Posted by | June 18, 2013 19:20 | Filed under: Top Stories

The right is apoplectic about President Obama’s trip to Africa, slated to cost upwards of $60 million, as detailed by the Washington Post. But it’s apparently only wrong when Obama does it.

President Obama’s travels to Africa are just like those of the two presidents before him: Bill Clinton went in 1998, and George W. Bush went with his family in 2003 (pictured) and again in 2008. Clinton’s trip cost the government around $42.8 million, according to the Government Accountability Office, and the Post doesn’t mention how much Bush’s trips cost — but to give you an idea, a 2003 trip Bush took to London sounds a lot like Obama’s Africa trip.

When Bush went to England in 2003 here’s what the Telegraph reported.

Mr. Bush will be accompanied by a retinue consisting of 250 members of the Secret Service, 150 advisers from the National Security Department, 200 representatives of other government departments and 50 political aides.

There will also be approximately 100 journalists travelling with him. There are also his personal chef, personal assistants, four cooks, medics and the presidential 15-strong sniffer dog team.

Here’s the difference between Bush’s trips and Obama’s: Obama canceled the cost-intensive safari.

Click here for reuse options!
Copyright 2013 Liberaland
By: Alan

Alan Colmes is the publisher of Liberaland.