View Full Version : The 2008 Presidential Inauguration
The election is over! The transition is underway! The plans are being planned! THE INAUGURATION OF THE 44TH PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA IS UPON US!
Here are some preliminary details and events...
THEME: RENEWING AMERICA'S PROMISE
Sunday, Jan. 18 – An afternoon welcoming event open to the public.
Monday, Jan. 19—The Martin Luther King Day federal holiday will be commemorated by Obama and his family, along with Vice President-elect Joe Biden and Biden’s family, in community service events around metropolitan Washington, D.C.
Tuesday, Jan. 20 – Noon swearing-in ceremony on the West Front of the United States Capitol. A luncheon in the Capitol’s Statuary Hall. The 56th Inaugural Parade begins around 3 p.m. Official Inaugural Balls will be in the evening.
Wednesday, Jan. 21- Obama and Biden participate in a prayer service.
THIS IS FOR ALL THINGS INAUGURATION!
Discuss.
UPDATE: I know that there are many Politico's out there that are planning on going to the inauguration, or have been to one before. Tell us all about your experience! Post your crowd reports!
UPDATE #2: Are you attending an Inauguration watch party? Tell us all about it!
OBAMA DEFENDS CHOICE OF PASTOR FOR INVOCATION
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20081218/ap_on_go_pr_wh/inauguration_minister
President-elect Barack Obama on Thursday defended his choice of a popular evangelical minister to deliver the invocation at his inauguration, rejecting criticism that it slights gays. The selection of Pastor Rick Warren brought objections from gay rights advocates, who strongly supported Obama during the election campaign. The advocates are angry over Warren's backing of a California ballot initiative banning gay marriage. That measure was approved by voters last month.
But Obama told reporters in Chicago that America needs to "come together," even when there's disagreement on social issues. "That dialogue is part of what my campaign is all about," he said.
Obama also said he's known to be a "fierce advocate for equality" for gays and lesbians, and will remain so.
Warren, a best-selling author and leader of a Southern California megachurch, is one of a new breed of evangelicals who stress the need for action on social issues such as reducing poverty and protecting the environment, alongside traditional theological themes.
The Human Rights Campaign, the nation's largest gay rights organization, said Warren's opposition to gay marriage is a sign of intolerance.
"We feel a deep level of disrespect when one of the architects and promoters of an anti-gay agenda is given the prominence and the pulpit of your historic nomination," the group said in a letter to Obama, asking him to reconsider.
Obama's selection of Warren is seen as a signal to religious conservatives that the president-elect will listen to their views. During the campaign, Warren interviewed Obama and Republican John McCain in a widely watched television program that focused on religious concerns.
Gay rights advocates say they are troubled that Obama would give Warren such a visible role at his swearing-in. "By inviting Rick Warren to your inauguration, you have tarnished the view that gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender Americans have a place at your table," the letter said.
I'm glad he pick Warren. Good for him for sticking by his word and not caving in to the Medios. I actually applaude Mr. Obama for his decision and they way he stuck up for himself.
I'm glad he pick Warren. Good for him for sticking by his word and not caving in to the Medios. I actually applaude Mr. Obama for his decision and they way he stuck up for himself.
It's more than the media. Rick Warren is a moron.
It's more than the media. Rick Warren is a moron.
But, it is who Mr. Obama wants and at least it isn't Reverend Wright. :hehe:
EXPECT LOGJAM OF CELL PHONE CALLS AT OBAMA INAUGURATION
http://www.cnn.com/2008/TECH/12/16/inauguration.phones/index.html
*looks at Jman*
The Senator
12-19-2008, 12:32 PM
But, it is who Mr. Obama wants and at least it isn't Reverend Wright. :hehe:
I don't really know if there's much of a difference between the two. Wright was an idiot who believed the white man invented HIV/ AIDS to kill black people; Warren is an idiot who believes a magic man in the sky controls everything we do, evolution was a concept invented by Satan, and that minorities deserve to be persecuted because they don't share the same vision laid out by said magic man in his all-powerful story book. They're both total morons.
I don't really know if there's much of a difference between the two. Wright was an idiot who believed the white man invented HIV/ AIDS to kill black people; Warren is an idiot who believes a magic man in the sky controls everything we do, evolution was a concept invented by Satan, and that minorities deserve to be persecuted because they don't share the same vision laid out by said magic man in his all-powerful story book. They're both total morons.
How can Wright be a Pastor if he too believes in the Magic Space Man?
The Senator
12-19-2008, 12:47 PM
How can Wright be a Pastor if he too believes in the Magic Space Man?
They both believe in the Magic Space Man, hence why they aren't too different from one another. Their assorted, other cuckoo-crazy beliefs also prove they are in the same boat.
Addendum
12-19-2008, 12:50 PM
How can Wright be a Pastor if he too believes in the Magic Space Man?
magic space man/invisible man - god
Wasn't Warren the one who said 'teh gayz' brought Hurricane Katrina to New Orleans? I'm drawng a blank... :huh:
Wasn't Warren the one who said 'teh gayz' brought Hurricane Katrina to New Orleans? I'm drawng a blank... :huh:
I think that was the crazy guy that goes to all those funerals and protests. Whatever his name is. Westboro Baptist Guy.
They both believe in the Magic Space Man, hence why they aren't too different from one another. Their assorted, other cuckoo-crazy beliefs also prove they are in the same boat.
I'm not going to wholely disagree. I only have a problem with it if they want government to create laws enforcing their beliefs. If they don't do that, whatever. They can do what they want and believe in what they want.
I think that was the crazy guy that goes to all those funerals and protests. Whatever his name is. Westboro Baptist Guy.
I think you're right. I get them all confused!
Addendum
12-19-2008, 01:02 PM
He did say that removing Terri Schiavo's feeding tube was "an atrocity worthy of Nazism"
I think that dumbass Pat Robertson said the thing about Katrina
INAUGURATION OF THE PRESIDENT: 2009
http://inaugural.senate.gov/2009/
This is an amazing website that has just about everything you need to know for Barack H. Obama's upcoming inauguration.
PLATFORM CONSTRUCTION PHOTOS
PARADE INFORMATION
TRIP PLANNING
CEREMONY INFORMATION
HISTORICAL INFORMATION
It's definately worth checking out!
Holiday
12-20-2008, 12:45 PM
Does anyone else have no interest in watching this? I'm sure I'll check out the highlights on the news but that's about it.
The Senator
12-20-2008, 01:02 PM
Wasn't Warren the one who said 'teh gayz' brought Hurricane Katrina to New Orleans? I'm drawng a blank... :huh:
No, that was John McCain's pastor friend, John Hagee...
No, that was John McCain's pastor friend, John Hagee...
They all blend together in my head! It's hard to tell them apart sometimes...
DACrowe
12-20-2008, 01:08 PM
If you've read Obama's book, you know the man has a very secular and pargmatic view of religion. He views many pastors as self-serving politicians, though not all and was basically an agnostic until he met Rev. Wright.
My guess is since disowning Wright, he is still a Christian, but has again a more pragmatic view of religion and took a pastor to pander to the right. And it worked.
Comicfilmer
12-20-2008, 01:11 PM
Anybody else here going to the Inauguration? I'm heading out on the 18th. I figure I'll do some sight-seeing first as it's been about 7-8 years since I've been out that way. I'm especially excited to check out the new WWII memorial for the first time.
Anybody else here going to the Inauguration? I'm heading out on the 18th. I figure I'll do some sight-seeing first as it's been about 7-8 years since I've been out that way. I'm especially excited to check out the new WWII memorial for the first time.
I wish I was able to go...I'll just have to check it out on tv. How in the world did you get a hotel room!?!?! Supposedly every hotel in the DC and surrounding areas are completely booked.
The Senator
12-20-2008, 01:17 PM
I will be at both the inauguration and the Out for Equality inaugural ball.
I will be at both the inauguration and the Out for Equality inaugural ball.
I'm jealous. :csad:
INAUGURATION SECURITY SET TO BE 'TIGHTER THAN EVER'
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/12/20/inauguration-security-set_n_152563.html
No strollers near the Capitol. No tents on the National Mall. None of that Silly String on the parade route.
That's just a sample of the items forbidden from President-elect Barack Obama's inauguration for security reasons. And while many people say the inconvenience is a small price to pay to witness the swearing-in of the nation's first black president, others are scratching their heads, trying to figure out how they will sit, snack, carry diapers or transport tired tots.
Some older people are backing out of their inaugural plans, partly because of a no-chair rule for the parade route. Parenting blogs are abuzz with complaints about the less-than-kid-friendly restrictions. Thermoses, coolers and backpacks are out at both the Capitol and the parade route.
"Of course, they're not going to say, 'no children,'" said Sunny Chanel, a San Francisco-based contributor to Babble.com, a parenting Web site. "But they're definitely not making it easy for parents with smaller children to go."
The tightest rules are reserved for the lucky 240,000 ticket-holders, who get to sit closest to the Jan. 20 swearing-in ceremony on the West Front of the Capitol. There are understandable prohibitions on weapons and pepper spray. But you also can't carry an umbrella. And don't think about holding up any "Yes We Did" signs _ posters also are not allowed.
The Senator
12-20-2008, 01:47 PM
I guess the Penguin won't be able to assassinate Obama afterall...
BIG INAUGURATION COMES WITH A BIG PRICE TAG
http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/12/20/inauguration.price.tag/index.html
Plans are in the works to open up the National Mall, extend hours for public transportation and -- perhaps most daunting -- provide parking for the influx of revelers.
"Even though we're very practiced at inaugurations and large events, this is one that will rewrite the book on inaugurations," said Rep. Eleanor Holmes Norton, D-Washington, D.C., who has requested an additional $15 million from Congress to help the city cover costs. That would double the $15 million Congress has already allocated to pay for all national events and demonstrations in Washington during 2009.
Mayor Adrian Fenty agreed that costs for increased security and crowd control would dwarf the original allocation. And for a city facing a budget shortfall and the same economic downturn affecting the rest of the country, now is not the time to rack up debt, Fenty told CNN.
"We are in talks with the federal government as we sit here today to let them know -- I think they already know that that's not enough," he said, referring to the initial $15 million allocation. "Now the question is if you want to make sure that you cross every 't' and dot every 'i,' it does look like it's going to be significantly more than that."
Fenty predicted costs for the city would near $50 million, the same amount Congress provided to both Denver, Colorado, and St. Paul, Minnesota, to host the Republican and Democratic conventions earlier this year.
Record-breaking numbers of people, he said, mean more services: "More buses, more federal cooperation, more emergency medical service workers, more police officers needed, more hotel rooms needed, more streets that are going to have to be closed, more water in case it's hot and more places to stay if it gets particularly cold and people need some type of hypothermia relief."
WARREN DEFENDS INAUGURATION INVITATION
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/12/21/rick-warren-defends-obama_n_152648.html
Under fire for opposing gay marriage, influential evangelical pastor Rick Warren said Saturday that he loves Muslims, people of other religions, Republicans and Democrats, and he also loves "gays and straights."
The 54-year-old pastor and founder of Saddleback Church in Southern California told the crowd of 500 that it's unrealistic to expect everyone to agree on everything all the time.
"You don't have to see eye to eye to walk hand in hand," said Warren.
Warren also defended President-elect Barack Obama's invitation that he give the invocation at the Jan. 20 inauguration in the keynote speech he delivered at the Muslim Public Affairs Council's annual convention in Long Beach.
Obama's choice of Warren earlier this week sparked outcry from gay rights and other liberal groups, who said choosing such an outspoken opponent of gay marriage was tantamount to endorsing bigotry.
"Three years ago I took enormous heat for inviting Barack Obama to my church because some of his views don't agree (with mine)," he said. "Now he's invited me."
souvlaki
12-21-2008, 07:45 PM
If you've read Obama's book, you know the man has a very secular and pargmatic view of religion. He views many pastors as self-serving politicians, though not all and was basically an agnostic until he met Rev. Wright.
My guess is since disowning Wright, he is still a Christian, but has again a more pragmatic view of religion and took a pastor to pander to the right. And it worked.
Honestly, that's the impression I got during the whole Rev. Wright scandal. I don't doubt he's Christian, but I think he played up his religion a bit during the primaries to appeal to the right. Has Obama even attended church since he was elected?
Honestly, that's the impression I got during the whole Rev. Wright scandal. I don't doubt he's Christian, but I think he played up his religion a bit during the primaries to appeal to the right. Has Obama even attended church since he was elected?
They've been searching for churches...I don't know if they've continued attending. Then again, if they hadn't been attending church I'm sure the Religious Right would be creating an uproar on FOX News.
souvlaki
12-22-2008, 12:22 AM
They've been searching for churches...I don't know if they've continued attending. Then again, if they hadn't been attending church I'm sure the Religious Right would be creating an uproar on FOX News.
I dunno about Fox News, but Politico has. That's why I was asking if he had attended church yet, because as of two weeks ago he hadn't, and Politico had a long, fairly retarded article about it, as if it's a big deal.
The Senator
12-22-2008, 12:24 AM
I could care less what religion the man is, or even if he believes at all... I care about getting this country off the eight years of anti-intellectual, anti-science policies which have set us back when compared to every other industrialized nation... from climate change to stem cell research...
tzarinna
12-22-2008, 06:33 PM
I'm working that day. I'll make the Lincoln Memorial thing for sure. I hope there won't be as many people there as on the day of Inauguration.
I'm working that day. I'll make the Lincoln Memorial thing for sure. I hope there won't be as many people there as on the day of Inauguration.
On Larry King Live, Joe Biden was talking about the potential of shutting down a highway near the capital and basically turning it into a parking lot! I don't know if he was kidding or not, but that's just insane!
tzarinna
12-22-2008, 10:58 PM
For the buses, right? That's super accommodating.
For the buses, right? That's super accommodating.
Yeah, for buses. I think it's a very nice thing to do. I just think it's crazy that there are going to be THAT many people that a highway needs to be shutdown. Wow!
The Senator
12-22-2008, 11:01 PM
On Larry King Live, Joe Biden was talking about the potential of shutting down a highway near the capital and basically turning it into a parking lot! I don't know if he was kidding or not, but that's just insane!
There is a highway which runs through the city which would have to be shut down anyway for security purposes (considering it runs underneath the National Mall and parade route), so this makes sense.
There is a highway which runs through the city which would have to be shut down anyway for security purposes (considering it runs underneath the National Mall and parade route), so this makes sense.
That's true. I would assume that is the highway he was talking about.
OBAMA TO BE SWORN IN WITH LINCOLN BIBLE
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/12/23/obama-to-take-oath-of-office-using-lincoln-bible/
The Obama transition team announced Tuesday morning that the president-elect would be sworn in with the Lincoln Bible, used by 16th president when taking the oath of office in 1861 (Full statement released Tuesday follows):
"Washington, D.C. - On January 20th, President-elect Barack Obama will take the oath of office using the same Bible upon which President Lincoln was sworn in at his first inauguration. The Bible is currently part of the collections of the Library of Congress. Though there is no constitutional requirement for the use of a Bible during the swearing-in, Presidents have traditionally used Bibles for the ceremony, choosing a volume with personal or historical significance. President-elect Obama will be the first President sworn in using the Lincoln Bible since its initial use in 1861.
'President-elect Obama is deeply honored that the Library of Congress has made the Lincoln Bible available for use during his swearing-in,' said Presidential Inaugural Committee Executive Director Emmett Beliveau. 'The President-elect is committed to holding an Inauguration that celebrates America's unity, and the use of this historic Bible will provide a powerful connection to our common past and common heritage.' "
"The Lincoln Bible will be available for a press viewing between 11:00 AM and Noon today in the Members' Room on the first floor of the Library of Congress' Thomas Jefferson Building at 10 First St. S.E. in Washington, D.C. Video and still cameras are permitted. Media should allow 10-15 minutes to clear security at the First Street entrance to the Jefferson Building. Clark Evans, who heads the Reference Services Section of the Rare Book and Special Collections Division of the Library of Congress, will also be available at that time to answer questions about the Lincoln Bible and the Library. High-resolution photographs of the Bible are also available upon request. RSVP is not required. Please contact the PIC Communications Office with questions.
Well, I guess this means that all of those people who say he's a muslim and was going to use the Qur'an instead of the Bible were wrong. Who knew? :whatever:
WARREN 'SCRUBS' ANTI-GAY LANGUAGE FROM WEBSITE FOLLOWING INVOCATION INVITE
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/12/23/rick-warren-scrubs-anti-g_n_153068.html
Yep! You can 'attend' their church and give them your money! Just don't expect any kind of acceptance in return! :dry:
OBAMAS TO APPEAR AT 10 OFFICIAL INAUGURATION BALLS
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/12/23/AR2008122302792.html
souvlaki
12-24-2008, 12:47 PM
WARREN 'SCRUBS' ANTI-GAY LANGUAGE FROM WEBSITE FOLLOWING INVOCATION INVITE
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/12/23/rick-warren-scrubs-anti-g_n_153068.html
Yep! You can 'attend' their church and give them your money! Just don't expect any kind of acceptance in return! :dry:
Actually I thought that was a pretty good step in the right direction. I don't like Rick Warren, but he's by far the most receptive of the mainstream evangelical preachers. He preaches about saving the environment (he was a huge fan of An Inconvenient Truth), and helping the poor, and has donated a ton of money to aids research. On top of being receptive to Obama, he also recently invited Melissa Ethridge and her partner to his church, and he plans on having dinner at their house soon. Maybe I'm being naive, but I'd like to think that he might actually change for the better after all this criticism being thrown his way. It's better to at least attempt to open a dialog with the more receptive evangelical leaders. Gay rights can only benefit from the religious right seeing they have nothing to fear by letting gay people have equal rights, and shouting at them and calling them bigots like a lot of progressives are doing right now wont help matters.
Visionary
12-25-2008, 03:11 PM
Will John McCain be there, lol? :D
Ocramed
12-25-2008, 03:34 PM
I could care less what religion the man is, or even if he believes at all... I care about getting this country off the eight years of anti-intellectual, anti-science policies which have set us back when compared to every other industrialized nation... from climate change to stem cell research...
I'd sooner see that the teacher's union actually teach the basics, instead of experimenting with the educational system (i.e. "new math") and political pandering (i.e. the multi-cultural and gay lobbies). When there is an actual meritocracy in place (i.e. actually penalizing teacher's performance based upon the ability of the student to learn the material), then you can throw stones at the Bush II policies...
Ocramed
12-25-2008, 03:40 PM
WARREN 'SCRUBS' ANTI-GAY LANGUAGE FROM WEBSITE FOLLOWING INVOCATION INVITE
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/12/23/rick-warren-scrubs-anti-g_n_153068.html
Yep! You can 'attend' their church and give them your money! Just don't expect any kind of acceptance in return! :dry:
And that is the crux of the matter: tolerance versus acceptance of homosexuality.
Personally, there is far more intolerence by the gay lobby on this Warren issue, since they (collectively speaking) think that Obama should ignore his own platform of reaching out to Conservatives (particularly those who are pro-Religion). I find that ironic and short-sighted since, well, let's face it: are gay activist are going to suddenly vote for the Republicans? Please.
O.
BIG INAUGURATION COMES WITH A BIG PRICE TAG
http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/12/20/inauguration.price.tag/index.html
Y'know, I'll just throw it out there...this is a ridiculous price tag. Our country is how much in debt? We go deeper into the red on a daily basis because of bail outs of industries and stimulus packages yet we can okay 50 million dollars for a party? Why not just have a private ceremony with the chief justice, outgoing president, the family and friends of those being sworn in present? It just all seems a bit too elaborate for me when our country is so deep in debt.
And that is the crux of the matter: tolerance versus acceptance of homosexuality.
Personally, there is far more intolerence by the gay lobby on this Warren issue, since they (collectively speaking) think that Obama should ignore his own platform of reaching out to Conservatives (particularly those who are pro-Religion). I find that ironic and short-sighted since, well, let's face it: are gay activist are going to suddenly vote for the Republicans? Please.
O.
It is my understanding that people are mad because this inauguration is one of...no, it is THE biggest civil rights accomplishment in our country's history and it is being opened by a man who campaigned vigorously against to deprive the basic right of marriage to millions of Americans.
Holiday
12-25-2008, 05:15 PM
Y'know, I'll just throw it out there...this is a ridiculous price tag. Our country is how much in debt? We go deeper into the red on a daily basis because of bail outs of industries and stimulus packages yet we can okay 50 million dollars for a party? Why not just have a private ceremony with the chief justice, outgoing president, the family and friends of those being sworn in present? It just all seems a bit too elaborate for me when our country is so deep in debt.
I agree. I know it's historic and everything but damn, that's just to much money.
I agree. I know it's historic and everything but damn, that's just to much money.
Its the biggest problem of our country. No one wants to sacrifice a damn thing. Not even our leaders who are telling us that we need to accept sacrifices in these difficult times, yet they will have a 50 million dollar party in order to stroke their own egoes?
Holiday
12-25-2008, 05:42 PM
Its the biggest problem of our country. No one wants to sacrifice a damn thing. Not even our leaders who are telling us that we need to accept sacrifices in these difficult times, yet they will have a 50 million dollar party in order to stroke their own egoes?
Yeah, it really sends a bad message with people losing their jobs and businesses going under everyday.
And while it is historic, there is no way this event can match the emotion of election night. Now that was really historic, this is just a big waste of cash.
Ocramed
12-25-2008, 08:51 PM
It is my understanding that people are mad because this inauguration is one of...no, it is THE biggest civil rights accomplishment in our country's history and it is being opened by a man who campaigned vigorously against to deprive the basic right of marriage to millions of Americans.
In other words, Obama should go back on his promise to reach out to the opposition, based upon politics? Or would Warren been palatible if Prop. 8 had failed? I'm going to admit that when Obama won the election, I thought he would be this flaming, left-leaning liberal who simply said he was going to be a pragmatist JUST to get elected. So far, he has been a man of his word, which is refreshing.
From what I hear on the poltical grapevine, if Warren had not sponsored that religious forum, the one that he hosted for Obama and McCain during the election, Obama would not have gotten the percentage of young and moderate Evangelistic voters that he did. Furthermore, if the numbers were correct, those numbers are much bigger than the number of homosexuals who voted. Does this put a damper on the celebration? Sure. Personally, you should not vote IN a constitutional prohibition (which has been done in California, in the matters of the OLD Prop. 14, which would have been the removal of housing protection for minorities, before it was found to be unconstitutional). However, the right to have gay marriages be recognized, if the trends are accurate, will be be a forgone conclusion within a few years (if not next year). They should learn to read the political nuances and strategize, rather than throw tantrums about something that IS going to happen anyway.
And if you think I am being harsh, then consider the racist language gays were throwing around towards Black folks indescriminately, when Prop. 8 had passed by 4 points, assuming that a) every Black voted, and, b) not every Black voted FOR Prop. 8. That sort of nonsense will not win any favors any time soon.
There are other ways to reach across the aisle than reaching out to a bigot. Why not have John McCain speak? Why not Colin Powell or Chuck Hagel or any of the countless Republicans or conservatives who are not also bigots who actively protest against a civil rights movement at the biggest civil rights event in our country's history? There is legit reason to be pissed off about a zealot speaking at Obama's inauguration. There is difference between a bigot and someone on the other side of the political aisle.
The Senator
12-25-2008, 11:30 PM
Rick Warren's bigoted comments extend far beyond homosexuals. They include Muslims, Jews, Catholics, and pretty much anyone who doesn't follow Christian ideals. I believe Obama should be extending his hand across the aisle and keeping a promise to open his administration to those who may disagree with him on a variety of issues; however, to give one of the highest speaking honors to a man who has done more to try and divide this country than unite it is a slap in the face to every demographic which worked vigorously to support his candidacy.
There are plenty of other preachers-- impartial preachers, none the less-- whom Obama could have selected. Joel Osteen would have been an excellent choice. He has remained relatively silent on the issue of gay marriage, as well as those who pursue other faiths. He is just as popular as Rick Warren in the evangelist community, but has approached controversial social issues such as gay marriage and abortion without taking a side, claiming that God knows what's best for all of us and only He can judge. While he has said that he doesn't believe homosexuality is "God's best" intention for man, he hasn't condemned gays, either. That's at least a step in the right direction.
The Senator
12-25-2008, 11:32 PM
Y'know, I'll just throw it out there...this is a ridiculous price tag. Our country is how much in debt? We go deeper into the red on a daily basis because of bail outs of industries and stimulus packages yet we can okay 50 million dollars for a party? Why not just have a private ceremony with the chief justice, outgoing president, the family and friends of those being sworn in present? It just all seems a bit too elaborate for me when our country is so deep in debt.
Because this is perhaps the most historic inauguration in our country's history. I feel the absurd amount of money is worth it. And I think most others agree.
Because this is perhaps the most historic inauguration in our country's history. I feel the absurd amount of money is worth it. And I think most others agree.
Our country is also facing a historic deficit, a historic crash in the market, and several historic bail outs of the private sector. Historic election or not, 50 million tax payer dollars for a party is not worth it.
Rick Warren's bigoted comments extend far beyond homosexuals. They include Muslims, Jews, Catholics, and pretty much anyone who doesn't follow Christian ideals. I believe Obama should be extending his hand across the aisle and keeping a promise to open his administration to those who may disagree with him on a variety of issues; however, to give one of the highest speaking honors to a man who has done more to try and divide this country than unite it is a slap in the face to every demographic which worked vigorously to support his candidacy.
There are plenty of other preachers-- impartial preachers, none the less-- whom Obama could have selected. Joel Osteen would have been an excellent choice. He has remained relatively silent on the issue of gay marriage, as well as those who pursue other faiths. He is just as popular as Rick Warren in the evangelist community, but has approached controversial social issues such as gay marriage and abortion without taking a side, claiming that God knows what's best for all of us and only He can judge. While he has said that he doesn't believe homosexuality is "God's best" intention for man, he hasn't condemned gays, either. That's at least a step in the right direction.
Osteen would've made a brilliant choice :up:
Comicfilmer
12-26-2008, 12:42 PM
I wish I was able to go...I'll just have to check it out on tv. How in the world did you get a hotel room!?!?! Supposedly every hotel in the DC and surrounding areas are completely booked.
I actually booked back in late September, before the election. At first I had a hotel right in the thick of it (Conn. Ave), but I was bumped due to dignitaries or something like that. I'm now on the outside the city, but it's a nice Hilton and it won't be too much of a problem so I'm okay with it. It's going to be a crazy trip, that's for sure. I'm excited about it though.
I actually booked back in late September, before the election. At first I had a hotel right in the thick of it (Conn. Ave), but I was bumped due to dignitaries or something like that. I'm now on the outside the city, but it's a nice Hilton and it won't be too much of a problem so I'm okay with it. It's going to be a crazy trip, that's for sure. I'm excited about it though.
I bet so! Were you planning on going despite the winner of the election?
OBAMA PICKS BIBLE FOR INAUGURATION, BUT WHAT VERSE?
http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/12/24/inauguration.scripture/index.html
Comicfilmer
12-26-2008, 01:33 PM
I bet so! Were you planning on going despite the winner of the election?
Yeah, I was planning on going regardless (but was REALLY hoping it'd be Obama I'd see). I've never been to one before and I knew I'd be able to clear my schedule that week.
StorminNorman
12-26-2008, 02:40 PM
Wait no Qur'an?
BlackLantern
12-26-2008, 02:43 PM
Because this is perhaps the most historic inauguration in our country's history. I feel the absurd amount of money is worth it. And I think most others agree.
I do not agree....I think there should be a small ceremony in the Oval Office and he should get right to work.....that would be change
rdh007
12-26-2008, 04:14 PM
I want to see the President get sworn in like every other one. And I think he and his party are entitled to a, well, party.
As for the price tag, you'd have to know what other inaugurations, especially second term ones, have already cost us. My guess is that this one isn't a whole lot more than Bush 2000 or Clinton 1992.
Carcharodon
12-26-2008, 04:41 PM
Wait no Qur'an?Why would a Christian want to be sworn in on the Qur'an?
You're just silly.
I want to see the President get sworn in like every other one. And I think he and his party are entitled to a, well, party.
As for the price tag, you'd have to know what other inaugurations, especially second term ones, have already cost us. My guess is that this one isn't a whole lot more than Bush 2000 or Clinton 1992.
Its my understanding that according to the article the average inauguration costs 15 million. This one costs 50. If the party wants a party they should pay for it. Why should our leaders tell us that we need to sacrifice when they are dumping 50 million ****ing dollars into a ceremony that could be held privately?
Holiday
12-26-2008, 05:29 PM
Its my understanding that according to the article the average inauguration costs 15 million. This one costs 50. If the party wants a party they should pay for it. Why should our leaders tell us that we need to sacrifice when they are dumping 50 million ****ing dollars into a ceremony that could be held privately?
15 million? It has to be more than that. I believe that Bush's second one cost 42.
Anyways, an example could be set here by Obama in having a smaller ceremony. To spend 50 million dollars of tax payer money in these times is ridiculous. He deserves the same celebration as the last few Presidents got but these are different times.
The Senator
12-26-2008, 05:31 PM
Well, it's good to know people are judging Obama for wanting to actually commemorate his inauguration, a ceremony which means so much to so many people. The American people do not care about how much money this costs. Most agree that the ceremony and accompanying celebrations are merited.
I'd sort of like you to back up that claim Jman. I'd argue most do not know that a leader who is urging us to sacrifice is wasting unprecedented amounts of money on a party whose sole purpose is to commemorate his own greatness.
Holiday
12-26-2008, 05:41 PM
Well, it's good to know people are judging Obama for wanting to actually commemorate his inauguration, a ceremony which means so much to so many people. The American people do not care about how much money this costs. Most agree that the ceremony and accompanying celebrations are merited.
In these economic times, there is no good excuse for spending that amount of money on a celebration. I know it's historic and he and his supporters (that includes me) deserve as big (or even bigger) an inauguration as any President but considering the state of our country I think it's a bad decision.
The Senator
12-26-2008, 06:02 PM
I'd sort of like you to back up that claim Jman. I'd argue most do not know that a leader who is urging us to sacrifice is wasting unprecedented amounts of money on a party whose sole purpose is to commemorate his own greatness.
How about the fact that my city's population is expected to grow by ten times the amount of its current population on January 20? Or the fact that I had to call seventeen Congressional offices before I got put on a waitlist for inauguration tickets?
I don't remember this happening ANY other time in this country's history. So many people are flocking from every single state in this country to see the inauguration of the first African American president. If people gave a damn about the fifty million dollar pricetag, they wouldn't be pouring so much of their own money to make it to his event. Congress wouldn't be worrying about a lack of tickets, hotels wouldn't be booked, and people wouldn't be taking out a second mortgage to rent a room in someone's apartment in DC for two nights to see this. You also forget about the influx of money the city is going to receive from these people. Many of these costs will be made up-- if not exceeded-- by tourists.
This will be the MOST historic presidential inauguration in history. A black man named Barack Hussein Obama became President of the United States. This party doesn't commemorate his greatness. It allows every single person who had a stake in his election a chance to commemorate his election. I'm not talking about partisan hacks, either. I'm talking about people whose outlook on life changed because he was elected. I'm talking about the hordes of people who feel that this election proves that ANYTHING is possible in this country. The symbolic nature of the inauguration resonates with people and captures the American spirit. And to deny people the right to celebrate this-- in what may be the one day where people can forget about the various crises we have been through-- would be outrageous.
Of ALL the things to complain about, of ALL the things to criticize Obama about, it is absolutely ridiculous that so many people are *****ing about the pricetag of his inauguration.
You want to ***** about costs? Why don't we end the war in Iraq? There's hundreds of billions of dollars right there we could cut in spending. Why don't we cut the numerous deals we have made with mercenaries all around the world? There's another multibillion dollar spending spree we can cut.
For people to complain about the cost of the inauguration is sheer pettiness. In fact, it exceeds pettiness and borders on the despicable.
How about the fact that my city's population is expected to grow by ten times the amount of its current population on January 20? Or the fact that I had to call seventeen Congressional offices before I got put on a waitlist for inauguration tickets?
I don't remember this happening ANY other time in this country's history. So many people are flocking from every single state in this country to see the inauguration of the first African American president. If people gave a damn about the fifty million dollar pricetag, they wouldn't be pouring so much of their own money to make it to his event. Congress wouldn't be worrying about a lack of tickets, hotels wouldn't be booked, and people wouldn't be taking out a second mortgage to rent a room in someone's apartment in DC for two nights to see this. You also forget about the influx of money the city is going to receive from these people. Many of these costs will be made up-- if not exceeded-- by tourists.
This will be the MOST historic presidential inauguration in history. A black man named Barack Hussein Obama became President of the United States. This party doesn't commemorate his greatness. It allows every single person who had a stake in his election a chance to commemorate his election. I'm not talking about partisan hacks, either. I'm talking about people whose outlook on life changed because he was elected. I'm talking about the hordes of people who feel that this election proves that ANYTHING is possible in this country. The symbolic nature of the inauguration resonates with people and captures the American spirit. And to deny people the right to celebrate this-- in what may be the one day where people can forget about the various crises we have been through-- would be outrageous.
Of ALL the things to complain about, of ALL the things to criticize Obama about, it is absolutely ridiculous that so many people are *****ing about the pricetag of his inauguration.
You want to ***** about costs? Why don't we end the war in Iraq? There's hundreds of billions of dollars right there we could cut in spending. Why don't we cut the numerous deals we have made with mercenaries all around the world? There's another multibillion dollar spending spree we can cut.
For people to complain about the cost of the inauguration is sheer pettiness. In fact, it exceeds pettiness and borders on the despicable.
Just because people are going does not mean they approve of the price tag. Most probably do not even know it. My point is you cannot back up your claim. And even if you did whip out an scientifically conducted poll to prove your point does not make it right. The majority of American's wreckless spending on credit is the reason we are in this debacle.
And yes, there are other ways to cut costs and they should be taken immeidietly. Right now, the only cost in Barack Obama's power to cut is this ridiculously elaborate ceremony that is 50 million dollars that can be diverted to other, more worthy endeavors. he is telling us that we need to sacrifice when he refuses to turn down a ceremony designed to stroke his ego? Lead by example, Barack.
StorminNorman
12-26-2008, 06:21 PM
Why would a Christian want to be sworn in on the Qur'an?
You're just silly.
Good way at failing to continue the "he's a muslim" joke, jerk :cmad::oldrazz:
BlackLantern
12-26-2008, 06:21 PM
He's a Muslim??? HOLY ****
StorminNorman
12-26-2008, 06:26 PM
The fact that I really cannot wait to celebrate the inauguration of a President who I debated loudly against is filling me with confusion :(
The Senator
12-26-2008, 06:28 PM
Just because people are going does not mean they approve of the price tag. Most probably do not even know it. My point is you cannot back up your claim. And even if you did whip out an scientifically conducted poll to prove your point does not make it right. The majority of American's wreckless spending on credit is the reason we are in this debacle.
And yes, there are other ways to cut costs and they should be taken immeidietly. Right now, the only cost in Barack Obama's power to cut is this ridiculously elaborate ceremony that is 50 million dollars that can be diverted to other, more worthy endeavors. he is telling us that we need to sacrifice when he refuses to turn down a ceremony designed to stroke his ego? Lead by example, Barack.
Your point is well noted. It appears we have to endure four years of people complaining about the most petty occurrences in his administration. I can't wait until he decides to get a golden retriever and there's a four-page thread filled with complaints about how much of a waste of money it is to take care of a dog. Or when he has to travel abroad and meet with foreign leaders, and people complain about how much money he's spending on jet fuel to do so. Or maybe he'll decide to throw a birthday party for his daughters, too, and he'll be criticized immensely for not making sacrifices where they are due.
BlackLantern
12-26-2008, 06:35 PM
If he is saying the American people should sacrifice (and I agree) he should be making some sacrifices as well...
Your point is well noted. It appears we have to endure four years of people complaining about the most petty occurrences in his administration. I can't wait until he decides to get a golden retriever and there's a four-page thread filled with complaints about how much of a waste of money it is to take care of a dog. Or when he has to travel abroad and meet with foreign leaders, and people complain about how much money he's spending on jet fuel to do so. Or maybe he'll decide to throw a birthday party for his daughters, too, and he'll be criticized immensely for not making sacrifices where they are due.
If he pays for your first and last examples out of his own pocket, I could care less. As for the second example it is state business, thus not a waste of money. A party is.
souvlaki
12-26-2008, 06:55 PM
I'm kind of curious exactly how much money went to this:
Mayor Adrian Fenty agreed that costs for increased security and crowd control would dwarf the original allocation.
That part doesn't shock me in the least. When you take into account just how many people are going to be there, and the fact that our new President probably will require more security than our last few it makes sense they'd spend a lot of money on that. On the bright side, local businesses in the DC area as well as surrounding areas will make a ton of cash during the week of the inauguration.
The Senator
12-26-2008, 07:08 PM
If he is saying the American people should sacrifice (and I agree) he should be making some sacrifices as well...
So you target the one thing which matters to millions of Americans as the sole thing which needs to be sacrificed? Fifty million dollars is nothing when compared to the hundreds of billions of dollars our government wastes every single year.
It is a start and it is Obama showing that he is willing to sacrifice as well.
Carcharodon
12-26-2008, 07:17 PM
If he pays for your first and last examples out of his own pocket, I could care less.Really? Could you?
Such a ****ing pet-peeve....:cmad:
Carcharodon
12-26-2008, 07:20 PM
Good way at failing to continue the "he's a muslim" joke, jerk :cmad::oldrazz:Oh, silly me, then. I guess it was a knee-jerk reaction to the past several months of hearing, "He's an A-Rab terrorist!" from white-trash dumbasses.
:csad:
rdh007
12-26-2008, 10:16 PM
Its my understanding that according to the article the average inauguration costs 15 million. This one costs 50. If the party wants a party they should pay for it. Why should our leaders tell us that we need to sacrifice when they are dumping 50 million ****ing dollars into a ceremony that could be held privately?
Nah, 15 million was the amount that they're (DC's) asking for from the government to cover their costs.
"Fenty predicted costs for the city would near $50 million, the same amount Congress provided to both Denver, Colorado, and St. Paul, Minnesota, to host the Republican and Democratic conventions earlier this year."
To me, if this costs taxpayers what the conventions cost us, that seems reasonable. I'm all for subduing things as much as possible, but this guy deserves the same party all these other jokers have gotten.
Nah, 15 million was the amount that they're (DC's) asking for from the government to cover their costs.
"Fenty predicted costs for the city would near $50 million, the same amount Congress provided to both Denver, Colorado, and St. Paul, Minnesota, to host the Republican and Democratic conventions earlier this year."
To me, if this costs taxpayers what the conventions cost us, that seems reasonable. I'm all for subduing things as much as possible, but this guy deserves the same party all these other jokers have gotten.
I agree.
jaguarr
12-30-2008, 01:06 PM
I see Matt still hates Obama with the blinding, searing, white-hot heat of a thousand suns.
jag
I see Matt still hates Obama with the blinding, searing, white-hot heat of a thousand suns.
jag
No, I think it's down to around 900 suns now. He's mellowed out since the election. :oldrazz:
jaguarr
12-30-2008, 01:16 PM
No, I think it's down to around 900 suns now. He's mellowed out since the election. :oldrazz:
Maybe his therapist helped him have a breakthrough. You can learn more about Matt's therapist at therapist.com. :hehe:
jag
Maybe his therapist helped him have a breakthrough. You can learn more about Matt's therapist at therapist.com. :hehe:
jag
:funny:
The Senator
12-30-2008, 01:23 PM
Maybe his therapist helped him have a breakthrough. You can learn more about Matt's therapist at therapist.com. :hehe:
jag
I heard Matt's therapist is the world's first analrapist (http://the-op.com/media/image2.php?ep=303&i=8855&cat=6200).
jaguarr
12-30-2008, 01:28 PM
I heard Matt's therapist is the world's first analrapist (http://the-op.com/media/image2.php?ep=303&i=8855&cat=6200).
LOL! I don't know about the first, but definitely the most professional! :funny:
jag
ORGANIZERS DESCRIBE DAY LONG ENDURANCE TEST
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/12/30/inauguration-organizers-describe-day-long-endurance-test/#more-33780
There are still a host of question marks around next month’s inauguration festivities, but one thing is undeniable: the day may be geared less to your average middle schooler, and more to a field-tested U.S. Marine.
In the latest blunt advisory released Monday, the presidential inaugural committee said ticket-holders for President-elect Barack Obama’s swearing-in ceremony will need to arrive no fewer than three hours before the outdoor ceremony’s scheduled 11:30 a.m. start time.
But getting there in the first place poses a logistical challenge that’s not for the faint of heart or limb. Despite a new plan to turn big sections of the city into parking lots for charter buses and a peak rush hour schedule plan for the city’s Metro system, most cars and buses are unlikely to be allowed to enter the city, let alone the designated two-mile security zone around the swearing-in site.
Metro officials warn that riders will be underground with “thousands” of fellow visitors – meaning that even those lucky enough to make it onto the platform will face lengthy wait times before they see the inside of a packed train car.
Attendees forced to abandon their cars for mass transit might want to start a Stairmaster schedule now: transportation officials have warned that capacity crowds may force them to turn off the system’s escalators – making the trip back above ground an ambitious workout.
Yikes! :wow:
LAWSUIT SEEKS TO STOP RELIGIOUS REFERENCES AT INAUGURATION
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/12/31/lawsuit-seeks-to-stop-religious-references-at-inauguration/
A number of atheists and non-religious organizations want Barack Obama's inauguration ceremony to leave out all references to God and religion. In a lawsuit filed Tuesday in Washington, the plaintiffs demand that the words "so help me God" not be added to the end of the president's oath of office. In addition, the lawsuit objects to plans for ministers to deliver an invocation and a benediction in which they may discuss God and religion.
An advance copy of the lawsuit was posted on a Web site by Michael Newdow, a California doctor and lawyer who has filed similar and unsuccessful suits over inauguration ceremonies in 2001 and 2005.
The new lawsuit says in part, "There can be no purpose for placing 'so help me God' in an oath or sponsoring prayers to God, other than promoting the particular point of view that God exists."
Newdow said references to God during inauguration ceremonies violate the Constitution's ban on the establishment of religion. Newdow and other plaintiffs say they want to watch the Inaugural either in person or on television. As atheists they contend having to watch a ceremony
with religious components will make them feel excluded and stigmatized.
"Plaintiffs are placed in the untenable position of having to choose between not watching the presidential inauguration or being forced to countenance endorsements of purely religious notions that they expressly deny," according to the lawsuit.
Among those named in the lawsuit are Chief Justice of the United States John Roberts, who is expected to swear in the new president; the Presidential Inauguration Committee, known as PIC; the Joint Congressional Committee on Inauguration Ceremonies and its chairwoman, Sen. Dianne Feinstein of California; and the Armed Forces Inaugural Committee and its commander, Maj. Gen. Richard Rowe, Jr.
The two ministers scheduled to participate in the ceremony also are named — Rev. Rick Warren and Rev. Joe Lowery. The document includes a quotation from Warren on atheists: "I could not vote for an atheist because an atheist says, 'I don't need God.'"
:dry:
60,000 VOLUNTEER FOR INAUGURATION
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/12/31/AR2008123103082.html
An unprecedented 60,000 people have sent applications to the Presidential Inaugural Committee to volunteer for activities surrounding the swearing-in of Barack Obama -- even if it means simply giving directions or friendly hellos to out-of-towners at airports and Metro stops.
With several days of events, including the Jan. 20 swearing-in, the committee needs 15,000 to 18,000 volunteers, officials said. That's three times as many as were called upon for the inaugurations of George W. Bush.
Committee spokesman Kevin Griffis said: "There's a hunger out there. People want to get involved. People want to be a part of this thing . . . a part of history."
Officials have thinned the applicant pool to about 27,000, said Tripp Wellde, the committee's director of volunteers. They've been screening the offers via questionnaires that focus on availability and capability. But the applications keep coming in through the committee's Web site, with a deadline set for 11:59 p.m. tomorrow.
Holy crap! :wow:
Nivek
01-04-2009, 12:49 PM
It's kind of strange to hear about this level of interest in a Presidential Inauguration in my lifetime. That, and I'm still amazed how many volunteers come to Obamas aid. I appreciate that a quality that I voted for him on (the ability to inspire and rally people to donate tiime, energy, and money) is still working in full effect. If he can get the funding approved, I see his infrastructure plans moving quick (which is what this country needs right now, new skills training, jobs, and innovative projects)
Almost TWO WEEKS until the inauguration!
It's kind of strange to hear about this level of interest in a Presidential Inauguration in my lifetime. That, and I'm still amazed how many volunteers come to Obamas aid. I appreciate that a quality that I voted for him on (the ability to inspire and rally people to donate tiime, energy, and money) is still working in full effect. If he can get the funding approved, I see his infrastructure plans moving quick (which is what this country needs right now, new skills training, jobs, and innovative projects)
After eight years of George W. Bush, there is finally something to be excited about again.
jaguarr
01-05-2009, 12:51 PM
Anyone else think D.C. is going to turn into a giant clusterf**k during the inauguration, simply due to the huge amount of people flooding the city?
jag
Anyone else think D.C. is going to turn into a giant clusterf**k during the inauguration, simply due to the huge amount of people flooding the city?
jag
I can't even imagine...
Malice
01-05-2009, 12:57 PM
This ordeal is going to be insane....
OBAMA'S INAUGURATION FUND-RAISING TOPS $24 MILLION
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/06/us/politics/06donors.html?_r=1
The $24 million puts Mr. Obama more than halfway toward the goal of raising $40 million to $45 million for what could be the most expensive inauguration ever, topping the $42.3 million that President Bush spent in 2005.
About 1,200 people have contributed $200 or more, according to the inaugural committee's website which is voluntarily disclosing the donations in near real-time. The site does not show donations of small donors, so it is not clear how many have contributed or how much, and Obama officials say the online fund-raising aimed at smaller donors is just beginning.
The big donors include 189 bundlers, who have collected $21.6 million of the $24.8 million (many also gave $50,000 themselves). Of those, 103 bundlers, who have raised $12 million for the inauguration, also raised money for the Obama campaign, according to a review by Alexander Cohen of Public Citizen, a watchdog group that seeks to tighten the nation’s campaign finance laws.
'YOUTH INAUGURAL BALL' TO CELEBRATE YOUNG AMERICANS' SERVICE
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2009/01/06/%e2%80%98youth-inaugural-ball%e2%80%99-to-celebrate-young-americans%e2%80%99-service-to-communities/
President-elect Barack Obama has added more inaugural balls to his list, taking the total number of celebratory events to ten.
The President-elect will host a Youth Inaugural Ball, five Regional balls, and inaugural events for his home states of Illinois and Hawaii on January 20, the 2009 Presidential Inauguration Committee announced Tuesday.
The Youth Inaugural Ball is intended for individuals aged 18-35 and will be held to focus on young Americans and their service to their communities. The regional balls, an inaugural tradition, and the celebrations in Illinois and Hawaii will be held for invited guests only.
"This is America's inaugural celebration in every way," said Presidential Inaugural Committee Executive Director Emmett S. Beliveau. "Young people are more engaged in this country's future than ever before and we want to harness that excitement by inviting them to participate in this historic occasion. In that same vein, we are hosting events to bring people from all walks of life and from across the country - from the President-elect and Vice President-elect's home states, as well as every corner of the nation - to celebrate this country's unity moving forward."
President-elect Obama and VP-elect Joe Biden will attend all ten inauguration events.
Malice
01-06-2009, 02:33 PM
rent a hall....hire a dj....
buy some booze...
50k is all you need
Has anyone seen pictures of the new 'Obamobile'? (aka the Presidential limousine.)
The exterior is paneled with five inches of ballistic armor, and is said to be able to withstand anti-tank grenade launchers. The underside of the car is also armored. The windows, which do not open, are transparent armor thick enough to block sunlight, which is the reason the interior is illuminated with naturalistic artificial lighting. The doors require automatic systems to open and the car has a run-flat tire system. The limousine is also environmentally sealed against chemical and biological attacks. A four wheel drive system to improve traction might also be fitted.
http://i11.photobucket.com/albums/a178/ebat9/ObamaLimo.jpg
It's a tank...with windows.
RAMORE
01-06-2009, 03:47 PM
That's a sweet car^:up:
By the way anyone talk about the ridiculous amount of money they are spending on this ball? Is that normal what have the last 3 presidents spent? They should put that towards better use.
Holiday
01-06-2009, 04:06 PM
By the way anyone talk about the ridiculous amount of money they are spending on this ball? Is that normal what have the last 3 presidents spent? They should put that towards better use.
Yes, it was discussed a couple of pages back. Take the time to read through this thread before you post in it. It's not that long.
MORE ON OBAMA'S PRESIDENTIAL LIMOUSINE
http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/01/06/driving.obama/index.html
Shortly after taking the oath of office, Obama will climb into the Mother of All Hybrids -- part car, part truck and, from the looks of it, part tank.
In keeping with recent tradition, the Secret Service will place a brand-new presidential limousine into service January 20 to drive the new president on the 2-mile jaunt down Pennsylvania Avenue during the inaugural parade.
Already, spy photos of the limo -- with patches of gray primer -- have leaked out. And already, the reviews:
"Ugly as sin," says one car enthusiast on an auto Web site. "Can't we make a hotter ride for our pres?"
"Sheesh," says another, "why don't they just transport the president around in an Abrams tank."
One news agency, noting its 8-inch-thick doors, says the limo can withstand a "direct hit from an asteroid." But GM spokeswoman Joanne K. Krell laughed off the comments.
"And it will fix you a latte if you ask," she jokes.
redfirebird2008
01-06-2009, 10:53 PM
Has anyone seen pictures of the new 'Obamobile'? (aka the Presidential limousine.)
http://images.loqu.com/contents/290/805/image/07-31/3642_04.jpg
It's a tank...with windows.
Yeah, I'd say he'll have the most security of any President ever.
RAMORE
01-07-2009, 11:05 AM
Yes, it was discussed a couple of pages back. Take the time to read through this thread before you post in it. It's not that long.
Well I thank you for your help Noob! What page would that be on and I'll get right to reading it?
The Senator
01-07-2009, 11:09 AM
I thought people in this forum would be above resorting to childish namecalling such as "noob"...
RAMORE
01-07-2009, 11:15 AM
You thought wrong I felt his comment to me to be condescending. I have never called anyone noob before that post.
The Senator
01-07-2009, 11:16 AM
You thought wrong I felt his comment to me to be condescending. I have never called anyone noob before that post.
Would you like some cheese to go with that whine?
RAMORE
01-07-2009, 11:19 AM
Yes I would Cheddar please:D
RAMORE
01-07-2009, 11:19 AM
What's up with your Avvy by the way?
So how 'bout that OBAMA INAUGURATION???
Holiday
01-07-2009, 11:46 AM
Well I thank you for your help Noob! What page would that be on and I'll get right to reading it?
http://forums.superherohype.com/showthread.php?t=316455&page=2
There. I had to back a whole 4 pages to find the discussion.
Oh, and your welcome.
souvlaki
01-07-2009, 11:54 AM
MORE ON OBAMA'S PRESIDENTIAL LIMOUSINE
http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/01/06/driving.obama/index.html
Why are people complaining? I could care less if it's aesthetically pleasing. Fact of the matter is, and for good reason, Obama needs all the extra security he can get. If that means he has to ride around in an ugly ass "tank" so be it.
Why are people complaining? I could care less if it's aesthetically pleasing. Fact of the matter is, and for good reason, Obama needs all the extra security he can get. If that means he has to ride around in an ugly ass "tank" so be it.
I think they were only saying it's 'ugly' because of the pictures that had originally leaked. (Which was an unfinished, primered limousine.)
souvlaki
01-07-2009, 12:10 PM
I think they were only saying it's 'ugly' because of the pictures that had originally leaked. (Which was an unfinished, primered limousine.)
Is the picture you posted unfinished? Because I don't think it looks that ugly, and it doesn't even really look all that tank-ish either. But then again, I'm completely ignorant when it comes to cars. If it goes from point a to point b then, as far as I'm concerned, the car has served it's purpose.
souvlaki
01-07-2009, 12:12 PM
'YOUTH INAUGURAL BALL' TO CELEBRATE YOUNG AMERICANS' SERVICE
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2009/01/06/%e2%80%98youth-inaugural-ball%e2%80%99-to-celebrate-young-americans%e2%80%99-service-to-communities/
That sounds like it could be a lot of fun, but it also is probably extremely pricey.
The Senator
01-07-2009, 12:15 PM
'YOUTH INAUGURAL BALL' TO CELEBRATE YOUNG AMERICANS' SERVICE
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2009/01/06/%e2%80%98youth-inaugural-ball%e2%80%99-to-celebrate-young-americans%e2%80%99-service-to-communities/
In other news...
NO YOUTH SHOW UP AT 'YOUTH INAUGURAL BALL' DUE TO FOUR-FIGURE TICKET PRICES.
:hehe:
Is the picture you posted unfinished? Because I don't think it looks that ugly, and it doesn't even really look all that tank-ish either. But then again, I'm completely ignorant when it comes to cars. If it goes from point a to point b then, as far as I'm concerned, the car has served it's purpose.
No, the picture that I posted is the finished version.
This is the picture (I believe) that got the 'ugly' comments started...
http://i11.photobucket.com/albums/a178/ebat9/art_cadillac1_cnn.jpg
souvlaki
01-07-2009, 12:17 PM
In other news...
NO YOUTH SHOW UP AT 'YOUTH INAUGURAL BALL' DUE TO FOUR-FIGURE TICKET PRICES.
:hehe:
Yeah, it does seem kind of pointless for that reason. I'm sure most people that age would be just as happy spending $50 on alcohol and throwing a house party on inauguration day. Hell, that's what I will probably do.
souvlaki
01-07-2009, 12:18 PM
No, the picture that I posted in the finished version.
This is the picture (I believe) that got the 'ugly' comments started...
http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2009/POLITICS/01/06/driving.obama/art.cadillac1.cnn.jpg
Oh, okay... yeah, that is ugly. Looks a lot better all finished up.
jaguarr
01-07-2009, 12:18 PM
rent a hall....hire a dj....
buy some booze...
50k is all you need
You're such a cheap date, Mal. :heart:
Why are people complaining? I could care less if it's aesthetically pleasing. Fact of the matter is, and for good reason, Obama needs all the extra security he can get. If that means he has to ride around in an ugly ass "tank" so be it.
The people complaining are probably also the same kind of people who helped Paris Hilton become famous, buy all of Britney Spears' albums, and call The National Enquirer "the newspaper". :o
jag
The Senator
01-07-2009, 12:18 PM
I have a free ticket to one of the inaugural balls which I'm thinking about pawning off to one of my friends. As much as I would like to go, navigating the city that evening is going to be extremely tedious.
I have a free ticket to one of the inaugural balls which I'm thinking about pawning off to one of my friends. As much as I would like to go, navigating the city that evening is going to be extremely tedious.
But you're already near the area, aren't you? You'd have an advantage.
The Senator
01-07-2009, 12:20 PM
But you're already near the area, aren't you? You'd have an advantage.
I'd have to drive through the city or take public transportation. Considering the city's population is expected to expand by ten times the amount of people already living there, any transportation will be extremely congested and beyond annoying. Especially since I will need to dress up.
souvlaki
01-07-2009, 12:22 PM
I'd have to drive through the city or take public transportation. Considering the city's population is expected to expand by ten times the amount of people already living there, any transportation will be extremely congested and beyond annoying. Especially since I will need to dress up.
Are you still planning on going to the actual inauguration? I remember you mentioned calling your local congressman about getting tickets a couple months ago.
I'd have to drive through the city or take public transportation. Considering the city's population is expected to expand by ten times the amount of people already living there, any transportation will be extremely congested and beyond annoying. Especially since I will need to dress up.
If I lived where you live, I would definately be there. Without question.
The Senator
01-07-2009, 12:23 PM
Are you still planning on going to the actual inauguration? I remember you mentioned calling your local congressman about getting tickets a couple months ago.
Yes... as long as it doesn't rain, considering umbrellas are not allowed at the festivities. And considering I'm going to have to navigate through a sea of people, through congested streets and Metro stations, standing outside in frigid rain for at least five hours doesn't seem all that appealing to me.
Yes... as long as it doesn't rain, considering umbrellas are not allowed at the festivities. And considering I'm going to have to navigate through a sea of people, through congested streets and Metro stations, standing outside in frigid rain for at least five hours doesn't seem all that appealing to me.
You could think of it as an 'endurance test'. :oldrazz:
Nivek
01-07-2009, 12:27 PM
No, the picture that I posted in the finished version.
This is the picture (I believe) that got the 'ugly' comments started...
http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2009/POLITICS/01/06/driving.obama/art.cadillac1.cnn.jpg
Supposedly, this is the most advanced Presidential "Limousine" ever made. I sell materials to a company down here that makes Custom Armored Limo's, and they said this car smokes anything they have the capabilities to make, and that his car can take multiple anti-tank rounds and still keep going. It looks ugly because all it is is a APC tank that has a faux car body on the outside.
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v192/Nivekian/armored_personnel_carrier.jpg
RAMORE
01-07-2009, 01:52 PM
http://forums.superherohype.com/showthread.php?t=316455&page=2
There. I had to back a whole 4 pages to find the discussion.
Oh, and your welcome.
Thank you Holiday you are a gentleman and a scholar.
RAMORE
01-07-2009, 01:59 PM
Just because people are going does not mean they approve of the price tag. Most probably do not even know it. My point is you cannot back up your claim. And even if you did whip out an scientifically conducted poll to prove your point does not make it right. The majority of American's wreckless spending on credit is the reason we are in this debacle.
And yes, there are other ways to cut costs and they should be taken immeidietly. Right now, the only cost in Barack Obama's power to cut is this ridiculously elaborate ceremony that is 50 million dollars that can be diverted to other, more worthy endeavors. he is telling us that we need to sacrifice when he refuses to turn down a ceremony designed to stroke his ego? Lead by example, Barack.
I agree with Matt's and Holidays responses a couple pages back my question is How much have other presidents spent? This sort of reminds me of the big 3 automakers flying to washington in private jets to ask for a handout and people freaking out. In the long run will it make a difference....no but it would set a brilliant example I think if he cut it significantly. Only spend money on Security. Give the rest to starving children or some other worthy cause you know. I know a lot of it's been raised privately but couldn't it go to something better?
BUSH HEADING TO TEXAS ON INAUGURATION DAY
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2009/01/07/bush-heading-to-texas-on-inauguration-day/
The White House said Wednesday President Bush will go directly to Midland, Texas after leaving Washington on Inauguration Day.
White House spokesperson Dana Perino said the President and First Lady Laura Bush will leave Andrews Air Force Base, and fly to Midland for a “welcome home event” in Centennial Plaza on the town square. They will fly on one of the jets he used as Air Force One during his presidency, though it will have a different designation that day.
Midland was the site of his send-off rally when he left for Washington before taking office in January 2001. The president lived in Midland as he was growing up, and it is the first lady’s hometown.
The President and Mrs. Bush will then fly to Waco, and go to their ranch in Crawford for the first night after leaving the White House.
OFFICIAL INAUGURATION POSTER RELEASED BY OBAMA TEAM
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/01/07/official-inauguration-pos_n_156045.html
The Barack Obama Inaugural Committee is releasing an official inauguration poster playing off past themes and marking the history of January 20th in a uniquely Obama fashion.
Designed by famed street artist Shepard Fairey, the print, created especially for the 2009 Inauguration, boldly declares "BE THE CHANGE."
It is the next step in the branding of the presidency -- a development that is not unique to Obama but one that he has used better than any other politician in recent memory.
Fairey's initial design -- a guerrilla style, dark-colored portrait of the then-candidate -- proved to be a political and cultural phenomenon during the campaign. The current edition plays heavily off those themes and it seems likely to be a major symbol during the inauguration festivities. The image will be available on buttons, lapel pins, stickers and t-shirts.
The poster will officially be released tomorrow on the Inaugural Committee's online store (http://pic2009.inauguralcollectibles.com/).
http://www.superherohype.com/forums/images/smilies/icon14.gif
tzarinna
01-08-2009, 09:24 PM
Security has been beefed up big time on the Metro. Traffic was ridiculous tonight. I'm so not looking forward to the big day, and I'm working that day. I'm going to need to leave super early and hope to find a nice quiet place to nap until my shift begins.
dnno1
01-08-2009, 10:04 PM
http://www.icv2.com/images/14054ASM583_ObamaVariantLG.JPG
5000 INAUGURATION PARADE TICKETS OFFERED TO THE PUBLIC
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/01/09/inauguration-parade-ticke_n_156671.html
Barack Obama's Presidential Inaugural Committee sold 5,000 tickets for bleacher seats along the inaugural parade route on Friday. The tickets, selling for $25 a piece, were available through Ticketmaster and reportedly sold out immediately. According to CBS News, "PIC is still reeling from the demand of these tickets and trying to figure out exactly how long the sales took."
Some more details on the parade the lucky 5,000 will be watching, from The Hill:
The 14-block parade route, from the Capitol to the White House, will open to the public at 7 a.m. on Tuesday.
More than 90 groups, from high school marching bands to a NASA float and the entire student body of the Virginia Military Institute, will participate in the country's 56th Inaugural parade. Bands from both the president-elect's and Michelle Obama's high schools will be included.
About 1,300 groups applied to participate, which organizers said was three times the number of applications for other recent Inaugurations.
OBAMA HAS ASKED TO SAY 'SO HELP ME GOD' AT SWEARING IN
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2009/01/09/obama-to-asked-to-say-so-help-me-god-at-swearing-in/
President-elect Barack Obama has requested that the words “so help me God” be added to the end of the oath of office to be administered by Chief Justice John Roberts on Inauguration Day.
That confirmation came in an affidavit filed today by Roberts' court counselor in a pending lawsuit by an atheist opposed to any mention of God in the inaugural ceremonies. Roberts said he would abide by Obama’s wishes.
The Constitution has specific language on what has to be said when swearing in the president, but the “so help me God” phrase has traditionally been added at the end of the required oath, starting with George Washington in 1789.
OBAMA, BIDEN INAUGURAL LUNCHEON DETAILS RELEASED
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2009/01/09/obama-biden-inaugural-luncheon-details-released/
The Presidential Inaugural Committee announced Friday that the 2009 Inaugural Luncheon will take place in the Statuary Hall in the Capitol and celebrate the bicentennial of the birth of President Abraham Lincoln, following the swearing-in ceremony of President-elect Barack Obama and Vice President-elect Joe Biden.
In keeping with the theme, meals will be served on replicas of china used during the Lincoln presidency, boasting the American bald eagle and the U.S. Coat of Arms.
The menu is inspired by the era of Lincoln’s presidency and features courses of seafood stew, pheasant and duck with sweet potatoes and chutney, and apple cinnamon sponge cake for dessert. Carefully-selected wines and champagne will be served to compliment the flavors of the luncheon courses.
Aside from the feast, the event features toasts to the new administration, presentations of gifts given by Congress on behalf of the American people, various speeches, and music by the Smithsonian Chamber Players – an ensemble known for its performances of period music played on instruments from the museum’s collection.
The inaugural luncheon tradition dates as far back as 1897, when one was held in honor of President McKinley and the U.S. Capitol, though the current practice began in 1953.
AMTRAK ADDS TRAINS ON INUAGURATION DAY: TICKETS STILL AVAILABLE
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2009/01/08/amtrak-adds-trains-on-inauguration-day-tickets-still-available/
Automobile traffic will be diverted; bridges closed. But from Amtrak, there's a bit of good news about Inauguration Day travel.
Amtrak says that it has increased the number — and length — of trains running to Washington on January 20, and that tickets are still available.
But they're going quick.
Amtrak can accommodate 5,600 in-bound passengers on a normal weekday, but will accommodate 8,200 to 8,300 on inauguration day, said Amtrak Chief Operating Officer William Crosbie. "I don't think in the (37-year) history of Amtrak we've put on this much capacity," he said.
But space is limited and travelers are encouraged to purchase tickets soon. All Amtrak trains in the Northeast require reservations and ticket purchases before boarding.
(For schedules and other information, passengers can visit www.amtrak.com (http://www.amtrak.com/servlet/ContentServer?pagename=Amtrak/HomePage) or call 800-USA-RAIL.)
Crosbie and Amtrak Police Chief John O'Connor have some advice for those coming to DC by train:
– When purchasing a ticket to DC, also buy your return ticket. Tickets will be on sale at Washington's Union Station, but the counter will be crowded.
– Take advantage of restroom facilities on-board the trains. Amtrak will provide additional portable facilities at Union Station, but there may be lines.
– Remember that there are no storage lockers at Union Station.
– Pay attention to the weather and dress appropriately.
– Have patience.
CHENEY 'EXCITED' ABOUT OBAMA INAUGURATION
http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/washington/2009/01/cheney-obama.html
Cheney first states the obvious: As a Republican, he voted for John McCain. But then the conservative Wyoming native and longtime Washington denizen says:
"I have the same feeling that I think many Americans have, that it's really remarkable that -- what we're going to do here in a few days is swear in the first African American president of the United States. When I came to town in 1968, we'd had the Martin Luther King assassination, Bobby Kennedy assassination, riots in the cities, major, major disturbances, a lot of it racially motivated around the country.
"And in fact, things have changed so dramatically that we're now about to swear in Barack Obama as president of the United States. That's really a remarkable story and I think a record of tremendous success and progress for the United States."
Apparently, momentarily taken aback by the vice president's positive tone on his party losing the White House, Blitzer mumbles, "Pretty historic. Pretty exciting."
And Cheney agrees! "It is," he says.
OBAMA TO DINE LIKE LINCOLN
http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2009/01/obama-will-eat.html
Mr. Obama has often invoked Mr. Lincoln on the campaign trail, from his candidacy announcement in Springfield, Ill., where Lincoln once toiled as a state legislator, to the 16th president's "team of rivals" in his Cabinet, which Mr. Obama has replicated by putting three former Democratic presidential primary opponents in his, to his pick of Bible for the swearing-in.
On the Saturday before his inauguration, Mr. Obama will also travel by train to Washington, D.C., starting in the city of brotherly love, Philadelphia, where that other lanky Illinoisan spoke while traveling from Springfield, Ill., in 1861. On the Sunday before his swearing-in, Mr. Obama will hold a rally at the Lincoln Memorial.
Lincoln-y enough for ya?
The luncheon's appetizer will be seafood stew in puff pastry -- scallops, shrimp, lobster -- served as a nod to the 16th president's love of stewed and scalloped oysters.
The main course -- duck breast with sour-cherry chutney and herb-roasted pheasant served with molasses sweet potatoes and winter vegetables -- is a nod to the root vegetables and wild game that Mr. Lincoln favored growing up on the frontier in Kentucky and Indiana.
The apple cinnamon sponge cake dessert is a nod to Mr. Lincoln's love of apples and apple cake.
The full menu (http://inaugural.senate.gov/luncheon/) was released by the Inaugural Committee on Friday, which also released the recipes for the meals (http://inaugural.senate.gov/documents/doc-2009-recipes.pdf) should one want to try them at home.
tzarinna
01-11-2009, 09:00 PM
Okay, so I might go. They cancelled a play so I only have one shift and it's in the evening. So what I was thinking of doing is take my bike downtown a day or two before hand, (you can't take it on the train the day of inauguration), and lock it up somewhere close to a station. That way when I get off the train my mobility around town will be a lot easier.
Superman
01-12-2009, 11:45 AM
Has anyone seen pictures of the new 'Obamobile'? (aka the Presidential limousine.)
The exterior is paneled with five inches of ballistic armor, and is said to be able to withstand anti-tank grenade launchers. The underside of the car is also armored. The windows, which do not open, are transparent armor thick enough to block sunlight, which is the reason the interior is illuminated with naturalistic artificial lighting. The doors require automatic systems to open and the car has a run-flat tire system. The limousine is also environmentally sealed against chemical and biological attacks. A four wheel drive system to improve traction might also be fitted.
http://i11.photobucket.com/albums/a178/ebat9/ObamaLimo.jpg
It's a tank...with windows.This may be a dumb question but I've been up all night so give me a break.:oldrazz:
If light can't even get in how can they see out?:huh:
jaguarr
01-12-2009, 11:47 AM
Okay, so I might go. They cancelled a play so I only have one shift and it's in the evening. So what I was thinking of doing is take my bike downtown a day or two before hand, (you can't take it on the train the day of inauguration), and lock it up somewhere close to a station. That way when I get off the train my mobility around town will be a lot easier.
Sounds like a great way to get your bike stolen.
jag
jaguarr
01-12-2009, 11:48 AM
This may be a dumb question but I've been up all night so give me a break.:oldrazz:
If light can't even get in how can they see out?:huh:
Through the power of science!!!!!! :up:
jag
Superman
01-12-2009, 11:48 AM
Okay, so I might go. They cancelled a play so I only have one shift and it's in the evening. So what I was thinking of doing is take my bike downtown a day or two before hand, (you can't take it on the train the day of inauguration), and lock it up somewhere close to a station. That way when I get off the train my mobility around town will be a lot easier.If it doesn't get stolen before then.:wow:
Superman
01-12-2009, 11:49 AM
Through the power of science!!!!!! :up:
jag:cmad:
Okay, so I might go. They cancelled a play so I only have one shift and it's in the evening. So what I was thinking of doing is take my bike downtown a day or two before hand, (you can't take it on the train the day of inauguration), and lock it up somewhere close to a station. That way when I get off the train my mobility around town will be a lot easier.
Sounds like a great way to get your bike stolen.
jag
I was thinking the same thing Jag.
RAMORE
01-12-2009, 11:55 AM
Is anyone else sick of the Lincoln comparisons?
jaguarr
01-12-2009, 12:04 PM
Is anyone else sick of the Lincoln comparisons?
I know, right? Obama doesn't even HAVE a beard! Sheesh!
jag
I know, right? Obama doesn't even HAVE a beard! Sheesh!
jag
Give it time. :cwink:
RAMORE
01-12-2009, 12:10 PM
:D You know what I mean next thing you know they are gonna give him a stove pipe hat like lincoln and very boxers he wore for his debut...
ram
GAY BISHOP TO OPEN INAUGURAL WEEKEND
http://news.yahoo.com/s/politico/20090112/pl_politico/17340
The Rt. Rev. V. Gene Robinson of New Hampshire, who was elected the Episcopal Church’s first openly gay bishop in 2003, will deliver the invocation for Sunday’s kickoff inaugural event on the steps of the Lincoln Memorial, the Presidential Inaugural Committee said.
President-elect Obama is scheduled to attend the afternoon event, which is free and open to the public.
“The president-elect has respect for the Rt. Rev. Robinson, who offered his advice and counsel over the past couple of years,” an inaugural official said. “It also has the benefit of further reinforcing our commitment to an open and inclusive inaugural.”
Robinson remains the Bishop of the Episcopal Diocese of New Hampshire.
Joe Solmonese, president of the Human Rights Campaign, the nation’s largest gay civil rights organization, said in a statement that the choice was "encouraging."
“Bishop Robinson models what prayer should be — spiritual reflection put into action for justice," Solmonese said. "It is encouraging that the president-elect has chosen this spiritual hero, and that should remain our focus today."
Many of Obama’s supporters were furious at the choice of Rick Warren, the evangelical pastor and best-selling author, to deliver the invocation at the swearing-in ceremony.
jaguarr
01-12-2009, 12:22 PM
So, Rick Warren is out and Reverend Robinson is in?
jag
redfirebird2008
01-12-2009, 02:25 PM
So, Rick Warren is out and Reverend Robinson is in?
jag
No, they're both in. Meanwhile, Obama is going to issue an order to close Gitmo during his first week as President. I'm sure the looney left will find a way to criticize him for that one too.
So, Rick Warren is out and Reverend Robinson is in?
jag
No. They are both going to be a part of the inauguration. Robinson will be overseeeing activities on the 18th. Warren is still scheduled to do Inauguration Day.
souvlaki
01-12-2009, 03:11 PM
:D You know what I mean next thing you know they are gonna give him a stove pipe hat like lincoln and very boxers he wore for his debut...
ram
The reason why he is being compared to Lincoln is because he is, and quite openly mind you, taking inspiration from Lincoln when making decisions about his cabinet positions, and his speeches. He's not going to be the next Lincoln, but there are certainly far worse Presidents that Obama could look to for inspiration.
jaguarr
01-12-2009, 03:12 PM
I'd prefer it if none of the religious types were involved in the inauguration, but that's just me, I suppose. :o
jag
tzarinna
01-12-2009, 04:24 PM
Sounds like a great way to get your bike stolen.
jag
If it doesn't get stolen before then.:wow:
I was thinking the same thing Jag.
Did I fail to mention that I would lock it up? :huh:
Did I fail to mention that I would lock it up? :huh:
Did you forget that people know how to break locks? :huh:
tzarinna
01-12-2009, 05:33 PM
They will be a sick amount of security in the city. I can't even unlock my bike from a rack without the cops eyeballing me.
They will be a sick amount of security in the city. I can't even unlock my bike from a rack without the cops eyeballing me.
I have no doubt that there will be an intense amount of security. I would just be a little leery.
Raiden
01-12-2009, 05:37 PM
Beyonce, Bono, The Boss part of Obama concert (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/28624836/)
NEW YORK - Judging by the lineup, Sunday’s inaugural celebration for Barack Obama at the Lincoln Memorial is a coveted gig for music’s top names.
Beyonce, Bono, Bruce Springsteen, John Mellencamp, Usher, Shakira, Sheryl Crow, Josh Groban and James Taylor are among the musicians scheduled to perform Sunday afternoon. The president-elect and his family are due to attend, with Obama expected to speak.
Other performers include Stevie Wonder, Renee Fleming, Garth Brooks, Mary J. Blige, Herbie Hancock, Heather Headley, John Legend and Jennifer Nettles. Historical passages will be read by Jamie Foxx, Martin Luther King III, Queen Latifah and Denzel Washington, with other celebrities expected to join them.
HBO will televise the show at 7 p.m. EST.
After getting the go-ahead from the Presidential Inaugural Committee two and a half weeks ago to put the show together, executive producer George Stevens Jr. said he quickly learned it would not be like any other special event he’s tried to book.
“On that first day, we asked Springsteen, Bono and Garth Brooks within a period of 45 minutes and got three ‘yeses,”’ Stevens said. “We said, ‘This is going to be fun.”’
Stevens said he tried to reach out to a diversity of artists. The theme for the show, titled “We Are One: The Obama Inaugural Celebration at the Lincoln Memorial,” is less about celebration than national unification.
“The list of stars is impressive,” he said. “But this is not a show biz, glitzy occasion. It’s going to be rooted in history, remembering the great president (Lincoln) who led us through difficult times.”
The artists won’t be performing their big hits, but will be asked to perform material appropriate to the occasion. One musician will be asked to perform “A Change Is Gonna Come,” the song made famous by Sam Cooke.
Springsteen, who performed his song “The Rising” on a somber occasion — the nationally televised concert after the 2001 terrorist attacks — is scheduled to bring the song back for the Lincoln Memorial concert, Stevens said.
Stevens is a producer of “The Kennedy Center Honors” and will be working Sunday with Don Mischer, who has produced Olympics ceremonies in the past. Stevens is a longtime Obama supporter. HBO televised a similar inaugural concert in 1993, for President Clinton’s first term in office.
HBO will be offering an open feed to its cable and satellite distributors on Sunday, meaning the pay cable network will be given free to anyone who wants to watch it.
After a cold snap later in the week, Washington’s long-range forecast calls for partly cloudy weather and temperatures in the mid-30s for the outdoor concert.
“We love it,” Stevens said. “We’re very Zen about this. We’re just going to make it work.”
tzarinna
01-12-2009, 05:45 PM
So does it start at 7pm or that just the air time?
jaguarr
01-12-2009, 05:54 PM
Josh Groban gets a mention in the article before Stevie Wonder? That's criminal! :down
jag
bell110
01-12-2009, 08:07 PM
"Stevens said he tried to reach out to a diversity of artists."
Um, I don't see any metal acts on that list :angry:
tzarinna
01-12-2009, 10:01 PM
Okay, so now I might volunteer for either the Bike valet thing or something else, or just slap my bike on a bus the day of. I'm going to need it.
OBAMA INAUGURATION TO AIR IN THEATERS
http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/hr/content_display/news/e3i64ab5b30222e725ff274c4907e5fa45b
President-elect Barack Obama is on his way to the big screen, thanks to a deal between MSNBC and Screenvision that will put the news channel's inaugural coverage in 27 theaters around the country.
Free tickets are being handed out via MSNBC.com to see the inauguration and parade from 11 a.m.-3:30 p.m. ET at the 27 theaters run by 11 exhibitor partners in 21 markets. Midday Tuesday isn't necessarily a big movie time, so it helps to fill the theater -- and boost popcorn and soda sales -- at a time when it's not usually busy.
That means that Keith Olbermann, Rachel Maddow, Chris Matthews and other MSNBC and NBC personalities will play the big movie screen in addition to the usual MSNBC cable and satellite stream. MSNBC won't be in high-definition until the second quarter, but both the channel and Screenvision say the quality will still be high.
"It'll look great," MSNBC president Phil Griffin said. "We're thrilled about it."
Screenvision was approached by MSNBC last year about carrying the coverage in some of the same theaters that take Screenvision's preroll video, executive vp exhibitor relations Darryl Schaffer said. Since August 2007, Screenvision has had an alternative programming division that has exhibited New York Mets baseball games, operas and other events live via movie theaters. Schaffer said that Screenvision had the capability to do as many as 200 locations, though MSNBC was looking for a smaller event than that.
For MSNBC, it's a chance to continue the momentum that vaulted it into the fastest-growing channel in all of cable in 2008. That's the strategy, and Griffin said Monday afternoon to expect more in 2009 to build MSNBC's brand.
danoyse
01-13-2009, 12:55 PM
Beyonce, Bono, The Boss part of Obama concert (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/28624836/)
So I get Bruce Springsteen at the inauguration, the Superbowl, and (most likely) the Oscars this year? And he's got a new album and he's touring again?
I love 2009. :woot:
Nivek
01-13-2009, 01:35 PM
GAY BISHOP TO OPEN INAUGURAL WEEKEND
http://news.yahoo.com/s/politico/20090112/pl_politico/17340
I say have the Gay hater guy close out the show with a prayer duet...
StorminNorman
01-13-2009, 01:49 PM
OBAMA INAUGURATION TO AIR IN THEATERS
http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/hr/content_display/news/e3i64ab5b30222e725ff274c4907e5fa45b
Anyone think this would happen if McCain was elected?
Raiden
01-13-2009, 02:12 PM
Anyone think this would happen if McCain was elected?
If there is a demand for it, but I doubt McCain's election would've elicited this much enthusiasm.
Nivek
01-13-2009, 02:13 PM
Anyone think this would happen if McCain was elected?
No, the bars would be full of depressed people getting loaded for all the wrong reasons, like the impending doom of President Palin.
Anyone think this would happen if McCain was elected?
No.
tzarinna
01-14-2009, 11:58 AM
I work at the Kennedy Center and not only is Oprah doing her show there on Monday but Arethea Franklin is doing a free concert that same day. Madness! I found a paid volunteer gig for Tues. They'll train us on Mon. after I leave from having a crazy ass work day, then they want us ready at 6 am Tues, after that I go to work at KC, madness! Both days at KC are time and half so it'll be worth it. :yay:
INAUGURATION STATS AND LOGISTICS FEVER SEIZES CAPITAL
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2009/01/14/inauguration-statistics-and-logistics-fever-seizes-the-nations-capital/
Seven days to Inauguration Day and counting.
And counting. And counting.
— 20+ jumbotrons.
— 5,000 port-a-potties.
— 10,000 National Guard troops.
But the statistic most people want to know is currently unknowable: How many people will show up?
Logistics fever is gripping Washington as officials tweak plans to accommodate the throngs of people expected to flood Washington for the inauguration of Barack Obama.
At a press conference Tuesday, local officials struggled mightily to achieve an almost impossible balance, encouraging people to participate, on the one hand, while warning potential participants that the crush of people could be overwhelming.
People should not venture into Washington on Inauguration Day without a travel plan, said Maryland Gov. Martin O'Malley. Indeed, they should think twice before traveling on the Capital Beltway, far from the big event.
"This is not a typical day in our country's history. This is not a typical crowd," O'Malley said. "This is not like throwing the family in the van and heading down for a visit to the Air and Space Museum."
souvlaki
01-14-2009, 12:05 PM
OBAMA INAUGURATION TO AIR IN THEATERS
http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/hr/content_display/news/e3i64ab5b30222e725ff274c4907e5fa45b
Is there a list of theaters yet? I actually might be up for doing this if there is a screening in LA.
tzarinna
01-14-2009, 12:07 PM
I am so going to Irish up my coffee that day.
Is there a list of theaters yet? I actually might be up for doing this if there is a screening in LA.
This is the official registration for the event. (And there is a showing at 'The Bridge' in LA.)
Go here...
http://www.msnbcevents.com/
STARBUCKS TO BROADCAST INAUGURATION
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/14/us/politics/14msnbc.html?_r=1
The inauguration coverage by the cable news channel MSNBC will be projected onto movie theater screens in 21 cities next Tuesday. The channel is also planning to announce a partnership with Starvucks to simulcast its coverage in 650 of the company’s stores.
MSNBC and other news outlets are looking to capitalize on the heightened interest in the inauguration of Barack Obama, as watch parties are being planned in cities across the nation.
On Monday, a line of people encircled the American Film Institute's theater in Silver Spring, Md., where 400 tickets were distributed for an inauguration simulcast. The institute plans to show the coverage from the TV One cable channel. Murray Horwitz, the director of the theater, said witnessing the inauguration with other people, even in a theater setting, was an appealing prospect.
“Not to sound too corny about it,” Mr. Horwitz said, “but it’s a time to come together as Americans.”
From Little Rock to Los Angeles, other screenings are being planned at churches, community centers, government offices and bars. In New York, screening events are planned at the Brooklyn Academy of Music and the Queens Theater in the Park, among others. The Fox News Channel will be shown on the Astrovision screen in Times Square.
Some groups, including public school systems, have asked CNN for the right to show its coverage of the event, and the channel has approved those requests, said Edie Emery, a CNN spokeswoman.
souvlaki
01-14-2009, 01:16 PM
STARBUCKS TO BROADCAST INAUGURATION
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/14/us/politics/14msnbc.html?_r=1
The commercialization of this is pretty tacky, but I must admit it's nice to see that so many people have an interest in watching a Presidential inauguration.
The commercialization of this is pretty tacky, but I must admit it's nice to see that so many people have an interest in watching a Presidential inauguration.
I think this is what alot of us 'lovingly' referred to as 'Obama-mania' during the Democratic primaries. :oldrazz:
'BAILED-OUT' BANKS DONATING TO OBAMA'S INAUGURATION
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/01/14/bailed-out-banks-donating_n_157960.html
Citibank executives, who are expected to ask for another billion-dollar federal bailout on top of the $45 billion in rescue funds they received in November, are trying to buy the goodwill of Barack Obama -- or they just want to help the president-elect throw the best inauguration party in history.
Of the hundreds of banks and firms which have received bailout money, Citibank employees have contributed the most to Obama's inauguration fund -- at least $113,000 as of Wednesday.
Among those contributions is $50,000 from Ray McGuire, Citi's co-head of global investment banking, and $50,000 from Louis Susman, the recently-retired vice chairman of Citigroup.
In recent weeks, Obama has vowed changes to the much-criticized $700 billion bailout program, demanding that the second installment should focus on helping families at risk of losing their homes and small businesses, and echoing Democratic criticisms of banks giving lavish bonuses to their senior executives.
Yet, as the New York Times recently reported, many of the banks, including Citigroup, need more bailout money and have been fiercely lobbying behind the scenes for a major piece of the $350 billion second installment.
Citigroup senior counselor and former Treasury Secretary Robert Rubin was close to Obama, serving on his economic advisory team. But he recently resigned from the firm after months of criticism of his performance and his admitted failure to foresee the credit crisis.
In addition, Citigroup employees were Obama's 7th-biggest contributor, giving $586,866 to the candidate during the 2008 election cycle.
Words cannot express how wrong I believe this is. Wow. http://www.superherohype.com/forums/images/smilies/icon13.gif
Fenrir
01-14-2009, 08:58 PM
'BAILED-OUT' BANKS DONATING TO OBAMA'S INAUGURATION
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/01/14/bailed-out-banks-donating_n_157960.html
Words cannot express how wrong I believe this is. Wow. http://www.superherohype.com/forums/images/smilies/icon13.gif
Financial bailouts don't come cheap. You gotta hand it to Citi...that was money well-spent.
redfirebird2008
01-14-2009, 09:13 PM
'BAILED-OUT' BANKS DONATING TO OBAMA'S INAUGURATION
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/01/14/bailed-out-banks-donating_n_157960.html
Words cannot express how wrong I believe this is. Wow. http://www.superherohype.com/forums/images/smilies/icon13.gif
Who says it's bailout money that's being given to the Inauguration? I would think it's employee contributions just like when you or I donate money to a political campaign. Unless there's direct proof that bailout money was given to those employees and then they turned around and donated to the Inauguration, I think it's a pretty weak connection that's being made.
Who says it's bailout money that's being given to the Inauguration? I would think it's employee contributions just like when you or I donate money to a political campaign. Unless there's direct proof that bailout money was given to those employees and then they turned around and donated to the Inauguration, I think it's a pretty weak connection that's being made.
I just think it gives off the wrong impression, either way. You know?
redfirebird2008
01-14-2009, 09:17 PM
I just think it gives off the wrong impression, either way. You know?
No, I don't know. This reminds me of those attacks from Clinton that Obama was taking money from "big oil" when in fact it was just employee contributions. I work in the oil and gas industry and I donated to Obama. Somehow that means I'm a special interest lobbyist? Hell no. I'm a regular Joe Schmoe who felt like donating a bit of money to my candidate of choice. That's all that's going on here with the Citi thing too, unless they have actual proof that those employees were given any bailout money in the first place. The only employees who would likely receive a chunk of the bailout are the CEO's. And they would likely blow it on far more frivolous crap than politics.
No, I don't know. This reminds me of those attacks from Clinton that Obama was taking money from "big oil" when in fact it was just employee contributions. I work in the oil and gas industry and I donated to Obama. Somehow that means I'm a special interest lobbyist? Hell no. I'm a regular Joe Schmoe who felt like donating a bit of money to my candidate of choice. That's all that's going on here with the Citi thing too, unless they have actual proof that those employees were given any bailout money in the first place. The only employees who would likely receive a chunk of the bailout are the CEO's. And they would likely blow it on far more frivolous crap than politics.
I concede that it's a weak connection, but who is to say that these bank CEO's aren't trying to buy off Obama?
redfirebird2008
01-14-2009, 09:25 PM
I concede that it's a weak connection, but who is to say that these bank CEO's aren't trying to buy off Obama?
That is possible, but you would think they'd have actual proof of who is donating the money. They claim that $113,000 from Citi employees has been donated. That implies that it's not just one of the head honchos involved. It's regular Joe Schmoes like us. I think it's incredibly misleading for people to attack donations from corporate employees and speak in such general terms. "Big oil." Yeah, Exxon's got how many employees? 106,000 according to Wikipedia. You gotta figure at least SOME of them support Democrats and not Republicans. That's probably one of the most misleading attacks you'll ever see, and it's a common tactic that seems to be used in every election.
That is possible, but you would think they'd have actual proof of who is donating the money. They claim that $113,000 from Citi employees has been donated. That implies that it's not just one of the head honchos involved. It's regular Joe Schmoes like us. I think it's incredibly misleading for people to attack donations from corporate employees and speak in such general terms. "Big oil." Yeah, Exxon's got how many employees? 106,000 according to Wikipedia. You gotta figure at least SOME of them support Democrats and not Republicans. That's probably one of the most misleading attacks you'll ever see, and it's a common tactic that seems to be used in every election.
The article did mention that two chairs had donated $50,000 a piece.
redfirebird2008
01-14-2009, 09:32 PM
The article did mention that two chairs had donated $50,000 a piece.
Well there we go. It's possible that it's bailout money but who knows. Perhaps they're actually using their bailout money the way it was intended, though given the actions of AIG, etc. I wouldn't bet on it. Hopefully there's some investigative digging on this to get to the bottom of it. If Obama finds out about this, hopefully he'll tell the Citi hot shots to shove that $100,000 up their arses.
I love how expensive this inauguration is going to be ($150,000,000) while the country is supposed to be in the worst economic status since the Great Depression. I just don't get it, this is absurd.
http://www.hindu.com/thehindu/holnus/003200901150913.htm
I love how expensive this inauguration is going to be ($150,000,000) while the country is supposed to be in the worst economic status since the Great Depression. I just don't get it, this is absurd.
http://www.hindu.com/thehindu/holnus/003200901150913.htm
It's the Coronation of the God-King, are you kidding?
I love how expensive this inauguration is going to be ($150,000,000) while the country is supposed to be in the worst economic status since the Great Depression. I just don't get it, this is absurd.
http://www.hindu.com/thehindu/holnus/003200901150913.htm
I said something similar at the beginning of this thread and was promptly accused of hating Obama on a personal level, just a heads up.
I said something similar at the beginning of this thread and was promptly accused of hating Obama on a personal level, just a heads up.
That doesn't bother me.
Malice
01-15-2009, 09:41 AM
Yeah, this is insane
What's the Average Cost of Higher Education in this country?
redfirebird2008
01-15-2009, 09:47 AM
I said something similar at the beginning of this thread and was promptly accused of hating Obama on a personal level, just a heads up.
2-3 million people showing up with a minority President in a country with a bad history of racial tension. For those two reasons, most of that money is being spent on security. The only thing they could have done is to tell everyone not to show up. But I don't recall previous Presidents doing this. They simply weren't popular enough to have that many people show up. Surely you guys realize the difference in security risks between 100,000 at one of Bush's inaugurations and 2 million at Obama's? Factor in that he's the first minority President and that makes security an even bigger problem for the Secret Service and other law enforcement agencies. And it's not just Obama's safety that they are concerned about. It's everyone else. 2 million people gathered in the same place presents an easy target for a terrorist attack.
Is there any reason this couldn't have been a private ceremony in the Oval Office? I get that it is historic, but 150 million dollars on a ****ing glorified party is a bit absurd, especially considering this man is telling us that we need to make sacrifices to fix the economy and deficit. It would be one thing if this were 2000, and we had a huge surplus, and people had jobs...but 150 million dollars? Hell, that is half of what he is asking Congress for to add to the bailout on his first day in office.
redfirebird2008
01-15-2009, 09:54 AM
Is there any reason this couldn't have been a private ceremony in the Oval Office? I get that it is historic, but 150 million dollars on a ****ing glorified party is a bit absurd, especially considering this man is telling us that we need to make sacrifices to fix the economy and deficit. It would be one thing if this were 2000, and we had a huge surplus, and people had jobs...but 150 million dollars? Hell, that is half of what he is asking Congress for to add to the bailout on his first day in office.
So every other President in recent history is allowed to have a party but the first black one is told to have a private ceremony simply because the white guys that preceded him screwed up the economy? Yeah, that'll go over REALLY well with the public, especially with African Americans who WANT to be there when it happens. :whatever:
redfirebird2008
01-15-2009, 09:58 AM
And by the way, half of the money is from private donations. So it's not $160 million in tax dollars being spent. It's $80 million. When you look at the security risks involved, I wouldn't be surprised if they are spending around $100 million on security.
So every other President in recent history is allowed to have a party but the first black one is told to have a private ceremony simply because the white guys that preceded him screwed up the economy? Yeah, that'll go over REALLY well with the public, especially with African Americans who WANT to be there when it happens. :whatever:
I'm not saying it is fair. Life often is not. But yes, that is how it should be. Real change would be a private ceremony in the Oval Office followed by him getting to work. Would it suck? Absolutely. But such is life. Our country is a **** hole. Our leaders cannot ask us to sacrifice while they blow one hundred fifty million dollars on a party. Our LEADER should not waste that kind of money then turn around and say, "by the way, my first order of business is to take $350,000,000,000 of your tax dollars and give it to private companies who basically hid what they did with the first $350,000,000,000 we gave them." Times are hard. We all need to be making sacrifices. Be it cutting back on little luxury items in our lives, or having a massive party to stroke one's own ego.
redfirebird2008
01-15-2009, 10:09 AM
I'm not saying it is fair. Life often is not. But yes, that is how it should be. Real change would be a private ceremony in the Oval Office followed by him getting to work. Would it suck? Absolutely. But such is life. Our country is a **** hole. Our leaders cannot ask us to sacrifice while they blow one hundred fifty million dollars on a party. Our LEADER should not waste that kind of money then turn around and say, "by the way, my first order of business is to take $350,000,000 of your tax dollars and give it to private companies who basically hid what they did with the first $350,000,000 we gave them." Times are hard. We all need to be making sacrifices. Be it cutting back on little luxury items in our lives, or having a massive party to stroke one's own ego.
I read something last night that said Obama wants the $350 billion to be used on helping the homeowners, not the banks. It sounds like there will be a hell of a lot more transparency and oversight this time around than with the first bailout. Hank Paulson should be thrown in jail for highway robbery.
I read something last night that said Obama wants the $350 billion to be used on helping the homeowners, not the banks. It sounds like there will be a hell of a lot more transparency and oversight this time around than with the first bailout. Hank Paulson should be thrown in jail for highway robbery.
Neither should happen! WIll there be oversight to see how much money the people that we bail out waste on X-Box 360s or new cars? Will we require them to shred their Am-Exes before we give them the check? The tax payers should not be forced to bail anyone out, be it Fortune 500 companies or home owners who bought houses out of their price range on credit and are whining because they can't make the payments!
Neither should happen! WIll there be oversight to see how much money the people that we bail out waste on X-Box 360s or new cars? Will we require them to shred their Am-Exes before we give them the check? The tax payers should not be forced to bail anyone out, be it Fortune 500 companies or home owners who bought houses out of their price range on credit and are whining because they can't make the payments!
YES!!!!!! And we need a FairTax Too!!!!:cmad::cmad::bh::cmad::cmad:
redfirebird2008
01-15-2009, 10:20 AM
Neither should happen! WIll there be oversight to see how much money the people that we bail out waste on X-Box 360s or new cars? Will we require them to shred their Am-Exes before we give them the check? The tax payers should not be forced to bail anyone out, be it Fortune 500 companies or home owners who bought houses out of their price range on credit and are whining because they can't make the payments!
I agree with this. I am against the bailouts altogether. But if they're going to be done, I'd rather it be for homeowners than corporate CEO's.
I agree with this. I am against the bailouts altogether. But if they're going to be done, I'd rather it be for homeowners than corporate CEO's.
Or Obama could, just, y'know...not ask for the extra 350 billion. The whole, "its gonna happen anyway," argument is absurd! Hold your elected officials to a ****ing standard. Grow a set and tell them they are wrong. Write letters, make phone calls. Don't settle. And giving it to home owners is no better than CEOes, it is worse! The bank bailouts can be excused to an extent because the economy collapses without them. Our economy does not collapse because some irresponsible yuppie loses the house they could not afford and has to go get an apartment.
redfirebird2008
01-15-2009, 10:27 AM
Or Obama could, just, y'know...not ask for the extra 350 billion. The whole, "its gonna happen anyway," argument is absurd! Hold your elected officials to a ****ing standard. Grow a set and tell them they are wrong. Write letters, make phone calls. Don't settle. And giving it to home owners is no better than CEOes, it is worse! The bank bailouts can be excused to an extent because the economy collapses without them. Our economy does not collapse because some irresponsible yuppie loses the house they could not afford and has to go get an apartment.
The bank bailouts are inexcusable with no oversight or transparency. The guys at Enron showed just how slimy top dogs in corporate America tend to be. The money isn't being used for the bank, it's going to the damn CEO retirement or vacation fund.
And I have written to Obama's Change.gov site stating that I'm against the bailout and I wish Obama would be too.
yes, I agree. And that makes it equally inexcusable. So what is Obama's solution for fixing the biggest case of corporate welfare our country has ever seen? Giving out the largest amount of private welfare our country has ever seen! Brilliant!
redfirebird2008
01-15-2009, 10:32 AM
yes, I agree. And that makes it equally inexcusable. So what is Obama's solution for fixing the biggest case of corporate welfare our country has ever seen? Giving out the largest amount of private welfare our country has ever seen! Brilliant!
Exactly. It sucks no two ways about it. As long as Congress/President/Treasury feel like going against the will of the people, I'd rather see our tax dollars blown on regular people than corporations. Let's just hope that eventually the people get fed up with it and we can vote all these people out of office at some point. I was stunned that the bailout was passed in the first place when like 80% of the citizens were against it. :cmad:
It's the Coronation of the God-King, are you kidding?
I said something similar at the beginning of this thread and was promptly accused of hating Obama on a personal level, just a heads up.
Maybe because it's slightly inappropriate? I'm not saying that either of you hate him on a personal level (although I'm beginning to wonder if there isn't something more), but throwing around names like God-King and Messiah doesn't help matters. It's one thing to say 'maybe this all is a bit much'. It's quite another to say what SuBe said.
The fact of the matter is that the inauguration of a president is a big deal. It has always been a big deal. It's not going to stop being a big deal. And it shouldn't stop being a big deal.
Maybe because it's slightly inappropriate? I'm not saying that either of you hate him on a personal level (although I'm beginning to wonder if there isn't something more), but throwing around names like God-King and Messiah doesn't help matters. It's one thing to say 'maybe this all is a bit much'. It's quite another to say what SuBe said.
The fact of the matter is that the inauguration of a president is a big deal. It has always been a big deal. It's not going to stop being a big deal. And it shouldn't stop being a big deal.
Most of what we say is hyperbole, Marx, and I think you know it. You are better than resorting to the personal attack card. :csad:
And I disagree. I feel a 150 million dollar ceremony is grossly elaborate and inappropriate in times like this. And yes, it was inappropriate in 2004, but isn't Obama supposed to be better than Bush?
Most of what we say is hyperbole, Marx, and I think you know it. You are better than resorting to the personal attack card. :csad:
I'm not personally attacking either you guys. (And you know that.) I'm just saying that throwing those kinds of names around in conversation doesn't help matters any.
And I disagree. I feel a 150 million dollar ceremony is grossly elaborate and inappropriate in times like this. And yes, it was inappropriate in 2004, but isn't Obama supposed to be better than Bush?
Again, all that I am saying is that inaugurations are a big deal. They will continue to be a big deal.
I'm not personally attacking either you guys. (And you know that.) I'm just saying that throwing those kinds of names around in conversation doesn't help matters any.
I know you're not and I apologize for the implication. I agree, but I think it depends on the context. I think with posters like SuBe, most respect him enough to know it is simply the use of hyperbole aimed to poke fun at the media and to an extent the Democratic party's portrayl of Obama and that he means no harm beyond that.
Again, all that I am saying is that inaugurations are a big deal. They will continue to be a big deal.
Yes, it is historically a big deal. Would a private ceremony in the Oval Office followed by Obama getting to work instead attending 11 parties make it any less of a big deal?
redfirebird2008
01-15-2009, 11:54 AM
Yes, it is historically a big deal. Would a private ceremony in the Oval Office followed by Obama getting to work instead attending 11 parties make it any less of a big deal?
To the regular citizens attending it, especially older African Americans, YES that would make it less of a big deal. They want to be there for the event and I don't think they should be denied.
To the regular citizens attending it, especially older African Americans, YES that would make it less of a big deal. They want to be there for the event and I don't think they should be denied.
Well, I guess we simply have reached an impasse and must agree to disagree?
redfirebird2008
01-15-2009, 11:58 AM
Well, I guess we simply have reached an impasse and must agree to disagree?
So you think it should be denied to them?
So you think it should be denied to them?
They could have news cameras in the oval office or rose garden during the swearing in. It could be viewed on television. It simply seems wasteful to me to devote that much money to what is essentially a party when there is so much wrong with our country right now, and a good portion of the problems being financial.
redfirebird2008
01-15-2009, 12:05 PM
They could have news cameras in the oval office or rose garden during the swearing in. It could be viewed on television. It simply seems wasteful to me to devote that much money to what is essentially a party when there is so much wrong with our country right now, and a good portion of the problems being financial.
I think people deserve a right to witness history live in person. Now, the thing I will agree with you on is the inaugural balls. These should be done away with entirely, not JUST during a time of economic hardship for the country. The inauguration parade itself is for the people. The balls are for the elite. Drop the balls and stop blowing money on over the top parties.
I know you're not and I apologize for the implication. I agree, but I think it depends on the context. I think with posters like SuBe, most respect him enough to know it is simply the use of hyperbole aimed to poke fun at the media and to an extent the Democratic party's portrayl of Obama and that he means no harm beyond that.
:heart:
Yes, it is historically a big deal. Would a private ceremony in the Oval Office followed by Obama getting to work instead attending 11 parties make it any less of a big deal?
Honestly, yes. The public needs a grand ceremony. Anything done in private, would be shortchanging. (As for all of the parties, I do not believe they're necessary. Not that many anyway.)
Raiden
01-15-2009, 12:07 PM
Obama is the first African-American elected as the president, and like it or not this inauguration is historic and many, many people wanted to be there for this event. Yes, it may seemed like it's getting a little too big but I don't think anyone, including Obama, can try to shrink the size of the event even if he wants do. That's just the way it is. If we have a second African-American elected as the prez in the future, I think the furor may die down quite a bit since it's not as big or as unprecedented like this one.
I think people deserve a right to witness history live in person. Now, the thing I will agree with you on is the inaugural balls. These should be done away with entirely, not JUST during a time of economic hardship for the country. The inauguration parade itself is for the people. The balls are for the elite. Drop the balls and stop blowing money on over the top parties.
:heart:
Honestly, yes. The public needs a grand ceremony. Anything done in private, would be shortchanging. (As for all of the parties, I do not believe they're necessary. Not that many anyway.)
I think I could agree with simply doing away with the balls on the grounds that the money dumped into the DC, Maryland, and Virginia economies will more than make up for the bill, most likely, where as the balls, are as firebird said, pointless wastes of money.
danoyse
01-15-2009, 12:30 PM
I'm going to play devil's advocate here and say that this inauguration blowout can be a good thing. With the sheer volume of people coming to DC and the surrounding areas (aren't there people staying as far as PA for this?), think of all the money that it's pumping into hotels, restuarants, means of travel, the shopping in the area. That's got to be good a thing.
I said something similar at the beginning of this thread and was promptly accused of hating Obama on a personal level, just a heads up.
I hate him based on policy alone. Personally i disagree with his personal belief system but thats all, which i believe affects his policy decissions.
So every other President in recent history is allowed to have a party but the first black one is told to have a private ceremony simply because the white guys that preceded him screwed up the economy? Yeah, that'll go over REALLY well with the public, especially with African Americans who WANT to be there when it happens. :whatever:
Yes he can have his shindig but can't he keep it under the alloted ear marked amount? I can't wait to see how he keeps the yearly budget from overflowing.
And by the way, half of the money is from private donations. So it's not $160 million in tax dollars being spent. It's $80 million. When you look at the security risks involved, I wouldn't be surprised if they are spending around $100 million on security.
Actually if you look at the article i posted the states Virginia and Maryland are asking for emergency funding. The article also states that the goverment is putting up $75 million (yes thats tax money) and the president elect is putting up the rest. SO yes he is putting up half but he is also going over the earmarked a budget of $49 million, the guy isnt even in office and he is going over budget. I just would like to know why it has to be so much? TV broadcasting is one thing but i mean Starbucks is going to be airing this specifically! SO he is the first African-American President whooo peee the guy is just the same as before, a president and nothing else. As for security risks, is it no different from any other president being inaugurated? The same amount of security should be in place that there was for Bush. Should there be more? No. He should'nt have gone over the Cap on the budget for this event.
Sorry to sound like an ass, but it really grinds my gears to see spending of this magnitude and have then to watch my dad who is running a small bussiness have to suffer in harsh economic times. That sounds dumb but i mean his bussiness should be thriving and it was spending like this is and thinking like this that hurt the economy in the first place.
PALIN WON'T ATTEND OBAMA DINNER FOR MCCAIN
http://www.motherjones.com/mojoblog/archives/2009/01/11768_sarah_palin_not_attending_obama_dinner_for_m ccain.html
On the night before Barack Obama is sworn in as the nation's 44th President, his inaugural committee will host a series of dinners honoring public servants it deems champions of bipartisanship. To be feted are Vice President-elect Joe Biden, Colin Powell, and John McCain, whom Obama vanquished last November. At the McCain dinner, the GOP senator, who managed to suppress his bipartisan tendencies during the hard-fought 2008 campaign, will be introduced by one of his closest Senate confidants: Senator Lindsey Graham. But McCain's No. 1 booster during the last year will not be among those hailing McCain. Alaska Governor Sarah Palin, his controversial running-mate, will not attend the dinner, Bill McAllister, a Palin spokesman tells Mother Jones.
According to McAllister, Palin will spend next week in her home state preparing for the legislative session, which begins on Tuesday, and for her State of the State address on Thursday.
Was she even invited? "I don't know if she was invited," McCallister says. Don't know? How could that be? It's hard to miss an invitation from a presidential inauguration committee. For its part, Obama's inaugural committee has declined to say whether an invitation was sent to Palin. Repeated phone calls to its press office produced no answer to this simple question.
The committee has announced that the McCain dinner will be held at the Hilton Washington and that Democratic Massachusetts Governor Deval Patrick will be the master of ceremonies. It notes that the attendees of all three bipartisan dinners will include "leaders in Congress from both sides of the aisle and Americans of both parties from across the country." Just not one particular American from up north.
Good, it basically says it right there, "Palin will spend next week in her home state preparing for the legislative session, which begins on Tuesday, and for her State of the State address on Thursday.", she will be working instead.
redfirebird2008
01-15-2009, 01:21 PM
I hate him based on policy alone. Personally i disagree with his personal belief system but thats all, which i believe affects his policy decissions.
Yes he can have his shindig but can't he keep it under the alloted ear marked amount? I can't wait to see how he keeps the yearly budget from overflowing.
Actually if you look at the article i posted the states Virginia and Maryland are asking for emergency funding. The article also states that the goverment is putting up $75 million (yes thats tax money) and the president elect is putting up the rest. SO yes he is putting up half but he is also going over the earmarked a budget of $49 million, the guy isnt even in office and he is going over budget. I just would like to know why it has to be so much? TV broadcasting is one thing but i mean Starbucks is going to be airing this specifically! SO he is the first African-American President whooo peee the guy is just the same as before, a president and nothing else. As for security risks, is it no different from any other president being inaugurated? The same amount of security should be in place that there was for Bush. Should there be more? No. He should'nt have gone over the Cap on the budget for this event.
Sorry to sound like an ass, but it really grinds my gears to see spending of this magnitude and have then to watch my dad who is running a small bussiness have to suffer in harsh economic times. That sounds dumb but i mean his bussiness should be thriving and it was spending like this is and thinking like this that hurt the economy in the first place.
Do you not understand the difference of 100,000 people vs. 2 million? If you don't, then I feel sorry for you. It's not just a security risk for the President, it's a risk for everyone. A gathering that large can be subject to a terrorist bombing. It's also a logistics nightmare. Portable bathrooms, medical help in case it's needed, transportation issues, etc.
Having said that, I think they need to do away with the inaugural balls. Huge waste of money. Just drop them entirely from the inauguration every 4 years regardless of the economic circumstances. Those balls are elitist. At least the inaugural parade is for the hundreds of thousands or millions of people who wish to attend it.
souvlaki
01-15-2009, 01:32 PM
Do you not understand the difference of 100,000 people vs. 2 million? If you don't, then I feel sorry for you. It's not just a security risk for the President, it's a risk for everyone. A gathering that large can be subject to a terrorist bombing. It's also a logistics nightmare. Portable bathrooms, medical help in case it's needed, transportation issues, etc.
Exactly. It's kind of a damned if he does damned if he doesn't problem for him, because he can't close off the inauguration to the public because that would obviously disappoint a LOT of people. On the other hand it's not his fault that over 2 million people are making the trip to DC to see this, and given the circumstances it would be pretty irresponsible not to spend the extra money on security.
The inaugural balls are a complete waste of money though, I agree on that.
PALIN WON'T ATTEND OBAMA DINNER FOR MCCAIN
http://www.motherjones.com/mojoblog/archives/2009/01/11768_sarah_palin_not_attending_obama_dinner_for_m ccain.html
She's goin' rogue, donchya know?
But seriously, it seems like she wasn't invited :hehe:
redfirebird2008
01-15-2009, 01:36 PM
She's goin' rogue, donchya know?
But seriously, it seems like she wasn't invited :hehe:
Poooooooooooooooor Sarah! :csad::hehe:
Do you not understand the difference of 100,000 people vs. 2 million? If you don't, then I feel sorry for you. It's not just a security risk for the President, it's a risk for everyone. A gathering that large can be subject to a terrorist bombing. It's also a logistics nightmare. Portable bathrooms, medical help in case it's needed, transportation issues, etc.
Having said that, I think they need to do away with the inaugural balls. Huge waste of money. Just drop them entirely from the inauguration every 4 years regardless of the economic circumstances. Those balls are elitist. At least the inaugural parade is for the hundreds of thousands or millions of people who wish to attend it.
I agree on the balls.
I do understand but he could have closed it to a certain amount of people like president elects in the past have done. Its as simple as that. I know the risk but again its HIS fault for making it that open. He wants so much attention well, he should have thought about that. There was an alloted amount and he went over it because he wanted more eyes on him. Everyone knows that adress was to be on every news channel already so everyone could have seen it, why make a bigger spectacule? If its a logistics nightmare why do it? It just is a bad idea to have that many people and open it up so much.
Exactly. It's kind of a damned if he does damned if he doesn't problem for him, because he can't close off the inauguration to the public because that would obviously disappoint a LOT of people. On the other hand it's not his fault that over 2 million people are making the trip to DC to see this, and given the circumstances it would be pretty irresponsible not to spend the extra money on security.
The inaugural balls are a complete waste of money though, I agree on that.
I agree it would be irresponsible, but he shouldnt have had the event opened up so much when he knew he had a spending limit.
Again I agree on the inaugural balls.
souvlaki
01-15-2009, 01:40 PM
She's goin' rogue, donchya know?
But seriously, it seems like she wasn't invited :hehe:
Even if she was, I doubt she would have gone. I get the impression that Palin despises Obama far more than McCain ever did.
redfirebird2008
01-15-2009, 01:45 PM
I agree on the balls.
I do understand but he could have closed it to a certain amount of people like president elects in the past have done. Its as simple as that. I know the risk but again its HIS fault for making it that open. He wants so much attention well, he should have thought about that. There was an alloted amount and he went over it because he wanted more eyes on him. Everyone knows that adress was to be on every news channel already so everyone could have seen it, why make a bigger spectacule? If its a logistics nightmare why do it? It just is a bad idea to have that many people and open it up so much.
I agree it would be irresponsible, but he shouldnt have had the event opened up so much when he knew he had a spending limit.
Again I agree on the inaugural balls.
Hush, you really don't get it. It's not about him. It's about the people. Are you really saying that he should deny people who have a historical connection to this (namely older African Americans who lived through segregation)? There was no "allotted" amount on the number of people allowed. It's up to the President and his people to decide how many people can show up, not some arbitrary crap that you come up with as a reason to criticize him.
Raiden
01-15-2009, 01:48 PM
Even if she was, I doubt she would have gone. I get the impression that Palin despises Obama far more than McCain ever did.
Agreed. Besides, she probably has ambition to run for president in 4 years, so she doesn't care if she doesn't make nice with Obama. Or it's possible that McCain doesn't want her to be there because it seems like they have a falling out after they lost the election, with his staff leaking about her taking alot more money for clothing that she initially admitted.
souvlaki
01-15-2009, 01:54 PM
I agree it would be irresponsible, but he shouldnt have had the event opened up so much when he knew he had a spending limit.
Again I agree on the inaugural balls.
I'm just personally of the opinion that something like the inauguration of the President, especially the inauguration of the first black President, should not be something closed off to the public. Like I said, you shouldn't blame Obama because 2 million people are willing to spend the money on plane tickets, hotel rooms, etc. to attend this. It's also irresponsible to not spend accordingly on security. Cutting security at an event like this to save money is just asking for trouble.
Even if she was, I doubt she would have gone. I get the impression that Palin despises Obama far more than McCain ever did.
So far as I know, she has yet to apologize for anything that she initiated on the campaign trail. That being said, she is certainly clinging to every last bit of media attention that she can.
Raiden
01-15-2009, 06:20 PM
So far as I know, she has yet to apologize for anything that she initiated on the campaign trail. That being said, she is certainly clinging to every last bit of media attention that she can.
I remember that after the election, Palin refused to apologize or retract her statement during the campaign that Obama was "palling around with terrorists" due to his past relationship with Ayers.
WARREN 'PRAISES' OBAMA'S PICK OF GAY BISHOP
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2009/01/15/rick-warren-praises-obamas-pick-of-gay-bishop/
Rick Warren offered an olive branch to another minister delivering an inaugural invocation — an openly gay Episcopal bishop who had been critical of the evangelical pastor over his support for California’s Proposition 8.
The California minister praised President-elect Obama’s selection of Eugene V. Robinson to deliver the invocation at the kickoff inaugural event.
Obama “has again demonstrated his genuine commitment to bringing all Americans of goodwill together in search of common ground," Warren said in a statement released Wednesday. "I applaud his desire to be the president of every citizen.”
Warren, who is delivering the invocation at the Tuesday swearing-in ceremony, drew fire from some Obama supporters over his opposition to same sex marriage and abortion rights.
Robinson had called Warren’s inclusion “really, really unfortunate” because of his support for Proposition 8, which barred same-sex marriage.
“It's about this particular venue and the role that he has in praying for all of America, and I'm just not sure he'd pray to God the same way I would,” Robinson told Beliefnet last month.
“…This particular choice [of Warren] is not about having everyone at the table for a discussion or some sort of general forum. Every choice related to who does what at the inauguration is highly symbolic, and I think the transition team failed to ask the question of what, symbolically, this might say to some of our citizens.”
Robinson said at the time his disappointment would not affect his plans to attend President-elect Obama’s inauguration.
How thoughtful. :dry:
Hush, you really don't get it. It's not about him. It's about the people. Are you really saying that he should deny people who have a historical connection to this (namely older African Americans who lived through segregation)? There was no "allotted" amount on the number of people allowed. It's up to the President and his people to decide how many people can show up, not some arbitrary crap that you come up with as a reason to criticize him.
Firebird, i can understand how this is historic, trust me i think it is too. That in no way means that you can go about spending more than was allowed! They can be a part of this historic event when they watch it on there television, its as simple as that. If they want to go and see him in person thats a God given right and I have no beef with that. I know there is no allotted amount of people, there was an allotted amount of money for this event and he passed it up to the tune of $26,000,000, so he opened the event to too many people. Its just that simple. Im not mad about how many will be there, hell my best friend will be, im angry because he spent so much damn money so that he could have as many eye's on him as he wanted. I didnt make up "arbitrary crap" as you so eloquently put it.
Sebastos
01-16-2009, 10:08 AM
I can't wait to watch.
Malice
01-16-2009, 10:26 AM
Hush, you really don't get it. It's not about him. It's about the people. Are you really saying that he should deny people who have a historical connection to this (namely older African Americans who lived through segregation)? There was no "allotted" amount on the number of people allowed. It's up to the President and his people to decide how many people can show up, not some arbitrary crap that you come up with as a reason to criticize him.
I get it...
Not for 150 million dollars...no
BlackLantern
01-16-2009, 12:20 PM
Change would be taking the oath in the Oval Office in a small ceremony and getting to work....this whole mess is going to be more trouble than it's worth....and for some reason, I think someone may end up hurt or dead
Nivek
01-16-2009, 12:38 PM
Sheesh, unless you live in D.C., I don't see why anyone would be huffing and blowing about the Inauguration. Besides, it's not like that money that is being spent isn't going into other Americans pockets for a change (ha-ha). All the organizers, caterers, police, security, hotel staff, hookers, ect. Thats money going right back into the economy, why would you take that much issue with a big event that celebrates national interest in a real Leader again.
redfirebird2008
01-16-2009, 02:38 PM
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0109/17506.html
This is an example of a guy in elected office who shouldn't be there. The only elected office he should be in is with the KKK. What a piece of crap. Hussein is a good name, yet pieces of garbage like him attack it. The guy just reeks of ignorance. Millions of innocent people have the name Hussein, yet this jackass assumes that it's somehow a "code word" for terrorists. That's like saying all the innocent people in the Muslim world are terrorists. Not surprising that he assumes they all are though, given his party's blatant racial and religious profiling of innocent Muslim Americans after 9/11.
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0109/17506.html
This is an example of a guy in elected office who shouldn't be there. The only elected office he should be in is with the KKK. What a piece of crap. Hussein is a good name, yet pieces of garbage like him attack it. The guy just reeks of ignorance. Millions of innocent people have the name Hussein, yet this jackass assumes that it's somehow a "code word" for terrorists. That's like saying all the innocent people in the Muslim world are terrorists. Not surprising that he assumes they all are though, given his party's blatant racial and religious profiling of innocent Muslim Americans after 9/11.
What gets me is that it was people like Representative King who accused Barack Obama of trying to hide his MIDDLE NAME from the public during the primaries and the presidential campaign. Now that he wants to use his FULL NAME in the inauguration (as many often do,) there's a problem with that too! It's ridiculous. And ignorant.
I've said it before, people like this should be no where near influential people. http://www.superherohype.com/forums/images/smilies/icon13.gif
BIDEN'S SON BACK FROM IRAQ FOR INAUGURATION
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2009/01/16/bidens-son-leaves-iraq-for-inauguration/
The son of Vice President-elect Joe Biden has returned from Iraq to the United States to attend the inauguration of his father and President-elect Barack Obama, a military spokesman said.
Beau Biden, who deployed to Iraq as a captain in the National Guard, is in the United States on temporary duty, said Lt. Col. Leonard Gratteri, a spokesman for the Delaware National Guard.
Biden plans to take several days of leave to attend inaugural events, he said.
The president-elect and vice president-elect are scheduled to take their oaths of office in Washington on Tuesday.
This is great news! http://www.superherohype.com/forums/images/smilies/icon14.gif
vBulletin® v3.8.4, Copyright ©2000-2013, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.