DC to Tap Homeland Security Funds to Pay for Bush Inaugural Expenses

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

U.S. Tells D.C. to Pay Inaugural Expenses

Other Security Projects Would Lose $11.9 Million

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A63896-2005Jan10.html

D.C. officials said yesterday that the Bush administration is refusing to reimburse the District for most of the costs associated with next week's inauguration, breaking with precedent and forcing the city to divert $11.9 million from homeland security projects.

Federal officials have told the District that it should cover the expenses by using some of the $240 million in federal homeland security grants it has received in the past three years -- money awarded to the city because it is among the places at highest risk of a terrorist attack.

But that grant money is earmarked for other security needs, Mayor Anthony A. Williams (D) said in a Dec. 27 letter to Office of Management and Budget Director Joshua B. Bolten and Homeland Security Secretary Tom Ridge. Williams's ofice released the letter yesterday.

DC To Use Homeland Security Funds To Pay Inaugural

http://www.wjla.com/news/stories/0105/199714.html

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

http://www.bartcop.com/bush_destroy.jpg

[Bronco_Beerslug]

U.S. Tells D.C. to Pay Inaugural Expenses

Other Security Projects Would Lose $11.9 Million

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A63896-2005Jan10.html

D.C. officials said yesterday that the Bush administration is refusing to reimburse the District for most of the costs associated with next week's inauguration, breaking with precedent and forcing the city to divert $11.9 million from homeland security projects.

Federal officials have told the District that it should cover the expenses by using some of the $240 million in federal homeland security grants it has received in the past three years -- money awarded to the city because it is among the places at highest risk of a terrorist attack.

But that grant money is earmarked for other security needs, Mayor Anthony A. Williams (D) said in a Dec. 27 letter to Office of Management and Budget Director Joshua B. Bolten and Homeland Security Secretary Tom Ridge. Williams's ofice released the letter yesterday.

DC To Use Homeland Security Funds To Pay Inaugural

http://www.wjla.com/news/stories/0105/199714.html

Largest double deficits in history, underfunded border and port security and we're throwing a party.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

Largest double deficits in history, underfunded border and port security and we're throwing a party.

Yep. A $40 million party paid for by DC's homeland security fund.

BTW, where is W*GS to clean this up for Smirk?

He usually follows the frat boy around with a shovel.

http://www.bartcop.com/nby_socsec.jpg

[RaiderH8r]

Yep. A $40 million party paid for by DC's homeland security fund.

BTW, where is W*GS to clean this up for Smirk?

He usually follows the frat boy around with a shovel.

http://www.bartcop.com/nby_socsec.jpg
It's comical here. Eleanor Holmes Norton has her panties in a full blown knot. I laugh. Mua ha haaa.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

It's comical here. Eleanor Holmes Norton has her panties in a full blown knot. I laugh. Mua ha haaa.

Translation:

"I can't really offer a justification for the looting of homeland security funds to finance the boy king's re-coronation, so I'll just let 'er rip with another big 'go team GOP!'"

Quotes

"Inaugurations are an important part of our history. They're a ceremony of our history; they're a ritual of our government. I think it's important to have the inauguration every time. It's also good for Washington's economy, for people to come in from around the country, for the hotels to be full, and the restaurants to be full, and the caterers to be busy."

--Pickles Bush, endorsing her husband's $50M re-crowning and America's steepest decline to fill up the restaurants and hotels for a few nights in Washington DC

[winstoncup bronco]

The inauguration is no different than the party conventions held last summer, and both of those were funded with Homeland Security money.

I guess protecting democratic lives is more important to you.

And show me one example where even one cop, or one agent, was taken off the street because of this.

[alkemical]

The inauguration is no different than the party conventions held last summer, and both of those were funded with Homeland Security money.

I guess protecting democratic lives is more important to you.

And show me one example where even one cop, or one agent, was taken off the street because of this.


I don't have time to try to find this info, but why throw over a hundred mil (convetions and inaguration) for stupid parties for the elite when our boarders are left open?

