When Bush had his second inauguration in 2005 at a cost of 42 million it was said by the left to be too expensive. Obama's is estimated to cost 150 million. Yes, that's change we can believe in when it comes to how much money is appropriate to spend for an inauguration.
Now we at Ulster Politics wish Barack Obama the best and we recognize this this is a historic moment in history, but the hypocrisy of how the media is handling the economy vs inaguration expense can not be dismissed.
Vanity Fair called the 2005 Bush inauguration: "Lifestyles of the Rich and Selfish" - and that was at 42 million.... a far cry from Obama's 150 million
What was the economy like four years ago? Four years ago, there was no recession, and the economy was in a whole lot better shape than it is now. However at the time, the tsunami in the Indian Ocean had just happened and there was the ongoing war in Iraq.
Now we at Ulster Politics wish Barack Obama the best and we recognize this this is a historic moment in history, but the hypocrisy of how the media is handling the economy vs inaguration expense can not be dismissed.
Vanity Fair called the 2005 Bush inauguration: "Lifestyles of the Rich and Selfish" - and that was at 42 million.... a far cry from Obama's 150 million
What was the economy like four years ago? Four years ago, there was no recession, and the economy was in a whole lot better shape than it is now. However at the time, the tsunami in the Indian Ocean had just happened and there was the ongoing war in Iraq.
Typically the overt criticism of an inauguration is unusual, but not for Republican George Bush. A 2005 a Washington Post poll found that a majority of Americans would have preferred a smaller, more subdued event.
Our own New York Congressman said "Precedent suggests that inaugural festivities should be muted - if not canceled - in wartime. That quote was made by " New York Democrat Representative Anthony Weiner in a letter to President Bush
A 2005 Washington Post-ABC News poll found that two-thirds of Americans think inaugural festivities should be scaled back. That includes half of those who voted for President Bush and 80% of John Kerry’s supporters.
In 2009 are facing the worst economic times that most people have seen in their life time. We are in a recession. Why isn’t anyone saying anything about the Obama’s 150 million dollar inauguration? People are unemployed, have lost their life savings and businesses have gone out of business. Where are the polls now?
Obama's inauguration is set to be the most expensive ever, predicted to reach over $150 million dollars. This dwarfs the $42.3m spent on George Bush's inauguration in 2005 and the $33m spent on Bill Clinton's in 1993.
And where are all of the polls today, asking whether Americans think inaugural festivities should be scaled back? Where are the claims of the Obama's being "Lifestyles of the Rich and Selfish"??
The staff at Ulster Politics thinks it's inaugural hypocrisy.
Posts
8 comments:
Even the figures reported in various venues for the costs of the Inauguration are uncertain. According to an ABC News report:
"The country is in the middle of the worst economic downturn since the Great Depression, which isn't stopping rich donors and the government from spending $170 million, or more, on the inauguration of Barack Obama."
Barack Obama is not only a hypocrite, his Presidency began falling apart before he was even inaugurated. Blagojevich. Richardson. Conflicts with his supporters in the homosexual community over Rev. Warren. Interference in the Gov. Paterson's decision as to whom to name to Hillary's Senate seat. Admission that he cannot keep his campaign promises vis-a-vis the economy. Displeasure of the Extreme Left over keeping Secretary of Defense Gates on the job.
Many have commented on Barack Obama's severe lack of experience. Now we are seeing just what that deficit is bringing our country.
Barack Obama is on track to be the greatest presidential failure in American history. He has time to change that course. The question is, does he have the ability to do so.
Only time will tell.
There is no denying how historic it is that our country has elected its first African-American President. Although, I did not vote for Barack Obama and am very concerned about some of the policies he is pushing, it is warming to see the happiness of those for whom this moment means so much.
However, there is something unbecoming about the extravagance of it all. As I watch all of this and remember the stage sets for the Democrat Convention when Pres. Obama received the nod for the Democrats and also on election night, the one thing that seems to be missing from it all is a sense of humility.
Perhaps this can all be chalked up to exuberance. But, being a cynic I more strongly suspect this is part of a marketing plan to make Pres. Obama a larger then life figure and begin his campaign for re-election immediately.
I like your article as it makes us ponder. I wish good will and success for our President, as our Country depends on him.
President Bush, IMHO, has a cult following of haters and fans. I feel the poor economy started tanking when they couldn't print any more anti-bush stickers and signs. Will President Obama sail boost media sales as much as President Bush has? My friends, that is a recession.
Our founding fathers were honest enough or had the wisdom to realize that individually we are smart, but collectively, we make our choices influenced by rummors and the media. I really didn't like President Obama's message of change, as it was more fluff than stuff. President Obama is being compared to Abraham Lincoln and FDR. Now Democrates are starting to lower the bar of expectation as they hold majority of power. I think it is unfair to be placed in history before one has even started.
In many ways these blogs remind me of early America, where people wrote under aliases to argue in words their thoughs and feelings in the local newspapers. To be blunt, it's popular to be a Democrate. It's unfortunate that its popular to hate President Bush. I am dishearten to feel labled as person on the wrong side of history. In the end, things will change, but will remain the same.
Dont forget that Hinchey is on the appropriations committee so he'll see that Dems get all the money and we get some too - just to keep him in office.
lets face it - you dont wish him the best
Imre,
Let's see, when Bush was in charge, you were part of a 30% minority who still supported him. Now with Obama, you are part of a 20% minority of people who have an unfavorable view of him. Those are the views of Americans, not the media. To suggest that people only arrive at an opinion based on the media and they do not form their own opinions or even live experiences that form opinions, is presumptuous. In fact, it is terribly insulting.
Do you see a trend? Your views, which of course you are entitled to, are being held by fewer Americans everyday. Your opinions are becoming more and more that of the fringe, even radical right. Is it time for you to hole up in a shack in the woods? You are outdated and obsolete.
How about this media fact: Biden's wife slips and says her husband had a choice, VP or SoS. Where is the media outrage, are we to believe Biden was equally qualified for both positions? The single best choice in all of the USA for each post. There is a reason 80% of Americans are favorable of Obama right now. The media only make positive statements. Now we know what it must have been like to have live behind the Iron Curtain, falsely believing the sun rose & set on the USSR.
Tell the truth, most of his cabinet choices are less than stellar. We are NY'ers and we know first hand that Hillary is a carpetbagger. A wallstreeter to oversee wallstreet, a little too friendly. A IRS cheat too boot? Explain this logic, we need a wallstreet wise person for treasurey but we don't need an intelligence person to run the CIA. $150-200 Million on a party while people are losing their jobs & homes. You can't make this shit up.
Could it be that the 20% are the only real independant thinkers left, that's a really scary thought.
9:28 read this Kingston Truth post:
"Just because we don't buy into the media sell of Obama doesn't make us all uni-bombers. Right now, all we have to support Obama is hope, fine. Hope is good and can lead to progress if the direction of change is structually sound. The concern by many is that we have been left in dark on most "change" plans.
A good debate will often flush out a new solution. Take for example the vocal debate a year ago about the mounting death toll in Iraq. Those that screamed bloody hell and asked for impeachment didn't get want they wanted, an immediate pull out of Iraq, but they triggered the discussion that ultimately lead to the built up and the success in Iraq today. Please remember the importance of a strong two sided aurguement. The worst thing for America would be 100% support of Obama. Obama needs to be reminded of the view of the 46% that voted against his Presidency. We all want him to succeed, but not at the cost of our own values. One may think the Patriot Act violates the rights of Americans, others may believe the Patriot Act is the very reason we have been terror free since 911. Neither view is 100% right. Those that can't understand that simple truth are extremist right or left."
Post a Comment