that too.... I was limiting myself to the practical aspects of the question. So Bush is already out?
woohoo On Sat, Jan 17, 2009 at 12:34 PM, Judah McAuley <[email protected]> wrote: > I was against the cost of the inauguration until last night I was > realizing that all the Bushies had moved out of the Whitehouse and I > found myself cheering an end to an 8 year nightmare. > > That's when I realized that several million people are going to head > to DC regardless of whether Obama wants to keep it small and > manageable or not. They need a bit a catharsis and to spit on the > grave of a national travesty and convince themselves that the people > moving into that house might be a bit better. > > So let America have its party and then roll up its sleeves and get to work. > > Judah > > On Sat, Jan 17, 2009 at 11:04 AM, Dana <[email protected]> wrote: >> I agree. >> >> The inauguration may not be a good instance of that though, as it has >> a fair amount of historic and psychological meaning. Quite apart from >> the history that is being made is the fact that perception matters a >> great deal in any push to get people buying again, and if we are too >> poor to mark really momentous occasions, perhaps I better hold off on >> that new washing machine... if you see my point. >> >> On Sat, Jan 17, 2009 at 11:01 AM, Scott Stroz <[email protected]> wrote: >>> You have a valid point, I have not bitched about it on this list. I have >>> bitched about it, just not here. >>> >>> I am not so opposed to the bailout as I am that there seem to be no strings >>> attached. Banks still gave millions in bonuses to the executive who put the >>> banks in the precarious position to begin with. >>> I also seem to think that in the future, we will hear a lot more stories >>> like what AIG did after getting bailout money. >>> >>> One thing that annoys me is that every time its pointed out that maybe Obama >>> could have done something different, you know, that 'change' he keeps >>> preaching, the defense has been 'well everyone else has done it'. >>> >>> Sometimes you can save more by limiting a lot of little spending rather than >>> eliminating one big purchase. >>> >>> On Sat, Jan 17, 2009 at 9:33 AM, Dana <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>>> my point is that I don't see you bitching about giving billions to >>>> banks. I have not been paying attention to the inauguration but you >>>> know what, I was in DC for Reagan's and you never saw so many hot and >>>> cold running balls. >>>> >>>> Furthermore, it's not just an extravagance. Consumer confidence needs >>>> to recover and I don't think sackcloth and ashes would work for that. >>>> >>>> On Fri, Jan 16, 2009 at 12:17 PM, Scott Stroz <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> > So, because its not billions of dollars its OK to piss it away? You >>>> should >>>> > get into politics, you'd fit right in with that attitude. >>>> > >>>> > Finish up your Kool-Aid, the Prophet of Change is on his way. >>>> > >>>> > On Fri, Jan 16, 2009 at 9:52 AM, Dana <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> > >>>> >> more people, higher security risks, it's four years later... that's off >>>> the >>>> >> top of my head. I heard they are closing all of the bridges in DC. >>>> That's a >>>> >> pretty extreme security measure and it will take a huge amont of >>>> manpower >>>> >> just for that right right there. >>>> >> >>>> >> ::shrug:: I have not been paying attention to the inauguration but don't >>>> we >>>> >> have better things to bitch about? Like billions being wasted in the >>>> >> financial sector? >>>> >> >>>> >> On Wed, Jan 14, 2009 at 12:55 PM, C. Hatton Humphrey < >>>> [email protected] >>>> >> >wrote: >>>> >> >>>> >> > >> Hurricaines, floods and the inauguration....makes sense to me...not >>>> >> > > >>>> >> > > After 8 years of Bush the federal government qualifies as a disaster >>>> >> > > area and emergency management is needed. >>>> >> > >>>> >> > Given the subject of this thread and the facts as they have been >>>> >> > presented, I don't think blaming Bush is going to work this time... >>>> >> > unless your poster boy for change only intends to change things for >>>> >> > the worse. >>>> >> > >>>> >> > Or do you have some logical explanation for why this should cost the >>>> >> > tax payers so much more? >>>> >> > >>>> >> > >>>> >> >>>> >> >>>> > >>>> > >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >> >> > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Adobe® ColdFusion® 8 software 8 is the most important and dramatic release to date Get the Free Trial http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;207172674;29440083;f Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/message.cfm/messageid:285338 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.5
