I see that another wingnut voltron has formed over the fact that there are 37 trees in the White House, started by the loathesome former secretary for Barbara Bush, Andrew Malcolm. James Joyner handles this rather nicely:
For one thing, these Christmas trees aren’t for the Obamas. Rather, they’re for the tens of thousands of tourists who line up in the cold to tour the White House during the holidays. Indeed, precisely because of all the tourists running around, this is the part of the White House that the Obamas are least likely to use.
For another, the notion that the best thing one can do during a bad economy is to cut back on spending is remarkably counterproductive. If anything, the Obamas should be laying on more Christmas trees–and so should the rest of those fortunate to have jobs. That’s, after all, how people who sell and transport trees and ornaments put food on their tables. The last thing they need is for people to start cutting back in some bizarre show of solidarity.
I’m not sure if James meant to make the argument for expanded government spending and a second stimulus, but he just did.
By the way, I love how wingnuts can claim Obama is simultaneously waging a war on Christmas while also having too many Christmas decorations up.