Did You Know...

   

$150,000,000: “[Y]ou don’t want it to look like a schlock affair”

Share
By Michelle Malkin  •  January 14, 2009 11:29 PM

The Obamafest on Jan. 20 will be the most expensive inauguration in American history.

Snort-worthy line of the night:

President Barack Obama’s inauguration next week is set to be the most expensive ever, predicted to reach over $150m (£102m). This dwarfs the $42.3m spent on George Bush’s inauguration in 2005 and the $33m spent on Bill Clinton’s in 1993.

Part of the spending includes emergency funding announced by the White House on Tuesday to help with the soaring costs. Most of this new federal funding will be to deal with the huge influx of people, estimated 1.5 million to 2 million.

A White House statement said that President Bush “declared an emergency exists in the District of Columbia”.

If there is snow, the costs will grow higher. The long-term forecast suggests there is a chance of snow on Sunday and again on the day of inauguration, on Tuesday.

Carole Florman, spokeswoman for the joint congressional committee on inaugural ceremonies, told the New York Daily News, which estimated the cost at $160m: “We’re always very budget conscious. But we’re sending a message to the entire world about our peaceful transition of power, and you don’t want it to look like a schlock affair. It needs to be appropriate to the magnitude of events that it is.

(link)

A little late for schlock avoidance, don’t you think?

Let me repeat what I said in my November 28, 2008 post, “Where are all the anti-Inauguration activists now?”

All of which reminded me of the unhinged Left’s protests in late 2004 before the Bush inaugural. He was bashed for continuing the American tradition in a time of war and for holding parties so soon after the southeast Asian tsunami disaster.

Remember?

Critics are calling on U.S. President George W Bush to scale back the glittering multimillion dollar parties planned this week in honor of his second-term inauguration, saying lavish festivities are unseemly at a time of war.

Bush is to be sworn in Thursday and feted with four days of pomp and party-going at a price tag of about $40 million.

An unprecedented military presence and other security measures will add another $100 million to the cost, to pay for everything from police overtime wages to reviewing stands stretching from the U.S. Capitol building to the White House.

But critics insist that with U.S. troops dying daily in Iraq, the tone surrounding this year’s inaugural celebration should be more modest.

“I would have hoped they would have followed the traditions of President Wilson and President Roosevelt, who at a time of war had a very muted celebration,” said Democratic Representative Robert Menendez, speaking on CNN.

“I think when young men and women are dying we should think about the reality of how we conduct ourselves here at home.”

His comments echoed those of Democratic Representative Anthony Weiner, who, in a letter to Bush, urged the president to redirect some of the $40 million “towards a use more fitting to these somber times — bonuses or equipment for our troops.”

Inaugural committee officials however, point out that the theme of the inaugural fete — “Celebrating Freedom, Honoring Service” — already honors the U.S. military, as well as the president’s role as commander-in-chief.

Bush told reporters last week he sees no problem with either how the money is raised or how it is spent, noting that it has all been raised with private donations.

“There’s no taxpayer money involved in this,” the president said, brushing aside calls that some of the funds be channeled to South Asia for tsunami relief.

“A lot of the people who are coming here to the inauguration have given” to tsunami victims, Bush said.

“I think it’s important to celebrate a peaceful transfer of power. I’m looking forward to the celebration,” he told reporters.

In fact, let me reprint Democrat Rep. Weiner’s entire protest letter from January 11, 2005:

01.11.05

REP. WEINER’S LETTER TO PRESIDENT BUSH ASKING THAT INAUGURAL FUNDS BE USED FOR THE TROOPS

President George W. Bush
The White House
1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW
Washington, D.C. 20500

Dear Mr. President:

The festivities surrounding your inauguration later this month are slated to cost $40 million – making this the most expensive inauguration in history. I urge you to re-direct those funds towards a use more fitting to these sober times – bonuses or equipment for our troops.

Precedent suggests that inaugural festivities should be muted – if not cancelled – in wartime. In the midst of World War II, President Roosevelt held his 1945 inaugural at the White House, making a short speech and serving guests cold chicken salad and plain pound cake. During World War I, President Wilson did not have any parties at his 1917 inaugural, saying that such festivities would be undignified.

Furthermore, $40 million could provide substantial support for our troops overseas. For example, we could buy armor for 690 unarmored humvees or provide a $290 bonus for each member of the armed services station in Iraq.

Please re-direct all the funds raised for the inauguration to our brave men and women in uniform.

With an estimated 1.5 million people expected to descend on Washington for the Obama festivities and a federal tax bill alone of at least $50 million, next January’s inauguration will dwarf Bush’s inaugural events and expenses. We are still at war. And, as the Democrats remind us, economic times are tough and average Americans are hurting.

Will Democrat Rep. Weiner demand that Obama go the “cold chicken salad and plain pound cake” route and redirect all the money Obama’s Chicago team is raising to the troops, too? Or has he stopped caring about the brave men and women he exploited in 2005 to score Bush-bashing points with the nutroots?

Will billionaire Mark Cuban, who demanded that Bush donate his inauguration funds to Indonesian tsunami victims, call on Obama to fork over the inaugural funds to victims of the Mumbai terrorist bombings or to distressed American homeowners under water on their mortgages?

Where are all the anti-Inauguration critics now?

Just wondering.

Still wondering…

blog comments powered by Disqus
Posted in: Double standards

Who gets Absolute Moral Authority?

July 20, 2016 07:33 AM by Michelle Malkin

Beyonce’s beehive of bombastic buffoons

April 27, 2016 09:18 AM by Michelle Malkin

Dear Mr. Colbert: Me so stupid. You so funny!

April 1, 2014 01:36 PM by Michelle Malkin

Tamera Mowry is not alone

January 15, 2014 09:43 AM by Michelle Malkin

Screen shot 2014-01-15 at 9.41.17 AM


Categories: Double standards, Politics

Follow me on Twitter Follow me on Facebook