The point of the statistic on spending on the war was meant to do a few things.
Put this huge waste of taxpayers money in perspective. Don't want to argue about whether the war is a waste of money but even still it puts your spending into perspective.
This isn't an issue. This is a Gotcha! moment from the conservatives. Yes, Presidential trips cost money. However this was hardly a thoughtless holiday but seems to establishing diplomatic relations just as actual Presidential visits do. Also it seems to me that the spending was partly to foster the image of American superiority. Doesn't this trip serve as America's status of wealth and power to the world? Or at least Spanish people?(or would you prefer that your Presidents wife is seen in some 3 star hotel?)
Some things levelled at this holiday are true and could merit discussion. She could've gone on holiday in America for example to the Gulf. Obviously it was decided that a holiday in Spain would be more beneficial(reasons above). I wouldn't mind a discussion of the pro and cons of travelling abroad instead of locally. I definitely mind this being treated like a very serious issue with conservatives climbing on top of their soapboxes.
I got you a big bag of it.
While the unemployment is exceptionally high, inflation is wonderfully low. In my lifetime the "stagflation" of the Ford/Carter administrations were generaly worse than they are today, although I am not complaining because as a college student I completely abused the system getting student loans with a rate BELOW that of inflation at the time.
