ABC News Exclusive: Obama Gets Thousands of Dollars of Tax-Free Perks

by: tremayne

Thu Feb 05, 2009 at 09:20


ABC has broken a story sure to rock the political world. Reporter Scott Mayerowitz has discovered that Barack Obama's compensation is actually more than the recently reported $400,000. Unbeknownst to many, in addition to that large 6-figure sum, Obama is allowed to use, TAX FREE, a very fancy limo which comes with a driver for whom he does not pay.

And the car is not just your average run-of-the-mill limo but chock full of fancy gadgets including rididculously expensive bullet-proof glass and other high-tech security features.

And the car is not Obama's only tax-free perk. He is also given, in addition to his handsome salary, a $50,000 budget for....wait for it....PARTIES! That's right, if he wants to welcome, say, Nicolas Sarkozy to the United States he can get the beer and chips and stuff FREE. At a time when many Americans have lost their jobs Obama is partying on your dime.

ABC News has also revealed this shocking truth: Obama has been given a HOUSE to live in TAX FREE while he is President. That's right, just when people are losing their mortgages Obama is given this gigantic perk and guess what he pays on it monthly: nothing! Nada!

As you can see, it's not some fix-er-upper either. It's got a ton of rooms and comes with another tax-free perk: free staff.

Really, as if this weren't enough, ABC informs us that Obama also gets to use, at taxpayer expense, a huge free airplane. He flies first class or coach or anywhere he wants to sit because the whole plane is his to use tax-free. There's more too but you'll have to read the full exclusive story for that.

ABCNews.com is also letting us know, in their top story, that on the stimulus bill "Obama lost" even though they say it will pass.

Just when we thought traditional media was dying ABC News comes along with these gems to prove they've still got it.
tremayne :: ABC News Exclusive: Obama Gets Thousands of Dollars of Tax-Free Perks

Tags: , , , , (All Tags)
Print Friendly View Send As Email
ABC News Exclusive: Obama Gets Thousands of Dollars of Tax-Free Perks | 27 comments
ABC comedy routine (4.00 / 3)
What's Obama supposed to ride around in as prez? A second hand Toyota? And is he supposed to drive that himself???

America is crumbling all around and this is all ABC can come up with???

Maybe a bullet-proof Prius? (4.00 / 3)


"It sounds wrong...
     ...but its right."
[ Parent ]
What does abc stand for again? (4.00 / 1)
Another Bad Comedy routine?
[ Parent ]
I thought this was snark (4.00 / 3)
But ABC really did produce this story.

Jesus.

Conduct your own interview of Sarah Palin!

Until your comment, I assumed snark also (0.00 / 0)
I didn't even bother following the link, because the whole thing seemed to absurd to be real.

Amazing what passes for journalism now.

[ Parent ]
Maybe Obama should cap his own compensation (4.00 / 2)
with suitable provisions for additional security costs, of course.

Most definitely, Scott Mayerowitz should get a Pulitzer for bringing to light that the US President gets a limo and Air Force 1. Rarely have I seen such powerful investigative reporting. Especially the issue of hosting parties in the White House for visiting foreign dignitaries, he must have had to go into deep cover, or contact a solid source for such a story. Hopefully, he can back it up with evidence so that he doesn't run the risk of having to serve jail time when he refuses to reveal his source.


"It sounds wrong...
     ...but its right."

Ad Revenue related? (0.00 / 0)
Can someone estimate for me how much ABC News would make for every person that reads this story, or if they comment also?
I think this is a tabloid piece designed to get eyeball views, since obviously the political arguments by Mr. Markowitz are pretty inane.
Dumbest. Article. Ever. (4.00 / 3)
eom.
Time for "National Cancel Your Cable TV Day" (0.00 / 0)
You can watch the Daily Show on the Internet anyway. Not much else is on.

If every progressive just canceled their TV plans for a day, a week, or a month, I think the TV industry might get the message.

Also, Democratic Congressmen have it within their power to fight back. I made this comment a year ago, and it's still relevant:

[W]hy aren't Congressional Democrats re-writing media laws? WE own the public airwaves, and we have a right to regulate their use. In fact, we had been regulating them fairly well until the Reagan years, whose administration started a deregulation process that extended into the Clinton and Bush years.

See this link for a brief timeline of the erosion of media regulations.

It's time to re-introduce laws ending media consolidation, ... even ban foreign ownership (Murdoch, Moon) of U.S. media.  

