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...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]

[Bronco_Beerslug]

Originally Posted by 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...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]

Originally Posted by Bronco_Beerslug

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.

[RaiderH8r]

Originally Posted by L.A. BRONCOS FAN

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.

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

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

Originally Posted by RaiderH8r

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]

Originally Posted by 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.

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/

[RaiderH8r]

Originally Posted by L.A. BRONCOS FAN

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]

Originally Posted by 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/

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]

Originally Posted by RaiderH8r

The photo is a fake too. .

Really? How can you tell?

[RaiderH8r]

Originally Posted by Bronco_Beerslug

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]

Originally Posted by RaiderH8r

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)

[Bronco_Beerslug]

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

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


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)

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





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)

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



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]

Originally Posted by Bronco_Beerslug

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

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


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)

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





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)

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



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]

Originally Posted by RaiderH8r

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]

Originally Posted by 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.

They all say along the parade route and along Pennsylvania avenue. That's pretty concise.

[RaiderH8r]

Originally Posted by Bronco_Beerslug

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]

Originally Posted by RaiderH8r

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]

Originally Posted by Bronco_Beerslug

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]

Originally Posted by RaiderH8r

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?tmp...e=12&ncid=1896

[RaiderH8r]

Originally Posted by Bronco_Beerslug

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?tmp...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]

Originally Posted by RaiderH8r

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.