I’m opposed to pomp and ceremony on a purely non-partisan basis. I’m with both Liberal and Diogenes (and how often do you hear that?). The President is a bureaucrat, not a monarch. Let’s get back to treating him like one.
(a) Note that the OP wasn’t pitting the idea of there being an inaugural, but rather the fact taht this year, FOR THE FIRST TIME, the federal government is asking DC to help pay for it, and suggesting that they use funds EARMARKED FOR ANTI-TERRORISM!
Whether the inauguration in general deserves pitting is another question entirely, so I’ll just point out:
(b) Bill Clinton’s two inaugurals, just to use Mr Moto’s example, did not take place during a war, nor did they take place shortly after the largest natural disaster in living memory
Yeah, and how much did JFK’s funeral cost back in 1963 (inflation adjusted) when we could have just put him into the ground and been done with it?
The idea is to have a ceremony that befits a head of state, and virtually every head of state has had one. You’re just hating because it’s Bush. Just admit it.
Give me a break. I really hate to do this anymore, but it’s true. Clinton’s Inauguration #2 was about as expensive as Bush’s. Most of the people enjoy the pomp and pagentry, which is why it continues.
Also, I’ve seen estimates on public funding between $2.8 and $28 million (with the rest covered by private donors), so If I were you I’d take any number that you see with a big grain of salt.
For the record, I used to do the same bitching about Clinton’s inaugurals. It’s a longstanding peeve of mine that these things are long and boring and expensive and the religiosity of the events rubs me the wrong way as well.
That’s exactly what we should have done.
Screw that. He’s a civil servant. He deserves no more pomp and circumstance than the guy who delivers my mail. We’re supposed to be egalitarians, after all.
And I bitched about Clinton’s inaugurals too.
See above. I have long been an opponent of these things.
That’s $28 million that would be better spent on the familes of the troops in Iraq.
Well fine then, Diogenes. Bitch about inaugurations in general, if you so choose.
That’s not what you’re doing in this thread, however, and it’s disingenuous for you to suggest otherwise.
This president is behaving particularly shamefully.
And you’re not actually responding to the point of this thread, which is not a rant about the inauguration in general (that’s a rant for a different thread) but about a very specific issue.
I did reply to that issue in my first post to the thread.
Bit of a hijack, but man…pity the poor marching bands.
If you’re in a marching band performing at the inauguration, you have to:
[ul]
[li]First, go to the Pentagon…yes, the freakin’ Pentagon…in the early morning where you will pass through a metal detector while bomb-sniffing dogs search your bus.[/li][li]Then, get driven from the Pentagon to the Washington Mall, where you will spend most of the day in a tent under guard.[/li][li]If you have to go potty during this time, you will be escorted to and from the bathroom by security personnel.[/li][li]Finally, march in front of the President…except you can’t make any sudden movements or even make eye contact with the Pres while you pass in front of him.[/li][/ul]
I gotta admit, if the pomp and circumstance is this much trouble then a quiet, dignified ceremony in the Rose Garden is looking better and better.
Nope. The idea is to have a ceremony that befits a President, not a King.
What? Screw you. I’d tell Mr. Ketchup to keep that shit simple too. Any other assumptions you need dispelled?
I just call them like I see them.
I’ll willingly concede that some (not all, surely) posters here would decry the extravagance of a Kerry inauguration. However, I don’t think for a second you’d here that complaint echoed by the general media.
I don’t recall any outcry over the Clinton inaugurals, nor did I complain myself.
Do you recall the organizers of Clinton’s inaugural trying to stiff Washington D.C. on the bill? That being, you know, what the OP was complaining about.
Damn, sounds almost exactly like the last of the Russian Tsars, right before the revolution.
The idea is to have a head of state that befits the ceremony.
That’s fucked up about eye contact. Are they afraid bin Laden has a Kryptonian on the payroll who’ll burn down the President with heat vision? Has General Zod escaped the Phantom Zone?
Right :rolleyes:
Ooh, that’s big of you!
I’m sure they would. If Kerry won, they’d switch sides almost as quickly as the election results were announced. Oh, wait, we’ve got that whole “liberal media” thing going on, right? Oh, and Jews control the banking and entertainment industries, too…
Stick it, Moto.
Sam
Sorry. My French is nonexistent.
Robin
We’re constantly told these political events are a windfall for the host city (hotels, restaurants, tax receipts, etc.). I don’t recall the mayors of Boston or NYC complaining about local expenditures during this summer’s conventions (BS fests)…quite the opposite in fact.