Cult of the Presidency Watch

Indefatigable antagonist Lonewacko points us to the sight of Chicago schoolchildren constructing a 150-foot Barack Obama:

Gene Healy on "The Cult of the Presidency" here. Wash that down with Reason.tv's "Obama Kids: Sing for Change (Pyongyang Remix)."

Finally, the Brooklyn Cyclones minor league baseball team has announced that they are changing their name for one night only to–can you guess it?–the Baracklyn Cyclones! Fans attending this admittedly clever promotion will receive Obama bobbleheads, team jerseys in patriotic colors, "Universal Health Care" (i.e., "free Band-Aids to the first 1,000 fans"), and other goodies. [Link via Baseball Primer, where one commenter asks: "Will Keith Olbermann be broadcasting the game?"]

Comments

[ev]

Why would anyone voluntarily want so much responsibility and go through all the work to be POTUS? Power, I guess. But why would anyone want to be such a control freak?

[JLM]

"Universal Health Care" (i.e., "free Band-Aids to the first 1,000 fans")

So, if you don't get in line early enough you don't get your "free" healthcare? This excercise may actually have some educational value.

[LurkerBold]

ev,

I guess nobody ever made a bobblehead in your image.

[ed]

"Dear Leader" indeed. Will he get giant posters too? Statues pointing The Way?

[Warty]

Shut the fuck up, Lonewacko.

[LurkerBold]

Will he we get giant posters too?

I hope so.

[LurkerBold]

Warty, I am sure that Lonewacko submitted this story in the most negative light for president Obama but I missed his comment on this thread.

[Travis]

Matt, you just made Lonewacko's day. Yeah!!! someone actually listens to me.

[Lonewacko]

But where was Reason when there were questions to be asked of its beloved Dear Leader?!

[JLM]

^^ BelovedDearLeader is one word, you silly imposter.

[John]

Their education is going to start at the innauguration. Two million people shivering in the cold in Washington. Some of them are going to live in a buses for up to six days at RFK stadium right accorss a short bridge from Anacostia, one of the worst neighborhoods in America. Can you say Superdome? Normally an inauguration is one day in and out of the city. But since the Obamabots need to see dearlybeloved leader more than once, it will be three days this time. It starts on Sunday with 1.5 million or more worshipful followers allowed a short viewing of dearlybeloved leader (should that be capitalized?). Then the bars will be open 24/7 until Tuesday. Understand that the DC police can't control Washington on a typical Saturday night. And all of that is not even considering the possibility of a terrorist attack.

[Pro Libertate]

I find Obama so inspirational and powerful that I'm going to call him "Steel" henceforth.

[stuartl]

Understand that the DC police can't control Washington on a typical Saturday night.

John, as a NoVa resident, I'm also a little torqued about all of the actions being taken, but this statement is ridiculous.

[John]

Pro,

Give it six months or maybe less and you will see any number of thumb sucking pieces in the MSM talking about how no one ever said that Obama was any kind of a transformational figure and anyone who says otherwise is just a right winger trying to set him up for failure by setting unreasonable expectations. You could start a betting pool on the first liberal MSM editorial writer who writes the first "no one said he was anything other than a good man and a politician and right wingers are rewriting history claiming that we promised that he was more" collumn. My bet is on David Ignatious.

[John]

"John, as a NoVa resident, I'm also a little torqued about all of the actions being taken, but this statement is ridiculous."

Really? There were three murders last Friday night alone. DC is always at or near the top of the Murder Capital of America list. DC is marginally better run than New Orleans and the only reason it is any better is because the Park police, capital police, Marshalls and any number of private security forces keep the NW side of the city somewhat safe.

[Mike G.]

Giving Lonewacko a hat tip is like giving Hitler the Sudetenland.

[LurkerBold]

John,

That is why we need more police.

[LurkerBold]

Took almost 3 hours to Godwine the thread. Does it really count when one is talking about a modern Nazi?

[creech]

The spending on this inauguration is obscene.
Estimates, including transportation and housing costs of all attendees, is probably about $500million. Think of the wasted energy. Think of the starving Africans that could use more food. Think of the unemployed in your own neighborhood and the retirees whose savings were wiped out by Barney, Chris, Alan, and the rest of the gang. Not only is it selfish to want to go to D.C., instead of watching from home, and donating your travel costs to a worthy organization, it is hypocritical for all those who wrung their hands and denounced the lavishness and excess spending that transpired for the Reagan inaugurations, which were far smaller.

[LurkerBold]

Creech, why are you against Black people celebrating but you are for white people celebrating?

[John]

I wonder when the Obamabots are going to start joining the military? They have spent the last 8 years calling anyone not in uniform and on the other side a chicken hawk. Well not Obama is in office and can end the wars in AFghanistan and Iraq if he choses. Clearly, he did not start those wars and they are not his. I will give him a pass on Iraq because he seems to have no intention of escalating the conflict and appears to plan to follow the agreed to plan to withdraw from Iraq over the next couple of years. But, he plans to not only stay in Afghanistan but escalate it by sending 30,000 additional troops. When he does that, it seems to me that Afghanistan is his war just like Vietnam was Johnson's war, rather than Kennedy's war, after Johnson exscalated the war in March of 65. Given that, aren't the of age Obamabots chicken hawks for not joining up to support it?

[joe]

It's a bit disconcerting to have a president that people like.

[joe]

John,

You didn't want those grapes up there anyone.

Keep 'em coming. You're making an awesome week even better.

[LurkerBold]

Yes Joe, isn't this odd?

[Warren]

Lonewackoooooooooooooooooooooooooooo

[The Angry Optimist]

It's a bit disconcerting to have a president that people like.

Dude, that's lame.

[the innominate one]

Matt - I was going to say don't encourage the lonelywacker like this, but Mike G.'s comment wins the thread.

John@9:10 - Ted Rall, an avowed liberal, has been saying the same thing about Obama throughout the campaign.

In any case, pretty much every new president is welcomed as a savior by his supporters and the MSM.

[LurkerBold]

John,

Vietnam was Nixon's war. Your partainship is showing.

[LurkerBold]

John,

Black people are represented dispraportanatly greater in the military than in the general population in all services. They already joined, why are you complaining?

[the innominate one]

John - I don't think you know what a chickenhawk is.

[John]

Joe,

I am working on the innauguration and it scares the shit out of me. I have been called up to work on it. If nothing bad happens it will be pure luck. This reminds me so much of Katrina in that we have a local government who won't admit it has a problem and refuses to plan for the worst. If there is a Mumbei like attack or so much as a flash grenade that goes off in that crowd, that crowd will stampede and 100s perhaps thousands will die. There are two wars going on and Israel is flattening Gaza and on top of that Al Quada has said they consider Obama to be responsible. Yet, neither the feds nor the DC government is planning for that because of jackasses like you who think that anyone who says "gee what if something bad happens" is some derranged rightwinger. The majority of the people I serve with voted for Obama and most of them are scared shitless over this event.

Further, I don't think it is a plan to expect people to live in buses for days with no LE coverage and not expect something bad to happen. As sure as God exists there is going to be a sexual assault or worse in that bus compound. It is a disaster waiting to happen.

Unlike you, I don't view everything through a political lense. I think if this thing goes bad it would be a national tragedy. That is why it bothers me so much. I really wish they would limit the crowd to 1/2 million or so and just have a normal innauguration. In this environment, post 9-11, to do more is madness.

[Seward]

joe,

It's a bit disconcerting to have a president that people like.

"The people" were quite fond of Bush in 2002 as I recall.

[LurkerBold]

John,

I hope they have someone watching you while you "work" the event.

[LurkerBold]

I really wish they would limit the crowd to 1/2 million or so and just have a normal innauguration.

The crowd is being limited to 300,000. Didn't you get the memo?

[Warren]

"The people" were quite fond of Bush in 2002 as I recall.

And even fonder in 2004 when they re-elected him. The masses are asses.

[Warty]

As sure as God exists there is going to be a sexual assault or worse in that bus compound.

So everything will be OK?

[cunnivore]

It's a bit disconcerting to have a president that people like.

I agree. This country works best when elected officials are held in utter contempt by the public, so their schemes face the maximum amount of resistance possible.

Luckily, I recall when Bush was massively popular too. Obama's luster will fade soon enough. So passes the glory of the world, joe.

[Seward]

John,

Vietnam was Nixon's war.

Except from early 1961 to early 1969, when it was Kennedy/Johnson's war.

What was that slogan back in the Sixties? It was something like...

Hey! Hey! LBJ!

Perhaps you can finish it for me.

[John]

Seward,

Don't feed the troll. Lukerbold is a fake, probably Robc or someone.

[LurkerBold]

Seward,

You have been leading in folley for centuries.

ow should I know what the old Stalinists were chanting?

[Mo]

John,
How are you not viewing this through a political lens? You're comparing an inauguration to one of the worst natural disasters in modern American history. You are seriously unhinged.

[Seward]

What's interesting is that we seem to be repeating this decade the guns and butter strategy of the Kennedy and Johnson years. Huge amounts of deficit spending on foreign and domestic issues. One of Ike's virtues (and there were many) was his dislike of government debt.

[Shadow of the Past]

As sure as God exists there is going to be a sexual assault or worse in that bus compound.

I don't think so. We're all familiar with the loose morals of the typical Obama supporter, so there should be plenty of wild, guilt-free, consensual sex going on to keep sexual assault off the table.

[P Brooks]

Indefatigable antagonist Lonewacko points us to the sight of Chicago schoolchildren constructing a 150-foot Barack Obama

And LoneWackOffer is pissed, because they should be busy erecting a 150 foot wall along the border.

Hey WackOff- how come you haven't been doing a victory dance about the cancellation of the NAFTA InfiltrationCorridor? Doesn't it fit in your narrative?

[The Angry Optimist]

Mo - I didn't read it that way. I read it as comparing the DC Government as the pre-Katrina NOLA Government: uncaring and indifferent in the face of a potential disaster. And honestly, I think that makes sense. There are a lot of security concerns about the inauguration I hadn't thought of.

[Warty]

So I was going to say something about how all this Beatlemania for Obama is highly creepy, but now all I can think about is a cartoon image of Obama with a beard that won't stop growing. Something is seriously wrong with me.

[John]

John,
How are you not viewing this through a political lens? You're comparing an inauguration to one of the worst natural disasters in modern American history. You are seriously unhinged."

No I see up to 4 million people coming to party for three days in a city that normally has 600,000 in a post 9-11 environment. The DC government is broke and has no plan to deal with that many people. Their only hope is that the numbers are bullshit and not that many people show up. If you are Al Quada or anyone pissed off over you name it, the innauguartion is the perfect place to make a political statement and kill large numbers of people. Beyond that if the city gridlocks, how to hospital workers get to work? How do restaurants get food? The veneer of civiliztion is very thin. It is madness to gather than many people in this city in the current environment. There is no way to control a crowd that large if it stampedes and no way to move or do anything if the city gridlocks.

[joe]

John,

Everything scares the shit out of you. You have demonstrated yourself to be a bedwetter extraordinaire for years now.

People like you are why this country lost so many of freedoms.

Seward,

2002 seems like a lifetime ago, doesn't it?

Also, LurkerBold is a spoofing troll, purposely making stupid arguments in the voice of a leftist for the purpose of discreding the people he can't seem to ever beat in an argument.

cunnivore,

This country works best when elected officials are held in utter contempt by the public If that were true, 2005-2008 should have been a pinnacle of good governance. Not so much, really.

Obama's luster will fade soon enough. So passes the glory of the world, joe. Wait a second, are you saying an 83% approval rating might be soft? That's unpossible!

[John]

I can honestly say that if John McCain had won the election and the Republicans were planning the same thing, I would be just as concerned. Maybe I am paranoid. I hope I am. But I really think this is a bad idea and worse still people are refusing to think worse case scenerio. That is what government and military get paid for. Anyone can be a meeter and greeter. They get paid to think worst case and plan for it. That is not being done. For what it is worth, I think the Bush homeland security and Pentegon people are asleep at the switch as well. They won't stand up and say something because they don't want to be subjected to the kind of accusations that Joe is putting out. That is pure cowardice.

[LurkerBold]

Joe, again, I am not working the same side of the street as you. You are a Corporatist-lite and I am a Progressive. But our opinions are frequently the same so there is some possibility that you can come around to the sid of true freedom from wage slavery.

[joe]

What's interesting is that we seem to be repeating this decade the guns and butter strategy of the Kennedy and Johnson years.

To be fair, they were piling up structural deficits during an economic boom, while we are currently in a serious slump. If we're still looking at permanent structural deficits as far as the eye can see even after this recession ends, then there's a problem, but deficits during economic slowdowns suggest something different to me than during boom times.

[Zeb]

The president should be inaugurated in the basement of the white house and not allowed to leave for any reason not essential to his office for the rest of his term. Every public appearance of the president is a huge waste of money and an unreasonable burden on people trying to go about their business in peace.

[James Ard]

Maybe we should rename the inauguration Default Daddy Day.

[John]

"Everything scares the shit out of you. You have demonstrated yourself to be a bedwetter extraordinaire for years now."

Fuck you Joe. I have worked on this stuff for years. I saw Katrina and Iraq up close and personnal. You don't know anything and have been no where and seen or done nothing beyond being fat dumb and happy. Good for you. But shut the fuck up about anything beyond that because you have no idea what you are talking about.

[John]

Joe,

You have proven yourself to be an unserious idiot on this topic. Hopefully nothing bad will happen and you can continue to be so.

[LurkerBold]

John, Joe did make good substinantive points about you. Hate is bad. Turn it to love.

[LurkerBold]

John, your Violent Right Wing Militant Warmongering center core is showing.

[joe]

Ohnoes, unserious!

LoL.

[cunnivore]

joe, imagine how much worse the governance would have been if Bush had 83% approval ratings for the last three years.

[LurkerBold]

Perhaps he means double-plus unserious, like an Orwell character?

[Seward]

joe,

To be fair, they were piling up structural deficits during an economic boom, while we are currently in a serious slump.

We too were piling up structural deficits during an economic boom. The world didn't start 18 months ago. So to be "fair" it remains the case that we are apparently repeating the same non-sense perpetrated by both the Kennedy/Johnson administrations and then extended by that of Nixon. All this deficit spending will bring about some future pain, it just depends on when we wish to face that.

[cunnivore]

For instance, if Bush had remained popular, dollars to donuts there would have been an attack against Iran in 2006.

[joe]

You know, cunnivore, the government was just as lousy when Bush had a 90% approval rating as it's been since he's been mired in the 20s.

I just don't see a difference; it's not things got better after 2005.

[Seward]

joe,

In other words, we're going to have to re-learn the lesson that "fine tuning" the economy is just not a very realistic expectation of fiscal, monetary, etc. policy.

[cunnivore]

The Patriot Act and the invasion of Iraq -- which I'm sure you'll agree were the pinnacles of bad governance during this milennium...both occurred when the president was extremely popular.

[joe]

Seward,

We too were piling up structural deficits during an economic boom. Oh, absolutely. "Reagan proved that deficits don't matter" Giggitty Giggitty!

My point is, it isn't fair to say that Obama's policies represent a continuation of that policy, since we haven't seen what he'd about deficits during a boom.

[cunnivore]

I just don't see a difference; it's not things got better after 2005.

We didn't invade any more countries, and the pace of civil liberties curtailment slowed from a sprint to a leisurely walk.

[LurkerBold]

My point is, it isn't fair to say that Obama's policies represent a continuation of that policy, since we haven't seen what he'd about deficits during a boom.

True enough, but I hope that he goes farther than what you are hoping for.

[Seward]

joe,

Oh, absolutely. "Reagan proved that deficits don't matter" Giggitty Giggitty!

Government deficits crowd out private investment, in part because of the safety of government debt.

My point is, it isn't fair to say that Obama's policies represent a continuation of that policy, since we haven't seen what he'd about deficits during a boom.

The natural inclination of government is to seek out new resources and expand its "competance." So what matters is the incentives that government types face; they're like any other economic actor.

[Seward]

cunnivore,

And most Democrats voted for the Patriot Act and the Iraq War Authorization.

[Mo]

No I see up to 4 million people coming to party for three days in a city that normally has 600,000 in a post 9-11 environment.

Dude, the Secret Service has completely dismissed the idea that 4 million people are coming out and estimating it at half that. While DC's population is 600K, it's daytime population is about 1 million. A doubling of the population, while a bitch, is something that cities deal with on a regular basis* without the aid of the National Guard and Secret Service (which will be present during the inauguration). You are a scaredy cat.

* The Super Bowl, many major college bowls and other special events.

[joe]

You've got a point, cunnivore.

I was thinking in terms of competence and goo-goo, not policy direction.

Seward,

they're like any other economic actor. If you mean that economic incentives are only one of the factors that drive their behavior, which is much more complicated than a simplistic profit-maximizing, Rational Economic Man model would suggest, then I agree.