Again the war on terror is a mirage.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

The coward

Thursday 20 January 2005 @ 04:41

"It occurs to me that all this security, all these cops and soldiers and guns and fences, are not really to keep the terra'ists at bay, but to protect Bush from the citizens of his own country. His limo was pelted with fruit, and the Cheney limo got battered by snowballs. There were tens of thousands of people here to shout him down.

The battery on my machine is just about gone, so I am going to find someplace warm. It was a privilege to be here. Anyone despairing for their country can feel a sense of pride today. Whatever else happens from here on out, know that thousands of people of good conscience carried the flag today in fine style."

- This is William Rivers Pitt, signing off from America's protest capitol.

Bigger than last time

Thursday 20 January 2005 @ 04:13

There were thousands and thousands of protesters thronging the streets just beyond the protest route. I must have walked 15 blocks and on every corner, there were groups of people shouting down Bush and this whole $40 million affair. The W folk could get no peace anywhere.

I have to wonder if this protest was bigger than the 2001 gathering. The way the city was divided up by the security fences, the cops and the soldiers makes it hard to say for sure, but if it isn't as big as four years ago, it is damned close.

http://truthout.org/fyi/

http://us.news1.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/p/rids/20050120/i/r349411637.jpg

[RaiderH8r]

Translation:

"I can't really offer a justification for the looting of homeland security funds to finance the boy king's re-coronation, so I'll just let 'er rip with another big 'go team GOP!'"

Quotes

"Inaugurations are an important part of our history. They're a ceremony of our history; they're a ritual of our government. I think it's important to have the inauguration every time. It's also good for Washington's economy, for people to come in from around the country, for the hotels to be full, and the restaurants to be full, and the caterers to be busy."

--Pickles Bush, endorsing her husband's $50M re-crowning and America's steepest decline to fill up the restaurants and hotels for a few nights in Washington DC

Do you not understand that the inaugural is mandated by the Constitution of the US? To not convene congress on the 20th day of January to and to Not inaugurate an elected President on that day is UNCONSTITUTIONAL.

[RaiderH8r]

The coward

Thursday 20 January 2005 @ 04:41

"It occurs to me that all this security, all these cops and soldiers and guns and fences, are not really to keep the terra'ists at bay, but to protect Bush from the citizens of his own country. His limo was pelted with fruit, and the Cheney limo got battered by snowballs. There were tens of thousands of people here to shout him down.

The battery on my machine is just about gone, so I am going to find someplace warm. It was a privilege to be here. Anyone despairing for their country can feel a sense of pride today. Whatever else happens from here on out, know that thousands of people of good conscience carried the flag today in fine style."

- This is William Rivers Pitt, signing off from America's protest capitol.

Bigger than last time

Thursday 20 January 2005 @ 04:13

There were thousands and thousands of protesters thronging the streets just beyond the protest route. I must have walked 15 blocks and on every corner, there were groups of people shouting down Bush and this whole $40 million affair. The W folk could get no peace anywhere.

I have to wonder if this protest was bigger than the 2001 gathering. The way the city was divided up by the security fences, the cops and the soldiers makes it hard to say for sure, but if it isn't as big as four years ago, it is damned close.

http://truthout.org/fyi/

http://us.news1.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/p/rids/20050120/i/r349411637.jpg
Your boy Billy Rivers Pitt is a full blown liar and he has grossly embellished the numbers to make people like you feel that you're not alone. The problem is that these protestors do give the Dems a bad name. Not because they disagree but the manner in which they do it. They ridicule children trying to experience a piece of their nation's history. The disrespect the military, uniformed (dress) soldiers supporting their country and president were spat upon and snowballs hurled at them with no regard for anybody's public safety. I personally witnessed the wife of a sitting Congressman pelted with a snowball laced with pepper spray. These people came in black masks and did these things in the name of democracy. They are a shameful lot whom you should, if you have any sense of dignity, class, or respect for the institutions of freedom, debate, and democracy, dissassociate yourself from quickly and gladly. And if this is the sort of discourse that Billy rivers pitt belives in, more power to him, my boots are bigger and my aim is more true. I prefer peaceful discourse to violent confrontation, but make no mistake about it, I am prepared for either.

