Critics are outraged at the price tag of President Barack Obama's trip to Africa this month, which is slated to cost as much as $100 million in the midst of sequester-related budget cuts.
"For the cost of this trip to Africa, you could have 1,350 weeks of White House tours," said Republican Rep. George Holding of North Carolina, referring to one of programs that have been the victims of the government budget cuts.
Look, you'll get no argument from me that this trip to Africa is fairly expensive. And I think "ix-nay on the afari-say" is the right call, under the circumstances. Moreover, I'm pretty sure that if I go outside and allow myself to steep in the druggy haze of Beltway conventional wisdom long enough, I'll probably get high enough to say, "Whoa, y'all. The 'optics' are, like, really bad, maaaaaan." (I don't actually think a sober discussion of the relative value of a presidential trip to Africa is allowed, actually.)
But if you're going to talk about the cost of the Africa trip, relative to the money that could be used to plug the skein of holes left by sequestration -- which Holding supports, by the way -- there are hundreds of examples that are more worthy than White House tours. For example, sequestration is putting many Americans' ability to tour their own homes in jeopardy, as essential housing subsidies get slashed.
But Holding, like many an out-of-touch, clapped-out Washington Congresscritter, loves his precious perks most of all.
At any rate, quit whining and repeal the damn sequester.
[Would you like to follow me on Twitter? Because why not?]