GSA, the Secret Service, Presidential vacations, and Other Scandals

[Foxfyre]

The EPA sets limits on allowable pollution. Don't you think they should have some scientific basis for the limits they set? Knowing at what point the shrimp population is affected is valuable information.

Show me that there was not already scientific means to determine that without expending milliions more in taxpayer funds that were already in serious deficit related to spending.

Again, how much graft, corruption, indifference to the taxpayer, waste, and utter incompetence are you willing to tolerate and defend? Is there not some point at which we can all draw the line regardless of which political party is in power?

There is no doubt that there is graft, corruption, indifference and waste in every government. That does not mean that every expenditure is without merit. The government has a role on our society and we as a rule benefit from it

The government intended role in our society was to secure our rights and then leave us alone to live our lives.

And you're still not answering the question. How much graft, corruption, indifference to the taxpayer, waste, and utter competence are you willing to tolerate and defend just because all government spending doesn't fall into that category? Is there not some point at which we can all draw the line regardless of which political party is in power?

 

[rightwinger]

Show me that there was not already scientific means to determine that without expending milliions more in taxpayer funds that were already in serious deficit related to spending.

Again, how much graft, corruption, indifference to the taxpayer, waste, and utter incompetence are you willing to tolerate and defend? Is there not some point at which we can all draw the line regardless of which political party is in power?

There is no doubt that there is graft, corruption, indifference and waste in every government. That does not mean that every expenditure is without merit. The government has a role on our society and we as a rule benefit from it

The government intended role in our society was to secure our rights and then leave us alone to live our lives.

And you're still not answering the question. How much graft, corruption, indifference to the taxpayer, waste, and utter competence are you willing to tolerate and defend just because all government spending doesn't fall into that category? Is there not some point at which we can all draw the line regardless of which political party is in power?

When we find it....we investigate it
If it is an unwarranted expense, then heads roll

That is the way it has always worked

 

[Foxfyre]

There is no doubt that there is graft, corruption, indifference and waste in every government. That does not mean that every expenditure is without merit. The government has a role on our society and we as a rule benefit from it

The government intended role in our society was to secure our rights and then leave us alone to live our lives.

And you're still not answering the question. How much graft, corruption, indifference to the taxpayer, waste, and utter competence are you willing to tolerate and defend just because all government spending doesn't fall into that category? Is there not some point at which we can all draw the line regardless of which political party is in power?

When we find it....we investigate it
If it is an unwarranted expense, then heads roll

That is the way it has always worked

So as long as they don't get caught or somebody is willing to look the other way, it's okay then? We won't worry about it? You don't CARE whether GSA employees spend more than $800,000 of YOUR money for a fun filled conference in Vegas? So far one head has rolled. As yet there is no disciplinary action suggested for anybody else despite a video of the employees mocking us.

 

[Foxfyre]

And then there is this blurb that we're picking up from the 'foreign' press but it sure isn't receiving much if any coverage here in the states:

OAXACA, Mexico - The elder daughter of U.S. President Barack Obama is spending her spring break in the historic Mexican city of Oaxaca in the company of 12 friends, a state police official said.


The young tourists, including 13-year-old Malia Ann Obama, are staying at a downtown hotel in this city famous for its colonial architecture and well-preserved native American traditions, the official said.


"We are here to block access to the hotel by other people and escort the vehicles that are carrying the visitors to tourism sites," the police official told AFP under the condition of anonymity.


Malia Obama and her friend are guarded by 25 U.S. Secret Service agents as well as Mexican police, the official noted. . . .

Obama's daughter spends spring break in Mexico

I was reading one account of what this particular trip cost and by the time you figure paying security costs to the Mexican government, lodging and accommodations and sight seeing for the entourage, and buying out the whole hotel for security reasons, the cost will far exceed what any of us will make in our entire lifetime.

Is the U.S. taxpayer picking up the tab? It's a pretty safe bet that we are.

Does anybody care?

 

[rightwinger]

And then there is this blurb that we're picking up from the 'foreign' press but it sure isn't receiving much if any coverage here in the states:

OAXACA, Mexico - The elder daughter of U.S. President Barack Obama is spending her spring break in the historic Mexican city of Oaxaca in the company of 12 friends, a state police official said.


The young tourists, including 13-year-old Malia Ann Obama, are staying at a downtown hotel in this city famous for its colonial architecture and well-preserved native American traditions, the official said.


"We are here to block access to the hotel by other people and escort the vehicles that are carrying the visitors to tourism sites," the police official told AFP under the condition of anonymity.