The photo is a fake too. But wheel out some more BS without investigating it, just another day for your modus operandi.

[Bronco_Beerslug]

The photo is a fake too. .
Really? How can you tell?

[RaiderH8r]

Really? How can you tell?
I guess fake was the wrong word, it may be real. The photo was NOT taken in or around Pennsylvania Ave. or the parade route yesterday.

[Bronco_Beerslug]

I guess fake was the wrong word, it may be real. The photo was NOT taken in or around Pennsylvania Ave. or the parade route yesterday.
The photographer must be lying then because she submitted it to Reuters........

--------------------------------------
Protestors shout as the presidential limousine passes by during the inaugural parade of President Bush (news - web sites) in Washington, January 20, 2005. As the president's motorcade made its way down Pennsylvania Avenue from the Capitol to the White House amid the tightest security in inaugural history, thousands of protesters along the parade route and nearby downtown streets booed, chanted slogans and carried placards condemning Bush's policies at home and abroad. (Shannon Stapleton/Reuters)


http://us.news2.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/p/nm/20050121/mdf829676.jpg

[Bronco_Beerslug]

This one did too............

----------------------------------------
http://us.news2.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/p/afp/20050121/lthumb.sge.djs76.210105022058.photo04.photo.defaul t-380x271.jpg

Demonstrators rally as the parade for the inauguration of US President George W. Bush (news - web sites) passes by on Pennsylvania Avenue, in Washington, DC.(AFP/Paul J. Richards)

---------------------------------------------


http://us.news2.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/p/ap/20050121/lthumb.dccg10601210017.topix_bush_inaugural_dccg10 6.jpg


Protesters yell as President Bush (news - web sites)'s Inaugural Parade passes along Pennsylvania Avenue in Washington, D.C., Thursday, Jan. 20, 2005.(AP Photo/Chris Gardner)

----------------------------------------------

http://us.news2.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/p/ap/20050120/capt.dcje22301202356.bush_inaugural_dcje223.jpg

Demonstrators protest against President Bush (news - web sites) along the route of his inaugural parade in Washington, Thursday, Jan. 20, 2005. (AP Photo/Jacqueline Malonson)

[RaiderH8r]

This one did too............

----------------------------------------
http://us.news2.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/p/afp/20050121/lthumb.sge.djs76.210105022058.photo04.photo.defaul t-380x271.jpg

Demonstrators rally as the parade for the inauguration of US President George W. Bush (news - web sites) passes by on Pennsylvania Avenue, in Washington, DC.(AFP/Paul J. Richards)

---------------------------------------------


http://us.news2.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/p/ap/20050121/lthumb.dccg10601210017.topix_bush_inaugural_dccg10 6.jpg


Protesters yell as President Bush (news - web sites)'s Inaugural Parade passes along Pennsylvania Avenue in Washington, D.C., Thursday, Jan. 20, 2005.(AP Photo/Chris Gardner)

----------------------------------------------

http://us.news2.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/p/ap/20050120/capt.dcje22301202356.bush_inaugural_dcje223.jpg

Demonstrators protest against President Bush (news - web sites) along the route of his inaugural parade in Washington, Thursday, Jan. 20, 2005. (AP Photo/Jacqueline Malonson)

The protestors were not gathered in single places in that great of numbers. They may have had a staging area blocks away, but not near the parade route. They gathered in groups of 20-40 people, but there were not thousands of protestors, most people were folks coming to celebrate the inauguration. The photos and article are grossly misleading.

[Bronco_Beerslug]

The protestors were not gathered in single places in that great of numbers. They may have had a staging area blocks away, but not near the parade route. They gathered in groups of 20-40 people, but there were not thousands of protestors, most people were folks coming to celebrate the inauguration. The photos and article are grossly misleading.

