I Guess Its Different Now

[Hemidakota]

Hi Hemi,

Obama did not spend $650 million at his inauguration. I can‘t even imagine where you got such a number.

Although it is too early to tell for sure, it looks like 2,000,000 people attended Obama’s inauguration, and that the cost for this was between $155 and $160 million.

However! Obama raised $45 million for his inauguration, and that is all he is allowed to spend on his inauguration. (He raised this money by donations that averaged $200.)

The remaining $115 million, which covers security, the swearing-in, and other services, can only be paid for by the federal government. Obama cannot, by law, use any of his money from donations to offset the $115 million.

Contrast this with Bush's 2005 inauguration: The total cost was $157 million, of which he raised $42 million for his inauguration. (Most of his donations came from corporate executives, for example, 12 energy executives donated $2.3 million).

So yes, Obama's inauguration is the most expensive in history - - by a whole $3 million.

Bottom Line:

Obama's inauguration cost $160 million, and accommodated two million people; of that amount he could only control the $47 million he raised.

Bush's inaguration cost $157 million, and accommodated 500,000 people; of that, he could only control the $42 million he raised.

If you're going to have an inauguration to accommodate two million people, I'd say that $3 million was money well spent.

If you want to eliminate the huge sum spent on inaugurations, then the whole ceremony will have to be revised, and because the security itself will always be over $100 million, it would have to be no public allowed.

Elphaba

Remind me to send you some of my medical pills... To get President Obama elected to office, the party spent over 650-million dollars.

[Hemidakota]

On a lighter note......gas went up yesterday....can I blame the President?????........he must have ties to big oil.

It is time for the BLAME GAME TO BEGIN.

[FunkyTown]

So, you agree with his pro-abortion babykilling policies?

You like the fact that he plans to NOT extend the Bush tax cuts?

I guess your idea of one who is qualified to lead the country is one who has 136 actual days experience in the U.S. Senate wherein he basically did nothing but vote "present"?

To each his/her own I guess.....

While you haven't won the prize for most logical fallacies in a single sentence, you've done well here:

First sentence: Strawman and appeal to emotion fallacies. Two in one sentence. Not bad.

Sentence the second: Nothing bad here, though you haven't actually made an argument except by inference. You believe extending the Bush tax cuts will resolve the issue. Make the argument rather than assume the argument has already been made. If you had said "I don't believe Obama will make a good president because he wants to eliminate the Bush tax cuts and (insert argument for the vital nature of the Bush tax cuts. Then establish a logical chain establishing this argument as true)" then it would be easier to take this seriously.

Sentence the third: Appeal to ridicule. Someone could point out that President Abraham Lincoln had the same amount of experience before he became President and that they feel he did a terrific job. Someone could point out that President James Buchanan had far more experience and was arguably the worst President in history.

Honestly, I recognize that most LDS members are Republicans and in areas where LDS are the majority, most will just assume that the arguments for the Republican party have already been made. Believe it or not, more than half of your country voted this man in. More than half of your country believed in what he had to say. The argument against Obama has been made and it was found wanting. The only way to tell if what he does is right is by allowing him to do his job.

Palerider is right. The man needs our prayers. He's a good man who many will try to deceive. We can only pray for him and hope he leads your nation aright.

[Moksha]

Obama spent a grand total or $3 million more than any other president in history. He also accommodated 1 million more people than any other president in history (Johnson had 1,000,000).

$3 million more

1 million more people

That's it folks!

Elphaba

Up to more debunking of misinformation, eh Ms. Snopes?

To get President Obama elected to office, the party spent over 650-million dollars.

Did Hemi get this right?

[gigi]

I am definitely not pro-abortion. There is a big difference between pro-abortion and pro-choice. Even the Church leadership say it should be left up to the woman, her husband/boyfriend, and the bishop. It is definitely not to be taken lightly.

Whoa! Couldn't let that one slip by.

Policies and Procedures: Statement on Abortion

Harold B. Lee, N. Eldon Tanner, and Marion G. Romney

Abortion must be considered one of the most revolting and sinful practices in this day, when we are witnessing the frightening evidence of permissiveness leading to sexual immorality. Members of the Church guilty of being parties to the sin of abortion must be subjected to the disciplinary action of the councils of the Church as circumstances warrant.

[Hemidakota]

If you believe the authenticity of Snoops.

[Dr T]

Isn't that Schnapps?

[Palerider]

Hi Hemi,

Obama did not spend $650 million at his inauguration. I can‘t even imagine where you got such a number.

Although it is too early to tell for sure, it looks like 2,000,000 people attended Obama’s inauguration, and that the cost for this was between $155 and $160 million.

However! Obama raised $45 million for his inauguration, and that is all he is allowed to spend on his inauguration. (He raised this money by donations that averaged $200.)

The remaining $115 million, which covers security, the swearing-in, and other services, can only be paid for by the federal government. Obama cannot, by law, use any of his money from donations to offset the $115 million.

Contrast this with Bush's 2005 inauguration: The total cost was $157 million, of which he raised $42 million for his inauguration. (Most of his donations came from corporate executives, for example, 12 energy executives donated $2.3 million).

So yes, Obama's inauguration is the most expensive in history - - by a whole $3 million.

Bottom Line:

Obama's inauguration cost $160 million, and accommodated two million people; of that amount he could only control the $47 million he raised.

Bush's inaguration cost $157 million, and accommodated 500,000 people; of that, he could only control the $42 million he raised.

If you're going to have an inauguration to accommodate two million people, I'd say that $3 million was money well spent.

If you want to eliminate the huge sum spent on inaugurations, then the whole ceremony will have to be revised, and because the security itself will always be over $100 million, it would have to be no public allowed.

Elphaba

I will just add.....the media jumped all over Bush for spending that money....if its wrong for one its wrong for the new Pres....times are not much different....however you and I both know the media will not hold Obama accountable like they did Bush......the media did not like Bush from Day 1....

[AngelLynn]

Honestly, I recognize that most LDS members are Republicans and in areas where LDS are the majority, most will just assume that the arguments for the Republican party have already been made. Believe it or not, more than half of your country voted this man in. More than half of your country believed in what he had to say. The argument against Obama has been made and it was found wanting. The only way to tell if what he does is right is by allowing him to do his job.

*Cough* I am LDS and I am Democrat. Does this mean I agree with every policy that the Democratic party puts out, of course not.

But the math for the election, it was clear that many people who normally vote Republican decided to vote diffrently. The same could be said for the 2004 election except in reverse, in order for Bush to be reelected many Democrats had to have voted for him.

[AngelLynn]

I will just add.....the media jumped all over Bush for spending that money....if its wrong for one its wrong for the new Pres....times are not much different....however you and I both know the media will not hold Obama accountable like they did Bush......the media did not like Bush from Day 1....

Umm I could state about the press getting on Obama about the flubbing up of the Oath of Office. It was on CNN earlier about it and on Yahoo AP press. Anyway the point is the press will eat alive anyone they choose to at any time they wish.

[Palerider]

Umm I could state about the press getting on Obama about the flubbing up of the Oath of Office. It was on CNN earlier about it and on Yahoo AP press. Anyway the point is the press will eat alive anyone they choose to at any time they wish.

If Bush had done the same thing....the coverage would have been far worse....my opinion...

[AngelLynn]

If Bush had done the same thing....the coverage would have been far worse....my opinion...

Probably so. Although in all things Obama re-took the Oath. And then I just heard that the press reported that Obama made a major flub in his speech, when he said 44 people have taken the Oath of office when it was actually 43.

Not sure if anything is too diffrent. Seems the Press is doing what they normally do, press forward.

[Palerider]

Probably so. Although in all things Obama re-took the Oath. And then I just heard that the press reported that Obama made a major flub in his speech, when he said 44 people have taken the Oath of office when it was actually 43.

Not sure if anything is too diffrent. Seems the Press is doing what they normally do, press forward.

Its still their media Darling in office and the negative coverage won't amount to what the former Pres went thru.

[AngelLynn]

Its still their media Darling in office and the negative coverage won't amount to what the former Pres went thru.

And this time I think I'll keep my mouth shut. Not really a fan of the former Pres, but that's another discussion and I am not about to get partisan about it all. More fights start over poltics and religion etc.

But I do think Obama should be given his due chance at having his star rise or fall by his own merits of course.

[Palerider]

And this time I think I'll keep my mouth shut. Not really a fan of the former Pres, but that's another discussion and I am not about to get partisan about it all. More fights start over poltics and religion etc.

But I do think Obama should be given his due chance at having his star rise or fall by his own merits of course.

Maybe I did not make it very clear....my beef is the media....The Clinton years were like teflon...nothing ever stuck...the media loved him.....they hated Bush and they love Obama.....I don't like how the media plays......

[Elphaba]

Remind me to send you some of my medical pills... To get President Obama elected to office, the party spent over 650-million dollars.

Hi Hemi,

You originally wrote:

The party spent over 650 million dollars, some of which is questionable contributions sources but the highest ever in history.

You did not specify where Obama spent this money.

And since the thread is about the amount of money Obama spent on the inauguration, and not on his presidential campaign, I thought you were referring to the inauguration, just as everyone else was doing in the thread.

I don’t need any meds, well, in this case anyway. But I’m glad to have your clarification.

Elphaba

Edited January 22, 2009 by Elphaba

[Elphaba]

Maybe I did not make it very clear....my beef is the media....The Clinton years were like teflon...nothing ever stuck...the media loved him.....they hated Bush and they love Obama.....I don't like how the media plays......

Hey Pale,

Reagan was the original "Teflon President," which meant public perceptions of him were not tarnished by the negative aspects of his administration. One example is the Iran/Contra affair, which got a huge amount of press, yet the media did not condemn him outright.

According to Congresswoman Patricia Schroeder, who coined the phrase, and reporter Howard Kurtz, the epithet referred to Reagan's ability to "do almost anything [wrong] and not get blamed for it."

I realize this was almost thirty years ago, but the media slides around that teflon pan, and its darling is not always a Democrat.

Elphaba

[gigi]

Aha, the media did not condemn Reagan. Well, there you go, they reported and did not condemn. Imagine that - they did their job. I wish they'd continue to do that. If I want opinions on politics I'll listen to pundits, etc. If I want news I want it reported, no opinion. Give me the facts and I get to decide to condemn or applaud.

Reporters are not supposed to show any bias. Just report! Ah, the good ole days.

We haven't had a perfect president yet. We won't now. Let's respect our leaders, pray for them, and stand very strongly for what we think is right (whatever that might be) in policy.

I'm thinking Obama is not the Savior or the Anti-Christ - he's the president.

[Brother Dorsey]

I am definitely not pro-abortion. There is a big difference between pro-abortion and pro-choice. Even the Church leadership say it should be left up to the woman, her husband/boyfriend, and the bishop. It is definitely not to be taken lightly.

As for the tax cuts, there is already talk about another stimulus package.

Huh? Pro-abortion/Pro-choice are the same thing. Don't get me wrong, I am all for womens rights...but I am also for the rights of the unborn. As far as your quote regarding what the church leadership say about abortion I think you are seriously wrong. I believe the only time the church leadership has ever said anything regarding being pro-abortion is when the mothers life is in serious danger. I do however recall a few talks about abortion being seriously sinful.

Obama made a public announcement that he is going to sign the Freedom Of Choice Act, which will allow all types of abortions including partial birth abortions, also allowing babies who are born alive due to botched up late term abortions, to be set aside without any medical care or nourishment and left to die (most of these babies have no medical problems and most of the ones that do, have things like cleft palates, club feet, things that are correctable, still they are murdered in the most cruel and inhuman way. They feel everything that is happening to them. There is more mercy for dogs that are put to sleep) This Bill also will make it mandatory for doctors and nurses to perform this murderous act even if they do not want to do so. This act also allows under age teens to have an abortion, even partial birth abortions, without parental consent.

In my heart I just cannot support a leader who supports this....period!

Regarding the Bush tax cuts I was referring to in my post. I think you are confusing last years congressional stimulus package with the Bush tax cuts from 4 years ago. Those tax cuts included the $1000 per child tax credit. So when Obama and the democrats let the Bush tax cuts end without renewing them it will be exactly the same as raising taxes. In my personal case $3000 a year.

And, please don't get me started on the Obama proposed stimulus package...2 trillion dollars? Do you have any idea where this money comes from? They borrow it from the treasury....but wait! The Treasury really has no more money....so they work 24/7 round the clock to print more. So, now you dollar is worth even less. AND guess what? (remember I said that Obama and congress has to borrow the money), Well, how does that money get paid back? Any clues? How about through more taxes and the people have to pay it back, us, our children and our children's children and beyond. Someone figured recently what last years stimulus will cost us...it was something like $900 for every $600 check sent out...AND WE HAVE TO PAY IT BACK...it's not free! Us, the ones who received the money have to pay it back...the government have become loan sharks with this economy!

