About us Login Get email updates
Research
Print

MSNBC's Tamron Hall asserted Bush's 2005 inauguration "cost roughly $40 million," ignored reported $100 million in additional costs

January 18, 2009 5:19 pm ET

Please upgrade your flash player. The video for this item requires a newer version of Flash Player. If you are unable to install flash you can download a QuickTime version of the video.

EMBED

SUMMARY: MSNBC's Tamron Hall stated that "the inauguration festivities" for President-elect Barack Obama are "estimated to reach as high as $150 million," while "[i]n 2004, to note, the inauguration of George W. Bush cost roughly $40 million." But the $40 million figure that Hall cited for Bush's second inauguration reportedly does not include security and transportation costs incurred by the federal government and the District of Columbia; these costs are included in the $150 million estimate that the media are reporting for the Obama inauguration.

114 Comments

During the January 18 edition of MSNBC Live, host Tamron Hall stated that "the inauguration festivities" for President-elect Barack Obama are "estimated to reach as high as $150 million," adding that "[i]n 2004, to note, the inauguration of George W. Bush cost roughly $40 million." However, the $40 million figure that Hall cited for Bush's second inauguration reportedly does not include certain costs incurred by the federal government and the District of Columbia such as security and transportation costs; these costs are included in the $150 million estimate that the media are reporting for the Obama inauguration. When the costs incurred by the federal government and the District of Columbia are factored in, the total cost of Bush's 2005 inauguration was reportedly around $157 million, as Media Matters for America senior fellow Eric Boehlert noted.

The Washington Post reported in January 2005 that the $40 million cost of Bush's inaugural celebration, raised from private donations "does not include the cost of a web of security, including everything from 7,000 troops to volunteer police officers from far away, to some of the most sophisticated detection and protection equipment." Further, The New York Times reported on January 5 that in 2005, "the federal government and the District of Columbia spent a combined $115.5 million, most of it for security, the swearing-in ceremony, cleanup and for a holiday for federal workers."

This year, the Presidential Inaugural Committee reportedly plans to spend around $45 million on the celebrations "surrounding the actual ceremony," all of which "comes completely from private donations, not the government." In addition, public funds will cover security, transportation, staffing, construction, and the actual swearing-in ceremony. According to CNNMoney.com:

The total cost of the inauguration to the federal government is $49 million, according to Abigail Tanner, spokeswoman for the Office of Management and Budget.

That $49 million includes a $15 million appropriation which has already been appropriated to the District of Columbia to help pay for the inauguration expenses. It also includes money to pay for the Secret Service during the inauguration and the military personnel during the parade following the swearing-in ceremony.

Meanwhile, the governors of Virginia and Maryland, and the mayor of Washington sent a letter to the federal government estimating that the inauguration was going to cost them a combined $75 million -- $47 million for the District alone -- for transportation and law enforcement.

The District may be eligible for more federal money beyond the $15 million appropriated. President Bush announced Tuesday that the District was in a state of emergency, making more funding available for "emergency protective measures that are undertaken to save lives and protect public health and safety."

From the January 18 edition of MSNBC Live:

HALL: Well, the inauguration festivities of Barack Obama as the nation's 44th president are estimated to reach as high as $150 million. In 2004, to note, the inauguration of George W. Bush cost roughly $40 million. At the same price, some Democrats criticized the president for being too lavish at wartime. And joining us now is Democratic congresswoman from the state of California, honorary co-chair of the 2009 presidential inauguration, Representative Linda Sanchez. Thank you so much for joining us, Congresswoman. I'm gonna ask you off the top before we talk about some of the fun that goes along with this -- and there is a lot of it -- $150 million. How can Democrats have criticized George Bush for $40 million, and then you see the lavish amount of money being spent here now?

SANCHEZ: Well, it's important to keep in mind that the vast majority of that money comes from donations. So --

HALL: I understand it's like $40 million. That -- that does --

SANCHEZ: Right. But you also have to think about the times that we're in and the fact that this is a historic election. When we were talking about the Bush inauguration and the criticism he received, that was his second inaugural. He had already been inaugurated once. We're talking about the first inaugural for a historic president, and we're talking about somebody that draws much larger crowds than President Bush ever did. There are so many people that were involved in his campaign and that want to be a part of this event, so it seems only fitting that in order to include as many of these people as possible, that the scope of it's going to be a little bit bigger.

HALL: It's interesting, because I believe it was either Chris Matthews or Mike Barnicle -- I'd hate to get either of them mixed up -- but they were talking about the grandeur, and that that's what these people out here really want. They want to see the spectacle of hope. Is that really -- was that a part of the strategy going in, or just did it evolve to this?

SANCHEZ: I wasn't part of the strategy in terms of what, you know, what the preparations would be, but I do think that, you know, people right now are looking to his presidency as restoring hope in America and they're excited about it, and that's why you see unprecedented numbers of people descending on Washington, D.C., and wanting to go to some of these events. And they're trying to make them as accessible as possible for everybody at all income levels, and so, you know, I think that the genuine excitement that he generates is just something that we haven't seen in decades in this country.

HALL: It's interesting. Where -- and I don't want to catch you off guard here; I know you're the co-chair so there were other people handling the nuts and bolts -- but do we know where the bulk of the money is going?

SANCHEZ: I don't know that answer.

HALL: Don't know that answer. I know that the transportation and the security is covered by city or the taxpayers' dollars there, but with that said, on a happier note, what are you most looking forward to?

