The controversy over inaugural spending

[wendybeth]

Are you two channeling SacTown and Scaeagles?

[sleepyjeff]

Originally Posted by wendybeth

Are you two channeling SacTown and Scaeagles?

...lol. Just wait until the mid-term elections.

[Gn2Dlnd]

Originally Posted by wendybeth

Are you two channeling SacTown and Scaeagles?

Ha-ha! My arguments are with The Man, man.

[scaeagles]

Originally Posted by wendybeth

Are you two channeling SacTown and Scaeagles?

That can't be - I would never say "fair enough" about anything Sac said.

I haven't gotten involved in this because I really don't care about it. I will simply say that I do not think that should Kerry have been elected there would not be such an uproar over any such spending of private money on these events.

There are always better things to spend money on than huge parties.

[Scrooge McSam]

Originally Posted by scaeagles

I haven't gotten involved in this because I really don't care about it.

See, that's what I thought... until I saw you reference the Times article, sans link, elsewhere.

Originally Posted by scaeagles

I will simply say that I do not think that should Kerry have been elected there would not be such an uproar over any such spending of private money on these events.

You are at least partly right. True, the dems probably wouldn't have too much to say but I suspect the repubs would be all over it.

[wendybeth]

Originally Posted by scaeagles

That can't be - I would never say "fair enough" about anything Sac said.

I haven't gotten involved in this because I really don't care about it. I will simply say that I do not think that should Kerry have been elected there would not be such an uproar over any such spending of private money on these events.

There are always better things to spend money on than huge parties.

Really? Then, all the past references (by Repubs) as to Theresa Heinz-Kerry's money were for..? He was roundly slammed by them for having a wealthy wife. I really don't think he would have been as gauche as to thrown such an expensive soiree during such times, but I could be wrong. If he had, I would be doubly critical of him, as I would hold him to much higher standards.

[jdramj]

Originally Posted by wendybeth

Really? Then, all the past references (by Repubs) as to Theresa Heinz-Kerry's money were for..? He was roundly slammed by them for having a wealthy wife. I really don't think he would have been as gauche as to thrown such an expensive soiree during such times, but I could be wrong. If he had, I would be doubly critical of him, as I would hold him to much higher standards.

Maybe his wife could have afforded to pay the costs all by herself

I just don't really see the arguement here....Clinton did it (with inflation it cost more) and Bush did it (still A LOT of money). Previous Presidents did it, and newly elected Presidents in the future will do all of this. You can't control private donations and how they are spent. If you were given money and told this is for an inaugural ball....would you really turn around and spend it elsewhere?

[Scrooge McSam]

Originally Posted by jdramj

Clinton did it (with inflation it cost more)

NO He didn't.

Refer to the first post in this thread.

[Motorboat Cruiser]

Originally Posted by scaeagles

I will simply say that I do not think that should Kerry have been elected there would not be such an uproar over any such spending of private money on these events.

As others have said, I have no problem at all imagining that had Kerry been elected, the republicans would have been all over him every inch of the way. Let us not delude ourselves into thinking that they are above any such thing.