LONGECITY

In '04 the AP bitched about Bush spending a quarter of this amount. Now, with the economy spiraling into a disaster, they are proponents of glitz. The democrats and their lackeys in the media, are nothing if not total hypocrites.
This is the Oscar's, Grammies and American Idol all rolled into one. Gird your loins!

http://www.guardian....auguration-cost

Obama's inauguration set to be the most expensive in US history

The $150m (£102m) cost of the celebration will dwarf the amount spent on George Bush's inauguration in 2005.

President Barack Obama's inauguration next week is set to be the most expensive ever, predicted to reach over $150m (£102m). This dwarfs the $42.3m spent on George Bush's inauguration in 2005 and the $33m spent on Bill Clinton's in 1993.

Part of the spending includes emergency funding announced by the White House on Tuesday to help with the soaring costs. Most of this new federal funding will be to deal with the huge influx of people, estimated 1.5 million to 2 million.

A White House statement said that President Bush "declared an emergency exists in the District of Columbia".

If there is snow, the costs will grow higher. The long-term forecast suggests there is a chance of snow on Sunday and again on the day of inauguration, on Tuesday.

Carole Florman, spokeswoman for the joint congressional committee on inaugural ceremonies, told the New York Daily News, which estimated the cost at $160m: "We're always very budget conscious. But we're sending a message to the entire world about our peaceful transition of power, and you don't want it to look like a schlock affair. It needs to be appropriate to the magnitude of events that it is."

Florman deals specifically with the inauguration ceremony at the Congress, which is relatively modest. The surge in spending is partly because of the Obama's decision to open the entire Mall to the public.

The federal government has budgeted $49m for the inauguration. But this does not take account of other demands, such as from Virginia and Maryland, the states surrounding the capital, that have also asked for emergency funding.

In addition, funding will come from Obama's own fund-raising efforts and from private contributors.

One of the biggest costs is transport, and the Washington DC transport authority has also put in a request to the federal government for extra funding.

Obama today issued a statement calling on people across the nation to participate by holding their own neighbourhood events, including their own balls. He acknowledged the logistical problems that will face Washington.

"Now, you've probably heard the reports that unprecedented numbers of Americans are planning to join us in Washington. That will mean long lines, a tough time getting around, and most of all, a lot of walking on what could be a very cold winter day," Obama said.

The presidential inaugural committee today published details of the inauguration and the days running up to it.

On Sunday, there will be a free concert opened by Obama at the Lincoln Memorial, with songs from Bruce Springsteen, Beyoncé and others and historical readings by actors including Jamie Foxx and Denzel Washington.

On Monday night, there will be a children's inaugural event in Washington.

On Tuesday, there will be the inauguration, parade led by the Obamas from Congress to the White House and a series of balls in the evening.

The inauguration events will end on Wednesday with a prayer service at the Washington National Cathedral.

In '04 the AP bitched about Bush spending a quarter of this amount. Now, with the economy spiraling into a disaster, they are proponents of glitz. The democrats and their lackeys in the media, are nothing if not total hypocrites.

Can you provide evidence for any of these statements? How many people cared to be present at the '05 inauguration? How many do you think will be there next week? On a per person basis, this will probably be cheaper... How do you propose to economize on this historical event?

Don't forget the enormous carbon footprint of this affair. Not only frivolously spending money in a severe recession but destroying the environment as well.

I really wouldn't mind it so much, but there is all this talk about people needing to make sacrifices and talk about new carbon taxes, yet Obama gets to spend $150 million on an all-day party with Jay-Z and Bruce Springsteen?

I thought Bush spent too much as well in '05. This one just makes me ill. I can't see the justification of such extravagance and idol worship.
Edited by Mind, 17 January 2009 - 01:19 AM.

The $150m (£102m) cost of the celebration will dwarf the amount spent on George Bush's inauguration in 2005.

Decadence.

Can you provide evidence for any of these statements?

NY Times

AP

Don't forget Salon
Edited by Mind, 17 January 2009 - 01:14 AM.

