Thursday, November 4, 2010


The price tag for Prez. Obama 3-day "visit" to Bombay, India.

Primarily for Security. Understandable when you consider that Bombay was the target not that long ago, and from the sea. And India, where Indira Ghandi was assassinated by her OWN guards in Delhi.

6oo million dollars.

6 Hundred Million Dollars

At least, that is what we've been told it's costing. You have to wonder what else it's gonna cost us.


Rachel said...

“The numbers reported in this article have no basis in reality," White House spokesman Tommy Vietor in an-emailed statement. "Due to security concerns, we are unable to outline details associated with security procedures and costs, but it’s safe to say these numbers are wildly inflated.”

"The costs are comparable to when President Clinton or President Bush traveled abroad," White House press secretary Robert Gibbs said Thursday. "This trip doesn’t cost $200 million a day," Gibbs added later.

And just to put it all in perspective, the entire war effort in Afghanistan costs $190 million per day. How long have we been there at that rate? Even if this INSANE rumor about Obama's trip is somehow true, just wait until we're out of Afghanistan (assuming such a thing ever happens) and pretend we stayed there three more days.

Rachel said...

Also this:
“I will take the liberty this time of dismissing as absolutely absurd this notion that somehow we were deploying 10 percent of the Navy -- some 34 ships and an aircraft carrier -- in support of the president's trip to Asia,” said Morrell at today’s Pentagon briefing. “That's just comical. Nothing close to that is being done."

Cats and Quilts said...

really? I get to pretend now.

BTW, this quoted amount was reported by the an Indian Press. The ball was certainly picked up by the Republicans and I dare say if this had been a Republican Administration, the US press would have been the ball-runners.

Since it looks bad for THIS president, I doubt the MSM vetted it and let it drop. Rather, if they vetted it at all, they followed Rahm's Rule.

But thanks for the smack down. It's great to compare every criticism of this Administration against the Afghanistan War. Which, strangely, seems to continue.

What you fail to address is that actually I didn't argue with the cost. I didn't criticize it at all.

You seem to be always so ready to jump my case; that is a knee-jerk reaction.