Yes, we can.

[Alex]

The Arizona Cardinals in the Super Bowl.

Obama really does bring change.

[scaeagles]

Four years ago when the economy was fine, there was expressed disgust at some 40 million being spent on the inauguration activities. This time around, with a horrid economy, why is 100 million considered OK?

[Snowflake]

Originally Posted by scaeagles

Four years ago when the economy was fine, there was expressed disgust at some 40 million being spent on the inauguration activities. This time around, with a horrid economy, why is 100 million considered OK?

Does not entirely answer your question, but here's a portion of an article. For the record I donated to help fund the party (about a couple of light bulbs worth)

The good news for taxpayers: Inaugural celebrations are paid for by the inaugural committee — and Obama has, once again, been a very successful fundraiser — at least $35 million by recent counts. Carole Florman, spokeswoman for the Joint Congressional Committee on Inaugural Ceremonies, told the New York Daily News:

"We're always very budget conscious. But we're sending a message to the entire world about our peaceful transition of power, and you don't want it to look like a schlock affair. It needs to be appropriate to the magnitude of events that it is."

full article here

[PanTheMan]

Originally Posted by scaeagles

Four years ago when the economy was fine, there was expressed disgust at some 40 million being spent on the inauguration activities. This time around, with a horrid economy, why is 100 million considered OK?

There are also the numbers to consider. 4 years ago the crowd was estimated at between 300,000 and 400,000. 8 years ago the numbers may have been higher due to protests. This time around 2 million may be an underestimate.

and a bit off topic here, but did anyone see the sunset tonight? Most beautiful one i have seen in 8 years

[€uroMeinke]

Bread and Circuses - during bad times no one wants to be reminded they're in bad times

[Alex]

I have no idea, I expressed no disgust last time.

But I suspect it is the same "my **** smells like roses but yours smells like ****" thing that's pretty standard. Were you bothered by the expense last time that it bothers you now or are you just expressing upsettedness on behalf of others?

[scaeagles]

Really, it's more criticism of the media than anything else. It's not anyone here - I don't recall much about it if anything posted here. The NY Times, BBC, and AP all had stories ripping the expense of it in 2004, but I haven't read any distress about this now.

I don't really care - he won, let the party go on for those who want to celebrate.

Edited to add:

To be fair, I did just come across an AP article in which I found something amusing -

In 2005, Reps. Anthony Weiner, D-N.Y., and Jim McDermott, D-Wash., asked Bush to show a little less pomp and be a little more circumspect at his party.

"President Roosevelt held his 1945 inaugural at the White House, making a short speech and serving guests cold chicken salad and plain pound cake," the two lawmakers wrote in a letter. "During World War I, President Wilson did not have any parties at his 1917 inaugural, saying that such festivities would be undignified."

[Alex]

Is it criticism you noticed on your own or criticism you're echoing from the link on the front page of the Drudge Report?

I ask because so far I've seen several articles criticising the cost of this inauguration, though in Op-Ed form (just as, if it was criticism, it must have been in the NY Times, BBC, and AP) from those ideologically opposed to the person spending the money. The complainers seem to have switched sides as so often happens.

That said, the article linked from Drudge is from the AP, so presumably they should be off your list of potential hypocrites. Though it only names two people who criticized the 2005 inauguration (and a quick search to find articles from 2005 also only ever name the same two people as complaining about the cost) and doesn't seem to make any attempt to get their opinions this time around to see if they are being inconsistent.

[Stan4dSteph]

Loved the performance by U2!

[scaeagles]

Originally Posted by Alex

Is it criticism you noticed on your own or criticism you're echoing from the link on the front page of the Drudge Report?

Actually I googled something to the effect of "inauguration cost 2005" and also for 2009 because in my various radio listenings I had heard of numerous op-eds disparaging the cost of the 2005 and that they same op-ed writers were strangely silent about this one.

What I found was relatively consistent with what I'd heard, but figured I should give full disclosure and cite one I had seen in the search since I had been critical of the AP.