Expand All Expand 1st Level Collapse All Add Comment
    • Author by robrob (January 18, 2009 5:56 pm ET)
         

      Why would they compare the costs of Bush's second inauguration with the costs Obama's first inauguration? Isn't that apples and oranges?

      Report Abuse
      • Author by MiddleLeft (January 18, 2009 7:24 pm ET)
           

        Robrob you are making the same mistake as Sanchez.  He doesn't realize the Bush figure doesn't include security costs. That is the big difference. In the previous thread it was intimated that Bush total inaugural cost was higher or equal to Obama.

        Report Abuse
      • Author by roundhouse (January 19, 2009 9:06 pm ET)
           

        I mean, if they really care, why don't they go back to the '81 inauguration and comment on the fact that Reagan's cost 5 times more than Carter's? 

        Report Abuse
    • Author by mefirst (January 18, 2009 7:28 pm ET)
         

      it's a big important historic event.  a lot of people will be there. 

      Report Abuse
    • Author by snoopy (January 18, 2009 7:53 pm ET)
         

      For the media, simply reporting on the cost of the inauguration proved to be a challenge. Most major outlets stuck to the lower, albeit still unprecedented, figure of $40 million, which the Presidential Inaugural Committee said it hopes to raise from private donors. But a more accurate figure may be $50 million. That's the amount cited by the Washington Times (which is plugged in to GOP circles). But even that number doesn't take into account the nearly $20 million that's being spent for security, putting the real cost at closer to $70 million, instead of the media's preferred $40 million.

      And it might have been helpful in the limited media debate that did take place about the inauguration's costs to point out that if the $40 million to $50 million raised for the GOP's parties had been donated to the war effort, as some have suggested, the money would have covered only about six hours of the U.S. military's operations in Iraq. (Costs are running roughly $110,000 per minute there.) Also interesting but unnoted is that between the 2001 and 2005 inaugurations, Bush and his supporters have spent roughly $115 million total on parties and parades.

      http://dir.salon.com/story/news/feature/2005/01/20/media_on_inauguration

      Report Abuse
      • Author by philib (January 19, 2009 9:10 am ET)
           

           Interesting read. I wonder how much Obama's inauguration will cost when you factor in security and transportation costs incurred by the federal government and the district of columbia... $200M? $300M?

           Facts are that Obama will cost this nation more. I wonder if snoop will whine about Obama spending $115M on parties over the next 4 years? Nah, he's a directed whiner. He only whines about what he is told to whine about. No individual thinking there. He can't even write his own reply, he copy/pastes someone elses.

        Report Abuse
        • Author by eweston8542983 (January 19, 2009 11:19 am ET)
             

          Well maybe he should follow your lead and wait till the conversation is days gone before posting snide and snark down a thread now over two hundred posts long. As I saw you did for fridays thread #1. Up right? Creditable?

          I think you'd prefer the bogus figures and I understand why.

          You are quite a piece of work Phil. If it ever got down, and time for effective effort in a contest I'd like to have you on the opposition's side. 

          Report Abuse
        • Author by snoopy (January 19, 2009 11:31 am ET)
             

          Claim what you want, as always, your opinion of someone else is never based in proof.

          Report Abuse
        • Author by snoopy (January 19, 2009 11:34 am ET)
             

          P.S. posting something sunday on a thread from friday that I no longer go to shows what a coward you are. Typical of your kind to whisper things behind someones back because you don't have the balls to say it to their face.

          Report Abuse
          • Author by philib (January 19, 2009 11:54 am ET)
               

               Obviously, you didn't notice that I was the first to post on Friday. And, while I don't live on the internet, like many of you all, I do post when I have the opportunity. Even in the future Obama presidency, some will have to work. We see who they will be. It will be the ones who aren't posting by the minute on mmfa. Like ewes, who tries to be the last to post with snide remarks on each. None being on-topic, much like his post earlier---not on-topic.

            Report Abuse
            • Author by eweston8542983 (January 19, 2009 1:00 pm ET)
                 

              I'd consider counting the number of posts you put up on sunday late, to what good use of my time?

              I ask lots of questions, most of them to inspire a little thinking,I get few answers from wingnuts. T Bone did offer a few replies, which I appreciated, but he failed to engage on most. Hey T what coment do you offer about the Mr. Turner mentioned below?

              Report Abuse
              • Author by eweston8542983 (January 19, 2009 1:09 pm ET)
                   

                Hell with it I'd hate for Phil to accuse me of lasyness. That would be horrible. I count 20 posts by him late Sunday. How many reply's did you expect Phil?

                Darn there's another one of those uncalled for questions.

                Report Abuse
        • Author by snoopy (January 19, 2009 11:38 am ET)
             

          Here phil, I've a nice map of all the racist groups currently tracked in the US.

          http://www.splcenter.org/intel/map/hate.jsp

          Isn't it interesting that most of the groups track the republican southern strategy map?

          Report Abuse
          • Author by anotheramerican (January 19, 2009 2:04 pm ET)
               

            Never let the actual discussion get in the way of your stream of consciousness. :-)

            Report Abuse
            • Author by eweston8542983 (January 19, 2009 2:21 pm ET)
                 

              Never offer a real reply, is that out of character for you today?

              Report Abuse
              • Author by snoopy (January 19, 2009 3:00 pm ET)
                   

                AA doesn't like being reminded of the true state of affairs. He pulled his head out of the sand long enough to go "ug. black man president. racism over. ug.".

                Report Abuse
              • Author by anotheramerican (January 19, 2009 4:01 pm ET)
                   

                Your reply and/or question makes no sense. Please go ahead and try again.

                Report Abuse
            • Author by snoopy (January 19, 2009 2:59 pm ET)
                 

              You should post that to phil, I was just responding to his off course remarks.

              Report Abuse
              • Author by anotheramerican (January 19, 2009 3:57 pm ET)
                   

                Snoop,

                Lets, see... a completely irrelevant response to my criticism of your completely off topic comment. I'll give you credit. You are consistant. :-)

                Report Abuse
                • Author by snoopy (January 19, 2009 6:03 pm ET)
                     

                  You keep leaving out phil. I understand your scorn is only for liberals, but please stop being consistant. Break from your mold and try something refreshing.

                  Report Abuse
          • Author by oscar the grouch (January 19, 2009 3:13 pm ET)
               

            Interesting map, oh great Beagle.  Was suprised to see the numbers listed for the Left Coast, Michigan, Ohio, New York and New Jersey as well as the South.  Looks like racist groups know no boundaries. Also some of the groups listed in some of the states is rather interesting as to what it must take to be labeled "racist".

            Report Abuse
            • Author by oscar the grouch (January 19, 2009 7:55 pm ET)
                 

              If my calculating skills are still ok, Snoop, the map shows 496 hate groups in Blue states (per the Electoral map) and 391 in Red states.  Appears it might be closer if just along racial lines, but SLC lists all the above as hate groups.  So it appears that "hate" at least has no boundaries.

              Report Abuse
              • Author by snoopy (January 19, 2009 8:03 pm ET)
                   

                I'm glad you mentioned that, Oscar. I actually started with a map of county by county voting in the 2008 election showing red/blue based on results and I am trying to superimpose the hate map on that grid. I was curious on how that would turn out. Looks like it's gonna take a good week's worth of work to do, so please ping me periodically for an update. I'll be really interested to see if the actual results bear out my original statement. I won't have a problem admitting to you I was wrong should facts bear true.

                Report Abuse
              • Author by snoopy (January 19, 2009 8:05 pm ET)
                   

                P.S. I will use the map showing not just red/blue, but shades of purple showing close voting counties. I don't think it fair just to dump a whole county into one bucket or the other based on win/lose results.

                Report Abuse
                • Author by oscar the grouch (January 19, 2009 8:56 pm ET)
                     

                  Looks like a pretty daunting task.  Good Luck.  You may be able to ignore the red states as there will be very little blue in most of them, just as some of the blue states will have little red, even though there will be more red in blue than blue in red.  I'm a little surprised that SLC did not list some of the major "gangs" as hate groups, maybe they are too hard to pin down for location, etc.  I think we will find that unfortunately hate crosses political boundaries.  I say "unfortunately" because it is an utter shame and waste of time and talent for hate to even exist.

                  Off the subject Manufacturing Cost Estimator, any interest? 

                  Report Abuse
          • Author by philib (January 20, 2009 9:40 am ET)
               

               I went to that site and it seems all are of 3 or 4 main groups; skinheads, nazis, kkk and nation of islam. Beyond that there aren't that many.

               I also noticed from your map, that while you complained that most seem to follow the 'republican southern strategy map', I think more hateful groups are within states won by democrats during the last election. So, while you may intend for that map to be a way of showing republicans are more racist than democrats, I think if you add the numbers there are more racist groups in states that are democratic leaning.  Use the link below to chart your hate groups by state won by the particular political group. I would add them up myself, buy you probably won't be on this thread any more. It's been over a day.

            http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2008/results/president/

            Report Abuse
    • Author by mk3872 (January 18, 2009 8:06 pm ET)
         
      Ugh. Amazing how easy it is for false information to make into the minds of those hearing only what they wish to hear. The overall cost of Obama's inauguration is unknown and this bogus $150M number is only being used because Drudge, The Guardian and The NY Daily News used it to try to embaras Obama. Regardless of what it was for Bush in 2001 or 2005, you must compare the same things. Saying Obama's cost is $150M with security but Bush's is $40 WITHOUT security is a false pretense and a great tactic being used by righties.
      Report Abuse
    • Author by ufleirx (January 18, 2009 10:25 pm ET)
         

      Ahhh, to be a Right-wing hack lying in the New Year.

      Report Abuse
      • Author by philib (January 19, 2009 9:12 am ET)
           

          Are right-wing hacks different than left-wing hacks? I see no difference.

        Report Abuse
        • Author by eweston8542983 (January 19, 2009 11:20 am ET)
             

          Leftwing hacks are embarrasing. Rightwing hacks enable hatred and violence.

          Report Abuse
        • Author by snoopy (January 19, 2009 11:30 am ET)
             

          Here's a rightwing hack who appears on Hannity periodically. Now if you can come up with an equivelant who appears on Rachel Maddow periodically I'd say you have a point.

          On Friday, neo-Nazi threatmeister Hal Turner, amplifying on an earlier posting suggesting that it would be a good thing to use an unmanned drone carrying explosives to attack the crowds, said a mass murder of those attending the festivities “would be a public service.” “I won’t say what may happen Tuesday but I will say this,” Turner wrote on his blog. “After Tuesday, the name Hal Turner may live in infamy. Let it be known that I saw what was necessary and decided to do what had to be done. I make no apology to those affected or their families.”

