by Jim Campbell
To be sure, the cost of President Obama’s trip to India and other countries in Asia may be “wildly over stated” as claimed by the White House.
Then again since the “most transparent administration” in United States History refuses to account for the actual or projected cost, how will the voter ever know?
In Yesterday’s article in the Wall Street Journal, “Fuzzy Math Dogs Obama’s Asia Trip,” little credence was given to the numbers and in fact the journal called the assertion of 47 warships accompanying the President a rumor.
Today the Pentagon has refuted this story completely false. Pentagon press secretary Geoff Morrell called the notion of sending so many warships to protect the president “comical.”
Robert Gibbs, White House Press Secretary, said the $200 million per day cost has no basis in reality.
What is reality is the cost Mr. Gibb? Incredulously White House spokesman, Tommy Vietor said the numbers couldn’t be released for “security concerns.” What concerns, are they thinking that nobody in India will notice the invasion of their country with planes, trains and automobiles?
The White House might deny the cost of 200 million dollars per day for the trip but not disclosing the actual costs lends a lot of credibility to the $200 million.
It will be a new record for the cost of a trip by an American president. The 40 planes make that a fact. They won’t be flying empty.
If the President’s entourage wasn’t enough, add the ridiculous irony of the humongous carbon footprint for this wholly unnecessary jaunt. Including 40 planes, 34 ships, and 6 armored vehicles, the total output comes to a whopping 8,469 metric tons of CO2 emitted for the Washington-to-Bombay round trip.
That’s roughly the equivalent of the CO2 output for the City of Raleigh, NC…for an entire year! Come on all you greenies and tree huggers where’s all your outrage?
Is there any wonder why the elections turned out like they did?
A lot more people than Obama could ever have imagined in his narcissistic mind are now paying closer attention to his rampant hypocrisy.
A solution for this extravagance, perhaps Congresswoman Michele Bachman had the best idea when she suggested to Anderson Cooper in the interview, “If it’s that difficult and that expensive, maybe we should use videoconferencing for these meetings.”
Sorry Anderson, Congresswoman Bachman is an attorney, with an advanced degree in taxation. CNN might be better served not sending a boy to do a mans job. Nice touch, though, having no facts at hand Cooper went on a little rant with “facts” provided for him after the interview.
That’s my story and I’m sticking to it, I’m J.C.