Recession? What recession? The Bushes Buy Fine China for almost 1/2 a mil.

[I.A.S.K.]

Originally Posted by MysticCat

What does a federal budget surplus have to do with the price of china in Washington, given that the china Mrs. Clinton bought was paid for with private foundation dollars, not federal funds? She didn't spend any "extra money" from any surplus.

I am well aware of that! Just like the new China was not paid for by the American people.
The point is about the way the spending appears and the impression it gives. The point is that even though it is not TP dollars, in a recession this type of spending is senseless and it makes it seem like the impression the president is giving the American people about this being hard economic times that call for drastic (700 billion dollar) measures is a lie since his wife is buying 1/2 a million dollar china.
The point in saying that there was a surplus when the Clintons left is that the economy and American people were not suffering. There was "extra money" so a purchase like this would not be considered offensive. This situation to me is about setting an example.

If your next door neighbor just got a new expensive couch (to add to the many he already has and you know that the person who is moving in after he leaves in 2 weeks is going to buy another) after he turned to you and asked you to sacrifice to help his friend pay for a huge mistake she made would you not question why he let someone buy him a Couch when he knew his friend needed help? Personally, he'd have to sell the Couch or make some type of personal sacrifice before he could step to me and ask for my dollars. I would question his discretion.

So, I disagree with the purchase and think it was a very bad idea and I also think it came at a bad time. It wasn't my money and there isn't anything that I can do about it (not that I would if I could). I also don't buy the "Its all American's china" idea. Its just my opinion on the matter.

[TexasWSP]

Originally Posted by I.A.S.K.

I am well aware of that! Just like the new China was not paid for by the American people.
The point is about the way the spending appears and the impression it gives. The point is that even though it is not TP dollars, in a recession this type of spending is senseless and it makes it seem like the impression the president is giving the American people about this being hard economic times that call for drastic (700 billion dollar) measures is a lie since his wife is buying 1/2 a million dollar china.
The point in saying that there was a surplus when the Clintons left is that the economy and American people were not suffering. There was "extra money" so a purchase like this would not be considered offensive. This situation to me is about setting an example.

If your next door neighbor just got a new expensive couch (to add to the many he already has and you know that the person who is moving in after he leaves in 2 weeks is going to buy another) after he turned to you and asked you to sacrifice to help his friend pay for a huge mistake she made would you not question why he let someone buy him a Couch when he knew his friend needed help? Personally, he'd have to sell the Couch or make some type of personal sacrifice before he could step to me and ask for my dollars. I would question his discretion.

So, I disagree with the purchase and think it was a very bad idea and I also think it came at a bad time. It wasn't my money and there isn't anything that I can do about it (not that I would if I could). I also don't buy the "Its all American's china" idea. Its just my opinion on the matter.

What the hell does private money used from a private foundation have to do with what Bush has said about the economy? Our economy is in the dumps. We are in fairly desperate times that have called for desperate measures. None of that means that someone can't spend their OWN PRIVATE money on a gift. Paris Hilton bought a 320,000$ pink Bentley with her own private money.....is she a threat to our national well being? No.

Personally, I'm a lot more pissed off that shitty companies with shitty business models have gotten billions of dollars of OUR own money through bailouts. Those were bad ideas.......certainly in a bad time....

....but that's just me.

[cheerfulgreek]

Originally Posted by DaemonSeid

The only good news is ... SUPPOSEDLY it's not being paid by our dollars, but I am sure that money could have gone a long way towards something else...

They can't make presidential styrofoam plates or sumn??????

I think I would be kind of embarrassed if other world leaders were invited to the White House and were served food on China that any one of us could afford to buy. I know it's not the equivalent, but I couldn't imagine having dinner on a holiday like Easter, Christmas, or Thanksgiving on paper plates. But I lol'ed when I read the "Presidential styrofoam plates" comment.

Originally Posted by TexasWSP

What the hell does private money used from a private foundation have to do with what Bush has said about the economy? Our economy is in the dumps. We are in fairly desperate times that have called for desperate measures. None of that means that someone can't spend their OWN PRIVATE money on a gift. Paris Hilton bought a 320,000$ pink Bentley with her own private money.....is she a threat to our national well being? No.

