Opuscula Any real value To presidential Show flag visits?

PRESIDENT DONALD TRUMP and his travel cohort jumps on fuel-guzzling, heavily staffed Boeing jumbo to fly to this or that disaster area.

He is following the lead of previous presidents.

Go to a disaster site, talk to a few people, and return to D.C.

Is there any benefit? To anyone?

SINCE I NEVER HAVE BEEN in a disaster – be it a Cat. 5 hurricane, a California wildfire, or mass shooting – I have no way of personally knowing if a presidential visit has any value to the people involved.

I know it (a) hurts my wallet — the jet and all that goes with it is a major expense to the taxpayer — and (b) the Chief Executive does nothing to help fight a fire, restore power or clear debris — the president MAY be able to console some survivors and visit the wounded following a shooting — but in reality, what good is a presidential on-site visit?

Do generals visit front lines before the guns are silent? In a word: No.

They stay in their quarters with their staffs to strategize. They probably would be useless on the front lines.

Ditto — in my opinion — presidential visits.

I have been in hurricanes. None, thankfully, Cat 3 of higher.

I have been a shovel man in more than a few brush fires, none of which got out of hand.

And while, as a hospital employee, I transferred bodies to funereal homes, I was not asked to console grieving relatives.

Is presidential flag waving — if you are a Democrat, presidential grand standing — really of any value?

Is a presidential visit desired? To hear the Democrats tell it, President Trump was NOT wanted in Pittsburgh. Will they say the same for his visit to Mexico Beach FL or what was the lovely mountain town of Paradise CA (a place I used to visit).

The media covers disasters like a blanket, presidential visit or not.

Does the president need yet another photo op? Hardly. (Remember, this applies to ALL presidents of both parties, not just President Trump.)

Will a presidential visit focus more media attention on the disaster? Not likely.

It would be better, in this scrivener's opinion, for the president to send

* the secretary of the appropriate department with an assistant or two and
* two representatives from the House, one from each party.

The president should stay in Washington, monitoring the media, receiving reports from the “official” delegation (ibid.) and the impacted area’s political leadership, and ordering appropriate federal responses.

Meanwhile, the president is available to handle other national issues.

AS FOR the jumbo jet: Keep it on the ground. The U.S. military has a number of smaller jets; the C-37A (Gulfstream G550) accommodates 15-passengers and can be configured to satisfy almost anyone’s ego.

Image above from Flickr (http://tinyurl.com/y84dxsy5) showing three government Gulfstream G550 aircraft.

The Gulfstream’s are substantially more cost efficient that a Boeing jumbo. One could be configured with all the communication bells and whistles a president needs when he — or she — needs to travel on official business. In the event the president wants to travel to, say, Hawaii, the president — or a benefactor — should reimburse the federal treasury for ALL expenses including fuel, consumables, and airport fees if the aircraft touches down at a non-government airport. Granted, the G550 cannot fly a president’s family to China without refueling stops, but it can make the trip (and the first family might get to see a little bit of America on the way).

I confess I have flown as a “guest of the government” when I worked as a reporter. The flight was in a Boeing (nee’ McDonnell Douglas) C-17 Globemaster shared with fully-equipped 82nd Airborne paratroops; it made being crammed into a commercial airliner’s cheap seats seem comfortable — and I didn’t have to wear all the trooper’s gear. The government wanted decent PR and at the time I was the reporter covering nearby military bases.

BACK TO THE ORIGINAL QUESTIONS

1. Is a presidential “show the colors” trip really worth it; does it boost morale; does it accomplish anything? Could more be accomplished by sending others and staying in D.C. to respond to their reports?
2. If a presidential jaunt must be made, is it necessary to make the trip in a jumbo jet when a smaller, more efficient, jet is available? Unless the flight is international and the president needs to show America’s wealth, is there really a purpose for a jumbo jet?

---

PLAGIARISM is the act of appropriating the literary composition of another, or parts or passages of his writings, or the ideas or language of the same, and passing them off as the product of one’s own mind.

Truth is an absolute defense to defamation. Defamation is a false statement of fact. If the statement was accurate, then by definition it wasn’t defamatory.

Comments on Presidential Visits