The U.S. government isn't.I hadn't thought the gov't's would play this sort of game, though. That's the eye opening part for me.
The U.S. government isn't.I hadn't thought the gov't's would play this sort of game, though. That's the eye opening part for me.
The U.S. government isn't.
The First Lady is not a government offical. She has no powers, no authority to do anything that can be considered government action.They didn't release the images? I'm going to have to read this whole thread again now...figure out just what they hey is going on.
The First Lady is not a government offical. She has no powers, no authority to do anything that can be considered government action.
The President can do certain things by executive order, take certain unilateral actions under the Constitution, and can take action pursuant to the laws passed by the Congress. He can also do things on his own that are not Presidential functions.
For example, early in his administration, Obama and Biden hit a Five Guys Burgers and Fries in Alexandria, Virginia. This was not a government function, and it reflected no endorsement, limitation, regulation, or contract with Five Guys by the U.S. government. When the Obamas vacation in Hawaii, it does constitute action by the U.S. government in favour of, against, or neutral toward Hawaii.
When Mrs. Obama says Americans should eat better, that is not government policy or government action. And when she participates in an internet "movement," it likewish is not government policy or government action.
They can try to persuade her, and she tends to support what President Obama does. But legally and formally, she is nothing more and nothing less than a citizen. Some First Ladies (Wilson, Eleanor Roosevelt) have been extremely active in government policy. Others, notably Mary Todd Lincoln, barely even played White House hostess, much less participated in policy. But in any case, the First Lady has influence because of her (presumably) close relationship with the President, but she has no power of any kind whatsoever. She also has no "duties" other than the ones she chooses to take on.right, gotcha. Do they have any say in what she does?
She doesn't have a staff. The White House has a staff.But her staff is.
http://usgovinfo.about.com/od/thepresidentandcabinet/a/Michelle-Obama-Staff-Size-Salaries.htmShe doesn't have a staff. The White House has a staff.
Sorry, Walter. You can go anyplace you want with this, rant and rave about this or that First Lady, positive or negative. Nothing will change the fact that the First Lady is not a government official, holds no government authority, and nothing she says or does can be considered an action of the government.
But she still uses up over 1 million dollars of public resources for staffing alone .Fine. Everything you've said is true. Still don't make Mrs. Obama a government official, give her any government authority, or make anything she says or does government policy or government action.
Don't forget gardening Mooch's organic veggie garden.But she still uses up over 1 million dollars of public resources for staffing alone .
They haven't even started to spend yet . Hmmmn I wonder really what it costs to keep a first lady ?
This lists all her entourage but omits her other servants , you know cleaning and cooking and walking the dog .
If you had a principled objection to the money spent on the First Lady, this might be an interesting conversation. But you don't. I'd bet the rent that as soon as we get a Republican President, your problems with the First Lady will vanish like the morning mist. Just as they didn't exist when Laura Bush was First Lady.Don't forget gardening Mooch's organic veggie garden.
That list of federal employees providing services for the first lady is totally irresponsible use of tax dollars .If you had a principled objection to the money spent on the First Lady, this might be an interesting conversation. But you don't. I'd bet the rent that as soon as we get a Republican President, your problems with the First Lady will vanish like the morning mist. Just as they didn't exist when Laura Bush was First Lady.
What were Laura's expenses?If you had a principled objection to the money spent on the First Lady, this might be an interesting conversation. But you don't. I'd bet the rent that as soon as we get a Republican President, your problems with the First Lady will vanish like the morning mist. Just as they didn't exist when Laura Bush was First Lady.
A lot less than Moochelle's I read.