Inauguration Gala

[Sanchez]

A family member recently spent $7000 on a/v equipment. Other family members felt that that was "over the top".

Was 80% of it taxpayer funded?

 

[lisadr]

The point is that they limit the amount of spectators by requiring tickets. Why can they not do the same for the inauguration?

Because it's not the super bowl-it's a historic event which Americans have the full right to participate in.

 

[LakeAriel]

Just curious, we know the cost of the Inaugartion, how much will we be spending in Iraq on the same day?

This says it all. That is just the monetary loss....

 

[Sanchez]

The point is that the Super Bowl is the production of a private, commercial, for-profit enterprise. That constitutes a relevant difference.

I will sleep well knowing that you have enlighted me.

 

[Uncle Remus]

Who loves a parade?

The Rev. Gene Robinson, a gay Episcopal bishop, will say a prayer at an inaugural event at the Lincoln Monument on Sunday; a gay and lesbian marching band will take its place in the official presidential parade; and a slew of gay parties and inaugural balls will be held in the nation's capital before and after Obama takes the oath of office.

And of course, here's the whiners:

But the gay-themed events have some conservative critics expressing concerns that while the celebration may be gay-friendly, it won't be family-friendly.

Jennifer Giroux, founder and president of Women Influencing the Nation, a group that focuses on restoring traditional family values, said, “I think (the) inauguration should be kept away from that. Christians may love the individual, but they are offended by the gay lifestyle. It’s unhealthy — spiritually, emotionally and physically.

"It’s not a day where a group that feels like it has some payback coming should be putting its decadent lifestyle on display.”

Link

 

[bicker]

I will sleep well knowing that you have enlighted me.

Thank goodness. I knew that you had the capacity. I really think everyone can see the other side of this issue if they tried to.

 

[LakeAriel]

Was 80% of it taxpayer funded?

You are leaving out the amount of money that will flow into DC between hotels, transportation, restaurants, bars, etc etc...

 

[Sanchez]

Because it's not the super bowl-it's a historic event which Americans have the full right to participate in.

Fair enough. You feel that $120 million in taxpayer dollars is warranted. I do not.

 

[designermv]

Because it's not the super bowl-it's a historic event which Americans have the full right to participate in.

Yep. And if Obama didn't take all the steps to ensure that the inauguration NOT become a logistical nightmare, we'd hear the right whining and complaining that he should have known millions of people would show up and taken the proper measures to accomodate them.

Let's not forget how much security will be necessary thanks to all the folks who'd like nothing better than to see Obama taken down by a sniper on inauguration day. Sad but true.

 

[LakeAriel]

This is starting to bother me..Could the OP correct the spelling in the thread title?

What good is stirring the pot about something if you don't spell it correctly.

Carry on.

 

[bicker]

Compare that difference of opinion (i.e., with regard to money, and the inauguration) to what people who were not fans of the Bush administration had to deal with, i.e., the decision by the folks running the country to expand the war on terror to include a misguided, unfounded war, that decimated respect for the US in the international community. How many billions of dollars was that respect, and all those lives-lost-for-the-wrong-reasons, worth?

 

[designermv]

This is starting to bother me..Could the OP correct the spelling in the thread title?

What good is stirring the pot about something if you don't spell it correctly.

Carry on.

Ya know, you are SUCH an elitist snob with your fancy spelling and stuff.

 

[Uncle Remus]

This is starting to bother me..Could the OP correct the spelling in the thread title?

What good is stirring the pot about something if you don't spell it correctly.

Carry on.

 

[lisadr]

Fair enough. You feel that $120 million in taxpayer dollars is warranted. I do not.

To keep folks who are coming because they want to be there safe -Yes. Would you have the Obama team not be prepared? Or again-tell Americans they cannot come? And if so. AGAIN, who?

But I guess if you want to be silly-it's your right .

 

[bicker]

Ya know, you are SUCH an elitist snob with your fancy spelling and stuff.

aruegula
arugela
aregela
arugala
arugula

 

[Geoff_M]

I think it is hard to believe that someone is not categorically inclined against Obama if that person doesn't have a strong record of having supported him prior to the election. I still haven't seen any reliably even-handed criticisms or reliably even-handed endorsements of the inaugural, yet. Still waiting . . .

Hey, I don't have a problem with "O" spending a boatload of cash on his big party, but what's wrong with pointing out a little media hypocrisy?!?!?

AP Slammed Bush’s ‘Extravagant’ Inaugural in ’05, But Now It’s Spend, Baby, Spend
Photo of Rich Noyes.

January 14, 2009 - 13:51 ET

Four years ago, the Associated Press and others in the press suggested it was in poor taste for Republicans to spend $40 million on President Bush’s inauguration. AP writer Will Lester calculated the impact that kind of money would have on armoring Humvees in Iraq, helping victims of the tsunami, or paying down the deficit. Lester thought the party should be cancelled: “The questions have come from Bush supporters and opponents: Do we need to spend this money on what seems so extravagant?”

