Waste of money if you ask me, which I guess you did.Mr.Pandah said:
I think according to Yahoo! News this inauguration is 8 times more expensive that the previous costliest (with inflation accounted for).
This is an inauguration...not a superbowl.
- Thread starter Mr.Pandah
- Start date
Recommended Videos
I think according to Yahoo! News this inauguration is 8 times more expensive that the previous costliest (with inflation accounted for).
Inauguration > superbowl, I'd say. Not seeing the problem...
Okay, the tax dollars thing, that's over the top, but if that such about the civil services costs being included this time and such are true, well... I dunno.
I'm just happy to see that at least the majority of Americans are able to vote in a black man rumored to be Muslim. Unfortunately, I live in an area in which even the middle-schoolers are complaining that Obama needs to be assassinated. Apparently, I also hate America, and am a communist. (I only fit one of those! (The communism one.))
Okay, the tax dollars thing, that's over the top, but if that such about the civil services costs being included this time and such are true, well... I dunno.
I'm just happy to see that at least the majority of Americans are able to vote in a black man rumored to be Muslim. Unfortunately, I live in an area in which even the middle-schoolers are complaining that Obama needs to be assassinated. Apparently, I also hate America, and am a communist. (I only fit one of those! (The communism one.))
Change...Change...CHANGE...change. That is why the inauguration is a superbowl, everyone is drugged up on change. It's funny how I would have though America was stupid if they voted in McCain but even when the country makes the right choice it does so for the wrong reason. You can't just believe in change you have to know what Obama is actually changing and how his change is actually worth all this hooplah.
According to whitehouse.gov (cached in Google), George Bush's inaugural celebration was 3 days long, so it's not like Obama's celebration is any longer, it's just being televised, whereas the last inauguration wasn't. And to echo what Cheeze pointed out, the actually celebration is is paid for out of private funds. The tax expense parts come from the logistical needs of dealing with such a large influx of people. Congress didn't just hand Obama a sack of money and tell him to party it up, and Obama can't be blamed for the fact that a lot of people came to see the inauguration of the first African-American president.
When you consider the fact that, in the year Obama was born, black people were being imprisoned and killed in the struggle for civil rights, that in the neighboring state of Virginia was closing public schools to avoid desegregating them, that even public libraries were whites-only, Obama's status as President of the United States is an incredible turning point. Of course people are going to show up in unprecedented numbers, completely aside from anything specific to the man himself. So what are you going to do? Refuse to put out extra security and port-a-potties and let Washington DC literally go to shit under the weight of the crowd? Washington DC, Maryland, and Virginia requested federal emergency funds, the Obama campaign didn't.
Personally, I'm not thrilled about the rock-star treatment Obama is getting from the media because I worry it will blow up in his face. But the inauguration on the TV? I can't get worked up over it. What else are they going to put on the news these days. "This just in--it's STILL really freaking cold! And all those people from the plane crash? Still alive! Fancy that. Oh yeah, there's that whole Israeli-Gaza thing, but no one wants to watch that. Lousy ratings and you have to think about it way too much. Did we mention that it's really freakin' cold?" Or just run regular programming, because I really am missing All My Children, Maury Povich, and Judge Judy.
When you consider the fact that, in the year Obama was born, black people were being imprisoned and killed in the struggle for civil rights, that in the neighboring state of Virginia was closing public schools to avoid desegregating them, that even public libraries were whites-only, Obama's status as President of the United States is an incredible turning point. Of course people are going to show up in unprecedented numbers, completely aside from anything specific to the man himself. So what are you going to do? Refuse to put out extra security and port-a-potties and let Washington DC literally go to shit under the weight of the crowd? Washington DC, Maryland, and Virginia requested federal emergency funds, the Obama campaign didn't.
Personally, I'm not thrilled about the rock-star treatment Obama is getting from the media because I worry it will blow up in his face. But the inauguration on the TV? I can't get worked up over it. What else are they going to put on the news these days. "This just in--it's STILL really freaking cold! And all those people from the plane crash? Still alive! Fancy that. Oh yeah, there's that whole Israeli-Gaza thing, but no one wants to watch that. Lousy ratings and you have to think about it way too much. Did we mention that it's really freakin' cold?" Or just run regular programming, because I really am missing All My Children, Maury Povich, and Judge Judy.
You wanna know something really sad? What if Obama doesn't *gasp* live up to all his hype, or if he does really bad in office. Do any of you realize what that will do to the morale of the American public? It would be disastrous.
Here's to you, Obama. I didn't vote for you, but I wish you the best of luck, you will need it.