          Earlier, on Jan. 11, Turner had posted photos to his blog, under the headline “My Inauguration Dream,” of a small, unmanned drone, an electronic guidance system and sticks of dynamite as he laid out one method of attack. He also discussed the possibility of sending up balloons filled with helium and a “payload” and fitted with fuses that would explode the balloons over the crowds. And he displayed a grainy video that purported to show that method being tested. “Too far fetched?” Turner asks of a possible balloon attack. “It got tested and it worked! … Watch the video and imagine what payload, other than the index cards taped to the outside of the test balloons, might be substituted? HMMMMMM. Might be something messy? Something contagious? Something deadly? Ahhhh, such possibilities!” Then, last Thursday, he posted an update, saying: “All the assets that need to be in-place for next week are now in-place; deep within the security perimeter. Everything is a ‘go.’ We have crossed the Rubicon; let history judge us well.”

          Report Abuse
          • Author by philib (January 19, 2009 11:56 am ET)
               

               How often does Micheal Moore appear on any left-wing hack's shows? Since I don't listen to each and every one, I would depend on your truthfullness.

            Report Abuse
            • Author by foghornleghorn (January 19, 2009 12:37 pm ET)
                 

              Moore doesn't advocate for the wholesale slaughter of his political opponents.  Kind of a big difference, don't ya think?

              Report Abuse
            • Author by snoopy (January 19, 2009 2:41 pm ET)
                 

              who has Michael Moore advocated killing? Only an idiot would think Moore is the equivelant of Turner. But then again, look who made the comment...

              Report Abuse
              • Author by philib (January 19, 2009 2:51 pm ET)
                   

                   I guess we could use any member of the Nation of Islam, then.

                Report Abuse
                • Author by snoopy (January 19, 2009 3:09 pm ET)
                     

                  Wow, you may actually be about to make a statement of fact. Now all you have to do is 1) come up with a few quotes as equally toxic as turner's expressing mass deaths of whites without apology, and 2) list one or two left wing shows that frequently hosts them to give them broad access to the public. c'mon phil, I'm actually excited for you! Let this be a day of infamy where you come through with an intellectually stimulating post of fact to back your claim! We here have faith in you phil, now it's up to you to seize your destiny and re-enter the ranks of fact based discussions!

                  Go phil!

                  Report Abuse
                  • Author by philib (January 19, 2009 6:09 pm ET)
                       

                    CBS news: http://openweb.tvnews.vanderbilt.edu/1994-1/1994-01-25-CBS-13.html

                     And (take your pick): http://www.seventhfam.com/audio/broadcasts/

                    Report Abuse
                    • Author by Col. Harlan Sanders (January 19, 2009 7:34 pm ET)
                         

                      Look at you go, Philly! You're trying!

                      So, you've got a tv report about the anti-semitic remarks (accusing Jews of stealing) made by Khalid Abdul Muhammad, followed by everybody on the show condemning those remarks. Now you just have to find him featured as a guest on somebody's mainstream show, explain how he's "left wing" and you're in the game.

                      I'm not sure what your second link is supposed to be. Did you just hope nobody would check, or was there a point?

                      Report Abuse
                      • Author by philib (January 19, 2009 7:58 pm ET)
                           

                           I'm sorry. Snoop only posted things the racist has on his blog, he didn't say anything about these messages actually getting out over anyones show. So, I would say if blogging is considered mainstream by snoop then a website promoting every message of the Nation of Islam would be equal.

                           Being on CBS is fairly mainstream. I didn't realize I had to take into account the audience reactions of the racists, too. So, the rule is that I'm supposed to find the racists who have racist ideals being promoted by mainstream media without any disdain from the audience? I don't think snoop did that either.

                        Report Abuse
                        • Author by snoopy (January 19, 2009 8:12 pm ET)
                             

                          You obviously missed all the appearances on Hannity. This site has all the clips though, so just take a few moments to peruse them and see for yourself.

                          But I'm really proud of you phil, this has got to be a breakthrough day for you! I'm impressed. Keep up the effort!

                          Report Abuse
                          • Author by philib (January 20, 2009 9:06 am ET)
                               

                               Thanks. But, I don't listen to or watch Hannity. So, I guess your point is mute. Perhaps Hannity isn't as popular with the right wing as you think. Maybe, just maybe you left wingers are the only ones listening to (or watching) him. Perhaps he gets all his ratings from people who follow him just to complain about him.

                               I actually don't trust this site to give honest independant opinion (just like you wouldn't trust WND). So, for me to look up all those articles as you suggest would be a waste of my time. Besides, I would hate to look up all those articles then find out you have stopped posting on this thread after just one day. It's not like these threads go on and on and on. They only last 3-4 days, it isn't that hard to follow up on your vast amount of questions you ask to be answered.

                            Report Abuse
                            • Author by philib (January 21, 2009 7:57 am ET)
                                 

                                 I realize it's been 3 days and you have been here and gone, but do you understand your tactic is quite similar to one of a person who many claim I am. I'll give you the defination from wikipedia:

                              "An Internet troll, or simply troll in Internet slang, is someone who posts controversial, inflammatory, irrelevant or off-topic messages in an online community, such as an online discussion forum or chat room, with the intention of provoking other users into an emotional response or to generally disrupt normal on-topic discussion."

                                 I guess all who come here for one day and post those kind of comments would be considered that. Especially the ones who come here for only one day of posting, then leaves, never to respond to replies to their concerns that they exhibit. You, snoop, especially show yourself to be a troll by posting that righties are racist with your little link, then dissapear when shown that it is the lefties who are the racists, using your link and correlation. You are everything you claim I am, only I stick around to take my medicine, instead of running and hiding after posting off-topic, trolling messages.

                              Report Abuse
    • Author by DAWUSS (January 18, 2009 11:41 pm ET)
         

      Are these figures adjusted for inflation? ;)

      Report Abuse
      • Author by Col. Harlan Sanders (January 19, 2009 1:43 am ET)
           

        No, I don't believe they are, Dawuss. That's what I like about this site, when citing conservative misinformation, MMFA spots the media and their GOP bosses a lot of points.

        It makes the petty whining of the wingnuts that much more amusing, when they go off on their "WITH"s and "Liberal bias" tantrums. This site, in general, lets the GOP and their puppets hit off of the ladies tee, and still spanks them.

        Report Abuse
        • Author by philib (January 19, 2009 9:14 am ET)
             

          "It makes the petty whining of the wingnuts that much more amusing"

             Oh man that couldn't be more true. I know I get a laugh out of you guys all the time!! Heck, that's why I come here...to laugh at your petty whinings.

          Report Abuse
          • Author by Col. Harlan Sanders (January 19, 2009 10:19 am ET)
               

            Brilliant reply, Philib. "I know you are, but what am I ?" is about what's expected of the brain-dead likes of you.

            BTW, you guys are wingnuts, we're moonbats. Get your terminology straight.

            Report Abuse
            • Author by philib (January 19, 2009 11:14 am ET)
                 

                 Et tu ... brilliant reply

              Report Abuse
              • Author by eweston8542983 (January 19, 2009 1:01 pm ET)
                   

                Transl: You too...brilliant reply?

                Report Abuse
                • Author by nerzog (January 19, 2009 1:16 pm ET)
                     

                  Ascendo tuum

                  Report Abuse
                  • Author by Col. Harlan Sanders (January 19, 2009 1:50 pm ET)
                       

                    Coitus non circum !!

                    Report Abuse
                    • Author by snoopy (January 19, 2009 2:42 pm ET)
                         

                      coitus interruptus?

                      Report Abuse
                      • Author by philib (January 19, 2009 2:53 pm ET)
                           

                        e pluribus unum

                        Report Abuse
                        • Author by eweston8542983 (January 19, 2009 5:28 pm ET)
                             
                          Damn, relavant and funny. More please.
                          Report Abuse
                          • Author by philib (January 19, 2009 7:10 pm ET)
                               

                            Last one from me (I don't speak latin).

                               "Let us not seek to satisfy our thirst for freedom by drinking from the cup of bitterness and hatred."

                               At which point I will apologize for past name-calling and hatefullness. I will try my best not to let it happen in the future. I would expect the same in return.

                            Report Abuse
                            • Author by mary59 (January 19, 2009 7:56 pm ET)
                                 

                              Lux Nobiscum.

                              Report Abuse
                            • Author by eweston8542983 (January 19, 2009 8:32 pm ET)
                                 

                              I've found myself expressing anger without good cause on occasion, Sigtek was one on the recieving end not to lond ago. Doing so makes me extremly uncomfortable. I make mistakes when I get angry and act from that anger. This fact means I will back off, as the causes I support are ill served by mistakes.

                              You ticked me off, I expressed that, its done. We'll all move on hopefully educated by the experience.

                              Report Abuse
    • Author by oscar the grouch (January 19, 2009 12:07 am ET)
         
      The $40M for 2005 sounds like a normal government estimate of a "project/program" and when all is said and done, the actual cost is 3-4 times higher. Will iit be the same this time around?
      Report Abuse
      • Author by Col. Harlan Sanders (January 19, 2009 1:46 am ET)
           

        3-4 times higher might happen sometimes Oscar, but I don't think it's "normal". My "normal" trip to the grocery store, or Home Depot usually exceeds my estimate going in, but I think that number is what it actually cost, considering it's a done deal 4 years ago.

        Report Abuse
        • Author by philib (January 19, 2009 9:16 am ET)
             

            Nice avoidance of his question. He asked will it happen this time too. Why would you ignore that question? Could it be because if 'normal' does happen then Obama will cost this nation nearly a half billion dollars on his inauguration.

          Report Abuse
          • Author by philib (January 19, 2009 9:33 am ET)
               

            "Why would you ignore that question?"

               I think you've already pre-answered that when you said: "It makes the petty whining of the [left]wingnuts that much more amusing".

            Report Abuse
          • Author by Brabantio (January 19, 2009 9:48 am ET)
               

            Normally they don't include these costs when discussing the price tag of an inauguration.  That would be the reason that it ends up 3-4 times more expensive than estimated.  In this case, those costs have been included, so I don't see how it could be that much more than the estimate.

            Report Abuse
          • Author by Col. Harlan Sanders (January 19, 2009 10:27 am ET)
               

            He asked will it happen this time too. Why would you ignore that question?

            Philib, that's what's known as a rhetorical question. I don't think Oscar had me confused with Nostradamus. If you look at his reply, it's obvious he understood my answer.

            You seem especially  stupid today,Philib, even for you. Did you get hit in the head with something heavy over the weekend?

            Report Abuse
            • Author by bruce1ace (January 19, 2009 11:49 am ET)
                 

              Do you think that the criticism directed at GWB for excessive spending in the 2005 inaugeration during wartime was justified?

              If so, do you believe it is fair to be critical of Obama for his spending on the 2009 inaugeration during a national financial crisis?

              This issue is being ignored because of the misinformation out there regarding the relative dollatrs spent in 2005 and 2008.  MMFA is saying these totals are relatively equal when everything is taken into consideration, so should the people criticizing Bush in 05 be making the same criticisms now?

              Report Abuse
              • Author by eweston8542983 (January 19, 2009 12:13 pm ET)
                   

                We've been comenting on missinformation about the cost of Obama's inauguation. What do you think we should use to compare it to?

                And why was it so long before information on shurb's inauguation costs became availible? That darn liberal media is somehow responsible I know it!

                Report Abuse
              • Author by Col. Harlan Sanders (January 19, 2009 12:37 pm ET)
                   

                Bruce, I'm personally not real big on ceremonies and spectacles, but those things are important to a lot of others. I do think critics should be consistent, I don't think that's being ignored. The issue that you're ignoring is that many in the media are using bogus information to favor Bush and smear Obama.

                It's already been mentioned by many that '05 was a second term inauguration, while this is a transition of power, and that should be taken into account.

                I think it's also worth noting that two factors used by the critics against the big money fiestas are war and the economy,both of which are disasters with GWB's name on them, not Obama's. I'd like to see these things scaled down, but to expect BHO to suck it up for GWB's mess, more than GWB, is a little screwy.

                Report Abuse
                • Author by bruce1ace (January 19, 2009 12:51 pm ET)
                     

                  I have said that the misinformation on the Obama inaugeration costs should be corrected.  This is definitely a problem in the media.

                  I don't expect Obama to scale down his inaugeration, nor does the cost of it bother me at all.  But Bush's expense in 2005 didn't bother me either.  The inaugeration is a big deal.

                  Report Abuse
              • Author by foghornleghorn (January 19, 2009 12:42 pm ET)
                   

                Do you think that the criticism directed at GWB for excessive spending in the 2005 inaugeration during wartime was justified?

                The difference is it was a re-election.  There wasn't a change of the party in power.  All Bush had to do was walk over to the capital and put his hand on the bible and then go back to being the decider or the president-guy or the war president (or whatever pet name Dick likes to call him to boost his ego).

                Report Abuse
                • Author by philib (January 19, 2009 3:00 pm ET)
                     

                     That's all Obama has to do...walk over, put his hand on the Bible and then go be the decider or warmonger (whatever pet name Joe likes to give him to boost his ego). What's the difference? Just another inauguration where the participants feel justified in spending ungodly like amounts of money to make them feel better.

                  Report Abuse
                  • Author by jamesB (January 19, 2009 3:17 pm ET)
                       

                    these inaugurations are what they are, and the incoming president has a right to party it up as did the previous ones.  We shouldn't expect anything less anymore than we should expect them to live in an apartment instead of the White House.  for any media person to manufacture some mini-controversy out of comparing this one to any other one is just cable news filling their air space.

                    Report Abuse
                    • Author by philib (January 20, 2009 2:47 pm ET)
                         

                         Turned out to be wayyy more complicated than he thought it would be. Simply "repeat after me" .... "uhhhh". Good thing part of the swearing in process was to promise to do the 'best he could'. Oh, well, we get what we pay for.

                      Report Abuse
        • Author by oscar the grouch (January 19, 2009 9:35 am ET)
             

          "normal" was an overstatement, We can look back at 2005, the estimate was $40M+/- going in, but MMFA has so kindly pointed out that the costs were "considerably" higher.  Now we have a $150M +/- going in. Will we look back in another 4 years and find out the actual cost was "considerably" higher.  Then, assuming that Obamaham is re-elected, what will the cost of the re-upping be? You spend more at Home Depot than you estimate?  Must be a guy thing, after all they do display those tools, etc so attractively. 

          Report Abuse
          • Author by Col. Harlan Sanders (January 19, 2009 10:39 am ET)
               

            Oscar, there have been several items here regarding the 40M vs 150M numbers. You should check those out.

            Report Abuse
          • Author by snoopy (January 19, 2009 3:49 pm ET)
               

            Oscar, I understand what you're saying, but I think there is more excess in a re-elected president having a second inauguration than in a newly elected president having a 1st inauguration. To say no president is deserving of a second inauguration is a standard I would advocate regardless of party affiliation.

            Report Abuse
    • Author by TadekKorn (January 19, 2009 4:11 am ET)
         
      I don't know what Tamron Hall's political leanings are, but like many in the news media, she seems to take her cues from Republican generated talking points. These rarely take to task the $10,000,000,000 monthly allocation for W's war in Iraq. There's rarely a murmur about the Bush-Paulson bailout of the banking industry which in less than 5 months has accounted for more than $350,000,000,000 in untraceable expenditures. Then there's the $4,000,000,000 unaccounted for by Cheney's old company, Halliburton. When have these suddenly fiscally conscious commentators last made mention of the billions of dollars shoveled to the private contractors engaged in "supporting" W's policies? Do they really believe that the average American can't see through their hypocrisies?
      Report Abuse
    • Author by Appleboy (January 19, 2009 9:35 am ET)
         

      I'm not sure if you can label the media Right or Left anymore. I think they are just plain goll darn dumb!

      Report Abuse
    • Author by BillinMidMO (January 19, 2009 9:37 am ET)
         

      I am very frustrated by the fact that MSNBC does not seem to have a "contact us" link. I was hoping to send them the URL to this article. They seem to be talking out of their a** about this 140 Million price tag, and NOT counting Bush's security cost. They just now did it again. Yuck. Security will obviously be very expensive.
      Somehow we have to keep media honest...a little difficult to do when even MSNBC has no feedback mechanism.

      Thank you Media matters...maybe Keith or Rachel will pick up on what you have exposed here.

      Bill Monroe in Missouri

      Report Abuse
    • Author by markbfoot199 (January 19, 2009 10:46 am ET)
         

      Each day I learn how the “Lefties” think on this website.  If a so called "right wing nut" makes a statement here it is false or comes from some media source that is not creditable enough, or you say they are whining "It makes the petty whining of the wing nuts that much more amusing”.  When a "Lefty" makes a statement it is true, and a “Right Wing Nut” is not allowed to question the source or the information.  The type of tolerance we get to look forward too in the future.

      Report Abuse
      • Author by Col. Harlan Sanders (January 19, 2009 11:01 am ET)
           

        Intolerance of strawmen. The horror !

        Report Abuse
        • Author by eweston8542983 (January 19, 2009 11:26 am ET)
             

          Prehaps Mark can direct us to a nominal wingnut site where we can engage in an open debate and not get shortly delected and banned/

          Phil may have sources also for us poor deluded moonbats.

          Check out thread #1 Friday as Phil bravely posts after most of us have moved along.

          Report Abuse
          • Author by mary59 (January 19, 2009 3:44 pm ET)
               

            And some of us had fun messing up his last words.  However, to be strictly on topic, I am glad to be here in my own cozy house in the Pac. NW, watching all the festivities on the television.  Yippee!

            Report Abuse
            • Author by eweston8542983 (January 19, 2009 5:34 pm ET)
                 

              Your presence and determination were gratefully noted Mary. I was a bit short on time to really answer well to phil's backdoor raid.

              Gonna be at an event tomorrow in Kingston. A little bubbly, a little fattening food, live music and good people.

              :)

              Report Abuse
          • Author by philib (January 20, 2009 9:20 am ET)
               

            "Check out thread #1 Friday as Phil bravely posts after most of us have moved along."

               The funny thing is that these threads only go for 3 days. It's not like it's that hard to follow along until the end. Plus the weekend ones are the ones I am able to post more on. I work during the weekdays and lounge during the weeknights. I have 3 opportunities to post on a weekday thread and several on a weekend thread. It isn't my fault you give up on posting 1/3 of the way through a thread.

               I do belong to another chat site. It is part of a sport simulation league so there aren't any women in it (actually one or two daughters of other guys play the sports but never chat). I would never tell you which site it is because it is a freindly league with freindly people in it. There are participants from all over the US and the world, including Germany, Lebanon, Canada, France and Korea (more but I can't remember all of them). We have Jews, Muslims, Christians, Atheists and everything in between. Liberals and Conservatives. I've even golfed with one of the Muslims and one of the Jews. Ever seen a Muslim, Jew and Christian golf together? That was a first for me too. We are good freinds, but don't agree politically or religiously. We often talk about each and don't name call, like is common here. We also don't post hateful posts, again, like is common here. That is why I would never tell anyone here what site that is.

            Report Abuse
            • Author by foghornleghorn (January 20, 2009 12:22 pm ET)
                 

               We also don't post hateful posts, again, like is common here.

              By promoting lies and spin, talking points and innuendo, you deserve every "hateful" post directed toward you.  Hateful in your mind is when your lies are exposed and called out.

              Report Abuse
              • Author by philib (January 20, 2009 4:04 pm ET)
                   

                   On that premise, wouldn't mmfa be open to all the hateful remarks, also? They promote lies, spin, talking points and innuendo. So many of mmfa's articles are just reworded to spin a point the way they want it spun. Are you saying that hatefulness towards them is unwarranted but towards anyone else (rightwinger) is OK? Many times mmfa's lies are exposed and many of you instantly deride that person (not necassarily me) for being a right-winger and ignore that actual point of the post. But, I'm glad you were able to put the focus on 'reasons' for hatefulness properly.

                Report Abuse
          • Author by philib (January 20, 2009 9:25 am ET)
               

               As a side note for that previous response. This is day three of this thread so you will probably have already moved along to other more deserving topics and won't even be able to respond to it. But, I thought I'd sneak in another 'late' response before this one closes.

            Report Abuse
    • Author by nerzog (January 19, 2009 11:23 am ET)
         

      Just be prepared for a cacophony of Republican Kvetching over the next 4 years.  I remember how bad it was when Clinton was elected;  the endless whinefest evolved into Troglodyte Talk Radio.

      We can rest assured that, this time around, it will be much worse.  They've got nothing else to do.

      Report Abuse
      • Author by nerzog (January 19, 2009 11:26 am ET)
           

        Actually, I should clarify that, while Conservative Talk Radio existed before Clinton,  it morphed into the cancerous abomination that we know today during the 90s.

        Report Abuse
        • Author by pete592 (January 19, 2009 11:29 am ET)
             

          To be even more precise, it was Clinton's signature on the Telecom Act, which brought on the current radio station oligopoly that the right-wing professional liars have free domain to expolit.

          Report Abuse
    • Author by anotheramerican (January 19, 2009 2:18 pm ET)
         

      Thomas Jefferson, walked from his boarding house to the unfinished capital for his inauguration and then walked back in time for lunch.

      Ahh the good old days.

      All these millions spent are just so people can say, "I was there". With TV, it should all be done in a studio. If we can have debates like that, why not the inauguration?

      Lots cheaper, same end results.

      Report Abuse
      • Author by eweston8542983 (January 19, 2009 2:29 pm ET)
           

        There's more than just saying "I was there". Communal bonding is no small thing. A chance to be a part of a large thing that they find find joy in, and seeing the joy shared. Try it sometime.

        Report Abuse
        • Author by worrierking (January 19, 2009 2:37 pm ET)
             

          "...seeing the joy shared"?

          Careful, Ewe, you know how the righties are about sharing and anything communal. They'll start yelling about socialists and commies.

          The only thing they like sharing is the wealth, as long as it's being shared upward.  Remember we've been at war for most of the decade so far and we've never had a war before where our leaders never spoke of shared sacrifice.

          The right's motto should be others will sacrifice so that we can share.

          Report Abuse
          • Author by Col. Harlan Sanders (January 19, 2009 3:33 pm ET)
               

            I earned that joy, keep your hands off it! My Joy!

            Report Abuse
            • Author by mary59 (January 19, 2009 3:46 pm ET)
                 

              The self-made man joy?

              Report Abuse
              • Author by worrierking (January 19, 2009 4:16 pm ET)
                   

                Hey I want a cut of the Worrier Troll dolls or if you'd like, the Colonel and I might enter into talks with your company about a corporate merger.

                We've been pretty successful in the waterproof, patriotic adult undergarment business and we're always looking for new products.

                Report Abuse
                • Author by mary59 (January 19, 2009 6:33 pm ET)
                     

                  Great.  I'll have my people talk to your people.  Now I just have to learn how to knit....

                  Report Abuse
                  • Author by worrierking (January 19, 2009 6:37 pm ET)
                       

                    It would be cheaper to hire out of work Republican Congressman and Senators to do the knitting for you.

                    They've worked their whole lives to keep wages down, now they'll be able to see just how much their skills are worth out in their cherished free markets.

                    Report Abuse
                    • Author by mary59 (January 19, 2009 6:55 pm ET)
                         

                      Good idea.  These dolls do need to be made in the U.S. of A.  but I don't know if the former legislators are up to the job.  I think worrier trolls would go like hotcakes......  All I could find on the google were warrior trolls:

                      Middle Earth Troll Gandelve Warrior w/Spear and Shield

                      Report Abuse
                      • Author by philib (January 21, 2009 8:03 am ET)
                           

                           The first one should go to snoopy, then ewes, then... wait, you all should get one. checking your posts, you post one days worth of immflamatory remarks then leave, isn't that the typical definition of a troll? None of you had anything constructive to say about AA's correct concern?

                        Report Abuse
        • Author by anotheramerican (January 19, 2009 4:24 pm ET)
             

          Ewe,

          I do. Every Sunday. I invite you (and everyone else if they don't already do so,) to try it sometime. :-)

          Seriously, I agree that commual bonding can be a good thing. One does not have to be in Washington D.C. this week to experience that bonding. Obviously all 53 million who voted for Obama, not to mention the rest of the country, cannot be in Washington D.C. for the festivities. That is why they broadcast them on TV. How many will watch the innauguration? Millions. The parties and extravaganza are simply and excuse to party.

          Not that it matters but I feel the same way about all presidential inaugurations. This week long extravaganza is simply and excuse by the political class for self gratification at the public's expense.

          I'm all for partying. I just think the public money and resources can be put to much better use.  I like the way Jefferson handled it.

          Report Abuse
          • Author by eweston8542983 (January 19, 2009 5:45 pm ET)
               

            Pass, but thank you. When going to church does not become a political statement and acceptance in the pews is not dependent upon political veiws, I'm there. There's some real progress in this direction, good.

            Politics combined with religion is good for neither.

            Report Abuse
          • Author by roundhouse (January 19, 2009 9:28 pm ET)
               

            " I just think the public money and resources can be put to much better use."

            Do you really? How would you put it to use? 

            Report Abuse
          • Author by roundhouse (January 19, 2009 9:28 pm ET)
               

            " I just think the public money and resources can be put to much better use."

            Do you really? How would you put it to use? 

            Report Abuse
    • Author by my4cents (January 19, 2009 10:32 pm ET)
         

      IMHO, if an elected peoples representative does not know the facts, why blame Hall or any other media figure?

      Report Abuse
    • Author by markkeith9289 (January 20, 2009 10:49 am ET)
         

      How many jobs could be created with $150 million?How many people about to lose their houses be helped with $150 million? This is the worst times our country has ever faced.

      Where is the Hope and change?,change and Hope?,hope and change?Or does that come after we have this big party first?

      Bush got hammered with the same questions and I havn't seen those questions this time.All I seen is the media slubbery on themselves.

      Oh, by the way did you know that Obama is get inaugurated today? Thought you might have missed the 24 hour coverage snice last sunday.

      Cheers,

      and I do hope he does well,all of our future is at stake.

      Report Abuse
    • Author by ugojwt2 (January 20, 2009 5:56 pm ET)
         
      first an foremost if a person googles tamron hall,others will see that tamron hall work for fox news,need no other explanation.tamron hall knows who butters her bread
      Report Abuse