Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

What is the point of re-inaugurating someone who already holds the office?

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU
 
bobweaver Donating Member (953 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-15-05 06:42 PM
Original message
What is the point of re-inaugurating someone who already holds the office?
Edited on Sat Jan-15-05 06:48 PM by bobweaver
Nothing is officially changing, so why is it an "occasion" that needs to be "celebrated?"
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
StephanieMarie Donating Member (642 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-15-05 06:46 PM
Response to Original message
1. So you can have a big party and pretend that you won.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Union Thug Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-15-05 06:46 PM
Response to Original message
2. Silly, self centered pomp and circumstance.
blah!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
imenja Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-15-05 06:47 PM
Response to Original message
3. so they can have their pockets filled by corporate interests
There apparently is not limit on corporate funding for inaugurals, and the energy industry has invested heavily. It's another chance to buy influence. It's also a way for the Republicans to thank their contributers by showing them a good time.
I see no legitimate purpose for something of this level of extravagance.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lapfog_1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-15-05 06:47 PM
Response to Original message
4. The main purpose is for major contributors
who helped re-elect someone to have a party... and to remind them that
won that they expect their agenda(s) to be enacted.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Laurab Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-15-05 06:57 PM
Response to Reply #4
5. To piss a lot of people off, as well
or, in other words, to show that they are still going to be as blatantly arrogant as ever, not caring about what anyone who disagrees with their agenda thinks. While the soldiers fight the assholes war with the "army they have, not the one they might want", due to lack of funding. Apparently, having a big party is more important than their lives.

I'm STILL wondering where they're getting the "10,000" soldiers who are supposed to be "dancing at the parties". I thought our soldiers were pretty much tied up right now, and the ones that aren't are probably not capable of dancing.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MichiganVote Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-15-05 07:10 PM
Response to Original message
6. Silly rabbit, this is the Bush family we're talking
Everything these people touch is overdone...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SmokingJacket Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-15-05 07:16 PM
Response to Original message
7. To gloat.
Why else?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tanyev Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-15-05 07:27 PM
Response to Original message
8. The last one was an inauguration.
This one is the coronation.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
oscar111 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-15-05 07:31 PM
Response to Reply #8
9. FDR cancelled the inaug Ball in WW2:NOW also wartime, so cancel inaug.
Edited on Sat Jan-15-05 07:35 PM by oscar111
I warrant that other wartime prez's cancelled this fluff during civil war, ww1, and the like.
Anyone know?

People dying in the streets {homeless die at three times the normal rate} next to the inaugration route, and 50 million is wasted on the parade?

Lunacy.

100 000 die / yr from heat , cold, rat bites.

4 billion dollars would house all of them with the old voucher system that existed pre-Reagan.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri Apr 26th 2024, 01:50 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC