Grassroots Network of the Republican Party of Virginia

The price tag for Tuesday's inauguration is now reported to be about 160 million., raising eyebrows and questions among some critics that perhaps modesty should be used here, considering our our current economic situation. Rest assured though, it is not all coming from government coffers. The planners deflect the critics by saying private contributions are putting a lot of money into the kitty. Just out of curiosity I pulled up a piece on the Bush inauguration in 2005 and I thought we should reflect on this as the ultimate example of double standards. Here's how the finger....on the other hand...was pointed four short years ago:

A.P. January 14, 2005 WASHINGTONPresident Bush's second inauguration will cost tens of millions of dollars — $40 million alone in private donations for the balls, parade and other invitation-only parties. With that kind of money, what could you buy?
• 200 armored Humvees with the best armor for troops in Iraq.
• Vaccinations and preventive health care for 22 million children in regions devastated by the tsunami.
• A down payment on the nation's deficit, which hit a record-breaking $412 billion last year.
…......New York Rep. Anthony Weiner, a Democrat, suggested inaugural parties should be scaled back, citing as a precedent Roosevelt's inauguration during 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," according to a letter from Weiner and Rep. Jim McDermott, D-Wash. "During World War I, President Wilson did not have any parties at his 1917 inaugural, saying that such festivities would be undignified..."

--end story---
Let's ask the A.P., Weiner and McDermott how many Humvees we could buy today and how many children we could feed. Why did the A.P. hold Bush inaugural planners in contempt, but did not cite the lavishness of his successor? Also, if private contributions can help cover the costs of an inauguration, why was it a big deal when private contributions to the RNC are used to cover the cost of clothing for our Vice Presidential candidate?

Views: 16

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

You know Deborah, the fact that the economy wasn't in the terrible condition in 2004 that it is now, should be cause to cut back on the festivities. And, speaking of "private" contributions to Obama, one of those contributors to the inaugural committee is none other than Citibank, who gave the largest "donation." They have already gotten one bailout, and are now coming back for more. I look at it that Citibank loaned the Obama Inaugration Committee money, and they will be reimbursed by the Bailout funds. Just kinda a round about way of the Bailout funds helping to pay for the inauguration of the One.

I had a thought the other day. I believe, if I am not mistaken, that the American taxpayers will be paying for at least some of the activities. I will be sure to get that number, divide it by the population total, and I will take a deduction on my tax return in that amount. I will enclose a note letting them know that I did not attend the inaugration, or partake of any of the festivities, therefore, I will take my refund on my return. If you have any questions, please call Tim Gaithner.
That's a good one.Timothy's excuse is about to become a classic. We could all do the same and call it amnesia, civil disobediance, a senior moment..Oops, I forgot I signed a form saying I'm self-employed.

Reply to Discussion









(sales help fund this site)




© 2021   Created by Tom Whitmore.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service