[applepansy]

Maybe I did not make it very clear....my beef is the media....The Clinton years were like teflon...nothing ever stuck...the media loved him.....they hated Bush and they love Obama.....I don't like how the media plays......

I agree!!! Media is suppose to be unbaised. . . . we do not have an unbiased media today.

applepansy

[Hemidakota]

Hi Hemi,

You originally wrote: You did not specify where Obama spent this money.

And since the thread is about the amount of money Obama spent on the inauguration, and not on his presidential campaign, I thought you were referring to the inauguration, just as everyone else was doing in the thread.

I don’t need any meds, well, in this case anyway. But I’m glad to have your clarification.

Elphaba

I was being facetious, Elph.

No meds? This morning my head hurts, my body aches, tears are flowing, perhaps I can borrow some from you...

[Hemidakota]

I agree!!! Media is suppose to be unbaised. . . . we do not have an unbiased media today.

applepansy

Something we did witness this week. Sad though, they will get what is coming to them.

[applepansy]

Huh? Pro-abortion/Pro-choice are the same thing. Don't get me wrong, I am all for womens rights...but I am also for the rights of the unborn. As far as your quote regarding what the church leadership say about abortion I think you are seriously wrong. I believe the only time the church leadership has ever said anything regarding being pro-abortion is when the mothers life is in serious danger. I do however recall a few talks about abortion being seriously sinful.

Obama made a public announcement that he is going to sign the Freedom Of Choice Act, which will allow all types of abortions including partial birth abortions, also allowing babies who are born alive due to botched up late term abortions, to be set aside without any medical care or nourishment and left to die (most of these babies have no medical problems and most of the ones that do, have things like cleft palates, club feet, things that are correctable, still they are murdered in the most cruel and inhuman way. They feel everything that is happening to them. There is more mercy for dogs that are put to sleep) This Bill also will make it mandatory for doctors and nurses to perform this murderous act even if they do not want to do so. This act also allows under age teens to have an abortion, even partial birth abortions, without parental consent.

In my heart I just cannot support a leader who supports this....period!

Regarding the Bush tax cuts I was referring to in my post. I think you are confusing last years congressional stimulus package with the Bush tax cuts from 4 years ago. Those tax cuts included the $1000 per child tax credit. So when Obama and the democrats let the Bush tax cuts end without renewing them it will be exactly the same as raising taxes. In my personal case $3000 a year.

And, please don't get me started on the Obama proposed stimulus package...2 trillion dollars? Do you have any idea where this money comes from? They borrow it from the treasury....but wait! The Treasury really has no more money....so they work 24/7 round the clock to print more. So, now you dollar is worth even less. AND guess what? (remember I said that Obama and congress has to borrow the money), Well, how does that money get paid back? Any clues? How about through more taxes and the people have to pay it back, us, our children and our children's children and beyond. Someone figured recently what last years stimulus will cost us...it was something like $900 for every $600 check sent out...AND WE HAVE TO PAY IT BACK...it's not free! Us, the ones who received the money have to pay it back...the government have become loan sharks with this economy!

Thank you for your points on both subjects.

As for Obama signing the Freedom of Choice Act. . .If he does, he's either stupid and doesn't realize what he's signing because signing it will make him complicit in murder. That bill is designed not to protect the rights of women, but to murder children in awful ways. . . at full term. A full term baby will live on its own. How can anyone condone the methods of murder employed in partical birth abortions? We will lose good doctors and nurses who quit practicing when this bill passes. Where is that going to leave women? With the doctors and nurses who don't have a moral bone in their body.

You explained the eonomics quite well. Very direct, but very clear.

applepansy

[applepansy]

Something we did witness this week. Sad though, they will get what is coming to them.

What happened that I missed? I miss a lot some days.

applepansy

[Palerider]

Elphaba

this is for my favorite Democrat....I feel the media jumped all over Ronnie for the Iran Contra, they got mad cause they couldn't nail him on anything....but thats ok...you and I both know what I am talking about and we are both to proud to admit it....:)