Or the story about the Standford Scandal - another Ponzi scheme - that involves not only Joe Biden's son, but the Biden Family. Or the story about Charles Freeman - Obama's pick for the Chairman of the National Intelligence Council. This Freeman guy has ties to Bin Laden (Think Farenheit 911) and his family. He was the US Ambassador to Saudi Arabi and did business with Bin Laden's Father. Freeman maintain on a regular bases that the bin Laden family had interests there were closely align with American interests. Hey Michael Moore - where are you movie cameras - you need to get them rolling... On top of all this Freeman also has close ties with the Chinese and Chinese Oil Companies (Oh gosh Cheney Halilburton, Cheney Haliburton). Furthermore the Freeman supported the Chinese government on the way the government handled the protestors at Tiananmen Square - hurry Michael Moore - get that camera rolling. I am waiting for Ren to post all over this board about Charles Freeman, Oil, The Saudis, The Chinese, etc. On second thought, no that wont' happen.

The monied/political class in this country favored Mao and while he was killing 80 million people our nations great benifactor old Rocky said it was a model society. We can admit that conservatives and liberals are corrupt criminals that should be arrested for treason. Glad to see that we are moving in that direction.

So are you complaining that the media isn't being as unfair to Obama as they would supposedly be to Bush (or "anyone else"), or do you actually think there's something to be outraged about here?

Well, it would be racist to criticize Obama.

If you are asking me I say outrage over all of it. We don't stop them we will wake up homeless on the continent our forefather's conquered like Jefferson warned.

Craig, you are a hypocrite on the topic of this sort of thing which you have denounced as wretched excess, previously, if you are not outraged about this.

Perhaps the Obamas see their self-indulgences as economic stimulus? If government spending is good for the economy, then the more money spent by government, the better. That is the message out of DC these days. The Obamas are merely setting an example.

Kate, if you think I won't be outraged at the Obama administration for anything you're quite wrong. Instead of the Right getting its panties in a bunch over trivial things like this, you all should be dancing a marathon jig for the numerous ways in which the Obama administration is continuing Bush policies. But hosting a Super Bowl party (I suppose the rest of America gave that one up?)- with burgers, dogs and oatmeal cookies; how self-indulgent! - and having some local school kids come over for a program for (brace yourselves) Black History Month - these don't really sound like "wretched excess" to me. And Earth, Wind and Fire? They can probably be hired for weddings at this point in their career; I wouldn't be surprised if they played for free at the White House.

I would be curious for you to elaborate on my hypocrisy (but don't forget, YET AGAIN, that Julie has pointed out previously how being a hypocrite is actually not a problem).

Need I point out that the Dow didn't begin its downward spiral immediately after Barack HUSSEIN Obama took the oath of office?

An interesting take here: https://online.wsj.com/article/SB123604419092515347.html

Here is my WSJ contribution for the day - for Craig. I do not have time to compose my own answer and my computer is behaving badly.

I guess one man's wretched excess is another man's fire-sale bargain.

Kate, that was a pretty weak response. I love how Taranto just tosses the word "fancy" into the story's mention of cocktail parties, and doesn't address all of the other, standard-issue, aspects of what's been happening at the White House during their off-time. Fancy! Yes, the cocktail stirring sticks were likely all topped with diamonds, courtesy of the American taxpayer...

If there weren't any cocktail parties in the White House during the administration of the fellow you voted for twice, it's only because he's a recovering alcoholic.

Yes, this is just one thing, and besides we are in the early days of the Obama presidency. We'll see what happens. And yet, this seems emblematic of a larger standard-issue message to America, that if you can do what you like and get someone else to pay for it, you should. Is that right or am I misunderstanding?

As to the comparisons with the previous administration, this one seems in all ways to be a "How we can top that?" crowd.