world

Obamas cap inauguration with 10 balls

21 Comments

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

© Copyright 2008/9 Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.

©2022 GPlusMedia Inc.


21 Comments
Login to comment

I have not been paying too much attention to the "festivities". I do not even feel like scanning the article for information.

Just how "festive" is it? And do we really need Beyonce singing live? I don't care if its Obama or Bush. If its all the pomp I am imagining, I am not impressed. I am getting pretty sick of displays of opulence.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Good point. Folks are loosing their jobs, people are dying in Iraq, and still Washington (not just Obama) parties like there is no tomorrow. In keeping with his promises to be responsible, The new President, Mrs. Obama, the kids and the Secret Service should have nipped down to the local Golden Arches for dinner and then stayed in for a movie. None of opulence.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Haven't seen a sitting president dance like this since they asked Reagan about Iran-Contra.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

timeborder,

I was thinking the same thing. Could you imagine how many worthwhile causes they could have helped out with this cash?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Good points all, well observed. The amount of money that has been sunk into this inauguration, apparently the largest for any inauguration, given the economic situation soon to be faced by all Americans, seems to demonstrate nothing less than an amazing degree of arrogance by the financial elite in Washington.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Recession? What recession?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Even at the peak of youthful exuberance, I couldn't manage more than 5 or 6 balls in one night. My record is 7 in 24 hours, but I had three different dance partners.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Will it exceed combined cost of hosting G7 G20 Global Warming meetings?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Innaguration costing more then 4 times more then the one that was previously most expensive. Yep, just like Obama said, change is coming to Washington. You think the government was wasteful under Bush... You ain't seen nothin yet.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

You guys need to get real. History was just made. There was obviously going to be a big celebration. I don't really care about all the balls he got into.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

"You guys need to get real. History was just made. There was obviously going to be a big celebration."

The bitter ones will obviously remain bitter. Note those moaning are more than likely those that over the last 8 years, cheered on Bush Co spunking all the money they borrowed from China on un-winnable wars...

0 ( +0 / -0 )

You guys need to get real. History was just made. There was obviously going to be a big celebration.

History is still being made, America is turning from "the" nation, to just another nation because of bottom to top fiscal mismanagement. One would have thought it would have been good for America, if the incoming president would have shown his fellow Americans a concept that escaped the previous president; sound fiscal management. Lavish parting is one of the first things people should cut out of thier budgets, when on the road to debt recovery.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

History is still being made, America is turning from "the" nation, to just another nation because of bottom to top fiscal mismanagement. One would have thought it would have been good for America, if the incoming president would have shown his fellow Americans a concept that escaped the previous president; sound fiscal management. Lavish parting is one of the first things people should cut out of thier budgets, when on the road to debt recovery.

Oh please. Tell that to the millions of people who travelled to Washington because they "wanted" something like this. Presidents act on what the people want, or are you a Bush supporter who gives the new ex a thumbs up for his abyssmal approval ratings from going against the will of the people. Like I said, this was one of, if not, the greatest accomplishment of any American of African descent in our history. If you didn't expect this, you're out of touch with reality.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

-EurajReturns

Millions of America want a lot of things that they don't really need (refering here to the inauguration balls and not Obama), hence the whole financial crisis. If you think that America can afford lavish partying with the state of it's economy, then I would say you like and others are out of touch with reality. When you are deep in debt, like America and apparently most American's are, is it really prudent to have big parties? What kind of example is the president setting about fiscal management and more particularly fiscal restraint?

As for being a Bush a supporter, I will repeat what I posted in my last post "a concept that escaped the previous president; sound fiscal management." Does that sound like some a Bush supporter would say?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Agreed! About the sound fiscal management.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

This inauguration will cost over $170 million, four times more expensive than the last inauguration. Certainly makes Palin's $150 thousand makeover, for which the left went completely ballistic, look like pocket change in comparison.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Well...it only took the lie mongers on the right a few hours to churn out their first bit of easily de-bunked nonsense and I see it's being repeated here.

Pres. Obama's inauguration did not cost four times more than bush's. The right-wing smear has skewed the numbers.

Here's why using the $160 million number and comparing it with bush's 2005 costs represented a classic apples-and-oranges assessment:For years, the press routinely referred to the cost of presidential inaugurations by calculating how much money was spent on the swearing-in and the social activities surrounding that. The cost of the inauguration's security was virtually never factored into the final tab, as reported by the press. For instance, here's The Washington Post from January 20, 2005, addressing the Bush bash:

The $40 million does not include the cost of a web of security, including everything from 7,000 troops to volunteer police officers from far away, to some of the most sophisticated detection and protection equipment.

For decades, that represented the norm in terms of calculating inauguration costs: Federal dollars spent on security were not part of the commonly referred-to cost. (The cost of Obama's inauguration, minus the security costs? Approximately $45 million.) What's happening this year: The cost of the Obama inauguration and the cost of the security are being combined by some in order to come up with the much larger tab. Then, that number is being compared with the cost of the Bush inauguration in 2005, minus the money spent on security.

In other words, it's the unsubstantiated Obama cost of $160 million (inauguration + security) compared with the Bush cost of 42 million (inauguration, excluding security). Those are two completely different calculations being compared side-by-side, by Fox & Friends, among others, to support the phony claim that Obama's inauguration is $100 million more expensive than Bush's.

Too easy.

Taka

0 ( +0 / -0 )

And since "the right" wants to talk about fiscal responsibility (which, after the last 8 years already buries the irony needle in the red), allow me to bring this to their attention:

From the AP:

President Barack Obama announced on his first day in office Wednesday that he is freezing the pay of the about a hundred White House employees who make over $100,000 a year.

The freeze would hold salaries at their current levels. It is part of a presidential memorandum being issued Wednesday when Obama attends a swearing-in for staff at the White House.

In a statement, Obama said "families are tightening their belts, and so should Washington."

Aides making above $100,00 include the high-profile jobs of White House chief of staff, national security adviser and press secretary. Other aides who work in relative anonymity also fit into that cap, if Obama follows a structure similar to the one george w. bush set up.

"They deserve a government that truly is of, and by, the American people," Obama said.

What a concept.

Taka

0 ( +0 / -0 )

42 Million/45 Million + ~100 million in security costs. No wonder AIG Executives thought it was ok to spend $440,000 of thier bailout money on a corporate getaway. Nero fiddling while Rome burns comes to mind. Partisan rhetoric aside, how can anyone be OK with spending that much on party/inauguration when their country's economy is still heading south? I suppose that since the inauguration was probably paid for from public debt, the party now, pay later(or default) mentality will keep going full steam ahead.

Obama could have instituted real change but saying times are hard and that American's all have to tighten thier belts and control thier spending. He could have backed up his words by reducing the costs of the inauguration.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I agree with the basic point that cutting back on some of this pomp &etc. may have sent a good message. But it's tough to take the hypocrasy of those who didn't (don't?) seem to care how many pointless wars Bush squandered trillions of dollars in. Shame.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

The hypocrisy is most evident and visible when people criticize one person for doing something, and then turn around and do the same thing they criticized the first person for, only do it much more extravagantly then they did. That is hypocrisy. Welcome to change! As in now that the Dems are in control, I'm definitely hoping for a change. Too bad we have to wait 4 years before we can make the change.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Login to leave a comment

Facebook users

Use your Facebook account to login or register with JapanToday. By doing so, you will also receive an email inviting you to receive our news alerts.

Facebook Connect

Login with your JapanToday account

User registration

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites