President Barack Obama (official thread)

[Moose]

Originally Posted by generaladm

I guess you missed the part where the '05 inauguration actually cost over $157 mil. The $47 mil figure only refers to the amount raised thru private donations, about equal to Obama's. It does not take into account the cost of added security and amenities, which is the bulk of the final price tag. There's much more about it here:

http://www.buckeyeplanet.com/forum/1384643-post1.html

That's great work. Now, show me all the other hidden cost of the Obama inauguration that's not shown as well. We (as a country) didn't have this big of a recession during the Clinton era. The Bush era didn't take a downward spiral until close to the end of his time. So, what were Clintons hidden cost. It would have been a good jester to scale it back, don't ya think? Of course there's a critic in every crowd as well.

Moose

[OSUsushichic]

Originally Posted by Moose

It would have been a good jester to scale it back, don't ya think? Of course there's a critic in every crowd as well.

One of those just left the White House.

[Bucky Katt]

Originally Posted by Moose

That's great work. Now, show me all the other hidden cost of the Obama inauguration that's not shown as well. We (as a country) didn't have this big of a recession during the Clinton era. The Bush era didn't take a downward spiral until close to the end of his time. So, what were Clintons hidden cost. It would have been a good jester to scale it back, don't ya think? Of course there's a critic in every crowd as well.

Moose

See below. The $170M figure for Obama includes the hidden costs. The $47M for Bush's does not.

Originally Posted by sandgk

Addressing the interjected topic, that merits it's own independent thread, the cost of the inauguration:

In 2005 Bush spent 42.3 Million directly on the inauguration.
DC, the feds and other State and local government entities spent an additional 115.5 Million on security, clean-up and a holiday for some workers.

Adjusting for inflation that would make Bush 2005 inaugurations costs of nearly 158 Million expand to 174.6 Million.

Which is close to the cited (though with unspecified original source) cost of $170 Million for Obama's inauguration - which figure bundles together the costs normally associated with an inauguration (the 45 Million or so from the Obama campaign / fundraising) and the remaining 125 Million that goes to security, clean-up etc, etc.

If anything, given the much higher attendance in DC the costs for security and the like are effectively lower than those for the Bush '05 inauguration. (250K attendees for Bush '05, Up to 1.5 Million for Obama '09 inauguration).

The merits of lavish inaugural festivities aside (good work for the caterers, hotels and other soft / tourist businesses in DC) the relative cost for the Obama inauguration is on par with that for Bush '05.

[generaladm]

Originally Posted by Moose

That's great work. Now, show me all the other hidden cost of the Obama inauguration that's not shown as well. We (as a country) didn't have this big of a recession during the Clinton era. The Bush era didn't take a downward spiral until close to the end of his time. So, what were Clintons hidden cost. It would have been a good jester to scale it back, don't ya think? Of course there's a critic in every crowd as well.

Moose

Not sure where you're going with this. I did notice that the link I provided only went to the first post, instead of the entire thread, which is what I intended. Here's a link to a post which links to an article that should clear up the cost analysis. Here's another article. There are no hidden costs for the Obama inauguration. The only hiding of costs was done by the people who claimed the 05 event only cost $47 mil. The recorded final output for 05, public (tax money) and private (donations), was $157.8 mil. That's not debatable, that's in the ledger. The projected cost of the 09 events, including public and private funds, ranges from $140 to $170 mil, the actual costs won't be known for some time. My only point was that the claims that the Obama inauguration were to be more than three times more costly than Bush's were inequivocally false. The figures in the article you cited are clearly providing only the private donations to the Clinton and Bush inaugurations, while comparing them to the total cost of Obama's. On a side note, the private money raised for Clinton's 97 event was less than for 93, because there was a several mil surplus held over from the prior.

