A lot of people are going to show up and their safety is paramount, so spend the gosh-durned money. Have the Treasury run the presses an extra ten seconds or so to pay for it (they’re soon gonna hafta be runnin’ 24/7 anyway to pay for all of Obama’s promises).

ILC, the “side” you are describing is NEITHER liberal or conservative but includes some from both ends of the political spectrum and anywhere in the middle.

No, it’s libertarian-conservative, or “classical liberal”. It only partly includes today’s Big Government conservatives (Bush, who at least managed to be on the side of human liberty in his foreign policy, while destroying it in the sphere of domestic economics). And it doesn’t include today’s leftists or Big Government liberals (Obama-Pelosi-Reid). Today’s left-liberals are essentially fascists who can’t admit it.

you are among the fanatics on the right

Not in the sense you mean. I have supported gay marriage, first-semester abortion rights, and full drug legalization for decades. I am, of course, a ‘fanatic’ about human freedom and everyone should be.

your accusations of denial… are just… hot air

No, let’s review again. I said this:

there is a good “side” in the country’s and the world’s conflicts – namely, the side of HUMAN LIBERTY – and an evil side, namely the side that opposes human liberty in various ways (be it criminal gangs, dictators, totalitarian states, terrorists, or Big Government politicians telling you what to do and stealing from you)

You, ADD, are unable to agree with the statement… until and unless it is watered down to include today’s “Big Government politicians telling you what to do and stealing from you”, and perhaps worse. I.e., until and unless it is watered down 75% or more of the way to meaninglessness. Like I said, Ayn Rand has an essay for you (see above).

ILC, the “side” you are describing is NEITHER liberal or conservative but includes some from both ends of the political spectrum and anywhere in the middle. If you agree to that then what you said is rational and true. IF you were making yet one more lame attack on liberals, then you are among the fanatics on the right who are NOT rational and who are a threat to the USA. Since the “sides” I was speaking of are liberal at one end and conservative at the other, your statements had no connection to mine and your accusations of denial, rejection blah blah blah were/are just characteristic pompous hot air.

So folks, now that ADD is gone in accordance with his 9,999th self-righteous promise to go, let’s review. I made the following central point:

there is a good “side” in the country’s and the world’s conflicts – namely, the side of HUMAN LIBERTY – and an evil side, namely the side that opposes human liberty in various ways (be it criminal gangs, dictators, totalitarian states, terrorists, or Big Government politicians telling you what to do and stealing from you)

ADD functionally rejected that analysis. Oh, he didn’t address it directly. But he ignored it, while spewing other snide venom at its speaker. Functionally, that’s a rejection of the analysis or position – just a cowardly one.

Now, whom does it serve? I spoke a truth. Which side is indirectly (but nonetheless) aided by ADD’s rejection of the dichotomy I pointed out? Hint: The evil side. The side that works against human liberty. The side that needs people to ignore or deny its existence.

ADD, if you do ever come back – and of course, I really know with 100% certainty that you will, because of your insincerity and your dependency on what you imagine to be your audience here – then the novelist-philosopher Ayn Rand has an essay that she wrote just for you. Cheers!

Will the declared emergency allow for better security? If so, maybe the purpose of the cost was to allow the emergency to be declared.

Got your helmet and bib on? Just checking.

Your typically asinine point was “Rachael criticized liberals, and you agreed with her, that proves you’re a fanatic who cant criticize conservatives.” It is, as is your custom, a logical train-wreck borne of a minuscule, petty and child-like mind. One does not follow from the other.

Furthermore, your asinine non-point is risible in light of the fact that Rachael, the liberal, and I, the conservative, are reaching a point of agreement while you are nipping at our heels failing miserably in your attempts at fanatical partisan “gotcha”.

I <3 irony.

I would like to see a breakdown of costs. The huge Inaugural platform on the west side of the Capitol and the Presidential Reviewing Stand at the White House were designed and the costs pretty much firmed up before the election. The cost would be the same if John McCain were being sworn in.

And I imagine a big chunk of the total cost is for security. That cost has soared as crowd estimates have increased.

I found it amusing, watching C-SPAN, to learn that the crowds expected in the National Mall for activities Monday and Tuesday will require 5,000 port-a-potties, which will have to be regularly “serviced”.

Things have sure changed since the first Inauguration I attended. At age 15 my parents let me travel alone half-way across the country to spend a week in Washington for Dwight Eisenhower’s second Inaugural in January 1957. Security was nothing like it is today. And there were not as many people in Washington for the event. I was able to get into the church when the Eisenhowers attended a special Inaugural service the Sunday before the swearing in and lucked out in getting a bleacher seat for the parade directly across Pennsylvania Avenue from where Ike watched. Pretty heady stuff for a kid too young to shave.

By the way, I think the federal budget that year was less than $100 billion (not including Social Security, which was then a separate account).

If you don’t understand, ADD, that there is a good “side” in the country’s and the world’s conflicts – namely, the side of HUMAN LIBERTY – and an evil side, namely the side that opposes human liberty in various ways (be it criminal gangs, dictators, totalitarian states, terrorists, or Big Government politicians telling you what to do and stealing from you) – then you don’t understand much.

The ONLY thing I was referring to is the idiotic belief among fanatics on both sides that they are “good” and the other side is “evil”. Rational people don’t think like that

I understood you exactly, ADD. Read again. Um, before you accuse others of not reading.

Rational people do think in terms of good and evil. It’s irrational (and immoral) not to. You disagree, or want to deny that. I understood you precisely. But, truth hurts so you don’t want to admit it.

You in turn said: “Rachael, the self-avowed liberal, was the first to acknowledge how incompatible with mainline liberal thinking her statement was.” And in your original comment you went on to spew about Dems, liberals and Obama. My points one and two.

#23 ILC, you can’t hit a nerve if you aren’t even on the same topic. Reading is fundamental as the old ads used to say. If you can’t understand how I was using good vs. evil it’s insane to go on about something else. The ONLY thing I was referring to is the idiotic belief among fanatics on both sides that they are “good” and the other side is “evil”. Rational people don’t think like that, most people don’t think like that. I knew some robot on here would pull out the “shades of gray” sh%t because that’s what you do,.misread a statement and then babble on about what you thought. You were wrong. If you want to hit a nerve, and I do admit that is quite easy to do with me then at least try to be closer to what I said. Your nonsense no longer angers me because it is a given that you will will do the same old thing just like AE will continue his childish insults.

Do we? A majority of the voters elected someone with very dubious associations and no significant experience, on the basis of promises alone. And before that, the trend has been on demanding more and more government services as long as they’re paid for by somebody else.

The likely motivations are not impressive.

Perhaps some of us — those who have resisted this — don’t deserve it. But majority rules and all must pay the price.

Thank you AE, and that proves my point. And, your infantile response also does.

Actually, it doesnt do anything of the sort. But no one ever accused you of being logical.

As for whatever you have going with AE: Sorry, I didn’t realize you needed me to deal with him for you.

I think its some sort of masochistic crush. He loves getting beaten up.