Posted on 01/19/2009 5:15:57 AM PST by Michael Eden
Newsmax has a story entitled, "Obama Inaugural Most Expensive In History," noting that:
Despite the recession, Barack Obama’s inauguration will be the most expensive ever and could approach $160 million — nearly four times what George Bush’s inauguration cost four years ago.Nearly four times as much as Bush's inauguration - and this in spite of one of the worst recessions in U.S. history.
The wasteful extravagance, of course, is an issue in and of itself. When the hell are politicians going to learn not to throw away other peoples' money on frivolous nonsense? Don't we have anything better to spend that kind of money on? But as much of an issue as Obama's gold-plated inauguration is, it pales in comparison to the larger - and continuously ongoing - story of the platinum-plated blatant liberal hypocrisy.
The Associated Press tacitly acknowledges the hypocrisy of this pathetic party in it's own story:
WASHINGTON – Unemployment is up. The stock market is down. Let's party.Only four years ago, liberals dripped with self-righteous indignant venom over the Bush inaugural - you know, the one that cost ONE-FOURTH AS MUCH as their guy's. John Tierney of the New York Times criticized Bush for throwing a lavish inauguration celebration against the backdrop of unsettling world events. How dare he celebrate when American troops were at war and children were going hungry in Asia? The liberal American Progress entitled its piece on the Bush inaugural "Lifestyles of the Rich and Heartless," and vindictively compared Bush's ball to what FDR spent in 1945. Paul Harri, writing for the Guardian in New York, entitled his piece, "Bush 'the king' blows $50m on coronation: President's lavish inauguration is 'obscene' when US troops are dying in Iraq war, say critics." Harri decried the Bush inauguration as "an unashamed celebration of red America's victory over blue America." A blogger writing on the Democratic Underground said in his creative title that "Bush told us to kiss his ASS regarding $40 mil 2004 inauguration." And Eric Boehlert of Salon plaintively whined that "Bush's overblown celebration" wasn't getting still more criticism.The price tag for President-elect Barack Obama's inauguration gala is expected to break records, with some estimates reaching as high as $150 million. Despite the bleak economy, however, Democrats who called on President George W. Bush to be frugal four years ago are issuing no such demands now that an inaugural weekend of rock concerts and star-studded parties has begun.
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 2005, Reps. Anthony Weiner, D-N.Y., and Jim McDermott, D-Wash., asked Bush to show a little less pomp and be a little more circumspect at his party.
Are we going to hear this liberal lecture now from liberals now that THEY run everything? U.S. Troops are still in the field, and dad burn it, those pesky children are still as hungry as ever, aren't they? Frankly, they should be screaming FOUR TIMES LOUDER, given the cost of the Bush inaugural relative to Obama's. I doubt it very much. Liberals generally lack the ability to think fairly - especially if they happen to wear the title "journalist."
Are we going to hear about things like the fact that Citibank - which surprise, surprise, is getting another massive government bailout - turns out to be the largest donor to Obama's inauguration? Are we going to hear the screeds about Obama being in bed with corporate interests feeding from the trough of the government? You know we won't. We went through the entire campaign hearing the Obama myth - duly reported as "fact" by a sycophantic media - that Obama raised most of his massive funding from small donors. It was never true. But the media was too busy digging through every scrap of Sarah Palin's garbage in Wasila, Alaska to take notice.
Should it matter that Bush raised all the funds necessary to pay for his $40 million (or $50 million, depending on who you ask) ball from private donors, whereas Obama is about to stick the taxpayer with a $125 million bill? He's only raised $35 million of the $160 million bill, according to the bottom of that same Newsmax story. Shouldn't Obama be decried for his unprincipled chutzpah? This guy has the largest campaign war chest in history, but he won't tap into it to pay all the rock bands for his own party? You won't hear about that either. Not from the mainstream media.
As it is, President Bush has declared a state of emergency to free up government money to pay for Obama's mother of all "overblown" and "unashamed celebrations." Apparently ever willing to play the role of scapegoat for vicious liberals, George Bush yet again willingly dons the "kick me" sign for them: you KNOW one day soon Obama will include the very millions that Bush freed up for Obama's own inaugural in his scathing criticism of Bush's massive deficit.
Let it be known that to be a liberal is to be a self-righteous hypocrite of massive proportions. Galling, blatant, mind-blowing hypocrisy - more than any other trait - is the quintessential defining characteristic of liberalism.
Unemployment is up. The stock market is down. Let’s party. A democrats dream come true.
Aside from the fact I cannot fathom how one could spend $160M on a “party”, the cost to taxpayers will be far greater than $160M, perhaps topping $1B. There are somethings like 45,000 security personnel deployed in DC this week.
Can we say stereotype?
“As it is, President Bush has declared a state of emergency to free up government money to pay for Obama’s mother of all “overblown” and “unashamed celebrations.” Apparently ever willing to play the role of scapegoat for vicious liberals, George Bush yet again willingly dons the “kick me” sign for them: you KNOW one day soon Obama will include the very millions that Bush freed up for Obama’s own inaugural in his scathing criticism of Bush’s massive deficit.”
This makes me the angriest.
Another Freeper said “you know he would be blamed if he didn’t and it got crazy”. Well too damn bad! Let it get too crazy and let OBAMA CALL HIS MASSES DOWN.
Why ONCE AGAIN should the Republicans be seen as the hated responsible adults while the Democrats are the cool uncles that everybody loves. I’m getting beyond sick of this and feel more helpless than ever.
Did George Bush call John McCain and ask how he gets so much love from the media and John gave him the advice to let the Dems play Monkey in the Middle with him and they will LOVE him? It ain’t working.
All we can do is grind our teeth in frustration! Once the pomp and circumstance is over and the 0 has to actually take responsibility, things will get interesting.
Only a Dem can spend $160M on a national celebration and FORGET THE FIREWORKS!!!
To be fair, the inauguration in 2005 cost $157 million, counting security costs and transportation.
To be fair, you should provide some documentation to substantiate your $157M claim. If, as I suspect, you can’t do this, then, to be fair, you should publicly admit that you are just one more lying liberal!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.