Campaigning on the taxpayers' dime
President Barack Obama and Linkedin CEO Jeff Weiner speak at the LinkedIn Town Hall meeting in Mountain View, California on Monday, September 26, 2011. (Jim Castel/CNN)
September 27th, 2011
10:41 PM ET

Campaigning on the taxpayers' dime


During President Obama's three-day swing through Washington State, California and Colorado, he fielded questions at a town hall meeting in Silicon Valley and visited a high school in Denver.  Two official events to promote his jobs plan.  Compare that to seven fundraisers he headlined, raising at least $8 million for his re-election campaign and the Democratic National Committee.

Who paid for the trip?  You did.  And so did we.  Taxpayers are footing the bill for almost the entire trip, which also cost millions of dollars.

It's standard practice for presidents, both Democratic and Republican, to go on predominantly fundraising trips with taxpayer's paying for most of the travel costs.  It's completely legal.  Do some official White House business on the trip and - voila! - the president's re-election campaign and party shoulder very little of the cost.

"Usually, a political party only covers a fraction of the costs of presidential travel, usually in the single digit percentages," says Pete Sepp with the National Taxpayers Union, a nonpartisan nonprofit group against wasteful government spending. "Most of the money raised really comes at a free cost to the parties. They only reimburse for a few hundred thousand dollars, on a given trip, if tax payers are lucky."

The price tag on presidential travel is exorbitant.  Air Force One costs $181,757 per flight hour to operate, according to the Air Force.  There's a C-17 military support plane to fly the president's limousines to his destination, perhaps another if Marine One will be used during the trip.

And the personnel: the salary costs of a Secret Service detail and dozens of White House staffers who also required meals, transportation and hotel rooms.  There are also local security costs like overtime pay for police officers who escort the presidential motorcade or provide security along the travel route.

There is little transparency in determining the cost of presidential travel.  A White House spokesman declined to say how the White House and the DNC divided the cost of Obama's western trip, citing security concerns.  Other administrations have refused on the same grounds.

A report conducted by the Democratic-controlled House Oversight and Government Reform Committee while President Bush was in the White House concluded taxpayers paid for about 97 percent of presidential travel, the Republican Party just 3 percent.

Pete Sepp says there's no reason to believe the breakdown is much different with the Obama administration or other White Houses.

"Ever since Ronald Reagan's administration, presidential travel has carried with it a lot of controversy over cost as well as politics," Sepp says.  "Even Richard Nixon was cited for having traveled a great deal abroad, when he was having domestic political troubles."

In September of 1995, President Clinton attended eight fundraisers in four days on a cross-country swing.

Taxpayers often pay for travel to campaign events that rally support rather than raise money, like President Bush's dramatic entrance into a baseball stadium in Ft. Meyers, Florida less than a month before his re-election in 2004.  Call it a perk of the presidency, something a mere candidate does not enjoy.

"And that's the point when the parties themselves have to pay for the cost of the pomp and the circumstance," Sepp says. "the pomp and the circumstance gets a lot smaller, a lot more modest."

soundoff (74 Responses)
  1. Howard


    September 27, 2011 at 10:56 pm |
    • Marley

      This is a joke right?

      Obama is half-black. Now just imagine what the *establishment* will do to Herman Cain.

      September 27, 2011 at 11:06 pm |
      • aaron

        what an ignorant thing to say u qweef racist, its gunna be funny when the next republican comes in to office & is doing everything unconstitutional and you wont say shit

        September 28, 2011 at 1:51 am |
      • Kevin

        What an ignorant comment! Most of us who are vehemently against Obama are not against him because he is bi-racial. We oppose him because he doesn't have a clue about how to ignite an economic recovery. Your comment is offensive. I can't stand Obama but am very impressed with Cain and other moderate conservatives.

        You need to get over the fact that not everyone makes decisions based on race; get used to the idea, too, that your support of Obama needs to be based on something other than race. That dog won't hunt any more.

        September 28, 2011 at 6:23 am |
  2. Petty

    So What!!! Find a real story to report.

    September 27, 2011 at 11:01 pm |
  3. GeoffreyF

    We paid for Bush's, Clinton, Bush I, Reagan and so on. What's different here? Huge corporations are now unhindered and paying for all those Republicans.

