Too lavish an inauguration?
January 20, 2009 12:56 AM   Subscribe

The inauguration may come with a record price tag and the lavish festivities are drawing fire. Some are even calling it obscene. A list of excesses needs very little comment to some. The money sure could go to a lot of other things.
posted by codswallop (32 comments total)

This post was deleted for the following reason: The intent of this post to editorialize via deception. Either this post belongs in 2005 or you need to be more honest about what you are doing. -- vacapinta



 
I can't wait for Obama to invent the time machine so we can go back to 2005 and stop this shit before it starts.
posted by dhammond at 12:59 AM on January 20, 2009


I can't wait for Obama to invent the time machine so we can go back to 2005 and stop this shit before it starts.

Yes, we can. With enough hope.
posted by codswallop at 1:00 AM on January 20, 2009


The money sure could go to a lot of other things.

Sure it could. But I don't know, can't we celebrate some seriously huge history being made? Especially as the bulk of the expense is coming from donations?

Damn, let's live a little today. Jeez.
posted by Marisa Stole the Precious Thing at 1:01 AM on January 20, 2009


Also, you do know your "drawing fire" link is to a 2005 story about Bush, right?
posted by Marisa Stole the Precious Thing at 1:02 AM on January 20, 2009


Damn, let's live a little today. Jeez.

Yeah, I mean it's Obama. Let's just relax. I mean if Bush was doing it, well then we could really get angry. But this is history. Let's celebrate. Pass me another billion dollar truffle.
posted by Avenger50 at 1:02 AM on January 20, 2009


Wait, now I'm thoroughly confused. Why is this all about Bush?
posted by Marisa Stole the Precious Thing at 1:04 AM on January 20, 2009


Also, you do know your "drawing fire" link is to a 2005 story about Bush, right?

All five links are to four-year-old news stories. This is a stunt post.
posted by grouse at 1:05 AM on January 20, 2009


I mean if Bush was doing it, well then we could really get angry. But this is history. Let's celebrate.

Yes, let's. How much is it costing you?
posted by Marisa Stole the Precious Thing at 1:05 AM on January 20, 2009


All five links are to four-year-old news stories. This is a stunt post.

I see that now. That's what I got for commenting as I read.
posted by Marisa Stole the Precious Thing at 1:06 AM on January 20, 2009 [1 favorite]


Ah . . . the squeals from the concern trolls and righties are as sweet as honey on my tongue. Keep squealing, piggies.

Media Matters debunkation, fwiw.
posted by troy at 1:12 AM on January 20, 2009 [3 favorites]


Ah . . . the squeals from the concern trolls and righties are as sweet as honey on my tongue. Keep squealing, piggies.

Mm mm! You tell 'em troy. I too can taste the troll pig concern honey on my tongue, so sweet.
posted by Avenger50 at 1:18 AM on January 20, 2009


The Media Matters refutation isn't particularly persuasive or satisfying. They're whining that the media didn't count the ancillary costs of Bush's affair, which would (presumably) bring it up to par with Obama's. That just means they're BOTH profligate.

Granted, they're not really concerned about the cost per se -- they're just trying to pre-empt the wingers from fabricating a "irresponsible" meme for Obama.


/For the record, I don't really care, as long as the vast bulk of the money is from donations. Indeed, a little celebration is entirely appropriate -- even a little excess celebration. And I find the massive number of people converging on the city oddly comforting.
posted by RavinDave at 1:27 AM on January 20, 2009


Serioously, what was point of this?

"People complained in 2005 about the cost of Bush's inauguration, but where are those people NOW, huh?"

Is that it? What I remember about Bush's inauguration is being pissed because Bush was being inaugurated. Not how much it was costing his wealthy donors.

I realize this day is like a kick in the nuts to the neo-cons, but seriously, why not post some shit about ACORN or something equally substantial by comparison?
posted by Marisa Stole the Precious Thing at 1:34 AM on January 20, 2009


Media Matters debunkation, fwiw.

