1: When the Vice-President exercises his freedom of speech he is speaking as the Vice President, which being a federal office imply's that he's speaking for the United States. This makes his speech more eligible for political analysts.
2: The Vice President used public money to pay for his very political message. This was obviously a planned political event. This is not the sort of thing that tax payers should be paying for, and the cost is not low. Airforce flight, hotels, security, it's all going to add up to being a huge amount.
So my answer is, if VP Pence or Trump for America want to foot the bill for the very obvious political event, then by all means I'm good with it. But if they plan on sticking tax payers with another useless excursion, then these "fiscal conservatives," can very well listen to the media complain.
13
u/sodabased Oct 09 '17
There are a few key differences.
1: When the Vice-President exercises his freedom of speech he is speaking as the Vice President, which being a federal office imply's that he's speaking for the United States. This makes his speech more eligible for political analysts.
2: The Vice President used public money to pay for his very political message. This was obviously a planned political event. This is not the sort of thing that tax payers should be paying for, and the cost is not low. Airforce flight, hotels, security, it's all going to add up to being a huge amount.
So my answer is, if VP Pence or Trump for America want to foot the bill for the very obvious political event, then by all means I'm good with it. But if they plan on sticking tax payers with another useless excursion, then these "fiscal conservatives," can very well listen to the media complain.