    September 27, 2011 at 11:06 pm |
    • ch

      We can't afford it. The taxpayers shouldn't have to pay for any president's travel to go to fundraisers and it should change from here on out. There are a lot of other ways in which this money could be spent and it isn't going to sorry chicken dinners to ask for money. Enough is enough.

      September 28, 2011 at 6:24 pm |
  4. drjmng

    I thought he was going to be a different kind of president. How disappointing!

    September 27, 2011 at 11:07 pm |
    • Howard

      Obama is probably not the anti-Christ ... he's probably just a radical, lying, ambitious, narcissist, con man, who will say, or do anything, to gain, and hold onto his personal power ... even if it means destroying America in the process !!!

      September 28, 2011 at 2:02 pm |
      • Marry

        Howard -- hey you used the wrong name!! It is not our President you are describing – you must mean the GOP/TP pretenders.

        September 29, 2011 at 2:00 pm |
  5. Balls McGhee

    boring. this is not news. All presidents do this. it is part of their job to get reelected. unfortunatley Congress made a law that said the president has to have protection wherever he goes and that is part of the costs we pay. dont be stupid and get riled up about this when the ultimate cost is nothing compared to the trillions the GOP has piled up in debt on us over the past 30 years. so petty...

    September 27, 2011 at 11:08 pm |
    • Steve-O

      My thoughts exactly. Why make a story about something that is common practice?? In the first two paragraphs they make it sound like it's something new that only Obama has done only to then explain that it's nothing new. What a waste of time on this article CNN!

      September 28, 2011 at 4:29 am |
    • mark boutilier

      all politicians do it

      September 28, 2011 at 8:29 am |

    CNN is in the business to manufacture news! the President has the right to talk directly to the people about The "American Jobs Act" CNN is join by the hip with the Tea Party and hate the President jobs plan is gaining popularity!

    September 27, 2011 at 11:20 pm |
  7. Prince Phillips

    No news, please find something serious and important to talk about.

    September 27, 2011 at 11:23 pm |
  8. Ron

    This is peanuts. Obama is running the whole government with the aim of getting reelected, including foreign policy (e.g. suddenly a big buddy of Israel). The best candidate (your tax) money can buy. Wait till you see the bill if he is reelected and the Dems get control of congress again! It will make the cost of Air Force One look like a tea party. Er, well, maybe that's the wrong analogy...

    September 27, 2011 at 11:24 pm |
    • Ron

      This is peanuts. Obama is running the whole government with the aim of getting reelected, including foreign policy (e.g. suddenly a big buddy of Israel). The best candidate (your tax) money can buy. Wait till you see the deficit if he is reelected and the Dems get control of congress again! It will make the cost of Air Force One look like a tea party. Er, well, maybe that's the wrong analogy...

      September 28, 2011 at 9:18 am |
  9. Charles

    You think this is boring? Do you pay taxes? Maybe not. But those of us who do should be outraged. A couple of "legitimate" stops and anyone campaigning can write off most of that trip to he Federal Gov't . We should all be outraged and anything that seems the least bit like campaigning should be footed by the Presidential campaign and not the taxpayers. I'm tired of it. Why isn't everyone else? Just because those who have gone before did it does not make it right. Show some backbone people.

    September 27, 2011 at 11:43 pm |
  10. Aaron

    What a few more million in taxpayer money? We're already funding corporate jets and oil companies. The rich have looted the country for trillions for the last decade plus. Obama's campaigning expenses are pocket change in comparison. No telling how much the Repubs perpetually campaigning for president have ripped us off for.

    September 27, 2011 at 11:52 pm |
  11. Jacquie

    Since when was this news? All Presidents have to take time to campaign and they mix government business with personal campaign business. So BFD. Every President has had this perk. Of course, let a black guy be President and all of a sudden everyone jumps up in down in disbelief that the horrible Socialist is spending our money on getting to election campaign events. I thin kwe got more to complain about and fix than this. Let's focus on real issues people.

    September 27, 2011 at 11:56 pm |
    • jane

      Yes, we (taxpayers) have funded every other presidential campaign, but look at this country. No jobs, triple diget debt and everyone is supposed to give for the cause whatever it may be. Obama just keeps shoving his kingship in our faces. He is obscene and loving all the adulation he procures at these over the top fundraisers. How can supposedly intelligent peop;le not see through this fradulen man?

