BoatBanter.com - View Single Post

wrote:
One of the thousands of reasons I'm not, and will never be POTUS, is
that I lack the proper sense of style and decorum.

We currently have a federal government spending money without
restraint
(or veto) and our men and women being killed every day in a war waged
for a hideous "faulty intelligence" mistake (kinder than saying lie).
IMO the appropriate re-inauguration would be a simple swearing in
ceremony in the Oval Office, a handful of dignitaries and a few press
photogs on hand. Shirt sleeves rolled up would be a nice touch. The
$45
million saved could be used to pay a few hours' interest on the
national debt.

The $40mm was privately raised. It is not public money. And D.C. gets
a significant amount of money for homeland security. I don't have a
problem for telling to to use less than 10% of that to support secuirty
needs of a presidential inauguration - which by the way, all Presidents
have had. The reason D.C. gets a substantial amount of security money
is because of the city's status as the nation's capital, where stuff
like inaugurations happen.

Instead, we have a coronation ball.

Which of you Bush-haters were whining about either of Clinton's
coronation costs.

And I like that touch in the article about what 90% of the voter in
D.C. wanted. I don't care. With everything the sore losers say about
red states being stupid, what may be the bluest city in country has
proved to have a lunatic electorate. I mean, what the hell have they
been thinking? The city was a crime infested hole while Barry was
mayor (it still is), he get caught smoking crack, goes to prison, and
the voters re-elect him.

My favorite Barry quote... "If you take out the killings, Washington
actually has a very very low crime rate."

But the bitching has worked. DHS says it is going to pay for a large
portion of this.