Personally, I'm a lot more pissed off that shitty companies with shitty business models have gotten billions of dollars of OUR own money through bailouts. Those were bad ideas.......certainly in a bad time....

....but that's just me.

I'm not a Bush supporter, but this is the best post so far on this thread. I agree, especially since it's not being paid for by tax payers.

[I.A.S.K.]

Originally Posted by TexasWSP

What the hell does private money used from a private foundation have to do with what Bush has said about the economy? Our economy is in the dumps. We are in fairly desperate times that have called for desperate measures. None of that means that someone can't spend their OWN PRIVATE money on a gift. Paris Hilton bought a 320,000$ pink Bentley with her own private money.....is she a threat to our national well being? No.

Personally, I'm a lot more pissed off that shitty companies with shitty business models have gotten billions of dollars of OUR own money through bailouts. Those were bad ideas.......certainly in a bad time....

....but that's just me.

Paris Hilton is not a member of the first family. If Bush's daughter did this would I be concerned? Probably.

I thought I covered that in my post when I said that the use of private $$ to buy China seems to be senseless and unnecessary. Since it was a purchase made by the first fam. for the white house (one that they are leaving in two weeks) it has to do with Bush. This use of $$ makes me (and others) question Bush's credibility (on the issue of the bailout). It also makes people feel that this 7 billion dollar bailout was total crap because if there's 1/2 a mil for china there should be $$ (non TP $$) to bail-out these corporate losers.

And FTR I think this bail-out was total crap. Mofo's just getting billions for no reason.

[deepimpact2]

Originally Posted by I.A.S.K.

I agree with DeepImpact. Eventhough the China is not paid for by the taxpayers it was still a senseless purchase. It makes no sense to purchase China for 1/2 a mil. when in two weeks the new first lady will be making another china purchase (because unless I'm misinformed each first lady gets to purchase china for the white house). I know it wont be in the first days that Mrs. Obama will make her china purchase, but it could be relatively soon and it will appear that our US leaders are just blowing money for no reason. In an economic crisis the Bush family is buying china? Really? Thats a great way to spark our economy. Is this china American made? (just wondering)

To hell with the historical legacy crap. Buying china is not the best way to enhance the historical legacy of the white house. I would have been more understanding if the Bushes purchased art of some kind. That is something that I would consider a legacy, but dinnerware? Nope. Its not like they dont already have china for dignitaries to eat from so what is the need for more? What dignitaries are they hosting over the next 14 days that they'll need china for?


DeepImpact2,
Maybe I misunderstood your post, but I thought that you meant that regular Americans couldn't visit the White House with the term visit meaning:
Go to the white house and have a meal using the expensive china.

In that sense Americans can barely visit the white house.
I do not consider something mine that I cannot use. If I jump through the necessary hoops I can go to the white house and view the china. That, in my opinion, does not make the china mine. That makes it someone elses china that I am going to see. Something cannot be considered "all of ours" if it can be used and only some of us can use it.

Well said!!!

I would also like to answer a question you asked. The question was what dignitaires are they hosting in the next 14 days that they will need china for. My answer is probably the very people who are occupying the Blair House and preventing the Obama's from moving in a little bit early. (Before anyone argues that no other president has done it, several media sources have reported that other presidents HAVE moved into the Blair House early.)

[MysticCat]

Originally Posted by I.A.S.K.

To hell with the historical legacy crap. Buying china is not the best way to enhance the historical legacy of the white house. I would have been more understanding if the Bushes purchased art of some kind. That is something that I would consider a legacy, but dinnerware? Nope. Its not like they dont already have china for dignitaries to eat from so what is the need for more? What dignitaries are they hosting over the next 14 days that they'll need china for?

From The Washington Post:

White House china is displayed in many rooms of the house, and the designs and shapes reflect the style and food in vogue through 200 years of presidential families. There are the French porcelain oyster plates and bonbon stands of the Rutherford B. Hayes administration and the cocktail cups and oatmeal bowls of Woodrow Wilson.