      September 28, 2011 at 12:41 pm |
    • ch

      Seriously, you are an idiot if you think this has anything to do with the color of his skin. Shame on you. I would rather provide that money for education or for people who need food or for those that lost everything from recent hurricanes but none of us taxpayers should be ok with this from here on out. We can't afford it anymore! Companies are having to cut back on every little thing and yet we don't expect that of our own government and its workers. We should be questioning $121 million on conferences and $16 muffins and all of the fundraising travel expenditures.

      September 28, 2011 at 6:30 pm |
  12. J.V.Hodgson

    Take out the cost of Airforce one and the Presidential security costs ( congress validated) Including accomodations or the costs of motorcades etc and the rest are relatively minor in comparison.
    On the other hand I do believe that If a president uses time on these trips to go fund raising then a cost contribution should be imposed of 15 % by the government On the funds received by the DNC or RNC on the revenue less costs of the function or 15% on revenue if local party organisations paid the costs of the function. It matters not when, where, the fundraiser takes place just take the cost contribution they receive at 15%, back to The government.
    Accross the board methinks we can pay for the American jobs by next November!!
    But then you have to apply the same rule not just to the president but the whole of congress and all its members.
    PACS what about them?

    September 27, 2011 at 11:58 pm |
  13. odiiiiii

    am so disappointed with CNN for allowing this sort of write up. This writer should shut up or go out there and look for news. Not even Fox news will come up with this kind of rubbish, arrant non sense........The worst news I have read this year and its so unfortunate its coming from CNN. so disappointing...

    September 28, 2011 at 12:25 am |
  14. Thomas

    And Texas is paying for Rick Perry's security and air cost !

    All presidents do this ,
    Bush used two jets , one for him and the first lady , and another for his kids.

    September 28, 2011 at 12:50 am |
    • Electricgrendel

      Hush, hush now. They've got an axe to grind, and a Democrat's in office. You can't expect them to do something as tiring as remember all of the way back to four whole years ago.

      September 28, 2011 at 4:21 am |
  15. Jane

    Who do you think is paying for all the costs being incurred by Bachman, Perry, et al.? Santa Claus? At least PRESIDENT Obama is also working his ass off trying to save this country whilst doing the Necessary campaigning. Bachman and Perry have done jack for their poor constituents since deciding to run..

    September 28, 2011 at 12:59 am |
  16. Henry Miller

    Private use of public money is usually illegal. Why are these people allowed to get away with this?

    September 28, 2011 at 1:04 am |
    • Jeff

      Seriously. You are outraged about something that is perfectly legal, supported by congress, and done by every president during every campaign? And this is the first time you have heard about it?

      September 28, 2011 at 3:45 am |
    • StopTheMadness

      Same reason every single president in history has don't get your panties in a bunch go back and read the article maybe you will get it. Your hate campaign isn't going to work on this one.

      September 28, 2011 at 5:43 am |
  17. ANTHONY76

    Whatever it takes to keep a Republican out of the White House is American money well spent.

    September 28, 2011 at 2:14 am |
    • Jen06

      Because things are going so well now I assume?

      September 28, 2011 at 3:46 am |
      • tyler

        ding. spot on.

        September 28, 2011 at 4:02 am |
      • Marry

        Why would you think these „Pretenders“ running for the GOP/TP could do better? “NO, H E L L NO” and no alternatives then to look into the past that created this mess will solve the problems? Get real!
        Of cause it is perfectly all right for the President to campaign! And, as ANTHONY76 said, every penny spend that prevents the GOP/TP staying a majority in Congress or even come near the WH is very well spend!

        September 28, 2011 at 4:54 am |
    • Kevin

      Obama's problem is that he doesn't get out of the White House enough and listens to poor quality advisers. I am one pleased moderate conservative that is going to help him pack after he gets soundly trounced in the November 2012 elections. ABO! Anybody but Obama. If the Democrats didn't believe that he was in huge trouble, why would they be talking about Hillary as President or even replacing Biden as VP?

      September 28, 2011 at 6:26 am |
      • a lttle sad

        That was Cheney. Last I heard, he was not a member of the Democratic Party.

        September 28, 2011 at 10:36 am |
  18. Adam

    Hes the president for Heavens sake, why is this news?

