The controversy over inaugural spending

[Gn2Dlnd]

Yes. So many things are annoying.

[Nephythys]

Originally Posted by Gn2Dlnd

Yes. So many things are annoying.

ah, finally we agree on something

[wendybeth]

My, he certainly has some very generous friends. I'm quite sure they do not expect anything in return ......

[Jazzman]

Originally Posted by wendybeth

My, he certainly has some very generous friends. I'm quite sure they do not expect anything in return ......

This is what I see as the real issue in this situation. I don't automatically assume that President Bush is being bought, and I haven't seen any facts or anything other than mere speculation to question his honor. (No, Michael Moore is not a trustworthy, solid source.) But it does concern me just how many favors $40 or $50 million in contributions may buy.

[Scrooge McSam]

I don't care how much private money is spent. It's yours. Spend it as you please. It's the lying I can't stomach.

[Gn2Dlnd]

The 40 million dollars is largely made up of corporate donations that the Bush Administration solicited. I'm (generic "I") not "telling" anyone how to spend their hard-earned money. Throw a party. Nephythys is absolutely right in that I'd have thrown a party if Bush lost the election. But it's certainly within my rights to criticize wasteful expenditures by the government. I don't care if it's tax money or private donations, it's still incredibly wasteful spending by our government when a war that the Bush administrastion created has caused so much damage and financial need. It's obscene that a catastrophe of the magnitude of the tsunami disaster can't have every last penny and ounce of manpower from the world because of that war. I posted real links to real information current as of 1/21/05. None of them were Michael Moore.

You can throw a really amazing party for a couple hundred thousand dollars. I mean an AMAZING party. 40 million dollars is in another universe, it's the kind of money that can change worlds for people. And it was squandered.

[Jazzman]

Originally Posted by Gn2Dlnd

But it's certainly within my rights to criticize wasteful expenditures by the government. I don't care if it's tax money or private donations, it's still incredibly wasteful spending by our government when a war that the Bush administrastion created has caused so much damage and financial need.

But that's the flaw in this argument. It is not spending by our government. If the spending is derived from contributions made by private citizens, or corporations, it is not government spending, whether the President solicited it or not. Unless the expenditures come from budgets funded by taxes, they are not government spending.

If this gala had been paid for with tax money, I’d be right there criticizing it too. But the simple fact is, it wasn’t.

[wendybeth]

Then why do I have the feeling this gala is going to end up costing us taxpayers, in one way or another?

[Gn2Dlnd]

Originally Posted by Jazzman

But that's the flaw in this argument. It is not spending by our government. If the spending is derived from contributions made by private citizens, or corporations, it is not government spending, whether the President solicited it or not. Unless the expenditures come from budgets funded by taxes, they are not government spending.

If this gala had been paid for with tax money, I’d be right there criticizing it too. But the simple fact is, it wasn’t.

No, you're right. If it was tax money I'd be out screaming for someone's head on a pike instead of just bitching to my friends. I absolutely see the difference between "spending by our government," which is what I said, and "government spending." I'm still appalled that our government solicited and spent 40 million dollars on self-congratulatory parties. "Lead by example" is, apparently, one of the courses Georgie Porgie missed when he was attending President school.

[Jazzman]

Originally Posted by Gn2Dlnd

"Lead by example" is, apparently, one of the courses Georgie Porgie missed when he was attending President school.

Now this is something that I can wholeheartedly agree with. While I personally don't see any cause for outrage over the event, I definitely do see a reason for much eye rolling and disbelief over his seeming arrogance and callous disregard in the face of so many tragedies around the world. This would have been a perfect chance for self redemption by scaling back the events and exhibiting a fair amount of the compassion which he has always sold the nation (and world) on. In this, he failed miserably and only made himself look like a big, rich doofus.