Malia Obama and her friend are guarded by 25 U.S. Secret Service agents as well as Mexican police, the official noted. . . .

Obama's daughter spends spring break in Mexico

I was reading one account of what this particular trip cost and by the time you figure paying security costs to the Mexican government, lodging and accommodations and sight seeing for the entourage, and buying out the whole hotel for security reasons, the cost will far exceed what any of us will make in our entire lifetime.

Is the U.S. taxpayer picking up the tab? It's a pretty safe bet that we are.

Does anybody care?

I thought it was a class trip

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/03/23/w...s-trip-delights-mexico-tourism-officials.html

 

[California Girl]

And then there is this blurb that we're picking up from the 'foreign' press but it sure isn't receiving much if any coverage here in the states:

OAXACA, Mexico - The elder daughter of U.S. President Barack Obama is spending her spring break in the historic Mexican city of Oaxaca in the company of 12 friends, a state police official said.


The young tourists, including 13-year-old Malia Ann Obama, are staying at a downtown hotel in this city famous for its colonial architecture and well-preserved native American traditions, the official said.


"We are here to block access to the hotel by other people and escort the vehicles that are carrying the visitors to tourism sites," the police official told AFP under the condition of anonymity.


Malia Obama and her friend are guarded by 25 U.S. Secret Service agents as well as Mexican police, the official noted. . . .

Obama's daughter spends spring break in Mexico

I was reading one account of what this particular trip cost and by the time you figure paying security costs to the Mexican government, lodging and accommodations and sight seeing for the entourage, and buying out the whole hotel for security reasons, the cost will far exceed what any of us will make in our entire lifetime.

Is the U.S. taxpayer picking up the tab? It's a pretty safe bet that we are.

Does anybody care?

I probably should be slightly pissed about paying for Obama's kids to have a spring break, but I'm really not. I don't see why they should miss out just because their dad is President. If that is the price, so be it.

Having said that.... I have serious issues with the kind of shit outlined in the link below.

http://www.coburn.senate.gov/public...&File_id=a7e82141-1a9e-4eec-b160-6a8e62427efb

^^^^ That 'stimulus' money..... and that I am pissed about.

 

[Foxfyre]

And then there is this blurb that we're picking up from the 'foreign' press but it sure isn't receiving much if any coverage here in the states:

OAXACA, Mexico - The elder daughter of U.S. President Barack Obama is spending her spring break in the historic Mexican city of Oaxaca in the company of 12 friends, a state police official said.


The young tourists, including 13-year-old Malia Ann Obama, are staying at a downtown hotel in this city famous for its colonial architecture and well-preserved native American traditions, the official said.


"We are here to block access to the hotel by other people and escort the vehicles that are carrying the visitors to tourism sites," the police official told AFP under the condition of anonymity.


Malia Obama and her friend are guarded by 25 U.S. Secret Service agents as well as Mexican police, the official noted. . . .

Obama's daughter spends spring break in Mexico

I was reading one account of what this particular trip cost and by the time you figure paying security costs to the Mexican government, lodging and accommodations and sight seeing for the entourage, and buying out the whole hotel for security reasons, the cost will far exceed what any of us will make in our entire lifetime.

Is the U.S. taxpayer picking up the tab? It's a pretty safe bet that we are.

Does anybody care?

I probably should be slightly pissed about paying for Obama's kids to have a spring break, but I'm really not. I don't see why they should miss out just because their dad is President. If that is the price, so be it.

Having said that.... I have serious issues with the kind of shit outlined in the link below.

http://www.coburn.senate.gov/public...&File_id=a7e82141-1a9e-4eec-b160-6a8e62427efb

^^^^ That 'stimulus' money..... and that I am pissed about.

Maybe, but the Obama's net worth is currently listed at something over $10 million. Why can't he pay for his kid to go on spring break like the rest of us have to do?

But yes, the waste in the stimulus money is reprehensible and the people should be demanding that heads roll. Instead, there is just a collective 'ho hum' from the left including the media.

The latest is Boehner's recent demand that the President pay for recent trips, at tax payer expense, that were obviously campaign trips as they were advocating measures that all had already agreed to. He has about the same chance as a snowball in hell of making that happen, but it is a valid criticism.

The Obama camp counters with the fact that Bush didn't pay for such trips prior to his mid term election. But the critics maintain that Bush's trips also were not ideological and weren't bashing anybody while Obama has been criticizing Republicans and using specific campaign rhetoric.

