful conference spending, while his family went on a luxury vacation in the Costa del Sol Spain that cost taxpayers nearly half a million dollars."
Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/201...g-group-claims/?test=latestnews#ixzz1tCepo6AA
 

KRSOne

Registered User
Dec 8, 2011
12,951
2,963
258
Sunnydale
#2
Good for her, she deserves a break every now and then. As Obama said its you and I that need to do some sacrificing for the good of the country.
 

gleet

What's black and white and red all over?
Jul 24, 2005
22,543
13,852
608
Idaho
#3





 

VMS

Victim of high standards and low personal skills.
Apr 26, 2006
10,309
2,650
586
#4
For someone who wasn't born with a silver spoon in her mouth, she sure knows how to spend like she was.

I've got no problem with someone spending that kind of money if they earned it (or their husband earns it and consents to spending it that way). I don't even have a major problem with First Ladies going on trips like this if there's even a shadow of an excuse for it.

That said, has anyone done an apples-to-apples analysis of how many times First Lady Obama has gone on these trips? Is anyone claiming this was a legit trip, to some kind of conference or something? I mean, yeah, it's Mallorca which is one of the fancier vacation destinations in Europe, but was there some kind of women's conference there to give her the excuse?
 

KRSOne

Registered User
Dec 8, 2011
12,951
2,963
258
Sunnydale
#6
How much did we blow in Afghanistan in the same time period?
She only spent around half of what one tomahawk cruise missile launched at Libya costs and 100 and some were launched just on the first day. Every cruise missile was 2 vacations so just on what was spent the first day she could have went on 200 vacations. Its a steal if you ask me.
 

Plunkies

Registered User
Jun 28, 2006
5,901
2,664
543
#8
For someone who wasn't born with a silver spoon in her mouth, she sure knows how to spend like she was.
I think there's a term for that. I forget what it is. Something rich?
 

Norm Stansfield

私は亀が好きだ。
Mar 17, 2009
15,949
4,075
328
#12
The Messiah does something indefensible? Change the subject.
 

The Godfather

Spark it up for The Godfather and say!!!!!
May 9, 2007
11,256
10
163
#13
I suppose pointing out that wars are one of the few things tax dollars are supposed to be spent on would be lost on you.
Not on wars that have been clearly lost.

What a god damn waste of resources. We're allowing for a Vietnam 2.0 to take place. The Taliban isn't going anywhere, the National security forces are even more incompetent then the ARVN!!
 

whiskeyguy

PR representative for Drunk Whiskeyguy.
Donator
Jan 12, 2010
36,346
21,959
398
Northern California
#14
Not on wars that have been clearly lost.

What a god damn waste of resources. We're allowing for a Vietnam 2.0 to take place. The Taliban isn't going anywhere, the National security forces are even more incompetent then the ARVN!!
He never said the wars were justified or ran well, just that they are something the Constitution allows the federal government to tax for and spend money on. I'm sick of the wars myself, but our nation's defense in general is a better expenditure of tax dollars than the first lady's vacations.
 

MayrMeninoCrash

Liberal Psycopath
Dec 9, 2004
24,322
8,507
693
Silverdale, WA
#15
He never said the wars were justified or ran well, just that they are something the Constitution allows the federal government to tax for and spend money on. I'm sick of the wars myself, but our nation's defense in general is a better expenditure of tax dollars than the first lady's vacations.
So it's a typical Don strawman. Spending money we don't have = OK if the Constitution says it. Maybe we could classify all trips by the First Family as military expenditures. That way Don can sleep soundly at night
 

Norm Stansfield

私は亀が好きだ。
Mar 17, 2009
15,949
4,075
328
#19
Why is it difficult to justify providing necessary security detail to the family of the most powerful person on the planet?
He's not the most powerful person on the planet. That title goes to the Chinese prime minister. He literally has life and death power over more than a billion human beings. He can kill anyone in China, without any justification or repercussions. Your piece of shit Messiah only has the power to steal and spend about half the income of 300 million people, and even that only if he has enough piece of shit accomplices in Congress. That's a lot less power.

And the problem isn't with their security. The problem is the difference between the cost of it if they stay in the US vs. going on a tour of Europe, and the fact that they don't care about that difference of hundreds of thousands of dollars.
 

Josh_R

Registered User
Jan 29, 2005
5,847
458
578
Akron, Ohio
#20
Why is it difficult to justify providing necessary security detail to the family of the most powerful person on the planet?

Paging Miley Cyrus to the Wackbag thread!
It's difficult to justify the WIFE of the most powerful person on the planet taking a half million dollar vacation, dummy. No one is saying she should have taken a flight on Continental with no security. If these assholes want take vacations from doing nothing all day, let them hire their own security or pay the FULL cost for AF-1 and the Secret Service detail. It really isn't that hard to understand, and I know you are smart enough to get it, but are purposefully doing the old liberal "what, I don't see what everyone is so upset about" routine.
 

Norm Stansfield

私は亀が好きだ。
Mar 17, 2009
15,949
4,075
328
#21
I don't see the problem here. It's not like America as a whole is known for being 'thrifty'.
I assume it's not your money. Otherwise I can't imagine how you could not see the problem.

If someone spent any of your money on a ridiculously expensive holiday for his wife, without your permission, you would see the problem.
 

MayrMeninoCrash

Liberal Psycopath
Dec 9, 2004
24,322
8,507
693
Silverdale, WA
#22
And the problem isn't with their security. The problem is the difference between the cost of it if they stay in the US vs. going on a tour of Europe, and the fact that they don't care about that difference of hundreds of thousands of dollars.
So what is the delta in costs between the security detail provided in the USA and the security provided in Spain?
 

Neon

ネオン
Donator
Mar 23, 2008
51,774
18,522
513
Kingdom of Charis
#23
How about the First Lady has a staycation when the economy is in the toilet, Mayr? You don't ALWAYS have to defend them.
 

MayrMeninoCrash

Liberal Psycopath
Dec 9, 2004
24,322
8,507
693
Silverdale, WA
#24
How about the First Lady has a staycation when the economy is in the toilet, Mayr? You don't ALWAYS have to defend them.
I'm not defending shit, just pointing out how pathetic the outcry of the usual suspects is. I agree with you but claiming that "The First Lady had an OUTRAGEOUS vacation because the taxpayers had to foot the security detail" is disingenuous.
 

Neon

ネオン
Donator
Mar 23, 2008
51,774
18,522
513
Kingdom of Charis
#25
I'm not defending shit, just pointing out how pathetic the outcry of the usual suspects is. I agree with you but claiming that "The First Lady had an OUTRAGEOUS vacation because the taxpayers had to foot the security detail" is disingenuous.
I think you are reading it wrong. Nobody is saying she shouldn't have security. What people are saying is that the cost of security shouldn't be an automatic. If security is very expensive, don't fucking go there on vacation. Security doesn't factor in to the decision of where to go in terms of how much it would cost and that isn't ok. I'm even willing to look the other way when it is the President himself that is on vacation, but not his dumb family.