Private property is private property, after all

He is the leader of the free world, but President Obama could not get a game of golf when visiting New York over the US bank holiday weekend.

The president is said to have been turned away by at least three exclusive Upstate New York clubs which were asked if he could play a round while visiting the area to attend an aide’s wedding over Labour Day weekend last month.

According to the local television news channel WNBC, the clubs complained that they were not given enough notice by the White House advance team for his requested tee-off time on the morning of Saturday August 30.

Sources told WNBC that the Trump National Golf Club, the Winged Foot and Willow Ridge, all in Westchester County, were among those who said that they could not accommodate the president’s security entourage on what would have been one of their busiest weekends of the year.

They were also reluctant to inconvenience their wealthy members, many of whom had paid more than $100,000 (£62,000) a year in membership fees.

Entirely the correct response: on both sides.

May I?

Sorry, no.

OK.

20 comments on “Private property is private property, after all

  1. His mission was to win the presidential election for the Democrats, twice. Mission accomplished. Why shouldn’t he play golf?

  2. Well of course not he’s a fucking darkie. He’s lucky they didn’t get him cleaning clubs and shoes or serving drinks and nuts.

  3. Bearing in mind the customary American reverence of the office of the President, irrespective of the incumbent, isn’t this the US equivalent of turning down a Royal visit?

  4. BiI,

    Cue old Tiger Woods Joke.

    A young TW turns up at Augusta for practice for his first Masters he is told “no blacks”. When he asks about practice he is told “there is a course just down the road you can use, its about a driver distance, or in your case Mr Woods, a 7-Iron”.

  5. Bloke In Italy – “Well of course not he’s a fucking darkie. He’s lucky they didn’t get him cleaning clubs and shoes or serving drinks and nuts.”

    Which is, I believe, pretty much exactly what Bill Clinton said about him the first time he ran for the White House.

  6. “many of whom had paid more than $100,000 (£62,000) a year in membership fees”: call me a cynic, but I wonder if that shouldn’t read “many of whom had more than $100,000 (£62,000) a year in membership fees paid for them by their shareholders”.

  7. They should have told his front-men “Tell the Marxist twat to piss off” and recorded the whole encounter for immediate upload to Youtube. It would have been better if the creep had turned up in person to be told same but you can’t have everything.

  8. bnis,

    Bearing in mind the customary American reverence of the office of the President, irrespective of the incumbent, isn’t this the US equivalent of turning down a Royal visit?

    Probably, but so what? A business is there to serve it’s customers, the people who pay its bills. If I owned a business I’d get someone to crunch the numbers on the value of PR generated by a royal visit vs the negative effects of customers not being served. If the latter was more than the former, they’d be politely refused.

  9. If a member was turfed out to allow a non-member to play on the private course some US lawyers would have sued the club for a few million bucks.

  10. “They were also reluctant to inconvenience their wealthy members, many of whom had paid more than $100,000 (£62,000) a year in membership fees.”

    They were also reluctant to inconvenience their members.

    There, I fixed it.

    Calling members “wealthy” and stating what their fees are is trashy, and not relevant to the story.

  11. … and it wouldn’t have just been “nipped in for a round”… The course would probably have been shut for a couple of days by the secret service…

Leave a Reply

Name and email are required. Your email address will not be published.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.