BUSH NEEDS MORE GAS. Here's why:

[cyberpj]

snip..
Taxpayers still foot the bill.

Almost every vehicle Bush uses is custom-made to add security and communications capabilities, and the heavier weight of these guzzlers further drives up gas and jet fuel costs.

The White House declines to discuss travel costs related to the presidential entourage, and did not respond to a request for the overall effect of higher fuel prices on its budget.

snip...
Elsewhere, whether in Washington, Des Moines, Iowa, or the Georgian capital Tbilisi, Bush is driven in a large motorcade. The typical presidential caravan has well over a dozen vehicles, including Bush's limousine and an identical limo put in as a decoy.

The motorcade generally doesn't cruise placidly at fuel-efficient speeds, but rather hurries along its route as fast as possible. It also often idles outside while Bush is at an event, burning up fuel but ready to depart at a moment's notice.

snip...
Starting with his inaugural in January, Bush began tooling around in new 2006 Cadillac DTS limos.

Air Force One fleet
In the air, Bush most often flies on a Boeing 747-200B laden with, among other things, an anti-missile system. Like gas for cars, fuel costs for the largest plane in the Air Force One fleet have gone up dramatically -- from $3,974 an hour in fiscal 2004 to $6,029 per hour now, according to the Air Force.

http://www.boston.com/news/nation/washington/articles/2005/08/24/of_all_gas_consumers_bush_may_be_most/

[electron_blue]

1. So are you saying he's going to use all that released oil himself??

sarcasm

[nini]

2. I'm certainly not one to defend him..

but don't all presidents require the security these vehicles require?

Yep the price of gas affects this too, but we can't expect the any president to drive around in vehicles that are not secure.

[cyberpj]

3. Ok. But could he stay in one place for a while? Seems he's never

really at the White House much, you know...working or anything. (more sarcasm)

He could set an example.
He could do without the ARMY that accompanies him.

[punpirate]

4. I think the difference is the degree of security...

... which has increased rather dramatically after 9/11, and the huge amount of travel Bush is doing, compared to previous presidents. During his August "vacation" in 2004, part of nearly every day was spent fundraising. Equally, Cheney's office (in 2003, I think) had to borrow money from other budgets to pay for his excessive travel, which was over-budget to an enormous degree.

It's not just that these are inherently expensive items--it's also that they are in almost constant use in this administration.

Cheers.

[nini]

5. ok. I see your point

I'll give them a somewhat cautious pass on the equipment, but if they are abusing the availability then I agree it's not correct.

However, arguing this will be futile in that we require safe transportation for those idiots just as every other president had. Fundraising was part of Clinton's travels too and if I remember correctly he also was criticized for using Air Force 1 to go on such trips.

Bottom line is we agree this admin is excessive on spending and they would never do anything to control it but they simply don't give a shit.

[Imalittleteapot]

6. "Don't buy gas if you don't need it."

Bush words. Does he need it? Yes, to get to fund raisers and photo ops.
:grr:

[cyberpj]

9. Also - He's using the opportunity to scare us with a smile... nt.

[high density]

7. Not that important, IMHO.

The extra money the White House spends on fuel is among the least of our worries right now.

[cyberpj]

10. Didn't mean to make it a major issue - shouldn't have shouted.

But it's interestin' info, innit?

Don't wanna fight, just teach and learn here....

[savemefromdumbya]

8. We the taxpayers should have a say!

It's our money too?

[cyberpj]

11. We give that power away to our senators and reps in congress.

I think it's high time we use this new-fangled technology to say it ourselves! Don't you?

How in God's Good name will we ever get THAT?

[savemefromdumbya]

12. My guess is our forefathers took the matter into their own hands so....

... we can do the same as our forefathers - all out strike - bring the country to a standstill and Congress will listen to the ordinary taxpayers?

Besides if the elections weren't rigged we may get a better result in Congress?