Do I personally think it would have been a nice gesture to tone down the spending? Yes. I don't think that would have been realistic, considering the unprecedented demand for the event. With millions of people flocking to DC, it would have been asking for disaster to cut back on the security and amenities. I certainly would have no problem with a major reduction in the celebrity events, but it's not known how much of that (if any) came from public funds. What's lost in all this discussion is that Obama had no say in the matter. Bush personally made a request to congress for extra funding. Why are none of the complaints directed at him?

[sandgk]

Originally Posted by OSUsushichic

One of those just left the White House.

eh, he wasn't a good jester - more like the unintentional jester.

But ...

that is behind us now.

It's a Brand New Day

[jimotis4heisman]

Originally Posted by OSUsushichic

Obama to get spy-proof smartphone...

Obama 'to get spy-proof smartphone' - CNN.com

im glad obama is using federal money to move a hockey team to western ontario... obama is trying to destroy the nhl by supporting RIM.

joking aside interesting that their is no issue with him using a foreign phone.
not joking-ill never use a blackberry, never. not one red cent of mine will go to jim basillie


also looks like obama has ordered his first unilateral military actions.
President Obama 'orders Pakistan drone attacks' - Times Online

[Moose]

Generaladm,
I understand your point. Cutting back on security is not an option, no matter who it is. As far as him not having a say, well, The left is pretty much hanging on every word he utters. So, He did have say, but elected not to. It is history, wish it was the other party. It will be interesting to say the least, with all the things he's already started to reverse. Let's see how it plays out. Time to buckle up the chin strap. It's gonna be a L-O-N-G haul......

Moose

Thanks for the debate!

[jimotis4heisman]

Originally Posted by generaladm

Bush personally made a request to congress for extra funding. Why are none of the complaints directed at him?

he got slammed for it. in the media and around here, led by sushi (i think)

i dont really have a problem with it. but the 600,000,000 of carbon al gore might

i love going to them honeslty, i know some of you get super patriotic over voting, not me. the peaceful exchange of government (most of the time) is something that i absolutely love about our country.

[sandgk]

Originally Posted by Moose

As far as him not having a say, well, The left is pretty much hanging on every word he utters. So, He did have say, but elected not to.

Bush is part of the left hanging on BHO's every word, who knew?

[generaladm]

Originally Posted by Moose

Generaladm,
I understand your point. Cutting back on security is not an option, no matter who it is. As far as him not having a say, well, The left is pretty much hanging on every word he utters. So, He did have say, but elected not to. It is history, wish it was the other party. It will be interesting to say the least, with all the things he's already started to reverse. Let's see how it plays out. Time to buckle up the chin strap. It's gonna be a L-O-N-G haul......

Moose

Thanks for the debate!

Thanks to you, too. I originally wasn't trying to question your opinion, just point out that the numbers cited in your article have been proven to be inaccurate. It certainly didn't help that the link I provided only went to a list of places to watch the inauguration. I think we're both in agreement that the present circumstances call for much more responsible gov't spending, especially in the pomp and circumstance area. There will be plenty of opportunities for Obama to do so in the future, and I think many people will be surprised that he doesn't live up the the liberal spending Democrat stereotype (I hope). The positives of the event are that it was a much needed positive advertisement of the US Gov, both here and abroad, and it dumped a ton of revenue into the businesses surrounding DC.

BTW, I've been known to spin around the old doghouse from time to time, myself.

Originally Posted by jimotis4heisman

he got slammed for it. in the media and around here, led by sushi (i think)

i dont really have a problem with it. but the 600,000,000 of carbon al gore might

i love going to them honeslty, i know some of you get super patriotic over voting, not me. the peaceful exchange of government (most of the time) is something that i absolutely love about our country.

Mmm...I don't know if "slammed" is the right term. I did hear Bush mentioned a few times, but the vast majority of venom was directed entirely at Obama, and even offered it as proof that he was going to spend the US into oblivion. Maybe I should just stop listening to Hannity.

