Quote:
Originally Posted by HappyTexan
His "annual" vacation there only started after he got elected President.
The taxpayer cost is pretty high.
|
And George W. Bush's Crawford Christmas vacations only started after he was elected President (he bought the ranch in 1999 and did not spend Christmas there that year).
So?
You're just fishing about for some reason to whine about President Obama.
And before you start bleating about how Hawaii is further from DC than Texas, Texas is also further from DC than Camp David. Yet not a peep about you over the fact that Bush Christmased in Texas rather than Camp David. Why? Because it doesn't really bother you that Bush chose a more-expensive option - Obanma's political affiliation bothers you. That's what this is all about. And aside from that, of all costs of a vacation, the fuel difference for cruising (the most intensive use of fuel in any flight is takeoff-and-climb) between DC-Texas and DC-Hawaii is a small fraction of 1% of the vacation's cost.
If Hillary Clinton is President in 2017, and spends Christmas in New York, while you be praising her for not using as much fuel as President Bush used to Christmas in Texas? Of course you won't.
Caveat:
I am
not criticizing President Bush for spending so much time in Texas (his record number of vacation trips to Crawford consumed more fuel and costs than President Obama's trips - if you really cared about such costs, you'd be claiming to be glad President Obama doesn't vacation as much as President Bush) - recreation and family time, however an individual needs to make that happen, results in leaders who function better, who are healthier, who make better decisions, etc. It's corporations focus so much on proper work-life balance.
I could easily take baseless cheap shots at Bush for his vacation numbers, but I don't begrudge him those numbers at all. Ultimately, they are trivial.
And unlike you, I'm consistent in how I apply my standards.