Inauguration funds: A better use?

[Stephen Joseph 0]

It's pretty shitty to have DC further burdened with these costs, but as per the 40 million I really don't see a problem since it is private money (and being private, we really shouldn't say dick about how its being spent)

[The Czech Republic 0]

Yeah if it's private funding, go nuts with balls. But using the public's money to have a big party with elitist pricks is what I would've expected from John Kerry, not George Bush.

[Big Ol' Smitty 0]

Nuts with balls.

[BX 0]

God, I'm so gonna be arrested on Thursday...

[kkktookmybabyaway 0]

Make sure to take pictures so we can share a laugh at D.C.'s finest beating you down with clubs...

[BX 0]

You know, they can each legally take three swings at me. They'll all take turns beating down the hippie and his Arab punk friend.

[Jobber of the Week 0]

It's pretty shitty to have DC further burdened with these costs, but as per the 40 million I really don't see a problem since it is private money (and being private, we really shouldn't say dick about how its being spent)

All it being private money means is that somebody's been bought. Ticket funds bought through the inauguration committee I could understand, though. But there's no way they made $40 million on that.

[Highland 0]

It's pretty shitty to have DC further burdened with these costs, but as per the 40 million I really don't see a problem since it is private money (and being private, we really shouldn't say dick about how its being spent)

All it being private money means is that somebody's been bought. Ticket funds bought through the inauguration committee I could understand, though. But there's no way they made $40 million on that.

[Vern Gagne 0]

Does Cheney call a kid from the audience to dribble a basketball?

[Highland 0]

That would be gold.

[NoCalMike 0]

I just love the ol' "harmless private donations" argument. I seriously doubt with all my heart that this funding is actually "donations"

[Justice 0]

I just love the ol' "harmless private donations" argument. I seriously doubt with all my heart that this funding is actually "donations"

*Cries a river*

[Positively Kanyon 0]

Just looking at those figures on the Bureau of the Public Debt, Dubya sure does like to spend plenty of money... In the 8 years Clinton was in office, the deficit increased by $1.5 Trillion, where as in the 4 years Dubya has been in office, so far, he has increased the deficit by $2.0 Trillion...

 

Just an interesting observation, not flame bait...

[C Dubya 04 0]

Just looking at those figures on the Bureau of the Public Debt, Dubya sure does like to spend plenty of money... In the 8 years Clinton was in office, the deficit increased by $1.5 Trillion, where as in the 4 years Dubya has been in office, so far, he has increased the deficit by $2.0 Trillion...

 

Just an interesting observation, not flame bait...

Hey don't blame this shit on me.

 

 

Oh, you meant the other Dubya. My bad.

[Stephen Joseph 0]

It's PRIVATE funding. NOT the government's money, so let people spend it how they damn well please.

 

/excepting the dc security issue, of course.

[Guest Deadbolt]

Being a Libertarian at heart spending $40 Million dollars is yet another example of big government spending. Should the $40 Million go towards our "war effort" in Iraq? Absolutely Not, as we have no business even being in Iraq.

 

Should the $40 Million go towards the tsunami relief efforts? NO. I feel for those people, I honestly do, but we have people living in poverty in this country. I feel we need to take care of our own citizen's first. I have no problem with private charity helping out the victims, but the government's spending should be limited to helping out our own citizens.

 

We are forced to pay the government each and every day and our national debt continues to spiral out of control. The only way to remedy this situation would be to send a message to Washington during the 2006 election cycle. One of the first lessons I learned 10 years ago when I first moved out on my own was this: If you have $75 and you want to buy a $100 stereo system, it can't be done without going into debt. You can not spend more than you have available. You would think after 230 years our government would finally get that.

[Justice 0]

Being a Libertarian at heart spending $40 Million dollars is yet another example of big government spending.

But... it's private funding.

[Guest Deadbolt]

Or your lead to believe it is....

[Justice 0]

Or your lead to believe it is....

OMFG! THINGS MAY NOT BE AS THEY SEEM~!

[Dr. Tyler; Captain America 0]

Even if it is private money, there is surely a better place that private money could go, isn't there?

[Your Paragon of Virtue 0]

Deadbolt is the reason why I don't like Libertarians.

[C Dubya 04 0]

Deadbolt is the reason why I don't like Libertarians.

Being pro legalization is the reason I do.

[NoCalMike 0]

Deadbolt is the reason why I don't like Libertarians.

Being pro legalization is the reason I do.

Libertarians aren't the only ones in favor. I know the Greens, while maybe not in full and 100% support legalization of all drugs, are in fact in favor of at no less the decriminilization.

[NoCalMike 0]

I just love the ol' "harmless private donations" argument.  I seriously doubt with all my heart that this funding is actually "donations"

*Cries a river*

I didn't ask you to cry a river for me, rather just pointing out that most of the companies are giving handouts to the Bush administration. I am sure there are a few in the pack just doing it out of kindness, maybe because they have local branches in the area.

[Gert T 0]

Eh, Clinton spent 30 Million himself on his own second inauguration. Frankly, I'd rather see them be a bit more dignified, but I'd hardly attribute this to just Bush. :\

Agreed. No matter who won the cost would be huge. I really think the whole thing is unecessary if it is your second term. Not to take anything away from it, but just like scoring a TD in football, "act like you've been there before."

 

But a lot of this is for the big donors and volunteers.

[The Czech Republic 0]

Deadbolt is the reason why I don't like Libertarians.

Capital-L's are the weird ones, lowercase-l's are the ones who should be steering the GOP back on track.

[cbacon 0]

To celbrate the festivities surrounding the swearing-in Fox News Brigitte Quinn interviewed a Vanity Fair Editor to comment on how exciting the galas are and such. Linked below is the roughly 3 minute video of a Fox News Meltdown.

 

Fox News interview w/ Vanity Fair editor

[NoCalMike 0]

To celbrate the festivities surrounding the swearing-in Fox News Brigitte Quinn interviewed a Vanity Fair Editor to comment on how exciting the galas are and such. Linked below is the roughly 3 minute video of a Fox News Meltdown.

 

Fox News interview w/ Vanity Fair editor

Although the Fox News anchor was clearly ambushed here, it is still quite amusing that she had really no defense for anything said.

[Justice 0]

To celbrate the festivities surrounding the swearing-in Fox News Brigitte Quinn interviewed a Vanity Fair Editor to comment on how exciting the galas are and such. Linked below is the roughly 3 minute video of a Fox News Meltdown.

 

Fox News interview w/ Vanity Fair editor

So... if I go on a cooking show to talk about cooking at the inauguration, that gives me free reign to spout off bullshit at the surprised anchor?

 

Seriously, she just spouted a bunch of "Fashionable Liberal" cliffnotes at the taken off-guard anchor. Talk about an ambush. Did she end up actually talking about the actual gala or did she keep going on?

[cbacon 0]

She did actually. She referenced past presidential inaugerations during war time and how she would have personally planned the ceremony.

 

They were discussing the inaugeration initself, so bringing up the way the vasts amount of money was spent on it is justifiable.