    September 28, 2011 at 2:28 am |
  19. Electricgrendel

    Typical two-faced bull puckey. Bush did the exact same thing, and never once did anyone say a word. Democrats are held to an entirely different standard than Republicans. If Democrats support not destroying the environment, or cutting back on fossil fuels they have to live in a mud hut and grow their own food or else they're talked about as "hypocrites." Republicans say they are fiscally conservative, then explode the debt under Reagan, Bush I and Bush II. Nary a word is said. They say they are for small government, and then Bush grows the government more than LBJ. There are two sets of standards. One for Democrats, and one for Republicans. Yet when everything goes to hell "both sides" are said to be corrupt or incompetent. Funny how that works.

    September 28, 2011 at 4:19 am |
  20. no to pork obama

    Yep, the economy is shot, America is a laughing stock, no jobs no retirement and this idiot ios spending my tax dollars, just shows me that obama is NO BETTER than the trash that sits on the corner collecting welfare and now obama threatens Ford to remove an add that downs the obama stimulus, someone do America a favor, teach obama the idiot about life.

    September 28, 2011 at 5:38 am |
    • StopTheMadness

      Yep be mad at Obama for doing something every president has done yep we can see your double standards, yep we can see clearly you are an idiot who thinks your hate campaign will work. Guess what only a few other simpletons will feel the way you do.

      September 28, 2011 at 5:45 am |
      • Adelso

        I didn't know about this trilogy (or the weritr, for that matter) and although I'm not a great reader of historical fiction, I am interested in that particular period. I think we very much under-estimate what Henry II did to regularize our laws and commercial systems. I shall have to look these out. Thanks.

        July 31, 2012 at 6:25 am |
    • Realitybites

      Don't forget, the economy is shot, we were a complete laughing stock, jobs, retirement etc were brought to you by the previous utilizer of these tax dollars.

      September 28, 2011 at 6:25 am |
    • Kevin

      How novel, Realitybites! Blame everything for the rest of natural time on Bush. But, let's run with your illogic. If Obama cannot be accountable for everything, since everything is Bush's fault, why have him in office? He can't fix this "Bush mess", so what good is he?

      September 28, 2011 at 6:28 am |
  21. NVB

    Those are not campaign costs, sir.

    The president, when he travels, must travel in Air Force One (which, for the record, is the name given to *any* air vehicle in which any sitting president travels). No matter where he's going, no matter what reason. As a matter of national security, anywhere the president goes, he must be accompanied by Secret Service agents. Anywhere, for any reason.

    The taxpayer is not funding "campaign costs", merely financing what it takes to protect and transport the leader of the free world. Depicting this as "taxpayers paying for campaign costs" is really irresponsible. If the president sits in the White House working on paperwork, there are Secret Service there. Stop trying to paint this as a big deal.

    And for the record, I think you'd be hard pressed to find a president -even if you looked closely at a really, really bad president like GWB- who wasn't also performing his job as Chief Executive while on these trips. So it's not exactly a paid vacation.

    This is irresponsible reporting, disguised as vigilance. You should be ashamed of yourself.

    September 28, 2011 at 5:55 am |
  22. Jerry

    President NObama (NO-blah-blah) and his supporter's credo: Go along with the Democratic agenda, or; you are dust in the wind!!! Yes, NObamamites, you are allowed to come out of the woodwork for a little while...

    September 28, 2011 at 6:36 am |
  23. Liz Carter in Georgia

    Reality bites alright! Everytime you biggoted lunatics start bashing our President, who YES, is there trying to fix the BUSH mess, it's heartbreaking to me and many others. However, the heartbreak quickly turns into anger because we know there's a another standard being exacted upon Pres Obama! He's got two GOP/T-PARTY knives in his back; you will be here twisting them until the end! The biggest dagger is RACISM and the other one is HATE! That he IS an intelligent Black Democrat Man just kills you!

    September 28, 2011 at 8:06 am |
    • Boiki

      I just looked at this book at the bosrktooe the day before yesterday I would love, love to win it When I went to Boston ealier this summer I was really disappointed that we weren't able to go to Salem I did learn from the site though that no noe was ever really burned at the stake' I don't know if I ever knew that before or just didn't think about it because in a book I read about Jane Grey, they did burn heretics at the stake Thank you for the contest

      August 1, 2012 at 2:47 am |
  24. Liz Carter in Georgia

    Hey Kevin and Jerry, listen up! I've said this over and over. Others have brought it to the attention of the masses, but it looks like due to all of these different standards nothing is being done about it! I'm going to say this more time! If He can't fix it! WHY? The BUSH PARTY is blocking everything he puts forth to fix all don't want him to fix it! You're racists, treasonists and obstructionists! Charges are due! @Balls McGhee, Aaron, ANTHONY76, Electricgrendel, and Marry good posts.

    September 28, 2011 at 8:39 am |
  25. Liz Carter in Georgia

    The media was more loyal and respectful to 'The Office Of The President', if nothing else. We didn't even have headline topics like this one 'Campaigning on the taxpayers dime' to beligerently bash, kick and scream about the cost of any previous traveling President until now! However, the man IS also working! He's trying to get the jobs bill passed by 'the people' since the GOP Congress won't do it! Obama is out talking about his jobs plan, encouraging Americans to call their Congressmen to pass it! HATERS!

    September 28, 2011 at 9:04 am |
    • Inrealityhere

      Liz, sounds like you are the hater.Get a grip. I don't hate this current president; I just hate what he's doing to the country and I resent the fact that he can legally use my tax dollars to fly around the country and try to convince people that he deserves to destroy it. When will you get it through your head that we are not racist! We would vote for ANYone, black or white, that realizes liberal policies are BAD for the country. "working"? All he does is talk! He's still banking on his community organizing expertise. "yes we can, yes we can" yes we can, run this country right into the ground.

      September 28, 2011 at 9:50 am |
  26. Ken in MD

    So what this article is basically saying is that this president is doing what every recent sitting president has done. So what? Let's stop nitpicking over a million dollars when there's trillions in debt and millions of people out of work.

    September 28, 2011 at 9:20 am |
  27. Rick McDaniel

    Not one bit happy about that, either.

    September 28, 2011 at 10:21 am |
    • a lttle sad

      Are you happy with the performance of the Repubs in office? How you liking that Teaparty downgrade, and the subsequent volatility in the markets? Did you remember to stick your 401K to cash or are you down 10-12% in the lasst 3 months?

      September 28, 2011 at 10:41 am |
      • didi

        The downgrade was due to lack of a plan to get the debt under control. The fact that congress couldn't come up with a plan just added to the uncertainty. And yes, I did take my 401 K out of the market because I could see the handwriting on the wall.

        September 28, 2011 at 11:35 am |
      • Farida

        it better. Thank you for your eoeuqlnt and accurate commentary.I agree: Obama is a moderate Republican; he is not a Progressive Democrat. So it's time to vote him out of office, even voting for a Republican since the difference between Obama and Romney would not be great: both had the same health care plan, which sucks; both will implement tax breaks for the super rich and corporations; and both will not create any jobs.In fact, Romney may not be as much of a hawk as Obama: Obama has increased our military presence abroad.It's time for all Progressives to send a protest vote to the DNC. If it gives us Republican look-alike candidates, we will vote Republican. We do not need two Republican parties in this country, the only difference being that the Democratic version is just a tad more liberal on its social issues, but still represents Wall Street, the super rich, and the multinational corporations.

        July 30, 2012 at 7:45 am |
      • Nada

        It is a common miradnesstunding that the Salem witches were burned, but no witches in the Colonies were ever killed at the stake as they were in Europe, as the British courts considered a burning death too cruel. This is so sad, I spent a long time at the site reading about these poor woman and men.

        August 1, 2012 at 3:04 am |
  28. SaintM

    Blah Blah Blah – and Reagan and Bush (I and II) or any other modern day president didn't take trips using taxpayer money?

    Your argument is one-sided, and seems to be written only to fuel anger–how stupid is that?

    September 28, 2011 at 10:29 am |
    • Abdul

      I've been trying to win this with sadly, no luck. A Burning Time by Carol Mates got me inrteesetd in the Salem Witch trials. It's been years since I've read it, but that scene when they tortured the main character's mother, by using razor blades still haunts me to this day. Their torture methods they used made absolutely no sense, it was a lose-lose situation for those accused, and sometimes they would be accused just because they pissed off one person. It wasn't fair and I'm glad that this isn't practiced anymore.I've also left a link of this at my blog, it's off to the side.Thanks~ Popin

      August 1, 2012 at 1:10 am |
  29. Tom

    We did the same for Bush. Did anyone bring this up then? I won't even read this article because it's sided, and pathetic, especially considering it's been like this through the past dozen or so election cycles.

