kodi ([info]cdk) wrote,
@ 2004-12-28 11:30:00
Previous Entry  Add to memories!  Tell a Friend!  Next Entry
I know I'm not the only one saying this, but seriously.

1945: "Under wartime conditions, the 1945 inauguration was limited to the swearing-in ceremony."

2005: "Each activity reflects our theme. We recognize this time that we are a nation at war... There will be a total of nine inaugural balls this year, a youth concert, a parade, a fireworks display and, the official swearing in ceremony at noon on Jan. 20... The estimated budget for the event is $30-40 million, but that will not cover security costs."

I don't like the idea of the inaugural balls to begin with; I think they're wasteful. I'm not saying something like "Cancel the Ball." I just find the contrast in attitudes to "wartime conditions" worth noting.

(Post a new comment)


[info]nephthys510
2004-12-28 07:34 pm UTC (link)
yerp.

Aren't we all supposed to make sacrifices during wartime?

Not to mention the fact that all those people will be dancing and stuffing their faces while the youths they sent to Iraq are dying...

Callous. Tacky.

Out of touch

(Reply to this) (Thread)

[info]cdk
2004-12-29 04:28 pm UTC (link)
Ah, clearly you forgot to read the whole article.

This year’s event will also have one brand new addition, the Commander-in-Chief Ball. This event will be free of charge to 2,000 members of the armed services and their families, featuring those who have recently returned from Iraq and Afghanistan, or those who will be deployed there soon.

See? Don't you feel like a bad American now? Why, he's inviting more than twice as many members of the armed services as have died as a result of hostile action since the war ended! How can you say the President does not love the troops, when he gives them free food at photo opportunities?

It would be interesting to know some of the demographics of the invitees, once they're selected. Most of the articles use language such as "troops," and "on the front lines of freedom" which implies that they're inviting enlisted service members, not commissioned officers. That may be believable, of course, because it makes for a better photo opportunity.

(Reply to this) (Parent)

[info]yonihamagid
2004-12-29 02:02 am UTC (link)
While you can't really call any war popular, WWII was universally accepted as necessary. Thus, there was no need in the corridors of power to distract the people with spectacles. The same cannot be said of Iraq. But there were presidents inaugurated during the Korean War and the Vietnam war. It would be interesting to compare their inaugural extravaganzas.

(Reply to this)


[info]moriarte
2005-01-03 08:10 pm UTC (link)
The president should just say "Give that money to the men and women serving in Iraq as a Christmas bonus" and be done with it...

(Reply to this) (Thread)

[info]cdk
2005-01-11 09:46 pm UTC (link)
Hey! I don't have an email address or a phone number or a home address for you, and I don't ever seem to see you on MSN any more. Send an email to kodiak@flail.com or something?

(Reply to this) (Parent)

Create an Account
Forgot your login or password?
Login w/ OpenID
English • Español • Deutsch • Русский…