1 mic + 1 Bible = $40 million dollars

(a model cynically ideal post)

Published on January 13, 2005 By Angloesque In Politics

I dunno about the rest of y'all, but I'm pleased to see how fiscally conservative our government is.

What with parades, fireworks, and other such hoopla, our President's inauguration is going to cost us $40 million American dollars. And apparently, according to the AP wire, that doesn't even cover the security for the event. (I doubt they tabulate and release those line items.) Apparently most of the money is raised by wealthy corporations who finance elections and special interest groups who buy us our presidents, but we can assuage our anger by knowing that the first lady will be buying her own dress. *Phew* At least my tax dollars aren't going to that! At least special interest groups aren't buying her a fur wrap!

Hell, I'm not even a Democrat and I'm pissed off. Look at it from my context: It would take me 1,700 years to finance the inauguration, based on what I'm being paid now. Dunno 'bout the rest of y'all, but I ain't living that long.

You all can rant and complain about gay rights, the separation of church and state, and other sociological issues, but if you look at the facts, our government is blowing $40M on one minute of oath-taking--an important minute, I'll grant, but a minute nonetheless. It may not be our tax dollars--not all of the cost, at least--but it is indicative of the waste that goes on by our elected officials.

(Makes me want to get on my wedding soapbox.....)

Wow, America, you've come so far. I'm so proud.

Comments

whoman69

on Jan 13, 2005

It would take me 1,700 years to finance the inauguration, based on what I'm being paid now. Dunno 'bout the rest of y'all, but I ain't living that long.

Let me beat the righties to it. Get a better job, ya deadbeat liberal.

drmiler

on Jan 13, 2005

1 mic + 1 Bible = $40 million dollars

By: Angloesque
Posted: Thursday, January 13, 2005 on Cynical idealism
Message Board: Politics
I dunno about the rest of y'all, but I'm pleased to see how fiscally conservative our government is.

What with parades, fireworks, and other such hoopla, our President's inauguration is going to cost us $40 million American dollars. And apparently, according to the AP wire, that doesn't even cover the security for the event. (I doubt they tabulate and release those line items.) Apparently most of the money is raised by wealthy corporations who finance elections and special interest groups who buy us our presidents, but we can assuage our anger by knowing that the first lady will be buying her own dress. *Phew*

Before you start whining go look at what Clintons innauguration cost.

Bill Clinton's inauguration president-celebration cost approximately $25 million

And this was in 1992.

Angloesque

on Jan 13, 2005

Before you start whining go look at what Clintons innauguration cost.

An estimated $33M. Not much better, eh?

-A.

Angloesque

on Jan 13, 2005

Get a better job, ya deadbeat liberal.

And you're a sweetheart, too!

Edit: There are so many jobs that pay so much one year out of college, too, I might add.

-A.

cactoblasta

on Jan 13, 2005

Before you start whining go look at what Clintons innauguration cost.'

He did say he's not a democrat... although I'll have to remember that line - it's a really useful comeback to, well, just about anything. It seems nearly as useful as "Your Mum!" Thanks, doc... or maybe I should say "Why don't you look at Clinton first?"

drmiler

on Jan 13, 2005

Reply #3 By: Angloesque - 1/13/2005 10:30:46 PM
Before you start whining go look at what Clintons innauguration cost.

An estimated $33M. Not much better, eh?

Yeah but according to figures that 33M came out of *our* pocket.

sandy2

on Jan 13, 2005

Well... talking about money:

Does anybody else find it very strange that one of the sattelite radio services payed 100 Million dollars a YEAR for Howard Stern to join their group for 10 years? Thats a BILLION dollars over 10 years. For doing a radio show. Crazy if you ask me.

Now, onto the topic:

I don't really think 40 million is that big of a deal. While I strongly propose fiscal responsability, 40 million is the cost (I assume) each year of flying Air Force One. The budget for the presidents protection is $1 Billion dollars a year. Those numbers are large. On top of this, the $40 million is also paid in part by the sales of tickets to the inagural balls, which cost 100 each and I believe say 10000 or more are sold.