So you're saying since you didn't see all these protesters that all the press organizations lied about the photos and stories?

[RaiderH8r]

I'm saying they list no specific locations such as McPherson Square, 15th and Penn. Saying protestors, "near" the parade is an ambiguous term, what is their definition of near. Near the parade to me means on the parade route with the other attendees, in which case they were not on it. Does near mean 2 blocks away staging their rally. Furthermore, the pictures are misleading because there are few signs intermingled with many people, this is often the case at access gates where protestors gather for a couple of reasons. One is that the gates is one place you're sure to get the most attention from the most people with the least amount of effort and two is that the gates are a massive staging point for everybody attending. If a camera catches a snapshot of a 5 protestors at a gate where 1,000 people are waiting to get in it gives the impression that there are 1,005 protestors where there are only 5. The captions need to be clearer and less misleading.

[Bronco_Beerslug]

I'm saying they list no specific locations such as McPherson Square, 15th and Penn. Saying protestors, "near" the parade is an ambiguous term, what is their definition of near. Near the parade to me means on the parade route with the other attendees, in which case they were not on it. Does near mean 2 blocks away staging their rally. Furthermore, the pictures are misleading because there are few signs intermingled with many people, this is often the case at access gates where protestors gather for a couple of reasons. One is that the gates is one place you're sure to get the most attention from the most people with the least amount of effort and two is that the gates are a massive staging point for everybody attending. If a camera catches a snapshot of a 5 protestors at a gate where 1,000 people are waiting to get in it gives the impression that there are 1,005 protestors where there are only 5. The captions need to be clearer and less misleading.
They all say along the parade route and along Pennsylvania avenue. That's pretty concise.

[RaiderH8r]

They all say along the parade route and along Pennsylvania avenue. That's pretty concise.
Actually, not if you had been here. The ONLY way they could have been along the parade route on Penn is if they had ticketed access to the seating areas. The seating areas, with few exceptions, were bleacher seating of four rows, with a few areas in front of the archives having about 8 row seating. Most of the pictures you have are clearly people mingling around, which was not allowed in the seating areas.

Furthermore you have not addressed the detestable fashion in which many of the protestors conducted themselves in their chosen discourse for opposition. Are you ceding your position on the issue?

[Bronco_Beerslug]

Actually, not if you had been here. The ONLY way they could have been along the parade route on Penn is if they had ticketed access to the seating areas. The seating areas, with few exceptions, were bleacher seating of four rows, with a few areas in front of the archives having about 8 row seating. Most of the pictures you have are clearly people mingling around, which was not allowed in the seating areas.

Furthermore you have not addressed the detestable fashion in which many of the protestors conducted themselves in their chosen discourse for opposition. Are you ceding your position on the issue?
My position??? All I addressed was your contention that the photo wasn't real.

[RaiderH8r]

My position??? All I addressed was your contention that the photo wasn't real.
That's fine, I just noticed you addressed one portion of the post and not the other, just wondering if you hadn't noticed the other part.

[Bronco_Beerslug]

That's fine, I just noticed you addressed one portion of the post and not the other, just wondering if you hadn't noticed the other part.
In any large groups there are always a "few". Reading different stories of protests all across the nation there are a only a few reports of any arrests.

And I'm inclined to believe the photos and reports (AP, Reuters) I read stating there were more than just a few protesters along the parade route and Pennslyvania Ave.

----------------------------------------

Mock Coffins and Jeers as Bush Sworn In
(snip)
As the president's motorcade made its way down Pennsylvania Avenue from the Capitol to the White House amid the tightest security in inaugural history, thousands of protesters along the parade route and nearby downtown streets booed, chanted slogans and carried placards condemning Bush's policies at home and abroad.

Some turned their back as the president drove slowly past. Others yelled, "George Bush (news - web sites), you can't hide. We charge you with genocide." Among the forest of protest signs, some read "Blood is on your hands" and "Iraq (news - web sites) is Arabic for Vietnam." Others called for electoral reform, gay rights, abortion rights and the use of renewable energy.