[joe]

Seward,

Democrats in Congress voted AGAINST the Iraq War authorization by a 58%-42% margin.

[Seward]

Mo,

It is my experience, having watched portions of a few inaugurations, that they are pretty boring.

[Mo]

Seward,
I don't doubt it. I also don't see why John is throwing a hissy fit over this thing. My guess as to the large crowd is the whole "First Black President" thing and less about popularity. Dealing with 2 million cold, bored people should be pretty easy. Yeah, it could be the target of a terrorist attack, but I'm guessing the Secret Service and FBI are doing a lot of monitoring for just that.

[Seward]

joe,

Wow, so Democrats could only muster that many votes?

If you mean that economic incentives are only one of the factors that drive their behavior, which is much more complicated than a simplistic profit-maximizing, Rational Economic Man model would suggest, then I agree.

Given how little that fact is discussed in our political discourse I'd say that it is an extremely important factor actually. Look for the unseen, to paraphrase Bastiat. And of course things like public choice theory, the Baptists and Bootleggers notion, etc. are something that neither conservatives nor modern day liberals who are politically active talk much about. It's all about the "vision" to help people, or make America safe, or protect our children, etc.

[Seward]

joe,

Indeed, I'll go even farther, I cannot think of any single piece of legislation that cannot in major part be explained by notions like concentrated winners and dispersed losers.

[Seward]

Mo,

Will Obama have a poet speaking about his inauguration? Bush didn't have one in 2001 as I recall.

[Seward]

Of course I could just be overly cynical. 🙂

But I think not.

[BDB]

John, it almost sounds like you're rooting for riots.

[BDB]

Katrina? Really? There are going to be power outages, flooding, and looting? Uh, ok.

[LGF Fan 11/4/08]

THERE WILL BE RIOTS IN GRANT PARK!!! RIOTS!!

[phalkor]

I will be in the desolate wasteland known as Pittsburgh during the inaguration. I cannot comprehend why anyone would flock to DC for this event. On the other hand I do understand why people would flock to a city for a superbowl or times square for new years. Maybe I'm stupidly optimistic, but this event doesn't seem out of line with any other major crowd event and things will probably be just fine.

whoever said there will be a sexual assualt, that's a statistical thing. it's like saying there will be a murder in Baltimore, or it will rain in Pittsburgh, or the Steelers will win the Superbowl, all extremely probable.

on another note, fuck you kevin gilbride, your play calling blows.

[The Angry Optimist]

The John-bashing on the security topic is getting pretty stupid. It is best to plan for the worst-case scenario, especially since people have so much "faith and hope" in the incoming President. A terrorist strike or riots would seriously demoralize the country.

[BDB]

TAO, terrorists strike when we least expect it not when we do.

Tell me what was the special symbolism of September 11th before the attacks? Nothing. It was just a regular day. That's WHY they attacked on it and not the Fourth of July, because our guard would be down.

[The Angry Optimist]

Katrina? Really? There are going to be power outages, flooding, and looting? Uh, ok.

BDB, come on. You know what he's saying.

[BDB]

No, I don't. I think a natural disaster and a planned event are two *very* different things.

[Seward]

Alright, well have a good day folks.

[joe]

It is my experience, having watched portions of a few inaugurations, that they are pretty boring.

I was at the 1993 Inauguration. I use the term "at" loosely, as I was so far away that I couldn't see the jumbo screen - but I needed a ticket to be there!

Yep, boring as all hell. I zoned out, only to come back in the middle of Maya Angelou's poem.

"Mastadons? What the hell? Weren't they just talking about health care?"

[phalkor]

unless you think Barack Obama is a natural disaster...

[The Angry Optimist]

You can believe what you like, BDB. 9/11 as a random date is not proof that terrorists will only strike when we least expect it. Assuming terrorists are rational, they will maximize the amount of terror they can inflict.

The shock of 9/11 worked to serve that, as would say, a random bomb in a Mall in the middle of Kansas, but a strike in the nation's capital on inauguration day would be terrifically symbolic.

[BDB]

I don't know about anyone else, but I'm goign to bookmark this thread for next week just to laugh at John's predictions of riots and looting.

[The Angry Optimist]

BDB -

DC Government = NOLA Government pre-Katrina. Potential disaster, failure to care or plan.

This is not hard.

[BDB]

TAO, they are more likely to strike on random dates because there is a greater chance of success. Security is going to be higher and more alert during things like the Superbowl, New Years, Inauguration Day, etc, while it won't be on a random workday during the non-holiday season.

[John]

AO,

It would be a disaster. Terrible for the country. Anyone who thinks that the danger of terror doesn't exist because the FBI and USSS has control of it, is dellusional. The problem is that DC is looking at this thing like the 4th of July or an ordinary innauguration. It is not. It is historic and people want to see it. The DC government has no plans to deal with that many people. They also have no way to deal with a three day event versus a one day normal event. If this were just going to be an innauguration, I would feel a lot better about it. It would be gridlock and chaos but nothing worse than Marti Gras and only one day long. It is the adding of two extra days and having people live in buses for days that makes this crazy. I am not the only one who is concerned. But politically, thanks to people like Joe and the people on this thread, those warning are not being thought through. Hopefully, we will get lucky and nothing will happen and people like Joe can continue to live in a stupor.

[Certain Unnamed Cardinals]

No one expects the Spanish Inauguration!

[joe]

Wow, so Democrats could only muster that many votes?

Did you live in this country in the year after 9/11?

I cannot think of any single piece of legislation that cannot in major part be explained by notions like concentrated winners and dispersed losers.. And Marxists can't think of any legislation that can't be explained by notions like the ruling class protecting its interests against the proletariat. When you're a hammer...

[John]

"I don't know about anyone else, but I'm goign to bookmark this thread for next week just to laugh at John's predictions of riots and looting."

