Who was watching the kids and the dog? Do taxpayers pay for the royal, er ,presidential pooper scoopers?

Silly, everyone knows it was First Mother-in-Law, Marian Robinson (Michelle Obama's mother). Why do you think she moved into the White House?

its actually quite nice of him to come explore the city...its the least he could do after him and george w stole wall street from us and moved it to washington...ya know...the city that isn't corrupt...oh, wait

Gin or Vodka martinis?

i like seeing a president and first lady who actually still seem to be totally into each other. it's a change of pace from everything i've seen since:

1) the reagans (two parts senile, one part anti-dope)

2) the first bushes (grandpa and grandma boring oldster love)

3) the clintons (insert any number of intern, BJ or butch haircut jokes here)

4) the second bushes (where was laura again? hiding away in shame?)

let's hear it for a presidential marriage we can get behind!

Hear, hear! I think by this time in his presidency, W had already logged 110 vacation days or something like that. He was able to do so because Cheney was running the show. Duh! 1 day in NYC for the Obamas is well deserved.

michelle sure has got some nice stems on her. yowsa!

Word. I'd hit that shit raw

just got "watch-listed" buddy.

Let's compare administration summer vacations:

One explores a new city, dines on local cuisines, actively works to maintain an intellectual life in the crucible of a presidency.

The other flees to a secure compound for a month at a time, spends entire days mountain biking the same six mile loop and chopping wood.

It is really disconcerting that the knee jerk response for many people whenever someone questions Obama's actions is to bring up one of Bush's questionable actions, even if Bush has nothing even remotely to do with the conversation.

I am trying to discern if that is the result of:

a.) anyone questioning Obama is being automatically branded a Republican Bush-lover/Obama-hater, or

b.) if they simply have no intelligent response but feel some deep desire to defend Obama at all costs, no matter what he is being accused of.

I, for one, voted for Obama and I think he's a great man. That does not mean he is infallible and that he should not be held accountable for his mistakes.

I understand in the grand scheme of things, this dinner date stuff is very minor, but the responses I've gotten to my very calmly worded questioning of the trip's timing, on Gothamist and in other conversations, have been frighteningly vitriolic and more often than not veer into "well at least he's not Bush" territory and calling me names. I am very scared that when he makes a really big booboo, and EVERY president makes at least a few, this blind, angry defense of the man will only enable him.

Again, this is not meant to defend Bush but seriously, do you actually equate "date night" with "summer vacation"? How about we wait until after Labor Day to see what the Obama family does for summer vacation?

Considering that the Obamas have two young daughters and are probably trying not to have them become notorious pubcrawling drunks as young adults, I guarantee their summer plans will be more thought out than reclusing in the Texas outback at every opportunity.

Bush bought the Crawford ranch in 1999 so I fail to see the relevance to the Bush twins seeing as how they didn't go there during their formative years and that they started college the same year Bush was sworn in as President. Perhaps you know more about the vacations the family took in prior years and you would like to share that information with us. And I'm not sure I would equate the known drinking exploits of the twins as "notorious pubcrawling drunks" since it sounds an awful lot like what many college kids do. But if that's what you think you're entitled to your opinion. It's probably for the best that you don't know what Al Gore's oldest daughter was up to during her college days. Add that to Al III's drug fueled 100 MPH speeding arrest and one could conclude that Al and Tipper didn't take the kids on the right sort of vacations.

What's the big deal? Obama has no right to be a human because the "taxpayers can't afford it"? And BTW, he only came to a city with a struggling economy and promoted eating out and seeing a decent play. I would be pissed, however, if he took out Air Force One for a lavish junket to Monaco for gambling, whoring and eating at Alain Ducasse's joint.

You equate being "human" with taking a private jet out for dinner and a show? I would have been more impressed if they had gone out for a night on the town in DC - a city that also has economic problems. They could have worked in a night on the town in New York the next time the President had official business in the city like the UN General Assembly meetings. It's not as if Blue Hill is in any danger of closing.

I remember when several former Presidents suggested that people not stay home with their wallets closed. I think they were soundly ridiculed. I wonder what the difference is now. Hmmm. . . what could it be?

PS: I rather like Obama. I just hate seeing logic tortured.

So what would you want him to do? Bicycle to NYC? Take a car to NYC? Hitchhike with his wife? Boo hoo maybe he should have ordered in from McDonald's instead; that will set an example for all Americans to live and eat like resilient rats.

I think he kinda does go out in DC but for now, it's mostly burgers...

I assume when they do go out in DC there won't be as much media attention.

GM was going to die sometime -- this weekend, next weekend, three months from now. That's no reason for Obama to hunker down in the White House. If cleaning up Bush's mess(es) means the Obamas can't leave Washington, then they will NEVER go anywhere or do anything. Good for them.

PS: Frank Bruni is a tool.