Lecturing the world about income inequality while their pets dine on crystal
Does America have royalty? It may not, but we certainly have elected aristocrats who live a lavish lifestyle on the taxpayer dime. President Barack Obama and his family have become the go-to example for irresponsible, audacious behavior, while the nation suffers economic hardship.
You may have read about some of Obama’s lavish vacations, most recently his wife’s Hawaii vacation which cost taxpayers over $350,000. The White House balked when asked how much Michelle Obama’s extravagant birthday party cost taxpayers. Then there was her trip to Aspen, while her husband took in rounds of golf with Tiger Woods.
Of course, the president and his family deserve to be able to take vacations and security is needed when they do. The point is they routinely gallivant around, smiling for cameras, as they spend taxpayer money, and all while President Obama is lecturing the nation about sacrifice and frugality.
Now we’ve learned that the Obama family pets, as if the first family were channeling pre-revolutionary French aristocrats, dine off of fine china and crystal. A picture of Michelle Obama’s dogs decked out in fine jewelry about to enjoy a first class feast off of fine china was tweeted on the First Lady’s Twitter account with a title of “Bon appétit!”
It’s an ironic use of the French term, since it was French Queen Marie Antoinette who famously responded to food shortages and inflation which were causing starvation amongst her people by saying “let them eat cake!” Antoinette and the French aristocrats are routinely referenced as an example of parasitic government, living fat off of the people while the people starve.
In America, 47 million Americans are on food stamps, poverty and unemployment are near all-time highs, and the debacle that is the Affordable Care Act has added additional costs to already struggling households.
Meanwhile, Michelle Obama’s dogs are living better than most Americans.
In 1980 Nancy Reagan was criticized for ordering new china for the White House, even though the funds were donated. The nation was in a recession created largely by Democratic President Jimmy Carter’s policies and the expenditure was thought to be unnecessary in the light of American economic hardship.
About the author: Keith Farrell is a political commentator and community organizer. He is a frequent contributor The Libertarian Republic and the founder and president of Spirits of ’76, a nonprofit service club dedicated to solving community problems with volunteer efforts. He graduated from the University of Connecticut and holds a BA in American Studies and Urban & Community Studies. Follow him on Facebook.