RE: $150 million for inauguration

RE: $150 million for inauguration (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid

Message

Crush -> RE: $150 million for inauguration (1/17/2009 6:41:51 PM)
Think of the children! 300 million vaccines! Whatever....the only good politician ...oh wait...oxymoron....DOH

Sanity -> RE: $150 million for inauguration (1/17/2009 7:04:17 PM)
The Associated Press is reporting that the Obama inauguration committee is only picking up around 41 Million of the bill, and that the rest is on the taxpayers. http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090117/ap_on_go_pr_wh/inauguration_spending quote: ORIGINAL: cjan Although many people assume the inauguration is paid for with tax money, in fact the entire event is funded by donors. The entire list of donors is available at http://www.wral.com/news/political/page/4324089/

AlexandraLynch -> RE: $150 million for inauguration (1/17/2009 11:58:23 PM)
Personally as a taxpayer I'd rather pay for that than let someone steal it with a war profiteering contract, or spend it in kickbacks to their friends in the industry they're supposed to be regulating, or on prostitutes for kinky sex while advertising their high moral values. It's a historic event, and someone's got to pay to rent the porta-pots, etc. for all the people that are planning to go. I'm reserving judgement. Let's see what he does in his first couple months in office, and then I'll have more to say. But I can say that having a person whose intellect I respect and who can put together a coherent sentence without handlers is someone I prefer to either of the frat boys we've had in office the last eight years or were offered on the Republican ticket. (And the fact that I'd rather have the government in my pocketbook than in my bedroom.)

thornhappy -> RE: $150 million for inauguration (1/18/2009 2:42:41 AM)
It said that the government is paying for security and transportation. It mentions the campaign contributions, but not all the private donors. So this isn't racking up 150 million on the government's tab. quote: ORIGINAL: Sanity The Associated Press is reporting that the Obama inauguration committee is only picking up around 41 Million of the bill, and that the rest is on the taxpayers. http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090117/ap_on_go_pr_wh/inauguration_spending quote: ORIGINAL: cjan Although many people assume the inauguration is paid for with tax money, in fact the entire event is funded by donors. The entire list of donors is available at http://www.wral.com/news/political/page/4324089/

corysub -> RE: $150 million for inauguration (1/18/2009 3:40:44 AM)
You really didn't think "change" would be cheap...did ya![sm=yeahright.gif]

thishereboi -> RE: $150 million for inauguration (1/18/2009 5:54:05 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: thornhappy It said that the government is paying for security and transportation. It mentions the campaign contributions, but not all the private donors. So this isn't racking up 150 million on the government's tab. quote: ORIGINAL: Sanity The Associated Press is reporting that the Obama inauguration committee is only picking up around 41 Million of the bill, and that the rest is on the taxpayers. http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090117/ap_on_go_pr_wh/inauguration_spending quote: ORIGINAL: cjan Although many people assume the inauguration is paid for with tax money, in fact the entire event is funded by donors. The entire list of donors is available at http://www.wral.com/news/political/page/4324089/ According to the article, Obama's committee has raised over 41 million for the party. So who do you think is going to pay the other 109 million?

Sanity -> RE: $150 million for inauguration (1/18/2009 10:45:03 AM)
While it's true that Obama's already spending our money like a drunken sailor, Obama only promised that "Once we get through this economic crisis, we’re going to have to embrace a culture of responsibility, all of us, corporations, the federal government, & individuals who may be living beyond their means." Since we're not through this economic crisis yet, technically he's still keeping his word. What's 109 million in taxpayer money, anyway. They're probably going to be shooting thousand dollar bills out of canons towards the crowds nonstop for several hours as party favors. quote: ORIGINAL: thishereboi According to the article, Obama's committee has raised over 41 million for the party. So who do you think is going to pay the other 109 million?

bestbabync -> RE: $150 million for inauguration (1/18/2009 11:15:45 AM)
after the "gloom and doom" press conference PE Obama gave on Monday i believe that every dime of that money could be better spent or saved to feed & house the jobless and homeless this recession/depression will produce. i pay taxes and with the state of our economy now, i would have hoped PE Obama would set a new standard. afterall his motto was "Change you can Believe In". give me some hope and a reason to believe PE Obama....please! give me reason to believe that politics of the past is no longer going to be the norm or accepted. give me reason to believe that we are in this awful mess together and we are going to fight our way out of it. give me reason to believe that you are not like all the other self centered politicians, both Pub & Dem! give me reason to believe in you PE Obama and prove to me that you want to help the american people for real by not spending our hard earned money for a party in your honor. IMHO.......just saying!

