Aneurysm

If I hear one more Democrat say this inauguration is costing too much, I am going to blow a gasket. Eight years after Bill Clinton’s 33 million dollar inaugural, 40 million is apparently too much.

Most annoying is the association between the tsunami, or this idiot’s association of the inauguration expense with the fallacy of unarmored vehicles in Iraq. Private donors are paying for the inauguration, but this is nothing new- Democrats are always quick to tel people how to spend their money.

But then again, Democrats are not about making sense. They are about making noise. It makes them feel better, which, I guess is good. They can keep behaving like fools, and we will keep running the government. I guess I can put up with it after all.






5 replies
  1. 1
    Ben says:

    Listened to Rush Limbaugh’s little one minute commercial on the drive home from work earlier this week. There was a convention for “furries” fans of anthroporphic animals going down at a local hotel, and a friend of mine was attending. As most conventions of this sort are, its an excuse to party.

    While Rush apparently thinks furry fandom is weird, he was pretty non-judgemental about the con. He did quote one attendee who said, “just because its weird does not mean it is not normal.”

    But then he went into a riff about what with the war, and the tsunami relief, shouldn’t the left be complaining about the convention, as well as inaugeration? I mean if partying because a Republican is re-elected is bad, why is partying while dressed as Wiley Coyote so much better and allowable?

  2. 2
    CadillaqJaq says:

    While living in California during the 80s and most of the 90s, I marveled at the Dem controlled state legislature’s term “Uncollected Revenues.”

    Nope, not taxes yet to be paid, “Uncollected Revenues” were a worker’s take home pay. Go figure. Remember, it’s not really our money, it’s theirs.

  3. 3
    Dodd says:

    Clinton’s 1997 inaugural actually cost US$42 million. Adjusted for inflation, they spent 49 1/2 million present day dollars – and had 1/3 more balls (12 v. 9).

  4. 4
    Jim says:

    Maybe some are more concerned w/ what that money is buying? Power, votes, lobbying etc. Many on the right hate being portrayed as owned by big business. Doesn’t this, and yes what Clinton did in his time was as well, show some impropriety?
    The fact that they are making D.C. pay for the added security out of their Homeland Security funds or wherever DC can find it, seems a bit odd. Either way, if a company, ceo, or gazillionaire wants to spend it, it technically goes into the economy, so its not all bad. Roughly 40 million into many many pockets can’t be all bad.

  5. 5

    Context matters

    Though I’ve been doing my damnedest to avoid any involvement whatsoever in the ultimately useless debate over the size and scope of President Bush’s inaugural festivities, this post by John Cole really does seem to require some sort of response:

    I…

Trackbacks & Pingbacks

  1. Context matters

    Though I’ve been doing my damnedest to avoid any involvement whatsoever in the ultimately useless debate over the size and scope of President Bush’s inaugural festivities, this post by John Cole really does seem to require some sort of response:

    I…

Comments are closed.