I hope your right. But of course you don't get paid to worry about shit like this, so it is okay for you to think like that. The problem is that there are a lot of people who get paid not to and are.

[joe]

Yeah yeah yeah, John, "rought men who stand on the" blah blah blah. You're a fucking clear-eyed god, and everyone else is just soft.

Been there. Done that. Don't intend to let the self-absorbtion of fantasists impress me anymore.

[BDB]

Well, if you're in security, you're trained to expect the absolute worst that could happen so yeah, no wonder you assume it will be Katrina.

Still, there were things present during Katrina that will not happen at the Inauguration (unless there's a surprise hurricane in the Chesapeake Bay--in January.

Namely:

*Flooding
*Power outages
*Lack of food and water

[BDB]

I also listened to the breathless predictions of how Obama supporters would riot on election night and it would be like 1968 all over again blah blah blah.

[John]

Yeah Joe,

It is facist to think and plan for bad things that might happen. It is facist to worry about the safety of the people who come to this thing. You have to be one of the dumbest peopel I have ever meet or seen.

[joe]

Were there riots and looting on the streets of Mahattan when the rail system shut down on 9/11? That was an actual disaster.

[John]

"I also listened to the breathless predictions of how Obama supporters would riot on election night and it would be like 1968 all over again blah blah blah."

It is not about Obama supporters. It is about millions of people drinking and partying in one area for days at a time and in a city who refuse to beleive anything can ever go wrong with a crowd. It is people like you who think planning is political that are the problem.

[BDB]

"Were there riots and looting on the streets of Mahattan when the rail system shut down on 9/11? "

Or during the power outages in New York earlier this decade, for that matter.

[BDB]

"It is about millions of people drinking and partying in one area for days at a time "

Uh, John, cities host the Olympics all the time. They last two weeks!

[joe]

I never wrote "facist." Hell, I didn't even write "fascist."

I've been pretty clear that the adjectives in question are "stupid" and "paranoid."

Preparing for the worst is one thing; you're predicting it. You're predicting that the presence of a large, happy crowd there to celebrate the electoral victory of a politician you like is going to end in riots and disaster.

BTW, do you really think that your habit of writing that I am not only wrong, but a uniquely stupid individual, is going to make your comments look any less hysterical and politicized?

[P Brooks]

"Deficits don't matter."

"Bleeding" will cure you. Except when it doesn't.

[John]

Joe,

Crowds are very dangerous things. Go ask the guy at Wall Mart the day after Thanksgiving. Go ask the people at The Who Concert in 1979. Those were happy fun events.

[joe]

Or, rather, a politician you don't like.

[The Angry Optimist]

Was Katrina really all that much of a surprise? I seem to remember that there were a couple of days where the path was predicted towards New Orleans.

[BDB]

"Go ask the guy at Wall Mart the day after Thanksgiving"

Sure, one underpaid temp security guard is totally the same thing as the Secret Service, Capitol Police, FBI, Washington Police Department, the National Guard...

[P Brooks]

I love the Golden Oldies.

9/11 9/11 9/11 9/11 9/11 9/11 9/11 9/11 9/11 9/11 9/11 9/11 9/11 9/11 9/11 9/11 9/11 9/11 9/11 9/11 9/11 9/11 9/11 9/11!!!111111!!

[joe]

Oh, look, John and the 1% Doctrine. Applied to domestic crowd control.

How nice.

So...how many Inaugural Riots have occured in American history?

[John]

"Uh, John, cities host the Olympics all the time. They last two weeks!"

those are planned for years not weeks and they are not held in DC. DC is one of the most incompetant local governments in the world.

[BDB]

"those are planned for years not weeks"

Washington had been expecting to hold an inauguration on January 20th, 2009 since at least January 20th, 2005.

[joe]

Yeah, what would Washington DC know about hosting large political events?

Um...

[BDB]

Like the feds won't be there too, John?

[P Brooks]

THERE WILL BE RIOTS IN GRANT PARK!!! RIOTS!!

You know how *them* people are; one short step out of teh JUNGLE.

[BDB]

Seriously, I'm bookmarking this thread. This is at least as good as the B girl thread.

[John]

"Sure, one underpaid temp security guard is totally the same thing as the Secret Service, Capitol Police, FBI, Washington Police Department, the National Guard..."

The Guard will be unarmed and completely unable to respond to anything. The SS only cares about the President. The FBI is there to clean up any federal crimes. They will not and cannot have large numbers of people on the street. The MPD can barely control Washington on a normal day. The capital police can only act on the mall and surrounding areas, not the entire district. More importantly, what are any of them going to do if something bad happens and the crowd spooks? Run for their lives is what. Chances are we will get lucky and nothing will happen. But that will be only because we got lucky not because we were realistic or planned for anything.

[joe]

Dammit, BDB!

I've been waiting for an opportune moment to write "...and then they'll carve Bs on people's faces" for an hour!

[John]

"Washington had been expecting to hold an inauguration on January 20th, 2009 since at least January 20th, 2005."

They were planning for the normal one day 1/2 million innauguration. Not this one. Like I said, if it were one day, I wouldn't be so worried.

[BDB]

They're not bringing in manpower from the suburban police departments? That usually happens during big events.

[joe]

Remember all the hysteria about the similarly-sized March for Life?

Or the anti-war demonstrations?

But something about an Obama inaugural crowd is uniquely frightening.

[P Brooks]

If Queeg had been elected, nobody would even have bothered to show up. Nobody who doesn't wear matching white belts and shoes, anyway.

Hence, the world would have been a safer place.

[John]

What is the other side of that BDB? If something bad happens, will you still bookmark this thread or pretend it didn't happen? I know Joe will say something stupid and blame it on Bush. You sometimes are more serious than that.

[BDB]

For that matter, where were the riots at the Million Man March?