"The china shows the taste of the day. It records history," White House social secretary Amy Zantzinger said.

The frequent entertaining at the White House takes its toll on the china, and breakage depletes the numbers over the years.

"Right now, we only have two complete sets of china we can use for a state dinner for 134: the Reagan and the Clinton services," Zantzinger said.

Mrs. Bush explained that up to now, presidential families have used the formal state services for their meals and entertaining in the upstairs private quarters. She said that she most frequently used the red Reagan china but that her husband is partial to the Johnson service, which Lady Bird Johnson designed to depict wildflowers from throughout the country. Now, Bush said, future first families will have the option of using the "more informal" set for lunches and small dinners.

. . .

The debut of the Bush china occurred at a small luncheon this week for U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon.

Originally Posted by I.A.S.K.

If your next door neighbor just got a new expensive couch (to add to the many he already has and you know that the person who is moving in after he leaves in 2 weeks is going to buy another) after he turned to you and asked you to sacrifice to help his friend pay for a huge mistake she made would you not question why he let someone buy him a Couch when he knew his friend needed help? Personally, he'd have to sell the Couch or make some type of personal sacrifice before he could step to me and ask for my dollars. I would question his discretion.

Your analogy is off in so many ways. To make it a bit more on target, my next door neighbor would have ordered that couch a few years ago, before any economic turndown. He didn't pay for it with his own money or with my money -- he paid for it with a gift of money that came with the stipulation that it can only be used for buying new furniture for the house. And while he has other couches already, they are not sufficient to meet the entertaining needs that everyone in the neighborhood expects him to fulfill on our behalf, which is one reason we've been letting him and his family live in the house to begin with.

The Bushes didn't just go to Ikea last week and buy new china. The process for designing and buying this china started years ago, and the reports all note that the new china had been expected to arrive long before now, but was delayed for a variety of reasons.

The money that was used to buy the china couldn't have been used for some other purpose, such as helping people who are having trouble paying mortgages. The money came from a foundation, which can only spend its funds on items related to the care, conservation, history and furnishing of the White House. So, there were three choices here: spend the money on china for the White House, spend the money on something else for the White House, or don't spend the money at all. They spent the money on china, putting a half-million dollars back into the economy that might not have been there otherwise.

Just not that big of a deal.

[RaggedyAnn]

Originally Posted by MysticCat

From The Washington Post:

"Right now, we only have two complete sets of china we can use for a state dinner for 134: the Reagan and the Clinton services," Zantzinger said.

Since this thread keeps on going...
I was shocked that we only had sets of up to 134 place settings. That's less than I used for my wedding. It would seem to me that it was a good purchase if there are any large events that are going to be planned, unless the White House is going to rent china from a catering company.

[TexasWSP]

Originally Posted by I.A.S.K.

I agree with DeepImpact. Eventhough the China is not paid for by the taxpayers it was still a senseless purchase. It makes no sense to purchase China for 1/2 a mil. when in two weeks the new first lady will be making another china purchase (because unless I'm misinformed each first lady gets to purchase china for the white house). I know it wont be in the first days that Mrs. Obama will make her china purchase, but it could be relatively soon and it will appear that our US leaders are just blowing money for no reason. In an economic crisis the Bush family is buying china? Really? Thats a great way to spark our economy. Is this china American made? (just wondering)

To hell with the historical legacy crap. Buying china is not the best way to enhance the historical legacy of the white house. I would have been more understanding if the Bushes purchased art of some kind. That is something that I would consider a legacy, but dinnerware? Nope. Its not like they dont already have china for dignitaries to eat from so what is the need for more? What dignitaries are they hosting over the next 14 days that they'll need china for?

1. Once again, what does using private, donated funds to purchase China have to do with our national economy? Please, enlighten me. How do you figure they are "blowing funds"? THE MONEY WAS DONATED AND SAVED FOR THE SOLE PURPOSE OF BUYING IT!!!! I feel like I'm taking crazy pills for Christ's sake.

2. Fine China is most certainly considered an art form you dolt.