    September 28, 2011 at 11:07 am |
    • C-Lo

      And that's the problem with you and people like you, Tom. You choose to comment on an artilce that you won't even read, automatically assuming it's sided and pathetic, yet if YOU HAD READ IT, it comes to the same conclusion you did. You are right, it is sided–to YOUR side (opinion).

      Maybe if you'd take the time to read, you wouldn't look so foolish and you might LEARN something in the interim.

      Of note in the "sidedness" of this article–a Dem controlled Oversight committee report said tax payers footed 97% of presidential travel during Bush's terms, however it leaves out that this covered ALL of his travel during all 8 years, not just times he may have been on the "campaign" trail in 05. And the WH declined to comment on the breakdown of expenses to the taxpayers vs. DNC payments "citing security concerns." I am not really sure how disclosing amounts paid jepordizes travel that has already been completed.

      September 28, 2011 at 12:18 pm |
  30. C-Lo

    I am curious as to the "logic" of some of you defending the president...Please, honestly, explain these discrepencies in your arguments, as I see them...
    1. The claim is that Bush ruined the economy, when he was handed a tough situation in a market (tech) bubble burst and a terrorist attack that stopped the country cold for over a week and hobbled it for months after, and yet jobless numbers remained at relatively healthy %s throughout, until Dems took over in 06.
    2. The fact that the Dems had 2 years of full control of Congress and the WH, but failed to pass a budget OR ANY jobs bill (except for that $1T "stimuls" which stimulated nothing).
    3. Are now accusing Republicans of being obstructionist when they were the ones who attempted to tackle the budget (which again Dems didn't do for 2 years), and were blocked by Reid from seeing the Senate floor and threatened wiht Obama's veto pen from Feb-August.
    4. RE: "affordable" health care–this plan was supposed to reduce premiums by bringing lower risk/cost individuals (young people) into the insurance pools. "Children" up to 26 years old were almost immediately allowed to join parents' health plans, and they did in droves–an estimated 2.3 million of these "low risk" people yet premiums shot up 9%

    The fact is, the Dems have been ineffective, not obstructed. If they were so worried about these issues when elected in 06 and 08, why are these "plans" just now coming up–with the exception of the ineffective "stimulus" plan, and why do they continue to promote the same solutions that failed previously?

    September 28, 2011 at 11:15 am |
    • Inrealityhere

      They continue to promote the same solutions that failed because .... I don't know ... I just don't get the illogic.

      September 28, 2011 at 12:03 pm |
    • Robert

      I can try and answer. 1.) Bush inherited a surplus of government spending on the back of four years of balanced budgets. The tech bubble burst before he took over, and lasted only a few months of his presidency. He had advanced notice of the terrorist attack, and ignored it completely, for that he should've been tried for treason. And in '07 the housing market crashed, and no, the dem's in congress had nothing to do with that. That resulted due to lax regulation and the removal of regulation for over 4 years of his 8 year terror train.
      2.) Check again, the stimulus worked. They passed budgets, go back and check. I agree, they did nothing to directly create jobs, which Obama had promised and failed to deliver.
      3.) So, the first major round of the dems vs. greedy ole poops happened with the finalization of the 2011 budget. The gop stated it would not allow it to go without 100 billion in spending cuts. The dems did not set any such rules. Finally, after a month of debate, they got, what 40 billion cut? When the Tea Party overlords found this out, they set the next showdown date: Raising the debt ceiling. Now, the GOP had gone along with 8 votes for the debt ceiling under Bush, without ONCE asking why, or putting up roadblocks, or attaching spending cuts. Now that it was a dem president in office the GOP seemed eager to make a point of spending cuts.
      4.) Premiums are handled at not only the state level, but also by companies, not government. I can't answer why they shot up. As a person paying an outrageous amount, I'd be happy to find out. However, the current GOP field wants to do anything and everything to get rid of it. Not fix it. END IT.

      Turn that question around: If the GOP have been this huge on cutting spending, why didn't they raise issues on any other debt ceiling votes? IF they were against stimulus, why did they sign onto Bush's proposal for it? And why do the GOP keep shouting "cut taxes, so the job makers will make jobs" when their tax rates are the lowest in decades, and no jobs are being made as of yet?

      September 28, 2011 at 12:13 pm |
      • C-Lo

        Robert–thank you for your thoughtful response, though you had to throw a couple digs in there, at least you made an effort to debate the points. Don't have time today to offer a response, although I think your points are debatable. At least you don't "tow the party line." Hope you stick around to further discuss.