[The Angry Optimist]

But something about an Obama inaugural crowd is uniquely frightening.

Knock it off, joe.

[P Brooks]

the crowd spooks

D'OH!

[Kolohe]

DC Government = NOLA Government pre-Katrina

This isn't the 80's; the DC govt, while not an exemplar of competence, is still better than it used to be. And they (i.e. the combined police forces of the MPD, Park Police, Capitol police, WMATA police, FBI, Secret Service, and a few others) have always been good where it counted: where tourists and/or white people are at.

This isn't the first inauguration the district's had. This isn't even the first one since 9/11.

Now, I do agree that if I was still living in the DC area, I would avoid downtown like the plague. I've been to both an inauguration and to a Time's Square ball drop. I concur with the assessments of others: both are cold, crowded and boring.

[BDB]

It's worth noting even in 1980s NYC they didn't have riots at the ball drop.

[joe]

TAO,

Explain something to me: why do people like you get more upset about the fact that I've pointed out the implication of John's thinking, than about his repeatedly making the same point?

[domoarrigato]

I went to Reagans lying-in-state. There was a huge crowd. I remember thinking that it would be really cool to sneak under the casket and prop old Ronnie up real fast. That probably would have sparked a stampede...

Unfort the Marine guard gave me a dirty look and instead I just walked by slowly.

[Taktix?]

Ain't no party like my Nana's tea party,
Hey, Ho...

[BDB]

I predict that there will be a few random assholes at the inauguration (some DUIs, a few random fights at 3 am) and certain blogs will scream about what a horrible disaster it was but the MSM of course is covering it up.

[The Angry Optimist]

I'm not upset; you're attributing malevolent and vicious motives to John for no reason.

I recommend you both let it go. What ever happens, happens.

[The Spanish Inauguration]

Amongst our weaponry are such diverse elements as fear, surprise, ruthless efficiency, an almost fanatical devotion to the Obama, and nice red uniforms!

[John]

I hope BDB and Joe are right. Unlike them, I am going to be right in the middle of this thing and will bear the brunt of the consiqeunces if bad things do happen. I have every reason to hope everything goes perfect. It is not about Obama being elected. It is about the world politcal environment and the size of the crowd and the total lack of planning on the part of the government. Joe and BDB don't know anything about what is actually happening on the ground so instead of making real points just call me names and question my motives. I would have to literally be suicidal to hope things go wrong.

[domoarrigato]

my take: life is like that. People predicting doom and gloom all the time, and always wrong. Then once in a great while something bad happens - 911, stock market crash, Reagan stampede. and whoever predicted it goes on the talk show circuit and cashes in. I look at dire predictions like a lottery ticket - costs you little as long as you don't pin your career on it - maybe it pays off! I make non serious dire predictions about non-economic stuff all the time now, its a great conversation starter. John I know your just doing your job, and your probably right about the government being stupid and ineffective - but then, thats kind of how government works, right? Try joining the private sector if you don't like dealing with complacent idiots. At least then you'll get motivated idiots.

[BDB]

I didn't question you're motives, John. I questioned your assumptions, but not you're motives.

[Mo]

Was Katrina really all that much of a surprise? I seem to remember that there were a couple of days where the path was predicted towards New Orleans.

Are you serious or playing dumb? It was not the expected landfall of the hurricane that led to chaos, it was the unexpected collapse of the levees and flooding that led to the chaos.

They've spent months planning for a larger than expected, longer than expected inauguration. Crowd control is hardly a new concept. There have been large events before and they're usually handled.

I do find it funny that John says the people handling the situation are incompetent boobs and that he should know, he's one of the people handling the situation.

[joe]

you're attributing malevolent and vicious motives to John for no reason.

No, not his motives, his perceptions.

I think he really believes this stuff. I think he really considers a million Obamaphiles to be much, much more dangerous than a million "Real Americans."

[BDB]

And this isn't because the D.C. government is a model of good government. It's because as long as people have food and water, and there's a reasonable show of police protection, they're usually don't act like jackasses. Especially at an event where they're happy.

[Mo]

I think BDB hits the nail on the head on the big difference between the reaction in NY and NOLA. In NY, people were scared, so they went somewhere safe and comfy. They knew they had access to food, clean water and electricity. In NOLA there was a lack of all of those things. In DC, though the crowd will be big, there will be no lack of food, water or safe shelter, no matter what happens*, so they will be relatively ruly.

* I assume there will be no nuclear attack. This would be a clusterfuck, inauguration or no.

[Jordan]

If President Hopey really was for "Change!", he'd cancel this coronation ceremony. I guess wasting taxpayer money is all he knows how to do though. Hope and Change!

[BDB]

And again, The Million Man March. Where were the riots? And those people were pissed off, not celebrating.

[John]

"Are you serious or playing dumb? It was not the expected landfall of the hurricane that led to chaos, it was the unexpected collapse of the levees and flooding that led to the chaos."

Why did it lead to chaos? Becuase NOLA and LA refused to plan for that contingency. They had had hurricanes before and that didn't happen so they figured why plan for it now. The DC government is thinking they have done innaugurals before and nothing happened, why plan for anything bad now? See the similiarity. No one is thinking or planning for worse case. It is never wrong to be prepared for worse case. If it comes off as Joe and BDB think it will, everyone sits around and does nothing great. But if it doesn't, you might want to be prepared for that. But whenever you mention that fact, you get people like Joe and BDB saying you just hate Obama.

[BDB]

"Joe and BDB saying you just hate Obama."

Where did I say that? I said you're assuming the worst because (If I'm getting you) you're in the security profession. They train you for the worst case scenario, every time to the point where it influences your thinking.

[LurkerBold]

Joe spotted the racism before me. I hang my head in Progressive shame.

[Taktix?]

