Presidential Inaguration

xarir said:

I read that the Presidential Inaguration and subsequent parties / gatherings will cost the US up to $15 million in security costs. Apparently an expanded no-fly zone will be set up along with anti-aircraft guns, coast guard patrols on the Potomac, combat air patrols above, ground security, chemical sniffers, welded manhole covers ...

While I can understand the political "need" of "being seen", this gross exaggeration of largese strikes me as completely unnecessary, particularly if the US taxpayer is footing the bill. Not to mention of course, that $15 million could be used for a lot of other things, particularly now. (Take your pick of Darfur, tsunami, AIDS ...)

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/4182385.stm

Click to expand...

This is a great point and I'm wondering if some of our American brothers can enlighten us on the need for an inauguration party at all. In addition, the U.S. is currently at war so is it even appropriate to have such an overwhelmingly expensive inauguration?

The inaguration is "necessary" because anti-influence-pedling laws don't apply to either the Conventions or the Inaguration. The Inaguration is famously an "ethics-free" zone during which big money can pull out all the stops to buy influence for the coming four years.

Presidential Inaguration may be a real Blast....

Officials fear "limousine bombs" at Bush inauguration

Sun Jan 16, 3:00 PM ET

WASHINGTON (AFP) - US officials working on security for President George W. Bush's second presidential inauguration fear terrorists could use limousines packed with propane gas canisters for an attack.


Fears of an attack by VBIEDs -- vehicle-borne improvised explosive devices -- come from a 39-page Al-Qaeda document seized in Britain in 2003, according to the Monday edition of Time magazine.

The document, titled "Rough Presentation for Gas Limo Project," discusses using limousines to deliver bombs equipped with propane gas cylinders.

The document recommends hiding bombs in limos because the long classy vehicles "blend in" and "can transport larger payloads than sedans ... and do not require special driving skills," according to Time, in its editions set to hit newsstands Monday.

Hundreds of limos are expected to jam the Washington streets throughout the week carrying inauguration guests from around the country.

The limos can also "access underground parking structures that do not accommodate trucks" and "have tinted windows that can hide an improvised explosive device from outside."

Even though the Bush inauguration is not mentioned in the document, segments are being passed around among US intelligence officials, according to Time.

The Al-Qaeda document calls for using three limos each carrying 12 or more compressed-gas cylinders each to create a "full fuel-air explosion by venting flammable gas into a confined space and then igniting it," according to Time.

The cylinders could even be painted yellow to falsely "signify toxic gases to spread terror and chaos when emergency and haz-mat teams arrive," the magazine reported.

link:
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=1521&e=2&u=/afp/usbushsecurityattack

This is a fairly robust tradition, the winner get's his day in the sun. Bush is spending about 1.7 less than Clinton did for his last inaugural - and given inflation the real delta is more than that. Private funds pay for a majority of the costs, although I'm sure this years security costs will be much higher - but that would happen no matter who took the oath.

I'll have a smile on my face on Thursday! Let’s hope the MooreOns do something stupid to remind the country why they made the right decision.

OTB

Wow! $15 million

That's almost as much as Andrea Clarkson spends on one of her trips.

I can't believe that you guys hate Bush so much that you begrudge him his inaguration party.

RE: WoodPeckr's post

How nice of the media to give the terrorists ideas.

Goober Mcfly said:

RE: WoodPeckr's post

How nice of the media to give the terrorists ideas.

Click to expand...

Goob ....Duh ?!?!?!?!?

Did you read the second sentence of that post, looks like you got it just a little bit backwards.....

"Fears of an attack by VBIEDs -- vehicle-borne improvised explosive devices -- come from a 39-page Al-Qaeda document seized in Britain in 2003, according to the Monday edition of Time magazine."

Don't fall for that 'Bush League Mantra' of the MEDIA being responsible for all of Dubya's problems.......LOL!

WoodPeckr: Duh! Al-Qaeda isn't the only terrorist organization around.

Yes, I missed that. Sorry....

Goober Mcfly said:

WoodPeckr: Duh! Al-Qaeda isn't the only terrorist organization around.

Yes, I missed that. Sorry....

Click to expand...

........And Timmy McVeigh, who probably gave Al-Qaeda the ideas to begin with, is dead........

Is not.

onthebottom said:

This is a fairly robust tradition, the winner get's his day in the sun. Bush is spending about 1.7 less than Clinton did for his last inaugural - and given inflation the real delta is more than that. Private funds pay for a majority of the costs, although I'm sure this years security costs will be much higher - but that would happen no matter who took the oath.

Click to expand...

Your facts are off - Clinton's 1997 party cost 29.6 million. Bush's will cost 40 million. Clinton's broke even, as Bush's is expected to.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn?pagename=article&contentId=A48775-2001Jan25&notFound=true

It doesn't surprise me in the least that, even four years on, you conservatives are still beating a very worn "Remember how bad Bill was!" drum.

I'll have a smile on my face on Thursday! Let’s hope the MooreOns do something stupid to remind the country why they made the right decision.

OTB

Click to expand...

This is the dumbest thing you've said in a while. How would the actions of any protester "remind" the country why they voted for Bush? Are you saying that, despite the fact that you were lambasting us for supporting Kerry just because we didn't like Bush, you voted for Bush just because you didn't like Michael Moore?

I'm not a Bush fan - But let the man have his day in the sun.

We don't do anything to let any newly elected PM have his day in the sun. I just don't understand the rationale for a publically funded celebration like this.

YYC - I'm not sure that comparing American political traditions with our own makes it any more appropriate or inappropriate.

Only thing that suprises me is no one has bitched about the use of 2 ply toilet paper

zydeco said:

YYC - I'm not sure that comparing American political traditions with our own makes it any more appropriate or inappropriate.

Click to expand...

Maybe it is wrong to question the appropriateness and you're right, simply comparing systems is largely irrelevant. But still, I just don't get it.

yychobbyist said:

Maybe it is wrong to question the appropriateness and you're right, simply comparing systems is largely irrelevant. But still, I just don't get it.

Click to expand...

Come on man, we don't have many tradition as it is, why can't we have this one, without people bitching and moaning about it.
Every country has their own tradition, that from the outside look dumb, but mean a lot to the population.
Can we not even have a party without somebody bitching about it???
Give me a break...

DonQuixote said:

True. I have no problem whith the Rs celebrating. They have reason to do so.
But,...... Why burden the city of Washington DC with a $15 million security bill
when that never happened before. I am well aware that the world has changed
dramatically since 9/11. But, large cities around the country are facing budget
shortfalls because of the declining economy. Cleveland, for instance, has a large
hole in its budget because of the security costs of the candidates visiting Cleveland
prior to the last presidential election. With shortfalls in education, health care
and other basic necessities of life the cities are falling further behind financially.
$15 million is considerably more than what Cleveland had to incur. Those security
costs will likely have a significant effect in the city providing basic services to the
needy, not the scam artists, but the truly needy.

It seems like there is a foolish expenditure of funds when the well-healed have the
party at the expense of the truly needy.

Don

Click to expand...

It this not a celebration of the R's..it is a celebration of the office of the POTUS.
Don't be so bitter all the time....it is un-American...LOL