        September 29, 2011 at 9:40 am |
  31. Lillie

    To all the HATERS....OBAMA/BIDEN 2012 and I can't wait to do whatever I can to make sure the country isn't subjected to a Perry or Romney catastrophe!!!!!!!

    And where were all the haters when Cheney/Bush were driving the country into the GRAND CANYON??

    September 28, 2011 at 11:57 am |
  32. Be Sane

    So this is news. Every incumbant has campaigned and it has been paid for by the taxpayers. DUH!

    September 28, 2011 at 12:42 pm |
  33. BOB


    September 28, 2011 at 12:50 pm |
  34. Nancy Werany

    Hey, at least we finally got transparency from this sad excuse for a president. It is transparent that he concocted the "jobs bill" that he knew would have no chance of passing, so that he had a platform to campaign and fund raise on, with the taxpayers paying for this campaign. His campaign slogan will be "The Republicans won't pass this great jobs bill, so it is all their fault" Very transparent and very slick. We're sick and tired of Mr. Oslickness.

    "O" – OUT IN 12"

    September 29, 2011 at 7:04 am |
  35. Liz Carter in Georgia

    Inrealityhere; Yes I AM a 'hater'! I hate the perpetual, strategical SPIN of the medias mocking of this US Presidents' genuine attempts to set this nation back on its feet! I hate the obstruction he's had to face by the GOP on EVERYTHING he's come up with, EVER SINCE he took the oath, even if they agreed with it in the first place! I hate that you OBAMA-haters have the gall to turn right around, whine and cry that he hasn't done anything! That's a LIE! HE'S BENT OVER SO FAR TO THE GOP, HIS OWN BASE IS MAD!

    October 4, 2011 at 1:50 pm |
  36. Liz Carter in Georgia

    Inrealityhere...I hate that you think you can just SAY it's not about race and it's all JUST about him not doing ANYTHING for the country! Really? Do your research..look it up! He's done more in these 3 years, signed more bills into law, not even to mention the 'war on terror', he's ACTUALLY took on FOR REAL, than BUSH or any other previous President had done in their first 3 years! If anyone brings up one thing he's done, I hate it when you all continue to downplay and discredit whatever that was he did!

    October 4, 2011 at 2:17 pm |
  37. Liz Carter in Georgia

    You see @Inrealityhere, you hit the nil on the head! I hate the envy and disrespect shown this President to even use the perks afforded ALL others! I hate cowardice racists and supremacists in America who find it easier to deflect it's burning existance back to the ones who're desparately trying to point it out! ACKNOWLEDGEMENT; once and for all is the ONLY way we can begin to move as a nation. No justice...No peace! That's the ONLY means by which that fire can be extinguished. They don't want it put out!!

    October 4, 2011 at 2:48 pm |
  38. Liz Carter in Georgia

    ...One more thing, You say you don't hate the President...I don't know..I don't know you.. I'll have to accept it, but I don't think you can truly speak for all of these people who have shown through their own words on this blog, day in and day out that they DO! Much of it's not one thing to do with his politics! Half of them don't even have a clue how or what to complain about; they piggyback generic complaints from one another to covertly remain racists and biggots! Obama said yes WE can! Not yes HE can!

    October 4, 2011 at 3:25 pm |
    • Vladik

      I wrote in McCain in 2000. He's changed since then, and so have I. Obama all the way.If Obama gets etleecd, Ie2€™m hoping that he can do everything for the White House that he did for the Illinois state legislature 2 short years ago.Yes, no doubt Romney's decades of political experience was what drew you to him. Or are there actually other skills someone can bring to office? I see a lifetime of politics as a negative now. It's about who you'll bring with you into office, what kind of decisions you'll make, and how willing you are to work with people instead of locking yourself in the White House believing you know better than everyone else.

      July 31, 2012 at 3:18 am |
    • Mariajose

      I don't see this as the failure of one party to neaotigte in good faith, I see it a a shortcoming of our political system. The skills needed to lead and compromise are different from the skills needed to raise money and appeal to your base and our current political atmosphere means you can't do both.However you spin this, a default means our leaders failed at the job we gave them. And I think that will cause a lot of people to be angry at government in general. Thoughts?

      August 1, 2012 at 11:55 pm |