THE PRESIDENT IS SPENDING MY TAX MONEY to campaign for re-election or for his favored candidates.
Every president has done this since Hector was a pup.
It used to be presidents campaigned from the last car on a special train.
Then, everyone could come to the tracks to wave (or boo) as the train whizzed past. At major stops, crowds would gather (be gathered?) to hear the candidate speak. If the president was campaigning for a fellow party candidate, the hopeful shared the platform with the Big Draw — president, state senator, etc.
Now, presidents travel in Air Force One, currently a Made-In-America Boeing 747.
Like the presidential trains that proceeded it, Air Force One is is a financial hole in the air. (The special trains weren’t “cheap” and they forced scheduled trains onto sidings while the Big Shots rolled on to their next stop.)
I know presidents and other Big Shots need to campaign for themselves and for candidates who support their ideas, but at what cost?
Is a 747 really necessary?
There are smaller jets available.
I know — I’m given to understand — that the president’s plane has special secure communications gear on board so the Commander-In-Chief can talk to almost anyone at any time.
But does it take a jumbo jet to haul the comm center from here to there?
Let’s “assume” — and we all know what “assume” does — that a jumbo jet is the only option for a Big Shot.
If that’s the case, MAKE THE CAMPAIGN PAY FOR THE RIDE.
Why should my tax dollars go to support candidates I would not vote for even if there was no opposition?
The president flies to, say Nebraska, to campaign for a candidate for congress.
I don’t live in Nebraska and, presidential ally or not, I don’t know, or care about Nebraska politics. Maybe the president makes intermediate stops on his way from D.C. to Nebraska. Each take off and landing is a financial burden … on the taxpayer — me.
- Every time a president comes to my neck of the woods, his presence screws up traffic, causes local taxpayers a bundle for additional security, and disrupts airport activity. Dear Mr. President: Stay in D.C.
Campaigning on the taxpayer’s dollar is an on-going disgrace.
Even without leaving D.C., candidates take advantage of franking privileges. OK, even thought they don’t pay for stamps, it does give the USPS letter carriers something to deliver — more junk mail.
The media also must foot a campaigner’s bill with free space (printed media) and air time (radio and tv). I suppose it’s fair since some campaign budgets can‘t afford “equal time.” (This is in addition to almost obligatory “public service announcements” such as “Join the Army.”)
If they can’t afford equal time, perhaps not many people support the candidate and he, or she, should “get the message” and quit the campaign trail.
I believe in democracy; it may not be perfect, but IMO it is the best thing we have. (I also believe some people cannot handle democracy and return time and time again to a dictatorship; Cuba being a prime example in the Western hemisphere.
FOR THE RECORD: My complaint is “party independent.” Both parties have abused the taxpayer for as long as there have been campaigns. Before the Democrats and Republicans there were the Federalists and Whigs.
I am reasonably sure that politicians elsewhere are no better at considering the taxpayers’ wallets.
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.
BCPLANNER: Comments on Make Pols Pay
No comments:
Post a Comment