 

[rightwinger]

And then there is this blurb that we're picking up from the 'foreign' press but it sure isn't receiving much if any coverage here in the states:



I was reading one account of what this particular trip cost and by the time you figure paying security costs to the Mexican government, lodging and accommodations and sight seeing for the entourage, and buying out the whole hotel for security reasons, the cost will far exceed what any of us will make in our entire lifetime.

Is the U.S. taxpayer picking up the tab? It's a pretty safe bet that we are.

Does anybody care?

I probably should be slightly pissed about paying for Obama's kids to have a spring break, but I'm really not. I don't see why they should miss out just because their dad is President. If that is the price, so be it.

Having said that.... I have serious issues with the kind of shit outlined in the link below.

http://www.coburn.senate.gov/public...&File_id=a7e82141-1a9e-4eec-b160-6a8e62427efb

^^^^ That 'stimulus' money..... and that I am pissed about.

Maybe, but the Obama's net worth is currently listed at something over $10 million. Why can't he pay for his kid to go on spring break like the rest of us have to do?

But yes, the waste in the stimulus money is reprehensible and the people should be demanding that heads roll. Instead, there is just a collective 'ho hum' from the left including the media.

The latest is Boehner's recent demand that the President pay for recent trips, at tax payer expense, that were obviously campaign trips as they were advocating measures that all had already agreed to. He has about the same chance as a snowball in hell of making that happen, but it is a valid criticism.

The Obama camp counters with the fact that Bush didn't pay for such trips prior to his mid term election. But the critics maintain that Bush's trips also were not ideological and weren't bashing anybody while Obama has been criticizing Republicans and using specific campaign rhetoric.

There are strict rules on what is campaign related and what is job related. I'm sure Mr Boehner will keep close tabs on what the President is allowed to do.

President Obama has a huge campaign chest which will be used to fund these trips

 

[Full-Auto]

that about rounds it out...........

This admin runs drugs, smuggles guns and now prostitution.

Have they missed any crimes? Besides accessory to murder?

Yes a lot of fraud is also involved. Is there any reason they should be allowed to speak on any subject?

 

[Foxfyre]

There is no doubt that there is graft, corruption, indifference and waste in every government. That does not mean that every expenditure is without merit. The government has a role on our society and we as a rule benefit from it

The government intended role in our society was to secure our rights and then leave us alone to live our lives.

And you're still not answering the question. How much graft, corruption, indifference to the taxpayer, waste, and utter competence are you willing to tolerate and defend just because all government spending doesn't fall into that category? Is there not some point at which we can all draw the line regardless of which political party is in power?

When we find it....we investigate it
If it is an unwarranted expense, then heads roll

That is the way it has always worked

He who votes does not hold much power. He who counts the votes holds absolute power.

He who makes the rules does not hold much power. He with power to enforce the rules holds absolute power.

Those with the power to investigate, to interpret, and to control the message have a huge advantage over those who don't have such power.

 

[Dr.Traveler]

Okay, I should have checked my facts better rather than trust the AARP to get it right. The shrimp on the treadmill and the rest of that study was not part of the stimulus package. And it may indeed have been a legitimate study.

In general, it's hard to know what to fund in science as nearly any study could turn out to be incredibly important. I tend to side with the funding of even the most mundane scientific studies for that reason.

 

[Wry Catcher]

Okay, I should have checked my facts better rather than trust the AARP to get it right. The shrimp on the treadmill and the rest of that study was not part of the stimulus package. And it may indeed have been a legitimate study.

But do we approve of our taxes going for things like that?

Do we want the Secret Service on assignment hiring prostitutes?

Do you care that the GSA, the one administration who should absolutely be setting the example for all the others, spent close to a million dollars on an education training conference during which they had a good old time at our expense and very little education or training went on?

Do you approve of government agencies going to lavish resorts for their training? Is that how you want the government to spend the money you expended your time, talent, and sweat to earn?

Misfeasance, malfeasance and non feasance are not restricted to the public sector. When your insurance company has a week long series of meetings in Hawaii on your dime, buys a new private jet or bribes (oops, withdrawn) or donates to the local Member of Congress money paid by consumers, isn't that as bad.

Worse, we can toss the bums out at the next election but you're stuck with the CEO's who raise prices in all industry's to pay for their perks.

