posted on Mar, 9 2009 @ 08:04 PM
reply to post by lynomor
Why is it still necessary to give tribute? Call it a gift, token of appreciation, present, whatever, it's still tribute being paid to a leader as a
sign of goodwill.
In economic times such as these should we be showering our allies with gifts that will just be cataloged and archived away from the public eyes for
the rest of time? I think I can find a better use of the money.
I think that we should really be pointing out that gifts are not necessary. The taxpayers(you know, average citizens, the ones who actually have to
pay their taxes, unlike cabinet members) get no access to the items that their money purchases for the opulent government figures. And they also get
no access to the gift purchased by the taxpayers of the visiting dignitary's country. Why the heck should any taxpayer be paying for any gifts when
we have a massive deficit and are borrowing trillions just to make it through the year?
I do understand that these gifts are traditional between leaders but if the citizens are really that upset about not getting a present(that they will
never have access to anyways), they really need to have their reality adjusted, perhaps with a boot to the head.
There is no indication of ill will by the President, and certainly none by the the citizens of either nation, so why the heck should we the citizens
apologize for something that we had nothing to do with other than the fact that the DVDs were undoubtedly placed on the bill of the taxpayer?
Personally I think it's pretty weak to apologize for something as unimportant as this. And to anyone who disagrees, please feel free to exercise your
rights guaranteed under the 1st amendment (and why not the second while you're at it?)
Obama said he was going to go line by line and eliminate wasteful programs, maybe the gift exchange was one of them.
But hey that's just my 2p.