"There are a lot of people dying overseas for nothing and I'm here to get my voice heard," said Bill Coffelt, 40, an engineer from Fairfax, Va.
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/nm/20050121/us_nm/bush_protests_dc&e=12&ncid=1896

[RaiderH8r]

In any large groups there are always a "few". Reading different stories of protests all across the nation there are a only a few reports of any arrests.

And I'm inclined to believe the photos and reports (AP, Reuters) I read stating there were more than just a few protesters along the parade route and Pennslyvania Ave.

----------------------------------------

Mock Coffins and Jeers as Bush Sworn In
(snip)
As the president's motorcade made its way down Pennsylvania Avenue from the Capitol to the White House amid the tightest security in inaugural history, thousands of protesters along the parade route and nearby downtown streets booed, chanted slogans and carried placards condemning Bush's policies at home and abroad.

Some turned their back as the president drove slowly past. Others yelled, "George Bush (news - web sites), you can't hide. We charge you with genocide." Among the forest of protest signs, some read "Blood is on your hands" and "Iraq (news - web sites) is Arabic for Vietnam." Others called for electoral reform, gay rights, abortion rights and the use of renewable energy.

"There are a lot of people dying overseas for nothing and I'm here to get my voice heard," said Bill Coffelt, 40, an engineer from Fairfax, Va.
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/nm/20050121/us_nm/bush_protests_dc&e=12&ncid=1896

Of course you're inclined to believe that stuff, it fits your world view. But the protests are not demonstrative of the whole of the attendees or even the nation for that matter. Remember that 90% of the district voted for Kerry, that didn't hold for the entire nation. Being surprised that protestors are in DC is like being surprised that the Broncos get booed in Oakland.

[Bronco_Beerslug]

Of course you're inclined to believe that stuff, it fits your world view. But the protests are not demonstrative of the whole of the attendees or even the nation for that matter. Remember that 90% of the district voted for Kerry, that didn't hold for the entire nation. Being surprised that protestors are in DC is like being surprised that the Broncos get booed in Oakland.
Not my world view just the events at hand. Who is surprised about the protests? They happened all over the country. More than half the country doesn't have confidence in Bush just 2 months after the election according to the polls. I know personally, after one of the HS football heroes here just came back in a box this week from Iraq, a lot of people here are getting their fill of this administration.

[RaiderH8r]

Not my world view just the events at hand. Who is surprised about the protests? They happened all over the country. More than half the country doesn't have confidence in Bush just 2 months after the election according to the polls. I know personally, after one of the HS football heroes here just came back in a box this week from Iraq, a lot of people here are getting their fill of this administration.

But less than half of the country had the confidence in sKerry to vote for him, interesting.

That does suck that he came back from Iraq in a box I sincerely feel sympathy for his friends and family. However, his life was his own to do with as he saw fit. Is the best way to honor his life to demean that for which he died? I guess that's an individual question for each to answer. Mine is to believe that a legacy of freedom and protecting those who can't protect themselves is a more honorable legacy than most could hope for.

I can't say what his motives or wishes were in life as I didn't know him. I do know from dealing with multitudes of military men and women that they would like to leave a legacy of defending freedom and protecting civilians from thugs and bullies who would impose their will upon those who can not protect themselves.

[Bronco_Beerslug]

But less than half of the country had the confidence in sKerry to vote for him, interesting.

That does suck that he came back from Iraq in a box I sincerely feel sympathy for his friends and family. However, his life was his own to do with as he saw fit. Is the best way to honor his life to demean that for which he died? I guess that's an individual question for each to answer. Mine is to believe that a legacy of freedom and protecting those who can't protect themselves is a more honorable legacy than most could hope for.

I can't say what his motives or wishes were in life as I didn't know him. I do know from dealing with multitudes of military men and women that they would like to leave a legacy of defending freedom and protecting civilians from thugs and bullies who would impose their will upon those who can not protect themselves.