Can you provide evidence for any of these statements?

There are many...thank god for the internet. It is much easier to expose hypocrisy nowadays.

NY Times of course.

AP

Don't forget Salon

In each of these examples, the issue was not so much cost as tone. Some people found the idea of lavish parties at the height of a war and in the immediate wake of the Indonesian tsunami to be troubling. This year, the war is winding down, there have been no major natural disasters in the past few weeks, and economic conditions call for massive spending to get the economy moving. So there is really no comparison whatsoever between the two inaugurations, other than the fact that way, WAY more people want to go to this one. So where is the hypocrisy?
Edited by niner, 17 January 2009 - 01:22 AM.

The unemployment rate jumped to a 16-year high of 7.2% from 6.8% in November. Let's party!

These denouncements are unfair. Obama's inauguration is a historic event that Bush's inauguration could never match and therefore the expenses are realistically going to be higher. The articles clearly state the reasons why the costs are higher: public access to the Mall, transportation costs, etc.. The articles clearly state that the money is coming from a variety of funding sources. I do not see any evidence of decadence. Rather, I see evidence of necessary expenses and an opportunity for a little fun and entertainment during a difficult economic climate.

From the article:

'The surge in spending is partly because of the Obama's decision to open the entire Mall to the public."
Edited by FuLL meMbeR, 17 January 2009 - 01:40 AM.

Niner wrote:

So there is really no comparison whatsoever between the two inaugurations, other than the fact that way, WAY more people want to go to this one. So where is the hypocrisy?

Maybe some of the newly unemployed are showing up for the free eats?

Mind wrote:

Don't forget the enormous carbon footprint of this affair.

Are your referring to Obama's inaugural address?

LOL. MSNBC disagrees with the op.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/28703864/

a little fun and entertainment during a difficult economic climate.

I would say little is the key word here. I don't see why Bush needed to spend $40 million and I don't see why Obama has to spend 4 times that much. When did historic occasions become so expensive. There is nothing little about $150 million.

In '04 the AP bitched about Bush spending a quarter of this amount. Now, with the economy spiraling into a disaster, they are proponents of glitz. The democrats and their lackeys in the media, are nothing if not total hypocrites.

Can you provide evidence for any of these statements? How many people cared to be present at the '05 inauguration? How many do you think will be there next week? On a per person basis, this will probably be cheaper... How do you propose to economize on this historical event?

Same old tune niner..."can you provide evidence..." are you trying say I am making this stuff up? There are quite a few articles out there on the ridiculous costs involved in this coronation. You are pretty good at research, so I know you can find the evidence yourself. The hypocrisy is obvious.

On a per person basis, this will probably be cheaper...
Can you provide any proof of this???

I have to agree with aim1, Mind, and FuLL meMbeR. Obama needs to set an example of sacrifice and thrift during tough economic times. Keeping the party small and well televised should be enough.

Didn't you get the memo? Cash is free these days. Just print as much as you need.

In 2005, for the inauguration of President George W. Bush’s second term, crowds were estimated at 400,000, a hundred thousand more than his first inauguration in 2001.
The amount spent was 40$ million (from what I'm hearing in this topic)

The estimated amount of people attending Obama's inauguration is 2 million.
The amount being spent is 120$ million.

Per person Bush: 100$
Per person Obama: 60$

Now please note I did no research at all to come up with these numbers (in the topic already) and that as an event becomes larger usually per person costs come down.

I have no opinion on this topic (not well enough informed) but I'm just offering an interesting comparison.

Given the technology that exists today you would think Obama could do a little bit of teleconferencing. There are some big cities with a lot of Obama supporters. They could have parties in their respective cities and then Obama could phone in (or teleconference in) with a short conversation. He could probably personally connect with millions of people this way and prevent all the travel and security headaches and expense.

On Sunday, there will be a free concert opened by Obama at the Lincoln Memorial, with songs from Bruce Springsteen, Beyoncé and others and historical readings by actors including Jamie Foxx and Denzel Washington.

