Is a Little Sensitivity Too Much to Ask?

Via Bride of Rove, this news caught my eye this morning:

"This holiday season more than 50,000 people will visit the White
House's 17 holiday parties and 11 open houses. Social Office staff will
be present to continue to assist guests and the United States Secret
Service should any confusion arise. As always, the United States Secret
Service will provide security and will control who has access to the
White House grounds."

Doesn't that sound rather excessive? We are in a heavy recession, after all, and unemployment is in double digits. Many Americans are hurting right now - broke, jobless, worried, and scared. And the White House is livin' large. Partying it up.

I can't help but wonder what the backlash would be if it were George Bush?

Actually, the Bushes did party hearty last year with sixty thousand visitors, 25 lavish receptions, seven dinners and White House tours, but unemployment was 7.2%, still high, but not as bad as what we're facing today.

Bush was regularly criticized for playing golf and going to Crawford, Texas.

It seems to me that no matter who is in the White House, we're going to analyze and criticize them. I certainly don't agree with everything Bush did. I don't agree with most of what Obama is doing.

I'm not advocating a joyless White House Christmas. I don't think Christmas should be canceled just because people are unemployed and having a hard time paying for it. But I do think, whether it is the Bushes or the Obamas, or whoever comes next, that some sensitivity is a good thing. Garish excess, like building a heated pavilion for a State Dinner, is poor taste.

All I'm saying is just scale it back a little. The Bushes probably should have, even with lower unemployment figures, and the Obamas should as well.

That's just my two cents.

Here is a nifty little site on how previous administrations have celebrated Christmas, including photos of the yearly Christmas cards (Regan's 1981 card is pictured above).

Criminal!

Holy cow - plagiarism illustrated.

Where's the OUTRAGE?!

White House Unveils New Web Site

The White House has debuted a new website designed to "fight the smears" about health care reform. Somehow, I'm still not convinced. The site is supposed to work sort of like his Fight the Smears site did during the campaign; this one, however, relies mostly on Obama's own words as backup for the claims. This is ineffective to me because he lies, so I find his words unconvincing in the end.

For example, take a look at the examination of the claim Reality Check: You Can Keep Your Own Insurance. The site offers the same Linda Douglass video we saw last week, continues the request to send "fishy" claims to flag@whitehouse.gov, then offers two videos of Obama: one of his tele-town hall to AARP ,and one of his July press conference. None of that is substantial enough to change my mind that your private health care provider will fold up his tent and leave once the public option arrives, if not before.

Consider another "reality check" offered on the site: that Reform Will Benefit Small Business, Not Burden It. This one comes with a 3 minute video by Christina Romer, speaking like she's reading to the nursery group, in which she explains the benefits of a health insurance exchange. She explains the "pay or play" provision for businesses. In the three minute video, she offers about 30 seconds of actual fact and those facts still don't change the perception (or the fact) that Obamacare will stifle small business. The "Check" backs up this video with a report from the President's Council of Economic Advisors, again with facts that are dubious and biased.

You've heard the explanation that you "can't define a word with itself"? It does nothing to help explain what the word means. The new White House site is sort of like that. It's the same old treacle of Obama citing facts by citing himself. "I say it so it must be true." Part of the problem and possibly part of his falling poll numbers is the perception that he is not telling us the truth. When he says, "You can keep your health insurance" he leaves off the part "as long as they stay in business" because he knows they won't be in business very much longer. Intentionally deceptive.

The Reality Check site does nothing to dispel that.

Poems on Pennsylvania Avenue

Just in case you're feeling the need for more culture in your life:

"On tap at the White House on Tuesday night? A poetry jam — with smooth jazz, cool verses and spoken word. The literary and musical event in the East Room will include the actor James Earl Jones, the writers Michael Chabon and Ayelet Waldman (who are husband and wife), the jazz singer and bassist Esperanza Spalding and the pianist Eric Lewis. Lin-Manuel Miranda, who wrote and starred in “In the Heights,” the Broadway musical that won a Tony last year, will also perform."

And you can watch live on your very own internet. I guess Elizabeth Alexander wasn't available.

First Family Farmers?

Roger Doiron, an organic gardener and food activist in Scarborough, Maine has started a campaign (complete with website) to encourage the Obamas to dig up part of the South Lawn for a vegetable garden.

His website is called Eat the View.

Actually, through the years, first families have done various things with the South Lawn. The Washington Post has the article and reminds us that during World War I Woodrow Wilson turned the South Lawn over to grazing sheep.

While the White House already has a small vegetable garden on the roof, Mr. Doiron would like to see a five acre veggie garden. That's a lot of tomatoes. He would like for the Obamas to grow food to furnish area food banks as well as the first family. He makes the comparison to the Victory Gardens of the World War II era.

Naturally the Obamas would not be expected to tend this garden, although I find growing my own vegetables kind of fun (but not five acres worth)! The National Parks service would inherit this detail.

Or perhaps Mr. Doiron would like to bring his volunteers over to hoe the carrots?

Redecorating The White House

This is an interesting article in Slate about how each incoming administration gets to redecorate The White House, including explanation of how much leeway they have in which rooms.

An excerpt:

Every four years, Congress appropriates money to maintain and redecorate the 132-room executive mansion. (George W. and Laura Bush were allocated $100,000 for the president's second term.) For the living quarters, which are located on the top two floors, the first family has significant leeway. It usually falls to the president's wife to supervise paint jobs and to acquire new furniture, wall hangings, and bedding. If, however, the president's family wants to alter the appearance of historic guest suites (like the Lincoln Bedroom) or any of the public spaces on the ground and first floors (like the Green Room and the state dining room), they must consult the Committee for the Preservation of the White House. (The curator of the White House, the director of the National Gallery of Art, and other luminaries belong to this committee, which Lyndon Johnson established by executive order in 1964.) State rooms are generally refurbished once a decade, often with funds from the White House Historical Association.

And as to large-scale additions:

First families may also choose to oversee large-scale home improvements and structural changes. The Kennedys commissioned a swimming pool; Nixon built a one-lane bowling alley below the driveway leading to the North Portico. Obama is thinking about constructing a basketball court. Jimmy Carter famously installed solar panels on the White House grounds that Ronald Reagan removed. George W. and Laura Bush added low-flow faucets and toilets, solar heating, and CFL bulbs.