There has been a small flood of e-mail, from the left and from the right, in response to my Wednesday column about President Obama's vacation to Martha's Vineyard. A sampling:

michael mcclintock
austerlitz, ny: think about it a minute: who is on expensive vacations now?
very rich people who don't care about health care or catastrophic
deficits because they're immune; congress, many of whom are not even
meeting with their constituents because they don't want to hear any
criticism, and the president; be interesting to research how many
presidents have taken their families on "state" visits, one after
another, month after month, and then after just seven months need to
take them on a vacation; it's a disgrace, even if soldiers weren't dying

 Brian:
"I enjoyed your column today. It addressed something that has been bothering me just a little. Watching the news last week I saw the first family visiting and enjoying the Grand Canyon. I thought that seemed like a nice little vacation. Earlier in the summer there were photo's of them in Paris and London and Moscow. I know there was some work involved in those trips but the photo's show there was plenty of shopping, dining and having fun as well. Those trips seemed like nice little get aways as well. There have also been the date night trips to Chicago and New York / Broadway and around Washington. Now the luxury beach house vacation. All of this in just seven months. In that same period of time I was able to take my family to the beach for a four day long weekend and I consider myself very lucky to be able to do that. And...... if flying an empty Air Force One to New York for photo's cost us over $250,000, what do each of these fun little excursions with hundreds of support staff cost us in tax dollars?"

Richard:
"I read your column today re: the perhaps unwise decision of President Obama to take a vacation at this particularly critical time in our national history. I like the man but, in my opinion, I believe his continuing tendency to 'outsource' his initiatives is simply due to his lack of any real management or executive experience. I also don't think things would be much different if John McCain or Hillary Clinton were in the job. I think now as I thought back when the three of them were in the running that it is a sad state of affairs in this country that we had such a poor choice of candidates for the highest office in the land. None of the three senators had any real executive experience. Whatever your political persuasion may be, at least George W. Bush & Bill Clinton were actually governors at one time before getting the top job and did have at least 4-years of executive experience at being governor before becoming president.
 
Arthur:
"Have you too joined the ranks of those finding sundry reasons to bash Obama. How would  Obama's presence in DC over these ten days resolve the problems of unemployment, two wars and a divisive health care debate. I would submit that Obama has been more engaged in his seven months than Bush in any two year period of his presidency. If anything, my concern was that Obama was approaching overexposure. Please note that one of the perks of the title Chief Executive of the US is that you are not required to accrue leave time. But in a political climate where the President is pilloried for swatting a fly, any activity can be shaded negatively."

Joey:
"Of course, you couldn't resist making George Bush and the "right wing" nuts part of the problem.  And, of course, there are no left wing nuts when a left wing nut is the author. Anyway, you forgot to mention the George Bush stopped golfing while soldiers were dying in war.  Guess what,  I saw Obama golfing while soldiers were
dying in war and you didn't mention it. I am sure it was just an oversight...nah, a left wing nut. You idiots are so obvious and you wonder why the media or rags, as they are now known, are going bankrupt."

A proud retired Defense Department employee and Army Reserve veteran:
"I am amazed that you, a typical liberal big-city newspaper columnist  and therefore a big admirer of President Obama, would take him to task for vacationing in Martha's Vineyard, in spite of the problems this country faces. The president, whether on a "deserved" vacation or not, is still responsible for running the country,and that responsibility does not end when he leaves Washington. However, that is not the reason I am writing to you. . . . I know that you reside on the left end of the political spectrum, so your political  views do not surprise me at all, and I am not writing to criticize them. What really disgusts me is that in order to buttress those views, you and many of your fellow columnists still deem it necessary to take gratuitous, nasty pot-shots at former president George W. Bush, such as 'George W. Bush set a record for presidential vacationing; he was the laziest commander-in-chief ever,' and  '{Obama's} not lazy like George W. Bush was, so his vacation is well-deserved.' . . . I'm sure you will scoff, but I believe that President Bush served this country well, both in and out of uniform. And who are you to trash him? Even though I don't know you personally, I bet I would be 99 per cent correct in saying that you never bothered to serve this country in the military or in any other way. And, most of you journalists are, to borrow a phrase from a past vice-president,a bunch of effete snobs out of touch with the vast majority of Americans."

Chris:
"Great article on the Vineyard vacation.  Think your point is well justified, but do you have to do the Bush bashing during it all.  If that is not enough, you drag the best president in history, next to Lincoln and Washington, Ronald Reagan, in to the equation.  At some point, you have to give up on the Bush bashing.  I am assuming you are a registered democrat and have a reasonably small intellect to continue writing things that everyone else in the democratic party likes to do, Bush Bash. . . . Come on big fella, come up with something new.  Get beyond the boundaries of just regurgitating the same crap you hear from the liberal left leaning media.  I know you can do it.  No, actually I don’t.  I think it is pretty sad.  Fortunately, you have a job with this left leaning publication.  How about an article on increasing taxes in Maryland.  Bet you are a guy that likes taxes.  You promoted Canada and Europe for all their vacation time.  How about you move there and write.  You would fit right in.  Who do you think you are kidding.  Write an article to try and criticize Obama’s vacation only to try and promote your own hatred toward anything Republican.  Bet you were part of that 26% on the lower right of page 13, the same page as your left handed criticism of Obama’s vacation."