On Monday night, there will be a children's inaugural event in Washington.

It`s funny how many people see Obama as a Messiah just because he is black...I don`t care about his background (ethnical, at least!) as I only care about whatever policies he`ll put in practice once he reaches power.

The problem is being black doesn`t make you a good president, it`s not a given. You can have good and bad white presidents, like you can have good or bad black or asian presidents. 3 of the 4 people mentioned in that article are black. With this said I don`t trust some of the people he appointed either...especially Summers, Emanuel and Hillary. I feel they`re arrogant, incompetent and corrupt, particularly the first.

Spending over 150 million bucks just to hear a crowd of people crying "Yes we can!" like robots isn`t exactly good for the future of Mankind. Just imagine what if that amount of money was donated to one or more projects we have on this forum?

Isn't some of this (perhaps most) money from private donations? Seems like it's been that way in the past. I think it's rather cheap and petty to complain about this amount of money for a historic event that millions of people are really into. This is about the political health and unity of our nation; how can you put a price on that? How much money gets blown on the Super Bowl?

Given the technology that exists today you would think Obama could do a little bit of teleconferencing. There are some big cities with a lot of Obama supporters. They could have parties in their respective cities and then Obama could phone in (or teleconference in) with a short conversation. He could probably personally connect with millions of people this way and prevent all the travel and security headaches and expense.

agree. mccain used to say obama's world's biggest celebrity. but why spending so much , how about just set some block parties and big screen tele- meetings

Was George W. Bush the first black president?

Oh no wait that's this guy.

[quote name='niner' date='17-Jan 2009, 08:42 PM' post='293000']
Isn't some of this (perhaps most) money from private donations?

Can you verify that statemnet?


Seems like it's been that way in the past. I think it's rather cheap and petty to complain about this amount of money for a historic event that millions of people are really into.

Of course you do. He's a democrat. Millions of people think it's disgusting to have so much schlock celebrity while the country is in an economic down turn

This is about the political health and unity of our nation; how can you put a price on that? How much money gets blown on the Super Bowl?

Forget the unity of this country. Your side spent eight years annihilating Bush at every chance. Now it's time for payback.
Oh and this one is from The Washington Post, so you don't have to ask me verify:

Barack Obama's inaugural organizing committee has struck deals with three television networks to the tune of more than $5 million, giving the networks exclusive access to inaugural events. But the arrangement is prompting questions about the president-elect's efforts to raise money by turning his inauguration into made-for-TV productions. All told, Obama's licensing of inaugural events to TV is the most ambitious and expensive in presidential history. Bill Clinton's committee licensed events to HBO and CBS during his first inauguration in 1993, but other presidential committees have generally shied away from selling exclusive rights to official events.

Any Immortalists going to the Inauguration? I'm going up starting tomorrow for the free concert, and staying through Wednesday. If any of you are going to be there, meet up with me on the Mall! (/s)

Isn't some of this (perhaps most) money from private donations? Seems like it's been that way in the past. I think it's rather cheap and petty to complain about this amount of money for a historic event that millions of people are really into. This is about the political health and unity of our nation; how can you put a price on that? How much money gets blown on the Super Bowl?

Events like the Super Bowl or the Beijing Olympics are useless. I don`t care about what people say about infrastructure and economics stimulus...all I know is that money would have been better spent on actual research. Why not use that money to support folding@home? We could easily surpass the 10 PETAFLOP barrier if governments were willing to put so much effort in money into the project.

Sports, useless presidential cerimonies, etc are meaningless and a waste of money. Being black doesn`t mean he`s going to be a good president. He`s surrounded himself with the same criminal crew from the past 2 administrations...do you really expect change? I expect more posing and more of the same stuff, albeit in a PC manner. Meaningless...what a waste of time.

Forget the unity of this country. Your side spent eight years annihilating Bush at every chance. Now it's time for payback.

Yes and this is the reason I have long suspected my country is not only headed for Civil War (again) and its own form of Balkinization but that our Civil War will be the real impetus for the most violent global war in human history. The Soviets were able to dissolve relatively non violently but I doubt this nation can.