The corporate media has abused its rights. They've become a weapon against Democratic policies and the truth. Congressional Democrats have the power to take away that weapon. They should use it.

This may be the single most important issue for Democrats: Lack of real media is what gave us the Iraq War, George Bush, "Dean's Scream," Swift Boat Veterans, and Flag Pins -- yet only a handful of groups (Common Cause, Freepress.net, etc.) are talking about it, and Congress seems to be ignoring it.

Time for "Cancel Your Cable TV Day" ... or week, or month.  

No (0.00 / 0)
In this country we have something called a "free press."

Conduct your own interview of Sarah Palin!
[ Parent ]
I should add (0.00 / 0)
I'm not criticizing the idea of boycotts, just heavy-handed government control of the media.

Conduct your own interview of Sarah Palin!
[ Parent ]
You prefer heavy-handed CORPORATE control of the media? (0.00 / 0)
There are about 6 or 7 companies -- Viacom, GE, Disney, News Corporation, Time Warner, Comcast, and Clear Channel -- that control the news on TV and Radio. When 7 corporations control TV and Radio -- we no  longer have a "free press."

Here's how "free" the media is:

The Telecommunications Act of 1996 lifted ownership limits for radio stations... One company alone, Clear Channel Inc., now owns nearly 1,200 radio stations across the country. Before the change, a company could not own more than 40 stations nationwide.

Several large stations owned by Clear Channel briefly banned the music of the Dixie Chicks because of their critical comments about President George W. Bush.  Stations owned by Infinity have also banned certain musicians based on their political views.

More freedom:

Cable TV rates have jumped 40 percent since the Telecom Act of 1996.

The Telecommunications Act of 1996 was, in part, meant to increase competition in the cable industry. The Act was heavily influenced by industry lobbyists and has had the opposite effect.

And more:

The nation's largest broadcast companies that will benefit from looser ownership standards have given more than $13.3 million in political contributions to federal candidates and national parties since 1995. These same media giants have spent more than $68 million lobbying Washington since 1999.

Here's what the Supreme Court has said about the First Amendment as it relates to media ownership:

"It is the purpose of the First Amendment to preserve an uninhibited marketplace of ideas in which truth will ultimately prevail, rather than to countenance monopolization of that market, whether it be by the Government itself or a private licensee. It is the right of the public to receive suitable access to social, political, esthetic, moral, and other ideas and experiences which is crucial here. That right may not constitutionally be abridged either by Congress or by the FCC."
--U.S. Supreme Court in the landmark 1969 case of Red Lion v. FCC


[ Parent ]
Yeah (4.00 / 1)
It is the right of the public to receive suitable access to social, political, esthetic, moral, and other ideas and experiences which is crucial here.

The media-space is much bigger than it was in 1969. The public has a lot of other choices aside from radio and broadcast TV.

All of the problems you point out suggest a need for anti-trust regulation and enforcement, not government control of content. Media bias is a symptom of the underlying problem.

Break up the monopolies and duopolies, don't regulate speech.

Conduct your own interview of Sarah Palin!

[ Parent ]
I agree with that (4.00 / 1)
Break up the monopolies, don't regulate speech.

That's what the Democratic Congress should be doing now -- breaking up the media consolidation -- especially in light of this media offensive against Obama and progressive policies.

[ Parent ]
Yes ... (0.00 / 0)
but you forget ... the airwaves are not owned by companies like Disney ... they are owned by the Gov't .. who lets Disney .. and other companies use them
[ Parent ]
Still, a free press... (0.00 / 0)
The broadcast airwaves aren't the only medium, and given the penetration of cable, satellite, etc. they're not even the only radio and TV mediums. Maybe back when everybody got their TV and radio over the air, there was some sense to things like the fairness doctrine. There was a very limited media-space, so it was important to ensure there was a diversity of voices. Now the media-space is very big, so anybody who wants to have a voice can get one if there's an audience.

The reason why the government auctions off/licenses the EM spectrum isn't because the government owns it. That's like the government owning the air, or gravity or something. The reason why it's licensed is because anarchy in its use would render it useless. Likewise, the government regulates things like water and air pollution not because the government owns them, but because they're a shared resource. There may be problems with that spectrum licensing process, but that's not an excuse for the state to abuse that power to interfere with the free press.

I actually think the market (for all its flaws) is sorting out the media problem right now (as evidenced by the success of programs like Olbermann and Maddow.) The media companies are getting their asses kicked right now, and when the dust is settled the ones doing the best work will be the ones that survive.

Conduct your own interview of Sarah Palin!