OrionTheWolf -> RE: $150 million for inauguration (1/18/2009 12:24:02 PM)
Was it as much malarky as when people were complaining about how what the money for Bush's second inauguration could be spent on? Those were Dem's doing it, but that would make it okay for them to complain, right? Find a standard and apply it equally. quote: ORIGINAL: Owner59 That`s what I was saying. What the not so happy people are complaining about is what DC and the feds NEED to spend to cover the enormous crowds that`ll be there(spending money,renting rooms,taking cabs,buying tickets/rail passes,buying meals,buying Obama shwag and generally lifting the local economy. The not so happy people are complaining that Obama is wasting our money/taxes dollars.Which of course, is malarkey.

rulemylife -> RE: $150 million for inauguration (1/18/2009 1:46:20 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Sanity While it's true that Obama's already spending our money like a drunken sailor, Obama only promised that "Once we get through this economic crisis, we’re going to have to embrace a culture of responsibility, all of us, corporations, the federal government, & individuals who may be living beyond their means." Since we're not through this economic crisis yet, technically he's still keeping his word. What's 109 million in taxpayer money, anyway. They're probably going to be shooting thousand dollar bills out of canons towards the crowds nonstop for several hours as party favors. quote: ORIGINAL: thishereboi According to the article, Obama's committee has raised over 41 million for the party. So who do you think is going to pay the other 109 million? Might I suggest you re-read the link you posted previously and try to see that there is absolutely nothing that says the cost will be paid for by the government, and consequently the taxpayers. This is yet another bash-Obama post, which I really wouldn't mind if it relied on facts, instead of a stream of misinformation supplied courtesy of conservative blogs. Inaugurals are paid for by the donations of those supporting the elected President. A percentage of the money does come from government funds for basic services that would be provided for any large scale event. Those services are generally provided because the influx of tourists more than makes up in taxes received the cost of providing those services. Why do cities compete for for the Democratic and Republican conventions if it is such a financial burden to host them? Why do cities vie for the Super Bowl if it costs them so much money in added services to the public? This is yet another ridiculous argument to discredit a man who hasn't even taken office yet.

Evility -> RE: $150 million for inauguration (1/18/2009 1:57:46 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: TheHeretic I wonder how long Obama's honeymoon will last. Until the first terrorist attack occurs on our soil under his watch. You know it's going to happen. It's not a matter of if but when. I won't be at all surprised if it happens before the end of this calendar year. I feel so much safer knowing that Leon Panetta will be heading up the CIA.

rulemylife -> RE: $150 million for inauguration (1/18/2009 2:20:39 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Evility quote: ORIGINAL: TheHeretic I wonder how long Obama's honeymoon will last. Until the first terrorist attack occurs on our soil under his watch. You know it's going to happen. It's not a matter of if but when. I won't be at all surprised if it happens before the end of this calendar year. I feel so much safer knowing that Leon Panetta will be heading up the CIA. Yes, as I recall that happened under another President recently. On his watch. But, of course, somehow he was not accountable for that, but hey, he's certainly a hero for keeping us safe since.

bestbabync -> RE: $150 million for inauguration (1/18/2009 2:37:57 PM)
back to the thread topic! i think the article mentioned that DC has been declared to be in a "state of emergency" which makes them eligible for taxpayer monies. my arguement is also in agreement with VPE Biden when he stated it is time we all accept the responsibility for the financial mess and start sacrificing, not throughing big expensive parties. so don't we all agree that the donated money would better serve and help the unemployed, the homeless, the victims of crime etc? why spend it on an expensive party when their are needy people in this country? just saying!

Sanity -> RE: $150 million for inauguration (1/18/2009 2:47:38 PM)
Try again. Third paragraph from the top: "Obama's inaugural committee has raised more than $41 million to cover events ranging from a Philadelphia-to-Washington train ride to a megastar concert with Beyonce, U2 and Bruce Springsteen to 10 official inaugural balls. Add to that the massive costs of security and transportation — costs absorbed by U.S. taxpayers — and the historic inauguration will produce an equally historic bill." In that same article the total cost is estimated to be 150 million so those who can do the basic subtraction can plainly see that the cost of Obamapalooza to our already bankrupt nation is going to be right around 109 million dollars. http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090117/ap_on_go_pr_wh/inauguration_spending quote: ORIGINAL: rulemylife Might I suggest you re-read the link you posted previously and try to see that there is absolutely nothing that says the cost will be paid for by the government, and consequently the taxpayers. This is yet another bash-Obama post, which I really wouldn't mind if it relied on facts, instead of a stream of misinformation supplied courtesy of conservative blogs. Inaugurals are paid for by the donations of those supporting the elected President. A percentage of the money does come from government funds for basic services that would be provided for any large scale event. Those services are generally provided because the influx of tourists more than makes up in taxes received the cost of providing those services. Why do cities compete for for the Democratic and Republican conventions if it is such a financial burden to host them? Why do cities vie for the Super Bowl if it costs them so much money in added services to the public? This is yet another ridiculous argument to discredit a man who hasn't even taken office yet.

thornhappy -> RE: $150 million for inauguration (1/18/2009 2:56:23 PM)
It doesn't say that taxpayers would pay for it - it says that the security and transportation costs are paid by the taxpayer. Not the other stuff. They're constructing a total of fed funds plus donations. quote: ORIGINAL: Sanity Try again. Third paragraph from the top: "Obama's inaugural committee has raised more than $41 million to cover events ranging from a Philadelphia-to-Washington train ride to a megastar concert with Beyonce, U2 and Bruce Springsteen to 10 official inaugural balls. Add to that the massive costs of security and transportation — costs absorbed by U.S. taxpayers — and the historic inauguration will produce an equally historic bill." In that same article the total cost is estimated to be 150 million so those who can do the basic subtraction can plainly see that the cost of Obamapalooza to our already bankrupt nation is going to be right around 109 million dollars. http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090117/ap_on_go_pr_wh/inauguration_spending

bestbabync -> RE: $150 million for inauguration (1/18/2009 3:01:25 PM)
http://newsbusters.org/blogs/rich-noyes/2009/01/14/ap-slammed-bush-s-extravagant-inaugural-05-now-it-s-spend-baby-spend this is a cool read!

