» OLD MESSAGE ARCHIVES «
The Pop Culture Information Society...
Messageboard Archive Index, In The 00s - The Pop Culture Information Society
Welcome to the archived messages from In The 00s. This archive stretches back to 1998 in some instances, and contains a nearly complete record of all the messages posted to inthe00s.com. You will also find an archive of the messages from inthe70s.com, inthe80s.com, inthe90s.com and amiright.com before they were combined to form the inthe00s.com messageboard.
If you are looking for the active messages, please click here. Otherwise, use the links below or on the right hand side of the page to navigate the archives.
Custom Search
This is a topic from the Current Politics and Religious Topics forum on inthe00s.
Subject: Bush inauguration
Written By: goodsin on 01/21/05 at 6:00 am
Hi Folks- anyone know how many countries had yesterdays' Coronation of The King of The World Inauguration of the President of the USA beamed live to them? We had it in the UK, I was gutted, because I was expecting to watch The Weakest Link (some may think I did, but I really meant the Quiz show) ;D. What I could bear to watch seemed quite spectacularly ceremonial, it seems the USA is getting to rival the UK in pageantry- though I was a bit worried at one point that they were going to deify Bush, rather than just swear him in as President... :o
Subject: Re: Bush inauguration
Written By: CatwomanofV on 01/21/05 at 11:20 am
I don't know how many countries were watching. I watched just a bit of it-that was all I could stomach. $40 million could have been used for a greater good.
Cat
Subject: Re: Bush inauguration
Written By: MaxwellSmart on 01/21/05 at 12:38 pm
You did better than I did...I watched absolutely NONE of it and changed the channel whenever the news started to show clips.ÂÂ
Me too! I was too worried about sudden uncontrollable projectile vomiting!
Tell me, how can the Bushies back their claim of Dubya being a down home man of the people when he and his cabal treat themselves like royalty?
It was the same way with the phony-baloney Reagans!
::)
Subject: Re: Bush inauguration
Written By: neebs25 on 01/21/05 at 1:05 pm
I agree, all that money could of been used for the aid of our troops >:(
Subject: Re: Bush inauguration
Written By: Don Carlos on 01/21/05 at 3:04 pm
  I agree, all that money could of been used for the aid of our troops >:(ÂÂ
Sorry to be picky, and I'm obviously not great speller, but this is a pet peeve. Its "could have" or "could've", not could of.
I agree that the $40-$50 million could have been much better spent. What found really interesting was C-Span2's coverage of the protestors from the ANSWER coalition, which was minimized by all the other networks, from the few minutes of the parade that I watched.
Subject: Re: Bush inauguration
Written By: AL-B on 01/21/05 at 4:41 pm
Sorry to be picky, and I'm obviously not great speller, but this is a pet peeve. Its "could have" or "could've", not could of.
And you're a perfesser??? (Just kidding! :))
Subject: Re: Bush inauguration
Written By: Vern on 01/21/05 at 4:49 pm
Actually, Clinton's second inauguration cost $42 million...of which $12.7 million were financed by taxpayers!
when that cost is adjusted for inflation, President Clinton's second inauguration cost about 25% more than the current President Bush!
Clinton spokesman Barry Toiv said at the time, "It's really a symbol to the world and has been for over 200 years, and it's worth celebrating."
Subject: Re: Bush inauguration
Written By: GWBush2004 on 01/21/05 at 4:53 pm
Actually, Clinton's second inauguration cost $42 million...of which $12.7 million were financed by taxpayers!
when that cost is adjusted for inflation, President Clinton's second inauguration cost about 25% more than the current President Bush!
Clinton spokesman Barry Toiv said at the time, "It's really a symbol to the world and has been for over 200 years, and it's worth celebrating."
Shh....don't confuse them with the facts.
All the people complaining now would have said nothing if it was Kerry, and did say nothing when it was Clinton.
Subject: Re: Bush inauguration
Written By: ChuckyG on 01/21/05 at 4:56 pm
Shh....don't confuse them with the facts.
All the people complaining now would have said nothing if it was Kerry, and did say nothing when it was Clinton.
Like the fact that Bush has us at war currently. Most of the complaints have been about it being a very large celebration while we're sending folks to die in a war begun on false pretenses.
That would just be confusing to think about though, much easier to point and say "But Clinton!"
Subject: Re: Bush inauguration
Written By: MaxwellSmart on 01/21/05 at 7:13 pm
Like the fact that Bush has us at war currently. Most of the complaints have been about it being a very large celebration while we're sending folks to die in a war begun on false pretenses.ÂÂ
That would just be confusing to think about though, much easier to point and say "But Clinton!"
That's exactly what I was going to say. It seems whenever the Right wants to tell dissenters to shut up, they say "We're a country at war!" However, when it comes to the rich sacrificing any luxury, when it comes to the Bushies showing the austerity the statement "we're a country at war" would seem to require, forget it! Then buying a Lexus and going to the big balls become acts of patriotism!
::)
Furthermore, I didn't vote for Clinton in '96, and I didn't approve of his lavish inauguration bash then either.
Subject: Re: Bush inauguration
Written By: philbo on 01/21/05 at 7:35 pm
Actually, Clinton's second inauguration cost $42 million...of which $12.7 million were financed by taxpayers!
er... not according to the Washington Post:
Clinton's inauguration cost $29.6 million and took in $23.7 million. Money left over from his first inauguration was used to make up the difference.
...still can't help lying about the Democrats? Hell, why change the habits of a lifetime, eh?
Subject: Re: Bush inauguration
Written By: nally on 01/21/05 at 7:48 pm
You did better than I did...I watched absolutely NONE of it
Same here. I was just not interested.
Subject: Re: Bush inauguration
Written By: philbo on 01/21/05 at 8:06 pm
It's not lies...it's facts...facts don't lie
Source, please - I turned up a dozen sites talking about the cost of the last few inaugurations, and the only one to hit the same cost as this one was Bush's first. There doesn't seem to be any dispute over the figures, so I'd like to know where you came up with your $40m for Clinton.
Facts don't lie... people do.
Subject: Re: Bush inauguration
Written By: Vern on 01/21/05 at 8:07 pm
er... not according to the Washington Post:...still can't help lying about the Democrats? Hell, why change the habits of a lifetime, eh?
I posted the facts,,,the facts never lie!
I don't know where the Washington Post gets their figures...but, you got to realize that it's the Washington Post ::)
Subject: Re: Bush inauguration
Written By: Vern on 01/21/05 at 8:09 pm
Source, please - I turned up a dozen sites talking about the cost of the last few inaugurations, and the only one to hit the same cost as this one was Bush's first. There doesn't seem to be any dispute over the figures, so I'd like to know where you came up with your $40m for Clinton.
Facts don't lie... people do.
Listen buddy, I don't lie, if that's what you're intending! >:(
Subject: Re: Bush inauguration
Written By: philbo on 01/21/05 at 8:20 pm
I posted the facts,,,the facts never lie!
I don't know where the Washington Post gets their figures...but, you got to realize that it's the Washington Post ::)
OK, if you don't like the Washington Post, what about CNN... or Fox News if you prefer. If you posted the facts, then surely there's a reputable source you can quote.
Listen buddy, I don't lie, if that's what you're intending! >:(
OK, so you don't lie... so check your "facts" before you post them.
Subject: Re: Bush inauguration
Written By: Paul on 01/21/05 at 8:21 pm
One of George's 'fans' from The Daily Mirror must've* watched it, as they printed a lowdown of some key words and how many times he said them...
'Freedom'.......27
'Liberty'..........15
'Tyranny'.........5
'Justice'...........5
'God'..............3
'Threat'..........2
'Security'........1
'War', 'Iraq', 'Iran', 'Terror' and 'My Mate Tony Blair' were not mentioned...!!
(* Hope DC noticed that...!!)
Subject: Re: Bush inauguration
Written By: Tanya1976 on 01/21/05 at 8:23 pm
I only watched the protesting groups! How cool! Power to the People!
Tanya
Subject: Re: Bush inauguration
Written By: neebs25 on 01/21/05 at 10:47 pm
Sorry to be picky, and I'm obviously not great speller, but this is a pet peeve. Its "could have" or "could've", not could of.
I agree that the $40-$50 million could have been much better spent. What found really interesting was C-Span2's coverage of the protestors from the ANSWER coalition, which was minimized by all the other networks, from the few minutes of the parade that I watched.
;D I'm glad you corrected me, I think it's funny because I knew that I had written it incorrectly, but did'nt know the correct way....always keep my mind open to make me a little wiser ;)
Subject: Re: Bush inauguration
Written By: goodsin on 01/24/05 at 9:54 am
Wow, I didn't realise the ceremony cost that much. Somebody metions that a fifth to a qurter of the money was US taxpayer's money, where did the rest come from? Donations from Bush's mates? :D
Subject: Re: Bush inauguration
Written By: MaxwellSmart on 01/24/05 at 12:09 pm
Wow, I didn't realise the ceremony cost that much. Somebody metions that a fifth to a qurter of the money was US taxpayer's money, where did the rest come from? Donations from Bush's mates? :D
Yes. Now that Bush won the election, he has no accountability to the people whatsoever. He described the election as the "accountability moment." Thank God it's only a moment, eh?
:D :o
Now Bush and Co. can devote themselves to their true purpose--big favors for big business! A lot of inaugural donations came from energy companies, for instance.
Subject: Re: Bush inauguration
Written By: Tanya1976 on 01/24/05 at 12:11 pm
Yes. Now that Bush won the election, he has no accountability to the people whatsoever. He described the election as the "accountability moment." Thank God it's only a moment, eh?
 :D :o
Now Bush and Co. can devote themselves to their true purpose--big favors for big business! A lot of inaugural donations came from energy companies, for instance.
Amen to that!
Tanya
Subject: Re: Bush inauguration
Written By: JamieMcBain on 01/24/05 at 12:31 pm
The money could have been spent to better equip the troops in Iraq, for food for those who nned it the most, aid for the flood victims, providing adequte jobs, clothing, and food for the homeless, better text, equipment, and repair for schools, research in fighting dieases, help ending pollultion, etc....
Instead it went to a self congradulatory event.
They had at least 5 balls and probally a dozen dinners, what a waste of time and money! ::) >:(
Subject: Re: Bush inauguration
Written By: McDonald on 01/24/05 at 12:37 pm
Shh....don't confuse them with the facts.
All the people complaining now would have said nothing if it was Kerry, and did say nothing when it was Clinton.
Actually, I would have. It's wasteful plain and simple. Where are your conservative resolutions when your candidate of choice blows forty mil. on a ceremony? But in your mind, the fact that a Democrat did worse in the past nullifies any conflict you may have had within yourself about the actions of your candidate... and it's a good thing. Could you imagine GW with a crisis of conscience?
Subject: Re: Bush inauguration
Written By: CatwomanofV on 01/24/05 at 12:50 pm
Yes. Now that Bush won the election, he has no accountability to the people whatsoever. He described the election as the "accountability moment." Thank God it's only a moment, eh?
 :D :o
Now Bush and Co. can devote themselves to their true purpose--big favors for big business! A lot of inaugural donations came from energy companies, for instance.
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/uclickcomics/20050124/cx_nq_uc/nq20050124
Cat
Subject: Re: Bush inauguration
Written By: philbo on 01/24/05 at 3:17 pm
One of George's 'fans' from The Daily Mirror must've* watched it, as they printed a lowdown of some key words and how many times he said them...
'Freedom'.......27
'Liberty'..........15
'Tyranny'.........5
'Justice'...........5
'God'..............3
'Threat'..........2
'Security'........1
'War', 'Iraq', 'Iran', 'Terror' and 'My Mate Tony Blair' were not mentioned...!!
(* Hope DC noticed that...!!)
All this "freedom"... couldn't resist writing this :)
Subject: Re: Bush inauguration
Written By: Don Carlos on 01/24/05 at 3:19 pm
And you're a perfesser??? (Just kidding! :))
Yes, I are one ;)
Subject: Re: Bush inauguration
Written By: Paul on 01/24/05 at 3:24 pm
All this "freedom"... couldn't resist writing this :)
Heh!
It's a pity 'Spitting Image' got kiboshed...you could've* made a fortune, phil...
Hold on...! Phil Pope used to do most of the 'musical' items on that show...you're not he, are you...?!! Heh! Forgive me...I shouldn't think so...
(* There's another one, DC...!)
Subject: Re: Bush inauguration
Written By: Don Carlos on 01/24/05 at 3:33 pm
Actually, I would have. It's wasteful plain and simple. Where are your conservative resolutions when your candidate of choice blows forty mil. on a ceremony? But in your mind, the fact that a Democrat did worse in the past nullifies any conflict you may have had within yourself about the actions of your candidate... and it's a good thing. Could you imagine GW with a crisis of conscience?
But according to sources, including Foux News, the Dems didn't do worse, and the neocons have not produced a source for their comparison.
In order to have a crisis of something, one must have that something. "Conscience" is not a word one would associate with the Bush family, and especially with Lil' Georgie.
Subject: Re: Bush inauguration
Written By: philbo on 01/24/05 at 3:39 pm
Hold on...! Phil Pope used to do most of the 'musical' items on that show...you're not he, are you...?!! Heh! Forgive me...I shouldn't think so...
Someone else who knows Phil Pope?  No, that's not me (but his two sons are in the same class as my two sons... small world, ain't it?)
Subject: Re: Bush inauguration
Written By: MaxwellSmart on 01/24/05 at 4:32 pm
But according to sources, including Foux News, the Dems didn't do worse, and the neocons have not produced a source for their comparison.
In order to have a crisis of something, one must have that something. "Conscience" is not a word one would associate with the Bush family, and especially with Lil' Georgie.
The Bush family is the Military-Industrial complex personified. They are genetically incapable of doing anything but serving the greedy interests of international capital.
Subject: Re: Bush inauguration
Written By: Don Carlos on 01/24/05 at 4:44 pm
The Bush family is the Military-Industrial complex personified. They are genetically incapable of doing anything but serving the greedy interests of international capital.
You got that right, and for generations.