I do agree with you about the poignancy of the ceremony. It reminds us that most parts of the world have never seen a peaceful change of leadership, and the fact that it's been our tradition for over 200 years makes it all the more special. Watching the ceremony and aftermath was a nice reminder that while the men and women of the federal government must play adversary much of the time, when they are off the clock they show that they are also colleagues, peers, and friends.

[OSUsushichic]

There's an inauguration thread to talk about this inauguration-related, but since the discussion has moved to this thread, here's what FactCheck.org says about the costs:

FactCheck.org: Did Barack Obama's inauguration really cost 4 times as much as George Bush's 2005 inauguration?

[MaxBuck]

So people are complaining about inauguration costs that are about 75% related to security. And which amount to about 60 cents a head for the populace. That's about half what a small Micky D coffee now goes for.

If the "high cost" of the inauguration is the biggest thing you have to complain about, you lead a charmed life indeed.

What a monumental non-issue this is. (And was for W, too.)

[generaladm]

Suspected U.S. missiles killed 18 people on the Pakistan side of the Afghan border Friday, security officials said, the first attacks on the al-Qaida stronghold since President Barack Obama took office. At least five foreign militants were among those killed in the strikes by unmanned aircraft in two parts of the frontier region, an intelligence official said without naming them. There was no information on the identities of the others.

Pakistan's leaders had expressed hope Obama might halt the strikes, but few observers expected he would end a tactic that U.S. officials say has killed several top al-Qaida operatives and is denying the terrorist network a long-held safe haven.
The United States has staged more than 30 missile strikes inside Pakistan since August last year _ a barrage seen as a sign of frustration in Washington over Islamabad's efforts to curb militants that the U.S. blames for violence in Afghanistan and fears could be planning attacks on the West.

First Missile Strikes On Pakistan Since Obama Presidency: Reports

WASHINGTON ? Iraq is stable enough to allow the roughly 22,000 U.S. Marines there to withdraw, the service's top general said Friday.
"The time is right for Marines in general terms to leave Iraq," said Marine Corps Commandant James Conway.
That war has become largely a nation-building mission rather than the pitched fighting in which the Marine Corps excels, Conway said.
Conway said he wants to see up to 20,000 Marines deployed instead to the building fight in Afghanistan, especially in the south where insurgents and the Taliban and al-Qaida benefit from both a nearby safe haven and booming trade in narcotics.
"When you've got those two elements you've got the potential for a long-term insurgency," he said. "That's where the Marines ought to be. That's what we offer the nation," he said.

Top Marine: Time For His Troops To Leave Iraq, Enter Afghanistan

[jlb1705]

Originally Posted by MaxBuck

So people are complaining about inauguration costs that are about 75% related to security. And which amount to about 60 cents a head for the populace. That's about half what a small Micky D coffee now goes for.

If the "high cost" of the inauguration is the biggest thing you have to complain about, you lead a charmed life indeed.

What a monumental non-issue this is. (And was for W, too.)

Of course this is a big deal. Why would anybody think it's a good idea to accomodate the assembly of nearly 2 million people on our nation's capital when that money could've been used to decorate the offices of about 139 Wall Street CEOs?

[DaytonBuck]

Obama Sides With Bush in Spy Case


The Obama administration fell in line with the Bush administration Thursday when it urged a federal judge to set aside a ruling in a closely watched spy case weighing whether a U.S. president may bypass Congress and establish a program of eavesdropping on Americans without warrants.
In a filing in San Francisco federal court, President Barack Obama adopted the same position as his predecessor. With just hours left in office, President George W. Bush late Mondayasked U.S. District Judge Vaughn Walker to stay enforcement of an important Jan. 5 ruling admitting key evidence into the case.
Thursday's filing by the Obama administration marked the first time it officially lodged a court document in the lawsuit asking the courts to rule on the constitutionality of the Bush administration's warrantless-eavesdropping program. The former president approved the wiretaps in the aftermath of the Sept. 11, 2001, terror attacks

Wired