Hypocrisy with Inauguration Costs
Email This Post
- 
Print This Post
-
Sometimes these entries just write themselves.
Here’s a clip from 2005 commenting on Bush’s inauguration…
“Democrats have criticised the $40m celebrations as a tasteless display of excess, saying tradition dictates that wartime inaugurations are restrained affairs.”
And here’s another from the NYT in 2005:
“Some critics say spending so much on these parties seems ill-timed both because of the Iraq war and the tsunami catastrophe in Asia. Anthony D. Weiner, a Democratic congressman preparing to run for mayor of New York, sent President Bush a letter on Tuesday suggesting that the millions in inaugural funds be sent to the troops in Iraq.
“Precedent suggests that inaugural festivities should be muted - if not canceled - in wartime,” Mr. Weiner wrote, noting that in 1945 Franklin D. Roosevelt limited the celebration to a cold luncheon at the White House.”
Both wars are still ongoing, we’re in the “biggest financial mess since the Depression”, and Obama’s party is expected to cost 25% MORE, at least $50 Million. Yet there are no complaints from the left.
I am not surprised that the man who spent $712 MILLION dollars on his campaign is continuing to burn through other people’s money. For the record, Hillary spent $221 million, and McCain spent $312 million. Obama spent 228% more than McCain alone…..and 34% more than Clinton and McCain COMBINED!
Where are all the calls for prudent, frugal behavior now?
Hypocrisy? You betcha.
Comment by Monz on 14 January 2009:
While I agree that the inaugural spending should be curbed a bit, there has to be some understanding that Barack Obama made history and a lot of people want to honor and celebrate that. The First anything only happenes once, and some of us are still having trouble believing that America has finally elected its first non-white President. Also, because of the state of the economy and the pathetic value of the dollar, Obama isn’t necessarily spending ten million more than Bush because money isn’t worth as much today as it was four years ago. Also, why should Obama punish himself for Bush’s mistakes. Lastly, I am tired of people bitching about the money Obama spent on the campaign. He revolutionized election politics by involving small donors, who gave their nickels and dimes, but the fervor with which he inspired these people allowed him to collect the type of money he did.
Comment by richard on 14 January 2009:
Obama will take the oath of office on reecyled carpet and volunters will clean up and recycle trash including horse manure
But, the carbon footprint for the event is expected to be the largest in history.
Comment by slowsmile on 15 January 2009:
Nice article Jason….I can’t help wondering what Ron Paul spent on his election efforts, it would be interesting to compare !! Apparently he will be running again in 2012….
After all that tremendous spend in the name of Democratic electioneering, my own fear - even through Obama’s most well-meant and earnest efforts - is that he is bound to fail in his attempts to repair the US economy. He has been very clear and objective in his efforts to surround himself with the best and most respected political and economic minds, I’ll give him that. But the US govt. has no more leverage left, either financially or politically.
…So the necessary tools are no longer available to Obama for economic recovery - they have all been exhausted.
Comment by Jason Blanchard on 16 January 2009:
Thanks slowsmile. I tend to agree that the “capital” is gone. I hope that Obama’s administration can provide a new sense of purpose for our country. But, I’m afraid they preach too much about government dependence rather than working the true American dream. For the record, Ron Paul only spent $34,534,888 on his presidential campaign… http://www.opensecrets.org/pres08/alsorans.php
Richard, aren’t we glad that the carbon footprint is meaningless
It’s just nice to stick it in the eye of those who think otherwise.
Monz, I’m happy the US has made history by electing the first half-white president (not non-white as you describe). The money that Obama raised during his campaign is RIFE with controversy. His campaign DID NOT DISCLOSE where more than half of their money came from. How convenient for his party to find a loophole in the campaign finance reform legislation they so proudly touted.
Donations under $200 weren’t disclosed, so Daffy Duck, Bart Simpson, Family Guy, Dertey Poiiuy, Mong Kong, Fornari USA, and jkbkj Hbkjb were able to contribute to his campaign. Look it up. In addition, his campaign made NO effort to follow the rules. Anyone with a credit card could make a donation under ANY name and ANY address. How can you track the $2300 ceiling if you don’t track it? You can’t….but since they didn’t report any of it, they don’t care.
Jason Blanchards last blog post..Hypocrisy with Inauguration Costs