I'm not sure of all his enlistment details but I think he was in before Bush attacked Iraq. He had less than 45 days left.
What people are questioning is did he really have to die?
I don't think there would be any questions if he died in Afghanistan looking for bin laden.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

Do you not understand that the inaugural is mandated by the Constitution of the US? To not convene congress on the 20th day of January to and to Not inaugurate an elected President on that day is UNCONSTITUTIONAL.

Yo Einstein:

Do you not understand that there's nothing 'constitutional' about Dim Son looting D.C.'s homeland security fund to pay for his inauguration - particularly when said looting results in security services for the D.C. area being underfunded?

The photo is a fake too

Hilarious!

Good one.

BTW, it's not like there's just one photo - there are numerous photos from multiple sources to choose from.

[RaiderH8r]

[QUOTE=L.A. BRONCOS FAN]Yo Einstein:

Do you not understand that there's nothing 'constitutional' about Dim Son looting D.C.'s homeland security fund to pay for his inauguration - particularly when said looting results in security services for the D.C. area being underfunded?

QUOTE]

Yo Einstein:

I always knew you were clueless, you just proved it again. Amendment XX of the constitution outlines the protocols and requirements that an inauguration occur on January 20. That is all my position on the issue was. The money in in question is for security. Just because you don't like the guy doesn't mean the country should have to do without an inauguration and ceremony, there were 54 million people who voted FOR the guy you ignorant douchebag. DC is not underfunded. Do you think that the appropriators responsible for divying up the money would let that happen? You are a twit, the Federal government will be paying the bill in full, one way or another. But keep up with the alarmist notions.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

The Freedom to Follow

What some Americans may have found annoying about George W. Bush’s second Inaugural Address was his use of a rhetorical device in which he stated obvious truisms about “freedom” with the suggestion that opponents of his policies – from invading Iraq to privatizing Social Security – must be people who hate freedom.

Bush has used this rhetorical technique before, as in Campaign 2002 when he created the impression that Senate Democrats who objected to Bush’s version of a Homeland Security bill were “not interested in the security of the American people."

Bush used the banalities, in effect, to set up a straw man of opposition, as if anyone who didn’t agree with his unilateralist foreign policy was both dishonest and craven. He said, for instance, “America will not pretend that jailed dissidents prefer their chains, or that women welcome humiliation and servitude, or that any human being aspires to live at the mercy of bullies.”

Again, Bush is juxtaposing himself as the brave leader who stands up for truth against his imaginary opponents who supposedly want to pretend that jailed dissidents prefer their chains or that women welcome humiliation or that human beings aspire to be bullied.

http://consortiumnews.com/2005/012105.html

http://www.bartcop.com/right-2-partee.jpg

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

http://www.bartcop.com/hooded-liberty-moveon.jpg
Four more years

Dancing the War Away

Watching the inaugural ceremonies yesterday reminded me of the scenes near the end of "The Godfather" in which a solemn occasion (a baptism in the movie) is interspersed with a series of spectacularly violent murders.

Even as President Bush was taking the oath of office and delivering his Inaugural Address beneath the clear, cold skies of Washington, the news wires were churning out stories about the tragic mayhem in Iraq.

There is no end in sight to the carnage, which was unleashed nearly two years ago by Bush's decision to launch this wholly unnecessary war, one of the worst presidential decisions in American history.

Incredibly, with more than 1,360 American troops dead and more than 10,000 wounded, the president never once mentioned the word Iraq in his Inaugural Address. He avoided all but the most general references to the war. Mr. Bush, riding the crest of his re-election wave, seems not to be bothered.

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story2&u=/ap/20050120/ap_on_go_pr_wh/inaugural_rdp

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

DC is not underfunded. Do you think that the appropriators responsible for divying up the money would let that happen? You are a twit, the Federal government will be paying the bill in full, one way or another. But keep up with the alarmist notions...you ignorant douchebag...