John's irrational fear of the Obama Inagurapalooza sounds an awful lot like the "Obama is the Anti-Christ" garbage coming from the likes of Big Hollywood, et al.

I'm pretty sure most major cities, including D.C., are fairly capable of handling large crowds. I say this because only they do it ALL THE FUCKING TIME.

I don't agree with Obama any more than the next rational, thinking human, but this doomsday hyperbole isn't helping anyone...

[joe]

Shifty John:

Further, I don't think it is a plan to expect people to live in buses for days with no LE coverage and not expect something bad to happen. As sure as God exists there is going to be a sexual assault or worse in that bus compound. It is a disaster waiting to happen.

It is never wrong to be prepared for worse case. If it comes off as Joe and BDB think it will, everyone sits around and does nothing great. But if it doesn't, you might want to be prepared for that. But whenever you mention that fact, you get people like Joe and BDB saying you just hate Obama.

So, is John saying that having this many people attend an inauguration is itself a disaster, or that a disaster might happen?

I guess it depends on where you pick up the thread.

[Mo]

See the similiarity. No one is thinking or planning for worse case. It is never wrong to be prepared for worse case. If it comes off as Joe and BDB think it will, everyone sits around and does nothing great.

That's bull the NG and the Secret Service are there specifically in case the worst happens. Either to thwart it or to manage the situation afterward. Considering the fact that inaugurations are when the federal government is most vulnerable, you'd better believe they're ready for the worst.

You're not some sort of Nietzschean superman. It's not the case that everyone is a moron except for you.

[The Angry Optimist]

Suddenly, libertarians find faith in Washington's ability to be ready!

Amazing.

[joe]

I say this because only they do it ALL THE FUCKING TIME.

DC hosts crowds in excess of a half million every year.

[torpid]

I'm with John on this one. We've seen how the blacks get when their team wins the NBA Championship, one can only imagine what will happen when their co-racial takes hold of the presidency.

[Seamus]

Still, there were things present during Katrina that will not happen at the Inauguration (unless there's a surprise hurricane in the Chesapeake Bay--in January.

Namely:

*Flooding
*Power outages
*Lack of food and water

On the other hand, blizzards have been known to hit D.C. in January. 1966 comes to mind. (Oh, wait, that's not going to happen again, cuz of global warming. Sorry I mentioned it.)

[torpid]

Mark my words, DC on Jan. 21 will look like Detroit the day after the Lions win the Super Bowl.

[P Brooks]

"your just doing your job, and your probably right"

"I didn't question you're motives, John. I questioned your assumptions, but not you're motives."

*sighs, bangs head on desk*

[BDB]

"The Angry Optimist | January 13, 2009, 11:58am | #
Suddenly, libertarians find faith in Washington's ability to be ready!
"

No, I have faith in the ability of normal human beings not to be total assholes when they have food, water, and shelter.

[BDB]

P Brooks, what are you trying to say?

[P Brooks]

What would I say if teh BOOGEYMEN detonated a dirty bomb in DC during the Ascension?

It might sound something like, "WOOOHOOOOOO!"

[Mo]

Suddenly, libertarians find faith in Washington's ability to be ready!

If there's one thing the government is good at, it's self-preservation. Considering that almost the entire presidential line of succession is present at the inauguration, I'm assuming they'll run a tight ship.

[joe]

A terrorist attack or other disaster happening to DC is a remote possibility for the 20th, just as it in every other day.

The problem is the assumption that a large crowd of Obama supporters is, itself, a disaster.

The worst thing that's likely to happen on Inauguration Day is a shortage of port-a-potties. Which is bad enough by itself, but doesn't quite get the juices flowing.

Sorry about that last image.

[John]

"So, is John saying that having this many people attend an inauguration is itself a disaster, or that a disaster might happen?"

Planning for the worse is having cops patrol that bus parking lot so people feel safe. Planning for the worse is not letting any busses in there until Monday. Planning for the worse is limiting the number of people in the mall to a million or so, so that you can have a realistic plan to evacuate the mall if something happens. Those are the things that are not happening.

As far as the USS and FBI planning for the worst, you people on on crack. The USS is there to protect the President. If anything bad happens, they will get him out of there and leave. FBI is not equiped and does not have the mission to directly respond to a terrorist attack or a civil disturbance. They just investigate. The state and locals are the first line on that stuff. It amazes me how childlike people are in their faith in government.

[James Ard]

Alright, already. Time for ya'll to put your money where your mouths are. If everything goes splendidly, joe and BDB win and if things go whacky, John wins. I predict that the traffic mess alone will piss off enough locals to create some unrest.

[BDB]

"I predict that the traffic mess alone will piss off enough locals to create some unrest."

Dude, traffic mess pissing off people is EVERY DAY in the D.C. suburbs!

[P Brooks]

That was just my inner grammar nazi thrashing to the surface, BDB.

[John]

There is no way to evacuate the mall in any reasonable or orderly manner if the crowd is much above a million. It is just impossible. That is why you need to limit the crowd. To let it get above a million is just to hope for the best and that nothing bad happens. I think the government owes its people better than that.

[cunnivore]

My bet will be that joe thinks everything went splendidly and John thinks it went whackily.

[James Ard]

BDB, the mess will be that no traffic is allowed and everybody will have to walk everywhere.

[P Brooks]

Planning for the worse is limiting the number of people in the mall to a million or so, so that you can have a realistic plan to evacuate the mall if something happens.

But what about the strip searches? Will there be film?

[LurkerBold]

If everything goes splendidly, joe and BDB win and if things go whacky, John wins.

What about me?

There is no way to evacuate the mall in any reasonable or orderly manner if the crowd is much above a million.

If we had invested in a robust poublic transportation infrastructure you would not be able to say that.

