Bush sticks DC with $12 Million Inauguration Expense

[Relbeek Einre]

Eleanor Holmes is not a voting member of Congress. She can speak, not vote.

[Rsak]

She is still a member of the house of representatives and sits on committees where her vote does count.

[Relbeek Einre]

I don't believe that's true, either.

You're not suggesting that one non-voting House "member" and no voice in the Senate constitutes appropriate representation are you?

[Rsak]

It is what her website says:

http://www.norton.house.gov/display2.cf ... =Community

"except the final vote on the House floor."

And if DC wants equal rights as the other states then they should become the 51st state in our nation.

[Relbeek Einre]

There've been efforts to do so, Rsak -- they've been blocked.

But still, that's ridiculous, if you're suggesting that makes the inequity OK. Of course, you'll simply deny you're making any such suggestion now.

[Rsak]

Of course, you'll simply deny you're making any such suggestion now.

Except for the Now part you are correct. I have never stated one way or another that their level of representation was fair.

I simply pointed out that they are represented, whether it comes with a vote or not.

If you feel that is not the correct level of representation then you can either fight Congress for more, fight to become a state ensuring your ability to take part in congress, or do nothing and complain about it.

By the way I honestly do not know why we are hung up on 50 states. I supsect that once we get over the hump of the next state many more will join such as Guam or American Samoa or Puerto Rico.

[Relbeek Einre]

Puerto Rico doesn't want statehood.

DC does - outside forces want to prevent that.

Thought you'd weasel.

[Rsak]

That is Puerto Rico's right to make that decision.

And stop confusing your assumptions about my position with what I have actually posted. I have not weaseled out of anything.

[Relbeek Einre]

Of course not, Waterhead.

There are still two undeniable points: Taxpayer money is coughing up $17.3 million (at least) for this inauguration, and DC's "representation" isn't enough to get them buggered by the feds.

$5.4 million, by the way, is DC's "we're the capital" allotment by the Feds, which is why $11.9 million is the amount they're getting 'stuck' with.

[Rsak]

Oh there you go again. You find yourself with yet another indefensible position and what do you pull out of your bag of tricks?? Namecalling.

Victory can be declared....

But seriously your undeniable points are only undeniable from your perspective. Those kinds of expenses are the same any other city would have to stend for any events they hold. The money being spent is funds directed to the District of Columbia and is not from the Federal Budget for this event. One part of it is from the "Capital fund" and the other is most likely going to come from the Homeland Security allotment for DC.

The reality is that spending that money may mean other security projects may not receive funding which is the cost of having the Inaguration but that is a priortization that the district will need to make. Flat out the only ones with a right to complain about this are the citizens in the District of Columbia.

[Relbeek Einre]

These KINDS of expenses? For one, the city has no choice but to hold the event. For another, I promise you Minneapolis doesn't cough up that kind of money for hosting a Vikings playoffs game - nowhere near it, in fact.

For another, it's still taxpayer money, and you can't deny that.

For a third, the "homeland security" budget had been earmarked for other things by the city when the Feds buggered them out of it, as you acknowledged.

For a fourth, the citizens and government of DC ARE complaining, and in this country anyone has a right to complain, despite your assertions.

Your positions are so ridiculous it's painful.

[Rsak]

There is nothing to say that the privately donated Inaguration does not have to pay for its own security and bus service. It doesn't have to be taxpayer money which is what you can't get through your head.

Second of all that money was going to be spent regardless.

Third Horray for having them prioritize. If you disagree with how they ranked the importance bitch to them for their poor budgetting. It is not like the inaguration does not happen every 4 years!

For a fourth, No the fuck you do not have a right to complain about this. If you don't live in DC you only have the right to complain about the allotment for funding since it is the capitol or why the Homeland security budget for DC was so high. What you do not have a right to complain about is how they spend it as long as it is withing the guidelines of the allotment bill your representative voted on.

Flat out if you feel this is such a problem why don't you donate what every you can to the DC so they can reduc the unfair cost you feel they are being punished with. Take a stand rather then just provide lip service to your outcry which is sourced in your continued attacks at the administration.

[Relbeek Einre]

Hmm.

There is nothing to say that the privately donated Inaguration does not have to pay for its own security and bus service. It doesn't have to be taxpayer money which is what you can't get through your head.

Actually, that's exactly my point. They have $50 million in private donations to play with for this event - far more than has ever been spent for an inauguration bash. Why, then, did they stick the taxpayers with the bill?

Second of all that money was going to be spent regardless.

Not relevant. I want it spent on something NEEDED, not on a self-indulgent party. Most Americans would agree.

Your third point is incomprehensible.

For a fourth, No the fuck you do not have a right to complain about this.

Apparently you're a little confused about what country we live in. And you wonder why the label Waterhead sticks to you like glue.

[Eidolon Faer]

Has anyone seen a breakdown of what the Clinton Library cost? Or the opening ceremonies for it?

Dear GOD man! Have you any idea how many starving Somalis that would have fed? And instead they held this self-indulgent party to celebrate a double-wide trailer enshrining the 2 kilobytes of emails that the computer forensics guys managed to salvage from the entirety of the Clinton Administration's records after Hillary got done destroying the incriminating evidence.

Or what about Marscon? How can we even THINK about holding a Science Fiction Convention when there are orphaned children in Banda Aceh being sold into the sex trade by unscrupulous opportunists?

For that matter, maybe we should all be issued a two-by-four and spend our evenings hitting ourselves with it. Maybe we should just wire car batteries to our own genitalia and curl into a black little lump of smoldering misery while Big Brother Kerry lectures us about the evils of Jenjis(sic) Khan and the fact that somewhere in the world there is some unfortunate soul whose misery is not self-induced.

Give me a break, Relbeek. This pious crap about self-indulgent parties isn't gonna sell. You're not exactly a ascetic monk yourself, you know. Just drop the act and admit that your only reason for being upset about the inauguration is that Bush won the election. You're getting trite.

[Relbeek Einre]

Eid, actually I'm punking Chants, who made the claim that the bill for the inauguration was put in private hands.

Your insults are unappreciated, but by all means don't let me stop you from further eroding your own character by making them.

[Rsak]

Why, then, did they stick the taxpayers with the bill?

Probably because every other inaguration has done the same. I don't agree with your implication that this is Government funding of the inaguration since it is not directly approrpriated.

However another reason would be because it runs the risk of fraud when seeking donations. It has to be made clear upfront where the money will be spent. Some donors may agree, while others may not.

Not relevant. I want it spent on something NEEDED, not on a self-indulgent party.

I agree the costs of the national conventions for the democrats and republicians must be cut back! Do you really comprehend how many items in our budget fall under the category of self-indulgent?

Apparently you're a little confused about what country we live in.

Do not confuse the right of free speech and the right to complain. One means you actually have a stake in the matter.. being a citizen in DC in this case. Those are two entirely different things, but don't let that stop you from missing the point and tossing more insults around.

[Relbeek Einre]

Probably because every other inaguration has done the same.[/quuote]

No, actually, not true. This wouldn't cause such a stir if it was.

I agree the costs of the national conventions for the democrats and republicians must be cut back! Do you really comprehend how many items in our budget fall under the category of self-indulgent?

I don't care what people do with private dollars. Well, I care, but people have the right to do with private money what they choose. This is tax money - including FEDERAL tax dollars, in fact. Different ball park. But maybe it's not that easy to parse, even some self-proclaimed libertarians don't seem to know the difference.

Do not confuse the right of free speech and the right to complain.

Heh heh heh. Vintage Rsakism.

[Rsak]

No, actually, not true. This wouldn't cause such a stir if it was.

So now you want it both ways?

It is not taxpayers money if the Federal Government pays for it, but it is taxpayers money if just DC does? Give me a break... your position is as any other politician!

I don't care what people do with private dollars.

Federal Money is being spent on those conventions which makes it the same ball park!

Heh heh heh. Vintage Rsakism.

Just another sign of your complete unwililngness to see things from another perspective. If you could sink so low you may realize that your seat of superiority is only of the making of your imagination!

[Relbeek Einre]

So now you want it both ways?

It is not taxpayers money if the Federal Government pays for it, but it is taxpayers money if just DC does? Give me a break... your position is as any other politician!

Gosh, that's not what I said at all. Your argumentation becomes even more pathetic when you're flailing.

Federal Money is being spent on those conventions which makes it the same ball park!

Really? How much? How does it compare to federal money spent at any private political event? Oh wait, are you just talking out your ass?

[Relbeek Einre]

Oh, forgot...

Just another sign of your complete unwililngness to see things from another perspective.

Thank you, Mr. Kettle. No, I tend to see things from a perspective called "Reality."