[ Parent ]
media consolidation is the problem (4.00 / 1)
Too few companies own nearly all the media outlets, and they use them to promote their own agenda. How many progressive voices do you hear on AM radio these days?

The only thing progressives have going for them in the media world is the Internet. But the Internet can easily get drowned out by CNN, NBC, ABC, and Fox News, as well as the Clear Channel network.

All those networks have a right to exist, but they don't have a right to monopolize the TV and radio airwaves. Those are our airwaves.

The "market" by the way ain't sorting anything out. That's because the "market" extends far beyond the media industry to the corporations that own and support them. GE, which owns NBC, is also an insurance company and a defense contractor -- is that the "market" you're talking about?  

[ Parent ]
ABC (0.00 / 0)
ABC is not a cable network.

Leaving aside the argument of whether boycotts of this sort are effective, if I cancelled my cable, while I'd be sticking it to Fox News and CNBC, I'd also be hurting current, ComCentral, HBO, and dozens of entertaining non-ideological networks. And besides, I don't really want to deal with this converter box fiasco.  

[ Parent ]
its not paranoia if there really out to get you (4.00 / 1)
I am starting to believe that comment that was on the front page yesterday about how all the networks are gunning for Obama trying to take his approval ratings down. If Hillary was prez maybe she'd be talking about the right wing conspiracy now. They are all corporate mouthpieces, bloated and corrupt, now that Bush is not cracking the whip on them they are running wild. Their monopolies have to be broken up, we need more outlets and more viewpoints in the national media that represent the citizens not the corporate masters, we especially need progressive viewpoints which are MIA.  
Dumbest Story Ever (0.00 / 0)
Anyone who watches TV knows that the President gets a free house, plane and a limo.  And $50K to entertain is pretty minimal considering the number of foreign dignitaries who come to the White House.  THat number obviously doesn't include state dinners which definitely run into the six figures.  I suppose we should tell all visitors to the White House to stop by Starbucks or Cosi on the way and bring their own coffee and food!


I'm going to cry (0.00 / 0)
By how simple that was to report, the taxpayers know that the President is getting all of these perks. They do not object to them. These perks are part of the President having a fixed salary, which is a Constitutional provision. But in the private sector people expect performance rewards and they are not getting them if the CEOs have to take a federal bailout.  

Darkness has a hunger that's insatiable, and lightness has a call that's hard to hear.  
The point is to TRY (0.00 / 0)
and get the people to object to them you see. WE MUST BE OUTRAGED AT OBAMA!  
[ Parent ]
Yes, it's silly… (4.00 / 1)
...but the piece clearly states that cranky sectors of the blogosphere are drawing the parallels between Obama's compensation "package" and that of the overfed CEOs he's trying to rein in. But here's my question: If Bush was entitled to the same perks (actually gave himself a raise in 2001, according to the piece), and everyone agrees that he was incompetent, what kind of recourse do we taxpayers have for all his perks and wasted money? I mean, Bush even stole an election (or two), so where're all the innovative legal minds who might try to bring him up on fraud charges? Just a thought...

"This ain't for the underground. This here is for the sun." -Saul Williams
Hilarious post (0.00 / 0)
thanks. I wonder how many of the CEOs worked as community organizers, turning down huge salaries coming out of Harvard in order to build change from the ground up in the South side of Chicago.

The Post Partisan  

The Post Partisan

Told ya (0.00 / 0)

The NYT strikes back in part (0.00 / 0)
Results of a study on perks given to top executives of 200 banks which took TARP money Common perks included country club memberships, pensions, insurance premiums, and cars and drivers.  

Darkness has a hunger that's insatiable, and lightness has a call that's hard to hear.  
who knew that the Onion had taken over ABC News? (0.00 / 0)
And they don't even mention all those security guards.  How many CEO's have more than a few dozen ?

I can't wait for Colbert to jump all over this.

ABC News Exclusive: Obama Gets Thousands of Dollars of Tax-Free Perks | 27 comments
Donate to Open Left







QUICK HITS

Friends of the Earth thanks the OpenLeft community for the ideas you generate and your contributions to the progressive movement.
As an anti-spam measure, there is a 24-hour waiting period after registering before new users can comment.
blog advertising is good for you
blog advertising is good for you
LIBERAL INSTITUTIONS
STATE BLOGS
SEARCH

   

Advanced Search

Home | RSS/XML Feed | Register | Contact

  © OpenLeft 2007-2009, Powered by SoapBlox