It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Over $35 million for Bush Coronation - Not Counting Security!

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 29 2004 @ 01:29 PM
link   
The inauguration is intended to be a simple swearing-in ceremony for the peaceful transition of power but since Reagan's time it has become an event worthy of British Royalty.

The costs this year are estimated to be over $35 million not counting expenses for security!



Planned are nine official balls, a youth concert, a parade, a fireworks display and, of course, Bush's second swearing-in ceremony at noon on Jan. 20. The cost will be between $30 million and $40 million, an amount that does not include expenses for security. AP News


The official Inauguration site (link) discusses the theme as A Vision of America and lists what to wear and of course prohibited items. Thats some vision there America.

This display of royal extravagance for the whos who of Washington is sickening in my opinion, especially in a time of war. Used to be that wartime meant sacrifice, not for these fat cats.

I guess they couldnt find a better use for the $35 million.


Those that do not genuflect before illegitimate power are planning a quiet protest.

Organizers are asking people to simply show up without banners or signs and in regular dress. At a pre-determined time they will turn their backs on Bush to make their statement.



On January 20th, 2005, were calling for a new kind of action. The Bush administration has been successful at keeping protesters away from major events in the last few years by closing off areas around events and using questionable legal strategies to outlaw public dissent. We can use these obstacles to develop new tactics. On inauguration day, we dont need banners, we dont need signs, we just need people.

We're calling on people to attend inauguration as they are: members of the public. Once through security and at the procession, at a given signal, we'll all turn our backs on Bush. A simple, clear and coherent message. - www.turnyourbackonbush.org...


Im willing to bet not a single photo of this protests makes it onto the mainstream media. It will be like Oscar night with stories about what people are wearing and who did their hair with the moral majority lapping it all up.

Hypocrites.

All hail Emperor Bush!

Sigh Hail!

.




posted on Dec, 29 2004 @ 01:35 PM
link   
Exactly, my friend. It's extremely ironic how it is exactly $35 million. That's the same they have sent to over 5 countries devestated by tsunamis. This really goes to show you how much worth $35m has for Bush.



posted on Dec, 29 2004 @ 01:55 PM
link   

The inauguration is estimated to cost $30 million to $40 million, which private donations will cover. Link


Personally I don't care if it costs 100 hundred or 100 million dollars so long as the donations come from private sources and not from the federal treasury.

B.



posted on Dec, 29 2004 @ 02:06 PM
link   
And alas.....
The 'left' and the anti-war factions unite to strike again....does nothing go un-politicized these days? Not even a catastrophic disaster?

Guess not.

Keep up the 'good' fight....




seekerof



posted on Dec, 29 2004 @ 02:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by Bleys
... so long as the donations come from private sources and not from the federal treasury.


Good point Bleys... I missed that. (p.s. your link requires registration which I am adverse to
)

It's still a bunch of fat cats throwing themselves a party though. The donators should think about the quake victims or the homless in DC rather than this charade.

I wonder how much the security costs will be? That will definitely come out of the public treasury which is probably why the numbers are not given.

I hope the "turn your back" protest gets some coverage but I'm not holding my breath.

.



posted on Dec, 29 2004 @ 02:07 PM
link   
I don't remember this being an issue when Bill Clinton's second inauguration was held. It cost roughly the same amount, perhaps slightly more when adjusted for inflation.

Then again, I suppose people weren't as desperate to drum up phony scandals back then, either.

And really, considering how many phony scandals were floating around back then, I guess that doesn't speak well of the current crowd of chest-beaters.

Just Say NO To Mindless Partisan Stoogery.




posted on Dec, 29 2004 @ 02:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by Seekerof
Keep up the 'good' fight....



Thanks! I will.

Somebody has to right?

It's much easier for me to point to reasons why Bush is the worst pResident ever than it is for you to point to reasons to support him. So I guess I should wish you a good fight as well.

After all, you need it more than me.


.



posted on Dec, 29 2004 @ 02:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by Gools
Good point Bleys... I missed that. (p.s. your link requires registration which I am adverse to
)

It's still a bunch of fat cats throwing themselves a party though. The donators should think about the quake victims or the homless in DC rather than this charade.


On this you will get no argument from me. Wouldn't it be a wonderful gesture for the "haves" to tone down the inauguration event and donate the majority of the monies to victims of the tsunami? A truly selfless act with the added bonus of great PR.


B

[edit on 12/29/04 by Bleys]



posted on Dec, 29 2004 @ 02:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by Bleys
Wouldn't it be a wonderful gesture for the "haves" to tone down the inauguration event and donate the majority of the monies to victims of the tsunami?


It will never happen. Anyone wishing to fund an event such as this, knowing the pain and suffering Bush has brought to thousands, can't be considered a compassionate human being. Selfish, power hungry sycophants is the best name for them. 'So what if thousands died in the tsunami - lets kiss up to the president and have fun !'

And if they don't care about people on the other side of the world, what about their own country ? - how many poor people would benefit if the 35m were spent on helping them.

This world is fecked.



posted on Dec, 29 2004 @ 02:21 PM
link   
it's privately funded so what's the big deal?
It's costing about the same as the first one, yet nobody made a big stink then.

Also, Clinton's 97 ball cost $29.6, which was also privately funded with 23 and change. The difference was made up by using funds left over from the first ball.

they get companies and high rolling friends to pony up the money. Both sides do this. both sides over spend. if you want to whine about this one being 40 million, whine about the last one and then start whining about clinton's.



www.washingtonpost.com...



posted on Dec, 29 2004 @ 02:31 PM
link   
If it this $35 million was added to the (comic) relief, it would total $70 million, which is still peanuts, just bigger peanuts.

[edit on 29-12-2004 by Indigo_Child]



posted on Dec, 29 2004 @ 02:31 PM
link   
[edit, apparently its privately funded]

Ah, well, really, who cares then. Its a waste of money obviously, but more than that gets wasted for lots of stupid reasons.

Yeah, it'd be nice and smart if the president insisted that these events be cancelled and everythign be sent to the tsunami victims, doubt he will do it, but thats not much of a criticism.

[edit on 29-12-2004 by Nygdan]



posted on Dec, 29 2004 @ 02:31 PM
link   
sheesh, Clinton spent 33 million in 1993. I'm calling for an investiagtion into this kid of overspending.


Politicians are entertainers without talent. they need a public stage. They can't get paid 20 million a year to be on a movie screen so they do the next best thing. they get themselves elected as gov't official and they then charge their rich "friends" to see them. They also hit corporations up for "donations" which will hopefully ensure that the funding/legislation etc that said company is concerned about is taken care of.

if coca cola wants to shell out $100,000 to eat lobster with Bush or if some columbian drug lord wants to donate $20k so he can have his picture taken with Clinton weeks before his arrest, so be it. Fools and their money.



posted on Dec, 29 2004 @ 02:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by Nygdan
Who is paying for the balls and banquets and choirs and parades?


the inaugural ball is paid for by donations. $250k gets you a nice package.


Indigo, maybe you should write a letter to The Washington Post, Coca Cola etc. It's big corporations that pay for a large portion of the ball.



posted on Dec, 29 2004 @ 02:48 PM
link   
Check this out; Here's the Inauguration's $250,000 donors or winners, who will be attending Georgie's party..

COMPANIES:

Altria Corporate Services Inc.
Parent company of Kraft and Philip Morris

Ameriquest Capital Corp.
Financial services company

Argent Mortgage Company

ChevronTexaco Corp.

Corporate Capital LLC
Investment firm

Exxon Mobil Corp.

Golden Eagle Industries Inc.
Buiding materials company

Kojaian Ventures LLC

Long Beach Acceptance Corp.
Auto loan company

Occidental Petroleum Corp.

Rooney Holdings Inc.
Construction company

Sallie Mae Inc. (Reston, Va.)
Student loan organization

Southern Company Inc.
Energy utility

Stephens Group Inc.
Investment firm

Town and Country Credit
Mortgage company

United Technologies Corp.
Aerospace and industrial manufacture

---

INDIVIDUALS

Elliott Broidy
Founder of investment firm Broidy Capital Management

Michael Dell
Founder of the Dell computer company

Richard Kinder
Former Enron president

S. Davis Phillips
Former North Carolina commerce secretary

T. Boone Pickens
Texas oilman

---

Oh ya Richard Kinder of Enron will be there
um ya.. Why would you ever invite someone named T-Bone Pickens from Texas i have no clue
.. So plenty of Gas & Oil companies, no surprise there. Hey who invited the Student loan freaks? huh huh, speak up nerds! oh yea, they have been making record profit years since Dubya took office so they're with us.


[edit on 29-12-2004 by syntaxer]



posted on Dec, 29 2004 @ 02:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by Bleys

Personally I don't care if it costs 100 hundred or 100 million dollars



Why not? Waste is waste.

A culture of extravagance and impropriety can only be remedied by saying "enough is enough".



posted on Dec, 29 2004 @ 02:57 PM
link   

Organizers are asking people to simply show up without banners or signs and in regular dress. At a pre-determined time they will turn their backs on Bush to make their statement.


I heard about this a while back... I really hope they manage to pull this off...



posted on Dec, 29 2004 @ 03:01 PM
link   
Gazrok

Some URLs could be no more obvious than this one. But there are totalitarian plans to keep suspect Joe Publics away from any inauguration, to minimize the impact.

www.turnyourbackonbush.com...



posted on Dec, 30 2004 @ 02:22 AM
link   

Originally posted by syntaxer
Check this out; Here's the Inauguration's $250,000 donors or winners, who will be attending Georgie's party..
:
:
:

Well, at a quarter million per pop, your list adds up to just over $5M. I wonder who's ponying up the other $30M? Must be all those bible thumpers in the Red States.


I notice that the man behind THE REAL STORY OF THE OHIO ELECTION, Diebold's own Walden Odell, is conspicuously missing. Maybe he made his donation in the form of electronic election machines.


Party on, George!

[edit on 30-12-2004 by jsobecky]



new topics




 
0

log in

join