I went to a number of conferences as a government employee and none were at lavish resorts, most were at hotel conference centers in large cities - San Francisco, San Diego, Sacramento, CA; Seattle, WA; Brooklyn, NY; Boston, MA. and at DOJ centers in Colorado. Meals were only provided at lunch, the usual Chicken or Beef, veggies and rice. Blah. In the morning, coffee and pastry - usually previously frozen or purchased at CostCo in bulk. Dinners were always on our own. We were reimbursed by our agencies but the amount never covered the cost of the meal.

Now, once I went with my wife (who was a VP in the financial services industry). A Limo picked us up at LAX and took us to the Beverly Wilshire Hotel near Rodeo Drive in Beverly Hills, CA. At check in we received a band new instant camera and a note inviting us to dinner at Chasen's in West Hollywood where we ate in a private room (must have been 12 couples + the insurance company execs hosting us). There were paparazzi with cameras outside the entrance when we arrived and a number of Hollywood actors even I recognized at the bar. This was night one.

When we got back to the hotel that night, a coffee table wine book signed by the author was waiting for us, inviting us to wine tasting the next night, before dinner. The Wine tasting was in the wine cellar of a wine shop on Rodeo drive owned by the author of the book. On a long table he pared wines from France and California. We started with whites and worked our way up to Clarets and Cabernet's. There were over twenty bottles in the queue.

After the wine tasting we were taken to dinner at a restaurants whose name I cannot recall, where we needed to go through the kitchen to use the restroom. Strange? Yep, but only because a Celebrity was celebrating a birthday in the other private room and security was tight.

[I neglected to point out on Saturday, my wife attended a seminar(?) on the product the insurance company was selling. The wives (I was the only husband attending) were provided hair style appointments and makeup (instruction?). I wasn't invited, so I explore Rodeo Ave and had a too small too expensive burger for lunch]

On Sunday my wife attended a seminar(?), sales pitch really and I read my book in the lobby. The sales pitch ended about 1 pm and we were whisked off to an Italian Restaurant which the Insurance Company had procured for the Afternoon. The Waite staff all sang opera and popular show tunes and we enjoyed a buffet of half a dozen types of Pasta and an equal number of different sauces, a salad bar of enormous proportions, warm breads and rolls and all the wine we could drink.

When it was over, about 4 pm we were taken by limo to LAX for our flight home. We did not spend a cent that weekend and were even reimbursed for our parking at SFO. Now, that in my experience is lavish.

 

[Foxfyre]

Okay, I should have checked my facts better rather than trust the AARP to get it right. The shrimp on the treadmill and the rest of that study was not part of the stimulus package. And it may indeed have been a legitimate study.

In general, it's hard to know what to fund in science as nearly any study could turn out to be incredibly important. I tend to side with the funding of even the most mundane scientific studies for that reason.

Don't you think that should be measured against whether the private dollar is producing better results with privately funded research before confiscating people's money for research that isn't producing much in the way of useful information?

Who do you think will work harder to do valid research? The guy who has to produce results that pass scrutiny in the private sector? Or those who only have to produce results that fit a particular ideological perspective of those funding the study?

 

[Caroljo]

that about rounds it out...........

This admin runs drugs, smuggles guns and now prostitution.
Have they missed any crimes? Besides accessory to murder?

Yes a lot of fraud is also involved. Is there any reason they should be allowed to speak on any subject?

Well that's pretty normal for "Chicago" style politicians, isn't it? They just brought what they knew to the White house with them!!

 

[Foxfyre]

that about rounds it out...........

This admin runs drugs, smuggles guns and now prostitution.
Have they missed any crimes? Besides accessory to murder?

Yes a lot of fraud is also involved. Is there any reason they should be allowed to speak on any subject?

Well that's pretty normal for "Chicago" style politicians, isn't it? They just brought what they knew to the White house with them!!

I have mixed emotions here. I do think being able to use our money to spend our money on anything that can be made to sound like a good idea is corrupting to both those in government and the recipients of the money, I do not believe that most or even many government employees are corrupt.

I do think however, that the leader of any organization sets the tone and style of how the members behave, think, react, and do their respective jobs. If a piss poor example is set at the tiop, those lower down on the ladder will likely think that's okay for them too.

 

[francoHFW]

To review: Total disengenuous Pubcrappe for brainwashed dupes. Cost for GSA conference went from $93 k in 2003 yo 630k under Booosh arrogant spendthrift policies- lobbyist/regulator madness. Scandal came out under Obama transparency policies. BTW, I thought SS agents were examples of wonderful Pub attitude....YUP.

 

[Sunshine]

What we see is USUALLY the tip of the iceburg. While they are dealing with this, the latest, another is going unnoticed. Guaranteed!

