Results 1 to 3 of 3
01-14-09, 04:54 PM #1
Lefties slammed Bush's inaugural, now spend, baby spend
AP Slammed Bush’s ‘Extravagant’ Inaugural in ’05, But Now It’s Spend, Baby, Spend
By Rich Noyes (Bio | Archive)
January 14, 2009 - 13:51 ET
Four years ago, the Associated Press and others in the press suggested it was in poor taste for Republicans to spend $40 million on President Bush’s inauguration. AP writer Will Lester calculated the impact that kind of money would have on armoring Humvees in Iraq, helping victims of the tsunami, or paying down the deficit. Lester thought the party should be cancelled: “The questions have come from Bush supporters and opponents: Do we need to spend this money on what seems so extravagant?”
Fast forward to 2009. The nation is still at war (two wars, in fact), and now also faces the prospect of a severe recession and federal budget deficits topping $1 trillion as far as the eye can see. With Barack Obama’s inauguration estimated to cost $45 million (not counting the millions more that government will have to pay for security), is the Associated Press once again tsk-tsking the high dollar cost?When I used to be somebody (I'm center top)
"A burning desire for social justice is never a substitute for knowing what you're talking about". -Thomas Sowell-
01-14-09, 05:22 PM #2
Nope. Double standard. Bias. No surprise.Pleasing nobody, one person at a time.
That which does not kill me, better start fucking running.
If I lived every day like it was my last, the body count would be staggering.
I intend to go in harm's way. -John Paul Jones
Hunt the wolf, and bring light to the dark places that others fear to go. LT COL Dave Grossman
01-14-09, 05:48 PM #3
Of course they're not questioning it. Why would they???--"D.B.A.D." --Me
--Life's tough...it's tougher if you're stupid.
--"Genius may have its limitations, but stupidity is not thus handicapped." -Elbert Hubbard
Users Browsing this Thread
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)