Fast forward to 2009. The nation is still at war (two wars, in fact), and now also faces the prospect of a severe recession and federal budget deficits topping $1 trillion as far as the eye can see. With Barack Obama’s inauguration estimated to cost $45 million (not counting the millions more that government will have to pay for security), is the Associated Press once again tsk-tsking the high dollar cost?

Nope. “For inaugural balls, go for glitz, forget economy,” a Tuesday AP headline advised. The article by reporter Laurie Kellman argued for extravagance, starting with the lede:

So you're attending an inaugural ball saluting the historic election of Barack Obama in the worst economic climate in three generations. Can you get away with glitzing it up and still be appropriate, not to mention comfortable and financially viable?

To quote the man of the hour: Yes, you can. Veteran ballgoers say you should. And fashionistas insist that you must.

"This is a time to celebrate. This is a great moment. Do not dress down. Do not wear the Washington uniform," said Tim Gunn, a native Washingtonian and Chief Creative Officer at Liz Claiborne, Inc.

"Just because the economy is in a downturn, it doesn't mean that style is going to be in a downturn," agreed Ken Downing, fashion director for Neiman Marcus.

And if anyone does raise an eyebrow at those sequins, remind them that optimism is good for times like these. "Just say you're doing it to help the economy," chuckled good manners guru Letitia Baldridge.

That spin is a far cry from four years ago, when the AP seemed interested in spurring resentment of the Bush inaugural’s supposedly high cost. Of course, displays of Republican wealth are routinely slammed by the media as elitist or aristocratic, while reporters seem to consider rich Democrats as stylish paragons whom we all should copy.

To get a real feel for the contrast, here’s an excerpt of Lester’s January 13, 2005 piece (as recounted in the MRC’s CyberAlert), starting with a lede designed to rain all over Bush’s parade and including the suggestion from two liberal Democrats that Bush eat cold chicken salad and pound cake instead:

President Bush’s second inauguration will cost tens of millions of dollars — $40 million alone in private donations for the balls, parade and other invitation-only parties. With that kind of money, what could you buy?

■ 200 armored Humvees with the best armor for troops in Iraq.

■ Vaccinations and preventive health care for 22 million children in regions devastated by the tsunami.

■ A down payment on the nation’s deficit, which hit a record-breaking $412 billion last year....

The questions have come from Bush supporters and opponents: Do we need to spend this money on what seems so extravagant?

New York Rep. Anthony Weiner, a Democrat, suggested inaugural parties should be scaled back, citing as a precedent Roosevelt's inauguration during World War II.

"President Roosevelt held his 1945 inaugural at the White House, making a short speech and serving guests cold chicken salad and plain pound cake," according to a letter from Weiner and Rep. Jim McDermott, D-Wash. "During World War I, President Wilson did not have any parties at his 1917 inaugural, saying that such festivities would be undignified."...

Billionaire Mark Cuban, owner of the National Basketball Association's Dallas Mavericks, voted for Bush -- twice. Cuban knows a thing or two about big spending, once starring in ABC's reality TV show, "The Benefactor," in which 16 contenders tried to pass his test for success and win $1 million.

"As a country, we face huge deficits. We face a declining economy. We have service people dying. We face responsibilities to help those suffering from the...devastation of the tsunamis," he wrote on his blog, a Web journal.

Cuban challenged Bush to set an example: "Start by canceling your inauguration parties and festivities."

Obviously, that’s not the media’s message to Barack Obama this year. And no one in the press is going to argue that, with the nation at war, the new President should be satisfied with cold chicken salad and pound cake.

I'm sure it'll be a monster party, but it looks like the estimates may be off a bit. If you want to still go, the WaPo is reporting that there's over 800 room left in DC proper and 15,000 unbook rooms in the surrounding states. You may also be able to get a great deal on a short term apartment or home rental too.

 

[rgf207]

Just curious, we know the cost of the Inaugartion, how much will we be spending in Iraq on the same day?

Ah good point but since Obama will be president that day, everyone here will come in and start threads blaming him for that.

Let's face it. People are going to rag on him for everything he does. He can't win. The people against him would love nothing more than to see him fail. It's sad but it's true.

 

[bicker]

... but what's wrong with pointing out a little media hypocrisy?!?!?

What's wrong with pointing out a little inherent poster bias?

The reality is that that the discussion thread comments I referred to (comments criticizing something related to Obama from clearly recognized Obama supporters, and comments praising something related to Obama from clearly recognized Obama opponents) have so much more credibility than discussion thread comments from any other sources. Pretty-much all other comments can be dismissed as either opportunistic, misguided, politically-motivated, etc. Why not highlight some of these unequivocally impact-ful comments? ... or the absences of such impact-ful comments, which itself highlights how much of a non-issue this really is.

 

[LakeAriel]

aruegula
arugela
aregela
arugala
arugula

How about arugulation?

 

[designermv]

How about arugulation?

This is my new favorite word.