Sandy2

drmiler

on Jan 14, 2005

Reply #8 By: Myrrander - 1/14/2005 12:27:31 AM
The next time I fart in public, I'm just going to look around and say "Well, LOOK AT BILL CLINTON." It's going to be the new comeback. As a matter of fact, I'm going to start using it all the time. We can just shorten it to a shout of "BILL" -- a four letter word if ever there was one. "Look, Michael, you seem to have stepped in some poo." "WELL, BILL!" See?

If they throw eggs at the limo again it will be worth every penny.

Get off it Myrrander. It's called comparision. If you don't like it then don't start threads that invite it.

Angloesque

on Jan 14, 2005

Yeah. I'm tempted to delete y'all's comments. I don't much care for partisan bickering--it doesn't matter if we're left or right, this is the way our government spends money. Your stupid soapboxes are pointless when they don't address the topic at hand.

-A.

kingbee

on Jan 14, 2005

Apparently most of the money is raised by wealthy corporations who finance elections and special interest groups who buy us our presidents, but we can assuage our anger by knowing that the first lady will be buying her own dress. *Phew* At least my tax dollars aren't going to that! At least special interest groups aren't buying her a fur wrap!

this is--to me, anyway--the real problem (investor involvement, not laura's fur wrap which we'll wind up paying for one way or another, im sure). while sponsor may not always = investor, the inauguration is hardly going to cure any diseases (more likely spread a few once the alcohol starts flowing) or feed the hungry who cant afford to feed themselves (unlike the attendees)...so any heart warming experienced by contributors will be the reflux kind, resulting from not being accorded access equal to the size of their payment...i mean donation. im sorta surprised it hasnt already become the 'fedex ontime presidential delivery' or the 'staples oval office stock-up celebration'--or that i havent hadda hear about how halliburton is the only entity in the whole world capable of handling inauguration logistics.

Angloesque

on Jan 14, 2005

staples oval office celebration

Wow, you've taken my cynicism one step further. Sometimes I don't know that's possible. Nice going.

Yeah. Special interests are the bane of a democracy.

-A.

kingbee

on Jan 14, 2005

It seems nearly as useful as "Your Mum!" Thanks, doc... or maybe I should say "Why don't you look at Clinton first?

hmmm...you almost got it.

just combine the two and you have the untoppable riposte: 'oh yeah? well bill clinton's mom!'

dabe

on Jan 14, 2005

I agree with the author's sentiment, regardless of whoever gets to pay that money, and whomever receives it. Forty million bucks spent on what is essentially a few minutes of taking an oath is downright decadent. The parties that follow are normal, but again that kind of money spent is decadent. The sheer hypocrisy it displays is dismaying. The donors bought their way in, and they expect something in return. That's a given. And Bush is just the guy to give it to 'em. He certainly has a history of that, with environmental issues, health care, pharmaceutical paybacks, etc. They all get their paybacks. Otherwise, they wouldn't pay the tabs.

A quid pro quo government is a dangerous and undemocratic government. Scary.

Angloesque

on Jan 14, 2005

the untoppable riposte: 'oh yeah? well bill clinton's mom!'

Yeah, LMAO at that. V. good.

decadent

Like a nice chocolate souffle, one with an exhorbitant price tag that you only eat two bites of anyway when the money could better have been spent on, well, pretty much anything.

They all get their paybacks. Otherwise, they wouldn't pay the tabs.

I wonder if it's cynicism or realism that makes me agree with you. Thanks for your comment.

-A, apparently a "deadbeat liberal."

BlueDev

on Jan 14, 2005

Uh-oh, I am going to agree with a deadbeat liberal! It is all over now.

This just plain pisses me off. What is the purpose? Oh, right. The pomp and ceremony of it are somehow going to heal the wounds that were ripped open during the election. I don't care who is getting sworn in, it is just wasteful. Sure, for a country like the US, 40 million ain't no big deal (though it is 5 million more than President Bush initially thought the US should provide for tsunami aid - hmm, perhaps I too am becoming cynical?). But think about all that could be done with 40 million dollars if used approriately and with prudence. It could save a lot of lives.

Go us.

Welcome Guest! Please take the time to register with us.
There are many great features available to you once you register, including:

Richer content, access to many features that are disabled for guests like commenting on the forums.
Access to a great community, with a massive database of many, many areas of interest.
Access to contests & subscription offers like exclusive emails.
It's simple, and FREE!