 

[Foxfyre]

Okay, I should have checked my facts better rather than trust the AARP to get it right. The shrimp on the treadmill and the rest of that study was not part of the stimulus package. And it may indeed have been a legitimate study.

But do we approve of our taxes going for things like that?

Do we want the Secret Service on assignment hiring prostitutes?

Do you care that the GSA, the one administration who should absolutely be setting the example for all the others, spent close to a million dollars on an education training conference during which they had a good old time at our expense and very little education or training went on?

Do you approve of government agencies going to lavish resorts for their training? Is that how you want the government to spend the money you expended your time, talent, and sweat to earn?

Misfeasance, malfeasance and non feasance are not restricted to the public sector. When your insurance company has a week long series of meetings in Hawaii on your dime, buys a new private jet or bribes (oops, withdrawn) or donates to the local Member of Congress money paid by consumers, isn't that as bad.

Worse, we can toss the bums out at the next election but you're stuck with the CEO's who raise prices in all industry's to pay for their perks.

I went to a number of conferences as a government employee and none were at lavish resorts, most were at hotel conference centers in large cities - San Francisco, San Diego, Sacramento, CA; Seattle, WA; Brooklyn, NY; Boston, MA. and at DOJ centers in Colorado. Meals were only provided at lunch, the usual Chicken or Beef, veggies and rice. Blah. In the morning, coffee and pastry - usually previously frozen or purchased at CostCo in bulk. Dinners were always on our own. We were reimbursed by our agencies but the amount never covered the cost of the meal.

Now, once I went with my wife (who was a VP in the financial services industry). A Limo picked us up at LAX and took us to the Beverly Wilshire Hotel near Rodeo Drive in Beverly Hills, CA. At check in we received a band new instant camera and a note inviting us to dinner at Chasen's in West Hollywood where we ate in a private room (must have been 12 couples + the insurance company execs hosting us). There were paparazzi with cameras outside the entrance when we arrived and a number of Hollywood actors even I recognized at the bar. This was night one.

When we got back to the hotel that night, a coffee table wine book signed by the author was waiting for us, inviting us to wine tasting the next night, before dinner. The Wine tasting was in the wine cellar of a wine shop on Rodeo drive owned by the author of the book. On a long table he pared wines from France and California. We started with whites and worked our way up to Clarets and Cabernet's. There were over twenty bottles in the queue.

After the wine tasting we were taken to dinner at a restaurants whose name I cannot recall, where we needed to go through the kitchen to use the restroom. Strange? Yep, but only because a Celebrity was celebrating a birthday in the other private room and security was tight.

[I neglected to point out on Saturday, my wife attended a seminar(?) on the product the insurance company was selling. The wives (I was the only husband attending) were provided hair style appointments and makeup (instruction?). I wasn't invited, so I explore Rodeo Ave and had a too small too expensive burger for lunch]

On Sunday my wife attended a seminar(?), sales pitch really and I read my book in the lobby. The sales pitch ended about 1 pm and we were whisked off to an Italian Restaurant which the Insurance Company had procured for the Afternoon. The Waite staff all sang opera and popular show tunes and we enjoyed a buffet of half a dozen types of Pasta and an equal number of different sauces, a salad bar of enormous proportions, warm breads and rolls and all the wine we could drink.

When it was over, about 4 pm we were taken by limo to LAX for our flight home. We did not spend a cent that weekend and were even reimbursed for our parking at SFO. Now, that in my experience is lavish.

It should be noted, however, that the cities that you mentioned are all expensive places to visit, however austere the commendations, and unless there is a compelling reason for all the people attending the conference to travel, training and education can be accomplished in or near the workplace at a fraction of the cost. And if it was necessary for people to travel, places like Topeka KS or Rapid City SD or Tulsa OK would love to have an economic boost and you would pay a fraction for hotels, transportation, and food as it costs for the most austere accommodations in many of those other places.

It should also be noted that you worked for the government and whatever was spent came out of the taxpayer's pocket and the taxpayer had no recourse if more money is spent than is necessary to accomplish a necessary goal. Maybe one such expenditure is hardly noticable. But when it is repeated again and again, by many hundreds of government agencies, the tab runs up real fast.

Your wife's company treated you on the company's diime and that didn't cost me a nickle.

I don't care at all what private commerce and industry legally does with their money. If they overspend and thereby run the cost too much for their product or services, I just choose a different product or services. The free market controlls that sort of thing pretty well.

If I want to be and live as an American, I can't choose a different government.