Join the Meeting Place for Moms!
Talk to other moms, share advice, and have fun!

(minimum 6 characters)

7 Bumps

so Michelle's spain vacay cost the taxpayers a hefty 250,ooo

How do you feel about this?


Asked by lovinangels at 3:25 PM on Aug. 9, 2010 in Politics & Current Events

Level 39 (112,638 Credits)
This question is closed.
Answers (90)
  • Her lavish trip is costing us $75,000 a day, during the worst economic recession in more then 30 years, and 9.5% unemployment. It shows a detachment from the American people who are suffering right now No other former first ladies trips were this lavish nor this costly to the taxpayer. Nancy's, & Laura's new china was bought through private donations, at no expense to the taxpayers.


    2 first class tickets would not pay for even 1 hour of fuel used on Air Force 2.

    If my husband & I wanted to go to Spain we can, and have, we are not poor, far, far from it.. rich envy my behind.


    Answer by Natesmom507 at 2:02 PM on Aug. 10, 2010

  • Didn't Obama gross $5.5 million last year????? Given the current state of the US Economy they could have footed the bill without burdening taxpayer who are cutting back in their own families lifestyle/vacations. I still think they are setting a poor example of fiscal responsibility.

    Answer by grlygrlz2 at 5:40 PM on Aug. 9, 2010

  • Makes me sick personally. Not a week after Obama goes on TV and says he's not so far removed from America these days. He once had bills and 2 young kids to save for college for blah blah blah. Sure there is no crime in her going to tim- buck- too if she wants to but you would think they would have better sense than that. Seems they just don't give a damn.

    Answer by itsmesteph11 at 5:31 PM on Aug. 9, 2010

  • The family has completely altered their lives to be in the public eye. I am sure they can't even go to the grocery store anymore. I would travel outside of the US to get a bit of normalcy in my life. To quote from the link, "She is a private citizen and is the mother of a daughter on a private trip," he said. "And I think I'd leave it at that.". It's not her fault that long ago the United States set into place a plan to keep the people who give so much from their lives to lead us a little protection. All presidents and their families have the same sort of secret service protection (which is essentially the cost of the vacation). In the same way that we paid for the secret service protection for anything that former presidents Bush and Clinton do. Whether or not I agree with any of their policies or political agendas I think it's the least we can do to provide them protection since they are constantly in the line of fire.


    Answer by MamaSarah1104 at 3:33 PM on Aug. 9, 2010

  • I'm glad they were protected.

    Answer by jdanielle82 at 3:37 PM on Aug. 9, 2010

  • If anyone thought a presidential family needed a vacation, they should be for an American vacation and an american vacation only. Promote our parks, our historical sites, our themeparks..........poorly thought out decision on the Michelle end. But then again, I think she has plenty of poorly thought out decisions.

    Answer by jewjewbee at 5:34 PM on Aug. 9, 2010

  • Indifferent, really. That's a drop in the bucket compared to the law the GOP wants passed barring the House from assembling between November and January. That means they are basically on a 2 month recess with full pay. If the average salary of a congressman is 174K and they are off for two months, and there are 435 members who will receive 348K for doing at taxpayer's expense that is $151,380,000 wasted. Not including benefits.So in the grand scheme of things, considering that the Obamas paid for it and required to have a security detail at our expense, it is indeed chump change.

    Answer by Izsarejman at 3:57 PM on Aug. 9, 2010

  • Michelle Obama's spending habits should not be compared to Laura, Nancy or Hillary. They should be compared to Eleanor and Rosalynn. Both of those first ladies did travel outside the US, but it was not for vacation, it was completely in the name of foreign relations. Any shopping and spa visits were ancillary to the primary purpose of the trip. They (and their handlers) were self-aware enough to know and understand the scrutiny they were under during leaner economies. Michelle (and her handlers) seem to be oblivious to this, as are her husband and his handlers.

    Answer by NotPanicking at 4:49 PM on Aug. 9, 2010

  • They also paid for the hotel rooms themselves, How much did the previous first ladies vacations cost? or does it only matter NOW?

    The last President relocated a whole slew of staff everytime he wanted to go to Crawford...the money was OBSCENE...did you complain them? Nancy's china replacement?


    Answer by sweet-a-kins at 3:40 PM on Aug. 9, 2010

  • Actually, if you look at Laura Bush's vacation overseas, they all had some sort of official capacity as well. Something a little more than "lunch" with the president of the country. Her "personal" vacations were spent primarily hiking our national parks.

    I think it is sad to spend that kind of money in this day and time.............every penny spent by the taxpayer was BORROWED. "We" didn't pay for it, our kids and grandkids will. I asked my 11 yr old how he thought about that...he pointed out that our family is only taking 1 trip this year and we had it paid for before we booked it.

    Answer by yourspecialkid at 3:58 PM on Aug. 9, 2010