Saturday, January 17, 2009

Obama has already discredited himself

Associated Press: Obama hosting pricey party in a dicey economy

Unemployment is up. The stock market is down. Let's party.

The price tag for President-elect Barack Obama's inauguration gala is expected to break records, with some estimates reaching as high as $150 million. Despite the bleak economy, however, Democrats who called on President George W. Bush to be frugal four years ago are issuing no such demands now that an inaugural weekend of rock concerts and star-studded parties has begun.

Obama's inaugural committee has raised more than $41 million to cover events ranging from a Philadelphia-to-Washington train ride to a megastar concert with Beyonce, U2 and Bruce Springsteen to 10 official inaugural balls. Add to that the massive costs of security and transportation — costs absorbed by U.S. taxpayers — and the historic inauguration will produce an equally historic bill.


The inauguration was a golden opportunity for the President to walk his talk. He could have proceeded with a simple inauguration and sent a clear message to the country. Talk about a missed opportunity. He would have garnered a lot of respect, even from those who did not vote for him.

But noooooo!!!! The hypocrisy and lunacy only continues in Washington, DC. I was actually going to give Mr. Obama a chance and see how it goes. Notice I haven't been very critical of him these last couple of months. But I'm off that train already, and he hasn't even been sworn in, yet!!! Friends, we are F-U-C-K-E-D!!!

With an inauguration gala of such epic proportions when all these people know how deep in shit this country is, I really have lost all respect for this government. It is on a self-destructive path. Fuck 'em all!! "Change we can believe in." Please. We're paying $150 million for these cannibalistic self-righteous government moonbats to love on each other for a few nights. That's pretty sick. Lots and lots of people are getting laid off right now. You government freaks are sending a really bad message, and it will come back to haunt you I promise.

The United States government thinks it is recession-proof. I got news for you: You're fucked, too. Just wait. That light at the end of the tunnel is a train and it's moving fast.

5 comments:

kerrcarto said...

Glenn Beck had a good point on this a couple of days ago.

This is a partial transcript of the conversation.

KEVIN: Well, of course, if you go through and you want to have a federal party on federal land, you go through I guess the National Park Service. So as an uncomfortable federal party, the rule would be 300:1. But if you want to have a private --
GLENN: Wait, wait, let me understand this. If I am federal, if I'm a government agency.
KEVIN: Right.
GLENN: I have to have how many?
KEVIN: It's 300, for every 300 people, one Porta-Potty.
GLENN: If I'm part of the federal government -- now again, I'm just looking for disenfranchisement. Does our government have to live by the same rules that we do? 300 people for every one Porta-Potty. But if you're private --
KEVIN: Right. If you want to, if you are a corporation or you just want to have a private party in D.C., you go through the department of, I think it's parks and recreation. And there's a convenient form online that you can go and fill out and along with your form which I think is $65 per 50 people, you will also have to send them a certificate showing that you have one Porta-Potty for every 75 people that are attending.
GLENN: So if we use what you would have to use, if this wasn't the federal government making -- again let's suspend all of the environmental laws so we can build a fence. That's what the government has just done. Now it's, we don't even have to live by our own rules because it's excessive, you can't afford it, it's crazy. But who cares; we make the rules. How many Porta-Potties would this event need?
KEVIN: I think the math was somewhere in the 53,000 range if you had four million people.
GLENN: So the federal government is providing 5,000 Porta-Potties for Tuesday, but if it was a private industry that had to do it, they would need a certificate verifying that if estimates were as high as four million people that you would need 53?
KEVIN: 53,000.
GLENN: 53,000. But no more than 53,000.
STU: Update on the inauguration crowds here, Glenn.
GLENN: Yeah.
STU: George W. Bush's inauguration crowd, 400,000. The biggest ever was Lyndon Johnson in 1965 with 1.2 million. Now, the D.C. mayor actually threw -- their estimate is double that. The actual -- they are saying it could be up to double that. The D.C. mayor threw out three to five million as an estimate just off the top of his head as to what he expected. If it hit five million, it would be tied for the largest gathering in human history. Only the Pope has drawn crowds that would equal five million people. That's what they are looking at. And they've got 5,000 Porta-Potties.
GLENN: Only the federal government. Only the federal government. It is absolutely remarkable to me.

kerrcarto said...

Damnit, I forgot to mention this was about the amount of "mexican spaceships" ( a loving term for portOpotties.) that you would have to have if you where a private entity.

Jackie D said...

"The U.S. Secret Service is overseeing a security force of more than 40,000 people, including 7,500 active duty soldiers, 10,000 National Guard troops and 25,000 law-enforcement officers.

That surpasses the 31,000 troops serving in Afghanistan."

In addition to the disgusting gluttony of the planned events...Doesn't the (well-publicized) size and scope of the security resources deployed to D.C. put a big terrorist bullseye on ANY other major city for the day?

Maeve said...

This whole thing makes me sick to my stomach.

PeggyU said...

This whole thing makes me sick to my stomach.

Me too, Maeve. Another thing that I just can't get over: Obama's cabinet appointments and the ease at which they passed inspection with Congress (Republicans ... where are you and why are you allowing this?).

Geithner - $34,000 in unpaid taxes and is put in charge of the treasury. Folks, I wouldn't hire an accountant who had this kind of water under his bridge, and they want to give this man oversight of the nation's finances(?). How many democrats are there who DON'T have this kind of baggage and who have the qualifications for the job? Couldn't Obama possibly have found someone else - some at least less obviously corrupt appointee?

We are in the middle of an economic mess, much of which has been precipitated by the actions of corrupt government officials (Barney Frank, et al). In a time when the nation's people are paying the price for unrestrained greed and corruption, what could be worse than to appoint a man with such a history? And, hey, he's not the only appointee with a pile of dirt under his rug. He's just the one who came to mind first.

Don't we the people (even democrats) deserve better? Where is the "hope" and "change" in this? My only "hope" is that someone in Washington will raise an objection already!

At what point do we give up on our government entirely and start to prepare to overturn it? I have never been this disillusioned. How do we hit the "reset" button and start over?