thornhappy -> RE: $150 million for inauguration (1/18/2009 3:02:38 PM)
One of the strategy/planning guys in Al Qaeda (blew himself up later in England) had a multi-step process regarding the US. He wrote that there wouldn't be another strike by AQ) on US soil (figured they could never pull off another large event again), they would isolate the US by bombing, etc. her allies (like Spain and England) and generally make it painful to be allied with us. I'd wonder if we were going to get something a little homegrown (remember OKC?) quote:* ORIGINAL: Evility quote: ORIGINAL: TheHeretic I wonder how long Obama's honeymoon will last. Until the first terrorist attack occurs on our soil under his watch. You know it's going to happen. It's not a matter of if but when. I won't be at all surprised if it happens before the end of this calendar year. I feel so much safer knowing that Leon Panetta will be heading up the CIA.

bestbabync -> RE: $150 million for inauguration (1/18/2009 3:08:52 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: thornhappy It doesn't say that taxpayers would pay for it - it says that the security and transportation costs are paid by the taxpayer. Not the other stuff. They're constructing a total of fed funds plus donations. quote: ORIGINAL: Sanity Try again. Third paragraph from the top: "Obama's inaugural committee has raised more than $41 million to cover events ranging from a Philadelphia-to-Washington train ride to a megastar concert with Beyonce, U2 and Bruce Springsteen to 10 official inaugural balls. Add to that the massive costs of security and transportation — costs absorbed by U.S. taxpayers — and the historic inauguration will produce an equally historic bill." In that same article the total cost is estimated to be 150 million so those who can do the basic subtraction can plainly see that the cost of Obamapalooza to our already bankrupt nation is going to be right around 109 million dollars. http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090117/ap_on_go_pr_wh/inauguration_spending http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/jan/14/obamas-big-day-declared-emergency/ looks like the taxpayers of DC will be taking on a huge portion of the cost! wow!

Vendaval -> RE: $150 million for inauguration (1/18/2009 3:18:43 PM)
Thank you for a real-reasoned approach to the matter, dc. This is an event that will draw record crowds to Washington D.C. and the officials in charge have to be well-planned and well-prepared. The potential outcomes to poor planning would be more expensive and time consuming in the long run. Municipalities that host large events such as political conventions, major sporting competitions and the like gain revenue in terms of dollars spent but also spend a significant amount of money for traffic, safety, police and other support systems. From CNN - "All the parties: The Presidential Inaugural Committee, which is responsible for the events surrounding the actual ceremony, expects that its budget will run about $45 million, but could edge slightly higher, according to Linda Douglass, spokeswoman for the group. Among the events sponsored by the committee are Tuesday's inaugural parade and 10 official inaugural balls. It has also paid the Smithsonian Institution $700,000 for its museums to remain open longer and handle the crowds on Inauguration Day. But the $45 million comes completely from private donations, not the government. The organization is not accepting funds from corporations or lobbyists, said Douglass. In addition to private individual donors, who can give a maximum of $50,000, the committee has been raising money by selling merchandise." http://money.cnn.com/2009/01/16/news/economy/inauguration_costs/index.htm?section=money_topstories quote: ORIGINAL: dcnovice A few thoughts: (a) I'm not sure a first inaugural and a second make for an apt comparison. Indeed, I'm not sure what the analogy for Obama's inaugural would be. You have a change of administration, change of party, and a genuinely historic moment (the first African-American President), not to mention a holiday weekend. So record crowds are expected. It might be more accurate, if possible, to look at per capita spending on various inaugurals. (b) The article notes that the amount earmarked by the federal government is actually $49 million--which, allowing for inflation and the swollen crowds etc., is pretty close to Bush's $42 million. The remaining money would be to help states and transit systems deal with what are expected to be record crowds. (c) Officials are in a no-win situation. If they spend the money they need to deal with the expected crowds, they're accused of waste. If they don't, and chaos results, they'll be accused of poor planning.

Sanity -> RE: $150 million for inauguration (1/18/2009 3:53:59 PM)
Why do I get the feeling that if this were a private party for the Republicans instead of the Democrats you wouldn't be nearly so apologetic, Ven? Especially in economic times like these it can't be easy to sweep the expenditure of 109 million taxpayer dollars under the rug, but I commend your effort. After Obama's countless speeches wherein he tirelessly insisted that "EVERYBODY" is going to have to make sacrifices I would expect a far more quiet and dignified swearing in, and NOT the expenditure of over one hundred million tax dollars just to massage his supersized ego.

Page: << < prev 1 2 [3] 4 5 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875