Here's to you, Obama. I didn't vote for you, but I wish you the best of luck, you will need it.
The federal government estimates that it will spend roughly $49 million on the inaugural weekend. Washington, D.C., Virginia and Maryland have requested another $75 million from the federal government to help pay for their share of police, fire and medical services.
And then there is the party bill.
"We have a budget of roughly $45 million, maybe a little bit more," said Linda Douglass, spokeswoman for the inaugural committee. That's more than the $42.3 million in private funds spent by President Bush's committee in 2005 or the $33 million spent for Bill Clinton's first inaugural in 1993."
Regarding those private funds, "Obama capped donations at $50,000 per person, which is still more than 10 times what individuals could give to his campaign, but a lot less than the $250,000 cap President Bush had at his last inauguration. Contributions from corporations, labor unions, political action committees and registered lobbyists are not being accepted by Obama."
The actual amount being spent on the party itself is not that much different than what Bush spent on his last inauguration party. So, what all this really amounts to is bitching about the fact that people want to see Obama inaugurated and didn't really give a rat's ass about going to see Bush and Clinton in person. All this noise about "your tax dollars" has absolutely nothing to do with anything regarding Obama's fiscal policy. If anything, Obama restricted the influx of cash into the inauguration in the only part of the situation he could control.
And then there is the party bill.
"We have a budget of roughly $45 million, maybe a little bit more," said Linda Douglass, spokeswoman for the inaugural committee. That's more than the $42.3 million in private funds spent by President Bush's committee in 2005 or the $33 million spent for Bill Clinton's first inaugural in 1993."
Regarding those private funds, "Obama capped donations at $50,000 per person, which is still more than 10 times what individuals could give to his campaign, but a lot less than the $250,000 cap President Bush had at his last inauguration. Contributions from corporations, labor unions, political action committees and registered lobbyists are not being accepted by Obama."
The actual amount being spent on the party itself is not that much different than what Bush spent on his last inauguration party. So, what all this really amounts to is bitching about the fact that people want to see Obama inaugurated and didn't really give a rat's ass about going to see Bush and Clinton in person. All this noise about "your tax dollars" has absolutely nothing to do with anything regarding Obama's fiscal policy. If anything, Obama restricted the influx of cash into the inauguration in the only part of the situation he could control.
Good, because that's not accurate. I don't think that *taxation* (i.e. theft under threat of force) is a legitimate means of acquiring government funds. I don't think it really matters what the gov't does with that loot--the means of acquiring it irrevocably taints all activities funded by it.jboking said:
Yes thank you. Im not too fond of that idea either. Also I really didn't give a shit that he was inaugurated today, another president hooray whopdy fucking doo, can I move on with my life now?JMeganSnow said:
In my school, we got a foriegn exchange student named Harison. He's from Australia. So, I asked him how long he's been here. He said, "Oh since the 8th".
I then proceded to tell him he picked an awful time to go to the States.
I then proceded to tell him he picked an awful time to go to the States.
They did pay for the big flashy party out of their own pockets. The tax money is going to pay for city services and security burden of all the people who showed up. Obama didn't personally invite all those people. In fact, he encouraged them to stay home and celebrate in their own communities. He can't be held personally responsible or fiscally liable for American citizens exercising their right to public assembly. Also, though Maryland and Virginia asked for 75 million in emergency aid, I don't see anywhere in the news that they actually got it yet, so both the tax bill and the squalling about the tax bill may very well be overblown.JMeganSnow said:
Well, he got more attention in my college, here in Canada, than Stephane Dion did when his party came for a conference. He was running for Prime Minister, and the election was mere weeks away.
It's the second coming of Jesus Christ. At least, that's how the media portrays it. I could only watch about 45 minutes of it before I couldn't stomach anymore. I personally don't dislike Obama himself, but the hype never ceases to disgust me. All this "First African-American President" plugging keeps feeding this nagging feeling I have, that America's sense of reverse racism got him elected. I obviously have nothing to back this up, so it's not a valid argument.
And I don't think we'll have to worry about Obama's image if he doesn't live up to the hype. We'll just find a way to blame Bush because it's really easy to hate him anyways.
And I don't think we'll have to worry about Obama's image if he doesn't live up to the hype. We'll just find a way to blame Bush because it's really easy to hate him anyways.
I'm not in the least opposed to government--a proper government is what makes civilization possible. But you don't form a proper government by building it on theft, no matter *how* good your intentions. It is entirely proper for the government to charge fees for services (such as contractual services) as a means of financing. It is NOT proper for the government to declare that it is the owner of your income and it only allows you to keep some of it out of politeness.Cheeze_Pavilion said: