Bush throws a $40MILLION dollar party, yet our troops have no armor.- Mtbr.com
Results 1 to 11 of 11
  1. #1
    born to chill
    Reputation: flowmaster's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    986

    Bush throws a $40MILLION dollar party, yet our troops have no armor.

    What a jackass...
    http://www.cnn.com/2005/ALLPOLITICS/...tion.costs.ap/

    (adding to ww's post)
    Inaugural party cost is excessive

    Whether it’s the Super Bowl, the Oscars or Mardi Gras, Americans know how to party — often to the extreme.

    This week’s inauguration party that got started Tuesday in Washington, D.C., is just that, a bit extreme.

    There is nothing wrong with having a party to celebrate an election victory. We just think spending $40 million to have a good time is excessive.

    It would be too much even if the U.S. weren’t involved in a war where American men and women are being asked to put their lives on the line so another nation has the chance for democracy. In just two weeks, the people of Iraq will be voting in a free and open election to choose their leaders. We doubt there will be much partying after the results are in.

    It would be over the top even if the people of South Asia weren’t facing years of rebuilding to put back together lives torn apart by a devastating tsunami three weeks ago.

    President Bush and the Republicans in control in Washington could have made a powerful statement to the world by toning down the party atmosphere. Such compassion would have done wonders for the image of the United States.

    What also troubles us about the inaugural excess is the huge contributions that just a small number of corporations and individuals are making. While there is nothing illegal about the $250,000 donations being made, it sure has the appearance of putting the government up for sale. Such high-roller contributions would not be permitted if they were intended for a political campaign.

    But these are, nonetheless, seen as political contributions in the eyes of most Americans. “Show us the money” is not the message that our elected representatives should be sending.

    The only part of the three-day event that federal taxpayers are covering is about $3 million for the swearing-in ceremony itself on the steps of the Capitol. But, the District of Columbia is paying the $17 million cost of security in a post-Sept. 11 world. That money will come from the D.C. homeland security budget, which is also taxpayer money.

    Still, this year’s cost is not out of line with recent celebrations.

    Few raised objections to Bill Clinton’s 1993 party cost of $33 million or President Bush’s inauguration celebration in 2001 that cost about $40 million.

    Those amounts are excessive, too, and show an embarrassing trend of escalating expense.

    Troubling, too, was the comment that President Bush made about the three-day event being a “celebration of my victory.”

    The celebration should not be about a personal victory, but rather about the fact that democracy works without bloodshed in the United States, no matter how divided ideologically we might be as a people. Rather than show the world we can throw a great party, we should be showing restraint

    http://www.wisinfo.com/sheboyganpres...19476261.shtml
    http://www.detnews.com/2004/editoria.../A11-44337.htm
    FATRAC - Folsom-Auburn Trail Riders Coalition - Member
    My personal site - Living single, seeing double, jumping triples

  2. #2
    Jm.
    Jm. is offline

    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    7,131
    Our troops have armor.

    And obviously armor and armored vehicles are not enough. What do we need to do about those Bradley's, they are armored vehicles, and a crew was killed a few weeks ago by a bomb, and another destroyed. We obviously need to junk all the bradleys and replace them with the gas-guzzling M1A2 Abrams tanks, because Bradleys just aren't enough.

    How much more are you willing to pay in taxes to fix all of this? $1000, $2000?

  3. #3
    Who are the brain police?
    Reputation: Locoman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    10,111
    U R sad...

    "How much more are you willing to pay in taxes to fix all of this? $1000, $2000?"... -Why don't you tell us what a human life is worth? what's your cut off point?

    "Our troops have armor." -Then the articles about troops digging through landfills for makeshift armor were false eh? Leftist propaganda no doubt. So what's your source of this news of yours?
    The Who - Glittering Girl
    Ween - The Grobe
    Yellowman - Strong Me Strong
    all your base are belong to us

  4. #4
    gentle like
    Reputation: kept man's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    14,837
    Loco, I did hear on NPR yesterday - no, Thursday - that the armour order will be filled pretty soon. Very soon. Damn, I wish I was better at remembering time frames and dates. They just kill me.

    So at this point, most all of the Humvees, etc, do have armour.

    What the dudes they were interviewing in Iraq were saying the problem is now is what Jm said - the "Improvised Explosive Devices" are getting better and better, and have taken out two Bradleys, apparently.

    Hmmm ... so will all, or none, dump on the NPR this time? Let's find out ...

  5. #5
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    2,494
    30 to 50 million would have been a start for armor. What a ridiculous amount to spend on a party. What would you rather have your tax dollars pay for? A lavish party for W or troop support?

  6. #6
    Jm.
    Jm. is offline

    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    7,131
    Quote Originally Posted by Locoman

    "Our troops have armor." -Then the articles about troops digging through landfills for makeshift armor were false eh? Leftist propaganda no doubt. So what's your source of this news of yours?
    Misleading at the least, and downright false at the most. The troops have armor.

    You are referring to equiping certain troops with armor to suffice against an AK47, not a simple flak jacket, but the troops have armor, to say they have "no armor" is simply wrong.

  7. #7
    mtbr member
    Reputation: mojo722's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    309
    Quote Originally Posted by ronny
    30 to 50 million would have been a start for armor. What a ridiculous amount to spend on a party. What would you rather have your tax dollars pay for? A lavish party for W or troop support?

    From what I understand private donations paid for the $40 mil. party, not tax dollars.

    However, tax money did have to pay for security etc...

    FWIW, I don't remember anyone b!tching about spending this and more on previous inagual parties.

  8. #8
    Your bike sucks
    Reputation: Carl Mega's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    1,914
    Quote Originally Posted by mojo722
    FWIW, I don't remember anyone b!tching about spending this and more on previous inagual parties.
    Well, I think that's because we are at WAR. If you want to be the "war time" president, you have to take all that comes with it. That includes shifting priorities when you are in a very, very expensive war. In WWII, the people and president rationed together - food and metal drives for the common folk and Roosevelt had a very reserved inaguration.

  9. #9
    T 3
    T 3 is offline

    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    5,477
    Bush Increases 2005 Budget For The Arts By 55 Million,Yet Our Troops Have No Armor !

    http://ww3.artsusa.org/information_r...2004_02_02.asp

    Americans for the Arts Praises the Administrations 2005 Budget for Federal Cultural Agencies

    Washington, D.C.February 3, 2004President Bush released his Administrations FY2005 budget with a recommended total increase of $55 million to the nations cultural agenciesthe National Endowment for the Arts, the National Endowment for the Humanities, and the Institute of Museum and Library Services. This budget marks the first time that the Bush Administration has proposed a substantial increase for all three federal agencies in the same fiscal year.

    Upon reading the budget,

    The arts and cultural community has much to be encouraged about with the release of the Administrations budget today. We are pleased that President Bush has recognized the value of our nations cultural agencies by recommending a total of $55 million for new grants, special initiatives, and programs. If approved by Congress, the NEAs budget would increase by $18 million, for a total of $139 million.

    While this total falls below the agencys funding levels of more than two decades ago, it represents a very sound investment. A recent study by Americans for the Arts demonstrates that the nonprofit arts industry alone generates $134 billion in economic activity every year. The financial return on governments investment in the nonprofit arts is more than eight times the investmentannually. Increasing public investment in the arts is the right direction for the economy and the state of our country.

    Americans for the Arts is the leading nonprofit organization for advancing the arts in America. With offices in Washington, DC, and New York City, it has a record of more than 40 years of service. Americans for the Arts is dedicated to representing and serving local communities and creating opportunities for every American to participate in and appreciate all forms of the arts. Additional information is available at www.AmericansForTheArts.org.

  10. #10
    Buster Brown
    Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by Locoman
    U R sad...

    "How much more are you willing to pay in taxes to fix all of this? $1000, $2000?"... -Why don't you tell us what a human life is worth? what's your cut off point?

    "Our troops have armor." -Then the articles about troops digging through landfills for makeshift armor were false eh? Leftist propaganda no doubt. So what's your source of this news of yours?
    It seems Jm. is saying the troops are liars... wonder if he has a yellow ribbon on his car?

  11. #11
    Buster Brown
    Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by mojo722
    From what I understand private donations paid for the $40 mil. party, not tax dollars.

    However, tax money did have to pay for security etc...

    FWIW, I don't remember anyone b!tching about spending this and more on previous inagual parties.
    19 million in public funds, 21 million in private funds.

    Yeah, Clinton wasn't a war time president or a president serving during a recession. Sometimes things happen that make us tighten our belts, and you can't run around playing king.

    PS: i love how you have that quote in your sig - it shows how foking stupid you are - you probably don't even understand what I was saying.

Members who have read this thread: 0

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

THE SITE

ABOUT MTBR

VISIT US AT

© Copyright 2020 VerticalScope Inc. All rights reserved.