So... this is how it's gonna be, is it? I mean, every time this man takes a shit it's going to be over-scrutinized and spun and plain lied about. Those chain e-mails about how Clinton personally murdered 87 people or whatever from way back when are going to seem like rational political discourse. I guess I expected it, but goddamn, he's not even actually President yet. Not that the fundamentalist giant-puppet-wavers and drum-circle-dancers of the Left who expected him to dismantle the World Bank and fucking free Mumia on his first day in office are much better. If I have to hear about how Obama has "betrayed" us over FISA or Rick Warren or whatever else once more, I'll scream. He's not Christ, he's a very charismatic and articulate center-left pro-business Democrat who just seems like Christ compared to the last 8 years of moronic bible-beating jingoistic cryptofascism fronted by a subliterate spokesmodel. I like him as much as the next guy, if not more, and even donated a considerable amount to his campaign, but... I guess what I'm saying is can't we wait until he's at least been President for a couple weeks before we start having to hear this kind of crap?
posted by DecemberBoy at 1:37 AM on January 20, 2009 [3 favorites]


Whatever, it's still less than it cost to make Waterworld.
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 1:39 AM on January 20, 2009


I'm saying is can't we wait until he's at least been President for a couple weeks before we start having to hear this kind of crap?

Are you new here? It starts hot and early, always. Sometimes the very second things happen. Don't you love it? Think inaugurations are bad, you should see funerals around here. Mu ha.
posted by Avenger50 at 1:43 AM on January 20, 2009


I can't work out whether the "hypocracy" tag is a mis-spelling or a witty comment.
posted by robcorr at 1:46 AM on January 20, 2009


No doubt this is being paid for by donations from those Auto Factory workers who make $71 an hour.

You know, it's kind of disgusting how the media just lets these little lies flow through it with no checking at all. This inauguration costs $160 million including security. Other inaugurations cost $40 million not including security. Those are not comparable numbers, and yet, people just lie lie lie about it.

It's disgusting.
posted by delmoi at 1:47 AM on January 20, 2009


I'm a bit put off that he's letting Roberts administer the oath. I'd prefer to see Ginsburg do it -- keep the wingers sputtering vitriol for weeks.
posted by RavinDave at 1:50 AM on January 20, 2009


Chief Justice always administers the oath.
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 2:04 AM on January 20, 2009


By the way, I don't actually remember anyone complaining about the cost of bush's re-inauguration in '05. All I remember is that they invited and then un-invited Kid Rock to perform. I mean clearly people did, but it wasn't even as big of a deal as people talking about Obama's inauguration today.

But either way, this is just about $80 per attendee, including security. Frankly that's damn cheap. Did two million people show up to Bush's inauguration? I don't think so.
posted by delmoi at 2:05 AM on January 20, 2009


The inauguration may come with a HORNY price FART and the lavish BATHROOMS are drawing POOP. Some are even calling it STUPID. A list of BUTTS needs very little comment to some. The FLAME-THROWERS sure could go to a lot of other EXPLODING DOODIES.
posted by Sticherbeast at 2:09 AM on January 20, 2009 [1 favorite]


Bush's second ignaugration cost 140 million.

Summary: MSNBC's Tamron Hall stated that "the inauguration festivities" for President-elect Barack Obama are "estimated to reach as high as $150 million," while "[i]n 2004, to note, the inauguration of George W. Bush cost roughly $40 million." But the $40 million figure that Hall cited for Bush's second inauguration reportedly does not include security and transportation costs incurred by the federal government and the District of Columbia; these costs are included in the $150 million estimate that the media are reporting for the Obama inauguration.

http://mediamatters.org/items/200901180003
posted by jfrancis at 2:12 AM on January 20, 2009


@Brandon Blatcher

There is no such requirement. LBJ was sworn in by a District Judge.
posted by RavinDave at 2:13 AM on January 20, 2009


Stunt posts are like stunt wine.
posted by twoleftfeet at 2:14 AM on January 20, 2009


Hypocracy?

Did you just coin a new word AND made a post that should have been posted in 2005 to boot?
posted by lucia__is__dada at 2:22 AM on January 20, 2009


There is no such requirement. LBJ was sworn in by a District Judge.

Learning something new everydady!
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 2:37 AM on January 20, 2009


then again, maybe not.
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 2:37 AM on January 20, 2009


Stop! Hammer time!
posted by bwg at 2:38 AM on January 20, 2009


MeFites are sure slow in the morning. :)
posted by rokusan at 2:42 AM on January 20, 2009


It's quite a circus - and good for the country in a roundabout way. We've made the front pages of all the world's papers today.
posted by Phanx at 2:44 AM on January 20, 2009


PRESIDENTIAL INAUGURATION is an anagram of INDULGE IN A TRUE ASPIRATION

The letters don't lie!
posted by twoleftfeet at 2:50 AM on January 20, 2009


« Older Be fruitful and iterate.   |   SPOON JAR! JAR SPOON! Newer »


This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments