Our imperial presidency

We have had more than our share of national presidents that acted like emperors, placing themselves above the laws of the land, while exhorting their subjects to work, live and love in ways they themselves avoided.

With that said, allow me to state that our current president appears to have won the award as the most frivolous and imperious of all such prior "emperors."

Hypocrisy is something I abhor in anyone; it is especially egregious in someone such as our president. Do you recall hearing Barack Obama promising "change" and "transparency" if he was elected? Can you remember the outrage expressed by his offices when a few CEOs of financially-troubled automobile companies traveled to Washington, D.C., on company aircraft?

And are you also able to bring to mind the minor criticism that surfaced when, shortly after he moved into the White House, the president used public funds to take his wife to the Big Apple for dinner and a Broadway show?

It then appeared to me the man, who had filled a naïve, emotion-driven nation with hope, was off to a start that suggested he was going to milk the highest office in the land for as much as much as it could produce. It seemed that lavish lifestyles were going to be the order of the day, with growing personal use of burgeoning staffs, along with frequent and unnecessary use of expensive assets, such as military aircraft and personnel.

Now, mind you, I have no objection whatsoever for a president spending big bucks to properly entertain visitors, such as the Queen of England, but I am incensed that any president would spend $1 million of our money on a personal night out with his wife.

Let's take a second look, at that inexcusable, disgraceful "date night" in New York City.

You may recall the news media then often quoted the cost for that personal trip to have been "only around $24,000" in taxpayer dollars. Well, as usual, the devil is in the details. Here are additional cost figures: some as reportedly presented by a retired Air Force officer, who was personally and unavoidably, involved in that inexcusable misuse of public funds.

Planning for the president's "date," began weeks before the actual event. Uncounted thousands of man hours were spent setting up security, lodging, meals, theater tickets, ground and air transportation, communications, medical support and more. Three days prior to D-Day (Date Day), a USAF C-17 took a plane-load of military passengers (Marines) to Kennedy Airport in New York so that they'd be ready to receive five helicopters set to arrive in support of Date Night. Seems to me that just one helicopter would be adequate to take the president to his hotel from the airport; why anyway, couldn't he just use the armored limousines that had been brought to New York, at significant expense, aboard USAF aircraft?

According to the reporting officer, at D-1 he flew Secret Service personnel and heavy, motorcade equipment to JFK, after which he and his crew spent two nights in the Hilton Hotel, at Times Square.

He estimated the one hotel bill, for just his crew and the Marines that were also staying there, came to at least $75,000 (which, by itself, is three times the total bill, for the entire trip, as originally reported by the liberal press).

The president avoided use of the politically sensitive, and more obvious Boeing 747 (by which he travels in sumptuous luxury when on official business), opting instead for three USAF Lear jets.

Altogether, 10 military aircraft were used to support the president on his personal, romantic excursion.

Hundreds of military personnel, civilian staffers, NYC and Port Authority security personnel, medical personnel and others were required to work in direct support of the president's play time. The overall bill quite likely well-exceeded $1 million, which came right out of the taxes that many of us pay.

At a time when our economy was tanking, due to reckless, unethical and politically motivated financial policies originated and/or supported by Democrats (e.g., Barney Frank, Charlie Rangel, Nancy Pellosi, etc.), and when the president had publicly criticized automotive industry CEOs for using private aircraft when on government directed business, the president immaturely flaunts his sudden wealth and power by a childish display of "Look at me: I'm da man!"

What next, Mr. Obama? Will we soon see opulent, potentate's palaces built along the Potomac, where a new, gilded, presidential barge, crewed by USN personnel, awaits the anointed one's every giggling gleeful command?

Did we elect a reformist, who promised that "yes we can" bring overdue change to Washington; or was it a privileged, bright-but-inexperienced and immature lad, who's going to spend more time and tax dollars enjoying the heady pleasures of office than in attempting to ethically and morally carry out the heavy responsibilities of being the leader and chief executive of what once was the greatest nation on earth?

Are notorious Illinois politics now the order of the day in Washington? God help us!