What part of the following don't you understand, you f*cking idiot?

U.S. Tells D.C. to Pay Inaugural Expenses

Other Security Projects Would Lose $11.9 Million

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dy...-2005Jan10.html

D.C. officials said yesterday that the Bush administration is refusing to reimburse the District for most of the costs associated with next week's inauguration, breaking with precedent and forcing the city to divert $11.9 million from homeland security projects.

Federal officials have told the District that it should cover the expenses by using some of the $240 million in federal homeland security grants it has received in the past three years -- money awarded to the city because it is among the places at highest risk of a terrorist attack.

But that grant money is earmarked for other security needs, Mayor Anthony A. Williams (D) said in a Dec. 27 letter to Office of Management and Budget Director Joshua B. Bolten and Homeland Security Secretary Tom Ridge. Williams's ofice released the letter yesterday.


there were 54 million people who voted FOR the guy you ignorant douchebag...

I got your "ignorant douchebag" swinging, you idiotic c*ck smoker.

What does the number of people who (allegedly) voted for the monkey have to do with the issue at hand?

[RaiderH8r]

What part of the following don't you understand, you f*cking idiot?

U.S. Tells D.C. to Pay Inaugural Expenses

Other Security Projects Would Lose $11.9 Million

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dy...-2005Jan10.html

D.C. officials said yesterday that the Bush administration is refusing to reimburse the District for most of the costs associated with next week's inauguration, breaking with precedent and forcing the city to divert $11.9 million from homeland security projects.

Federal officials have told the District that it should cover the expenses by using some of the $240 million in federal homeland security grants it has received in the past three years -- money awarded to the city because it is among the places at highest risk of a terrorist attack.

But that grant money is earmarked for other security needs, Mayor Anthony A. Williams (D) said in a Dec. 27 letter to Office of Management and Budget Director Joshua B. Bolten and Homeland Security Secretary Tom Ridge. Williams's ofice released the letter yesterday.



I got your "ignorant douchebag" swinging, you idiotic c*ck smoker.

What does the number of people who (allegedly) voted for the monkey have to do with the issue at hand?
Having your panties in that tight of a wad has to be uncomfortable, you're a bit irritable now, just relax a bit. You're going to give yourself an aneurism.

Breaking with precedent is just that, it is not breaking the law. Furthermore, that money will come back in spades through the next appropriations cycle. It is abundantly obvious to anyone who understands our political system and government that you are absolutely clueless. I really hope you don't teach.

The number of people who did vote for the President is important because the inaugural events are a celebration of our nation. And although the concept is alien to you, there are those who supported other candidates that recognize that the nation must celebrate it's foundations and traditions and are willing to take the wins with the losses and more forward in a constructive fashion. You on the other hand are so blinded by hatred that you could not possibly conceive of two people from different idealogical systems and beliefs getting along. You are a hate filled hypocrite. Where's the tolerance?

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

Having your panties in that tight of a wad has to be uncomfortable, you're a bit irritable now, just relax a bit. You're going to give yourself an aneurism.

You're the one who lost your composure first and initiated the name-calling.

Now you're backpedaling because I refused to turn the other cheek.

Furthermore, that money will come back in spades through the next appropriations cycle.

This is nothing but feeble spin, and is completely beside the point.

Go back and read the article.

It states unequivocally that D.C.'s homeland security budget is being shorted by $11.9 million, and that the money tapped for gigglekill's inauguration was earmarked for other security needs.

It is abundantly obvious to anyone who understands our political system and government that you are absolutely clueless.

Oh, the irony.

The number of people who did vote for the President is important because the inaugural events are a celebration of our nation....

Once again, you're deviating from the issue, i.e., how the inauguration is paid for. The question of how the inauguration is paid for is completely independent of the issue of how many people voted for the chimp.

You are a hate filled hypocrite. Where's the tolerance?

This from the same guy who just called me an "ignorant douchebag" without provocation on my part?

This would be funny were it not such a sad example of right-wing hypocricy.