No one does violence to Americans like Americans. We will probably end up being not only the first nation to use nukes in combat (and technically the last too) against a foreign nation but the first to use them against ourselves.

Oh and lest you foreign nationals gloat too much trust me, no one gets out alive. There will be no innocent bystanders, no neutral or sacred ground, should we go to war against ourselves we are the nation that claims you are either with us or against us and you will be forced to take sides or be overrun. When we go berserk the world will be lucky to survive the hangover.

Everyone here can easily prove me wrong, make this dire prophecy false and I would be glad if you do. It would simply require that everyone come to their senses and seek a form of reasonable reconciliation but I trust most see only one form of victory and that will be the death of us all. Your own included.

True victory is not predicated on the defeat of an enemy, it requires survival of the conflict intact and the ability to grow even stronger from the conflict and perhaps even unified with the former foe, blending strengths and ameliorating weakness but all that requires rational understanding and honest negotiation, something all too few appear capable of lately.

The only truth of who is right and wrong right now in America is that we are all armed and very dangerous. Might may not make right but it sure can make a bloody mess of things. You want a fight?

I suspect you very much underestimate the curse of being very careful about what you wish for because you just may get it.

BTW the Federal Government only pays 40 million for the inaugural, it is set by law. All the rest comes from campaign funds and private donations.

Considering this is also likely to be the largest turnout in history for an inaugural some of the *excess expense* is justified but the rest you can just chalk up to the usual suspects and the common practice of political pandering and hubris.

I really must say we look more like Rome at the Fall of the Republic everyday.

Bread and circuses.

Forget the unity of this country. Your side spent eight years annihilating Bush at every chance. Now it's time for payback.

Yes and this is the reason I have long suspected my country is not only headed for Civil War (again) and its own form of Balkinization but that our Civil War will be the real impetus for the most violent global war in human history. The Soviets were able to dissolve relatively non violently but I doubt this nation can.

Wow Laz, I haven't seen you this cynical before. I'm afraid I don't see civil war on our horizon. I don't know where you got the quote since I have some of the dead-enders on my ignored users list now. It's most helpful. I must say that it's a creepy example of the problem. There are quite a number of people like that in America, whipped into a frenzy by Right Wing Hate Radio, Fox News, and other propaganda outlets. I think their day in the sun is over. Even Rupert Murdoch has been said to be turning away from the Roger Ailes-style hard right approach. I think a lot of people on the Right are going to come around. A few dead-enders will remain bitter, withdraw somewhat from society, and turn to their guns as some sort of refuge. I hope that the Limbaughs, Coulters, Malkins, O'Reillys, and the rest of the hate-mongers will be further marginalized to the point that they can be nothing more than objects of pity. At the moment they are still trying to destroy our nation, but their star is fading.

U2 performed this song at the Lincoln Memorial yesterday. It's called Pride. I'm proud of my country now, after 8 years in the desert. I'm proud that we have a leader my children can look up to.

One man come in the name of love
One man come and go
One man come here to justify
One man to overthrow
In the name of love!
One man in the name of love
In the name of love!
What more? In the name of love!

One man caught on a barbed wire fence
One man he resists
One man washed on an empty beach
One man betrayed with a kiss

In the name of love!
What more in the name of love?
In the name of love!
What more? In the name of love!

...nobody like you...there's nobody like you...

Mmm...mmm...mmm...
Early morning, April 4
Shot rings out in the Memphis sky
Free at last, they took your life
They could not take your pride

In the name of love!
What more in the name of love?
In the name of love!
What more in the name of love?
In the name of love!
What more in the name of love...

MediaMatters completely debunked the 150 millions figure. This inauguration will barely cost more than the one in 2005. The 150 millions figure is obtained by adding the cost of security. When you do the same for 2005 you get a figure of 157 millions. Yet again, dishonest right wing journalism at work.

http://mediamatters....ns/200901170003