[torpid]

In any crowd of a million people, there are over 500,000 women, and 50,000 of them are having PMS. I'm with John.

[James Ard]

BDB, best that we write up some earmarks to help the important people get around quicker.

[Taktix?]

Mark my words, DC on Jan. 21 will look like Detroit the day after the Lions win the Super Bowl.

So the world's going to end on Jan 20th?

I don't understand...

[BDB]

"James Ard | January 13, 2009, 12:12pm | #
BDB, best that we write up some earmarks to help the important people get around quicker."

HA!

[BDB]

I'm not saying there won't be pissed of locals or some stupid drunk people, but it's not going to be 9/11 or Katrina.

[Taktix?]

What would I say if teh BOOGEYMEN detonated a dirty bomb in DC during the Ascension?

Exactly. Bush's greatest achivement is that I am numb to this fear-mongering bullshit. Hopefully, I'm not the only one...

[Rudy Giuliani]

Did someone say 9/11!?

[Seward]

joe,

And Marxists can't think of any legislation that can't be explained by notions like the ruling class protecting its interests against the proletariat.

Well, in the case of public choice economics it is actually born out by the well, data. Which is why public choice economics is not discredited and is part of the mainstream of economic thought and Marxist economics is. Keep those low and slow meat pitches coming there joe.

[Seward]

joe,

Did you live in this country in the year after 9/11?

Sure. Indeed, wasn't the authorization vote just about after the first anniversary of that event? Not quite sure why that excuses either the Patriot Act or the Iraq War Authorization though.

[Seward]

I always find it rather odd how so many modern liberals want to put all these controls on how people give money to candidates then they run directly away from the central insights of public choice economics.

[joe]

Ah, the magic "date" invocation. You know, the kind that doesn't provide any data.

No one's questioning that the public choice problem exists; but then, the wealthy using the government to advance their interests exists, too.

It's the fundamentalist insistence that it explains everything that makes your statement worthy of mockery.

[Seward]

joe,

And that should read Marxist economics is discredited, just to clear up my language a bit.

[joe]

Sure. Indeed, wasn't the authorization vote just about after the first anniversary of that event? Not quite sure why that excuses either the Patriot Act or the Iraq War Authorization though.

Um, the USA PATRIOT ACT passed within two months of 9/11, and the IRAQ WAR authorization vote was just about one year after 9/11.

You're SURE you lived in this country during the year after 9/11?

[LurkerBold]

Joe, are you finally admitting again that the corporations run everything and we need to keep more programmes in the government?

[joe]

And that should read Marxist economics is discredited

That's nice, but the Marxist insight that the wealthy use the governmentn to protect their interests isn't actually an economic insight, but a sociological and political one, and has in fact stood up pretty well.

[LurkerBold]

That's nice, but the Marxist insight that the wealthy use the governmentn to protect their interests isn't actually an economic insight, but a sociological and political one, and has in fact stood up pretty well.

Right on Joe!

The Marxists were the beginning, the Progressives are the future.

[LurkerBold]

I haven't written a comment on this thread yet. Stop spoofing me!

[Seward]

joe,

Magic dates?

I really see no reason to defend the Democratic congresscritters in the main during the Bush administration.

It's the fundamentalist insistence that it explains everything that makes your statement worthy of mockery.

Yet I didn't insist that it explains everything, did I? I very clearly used qualifying language which insisted that it didn't explain everything.

[LurkerBold]

Yes, I have! Cut that out, joe!

[LurkerBold]

So the fake wakes at 12:34 today?

[Seward]

joe,

That isn't a Marxist insight, it is at least a Madisonian one. Though Madison expanded to all strata of society who could get the costs associated with, well, association.

Actually, I'm wrong even there; it is in fact really, an insight from the Scottish Enlightenment; Smith, Ferguson, David Hume, etc. It may even be older than that. So, wrong again.

[joe]

Yet I didn't insist that it explains everything, did I?

Hmmm, let's go to the tape:

Seward | January 13, 2009, 10:37am | #

joe,

Indeed, I'll go even farther, I cannot think of any single piece of legislation that cannot in major part be explained by notions like concentrated winners and dispersed losers.

You're right, you only wrote that it explains every piece of legislation.

[Seward]

joe,

BTW, you'll find that Marx "borrows" heavily from Smith; that even includes Marx's notions of a society which changes based on its method of economic exchange.

[Seward]

joe,

As a parting shot I'd just note how nicely the observations of Smith and Madison and Marx's odd adoption of Smith's view all dovetail with public choice theory.

[joe]

Retreat into errata.

I wouldn't want to argue with my actual point, either.

Adopting an unwarranted tone of superiority is so much easier than trying to argue that fundie libertarianism is distinct from every other kind of fundamentalism, and doesn't assert a universal application of its central insights that extends to shoehorning every event into a pre-set narrative while dismissing competing narratives.

You don't have to run away from an adopted tone and pretend you never engaged in such a ploy.

[Seward]

joe,

Well, as that is the case it would be pretty easy to prove me wrong, woudln't? Surely there is one piece of legislation out there where all or most of its provisions can be explained by pure altruism? I don't think anyone who actually experienced the sausage making process involved in legislation or regulation would disagree with me though.

[bigbigslacker]

But something about an Obama inaugural crowd is uniquely frightening.

Aside from the fact these will largely be people stupid enough to have voted for Obama, any inaugural crowd is frightening. "My guy won. Hurray fur us! I feel soooo part of it! This is history"

Loser weirdos with so little going on in their lives they can split for a few days so they can clap their hands together and cheer in unison. Awesome. Where do I sign up. I so want to feel part of something special.

The kids making the 150 foot artwork have an excuse - they're kids.

People with lives will be staying home to retile the bathroom, or work in their (frozen) gardens, maybe even have sex.

Now, if Ron Paul had won, that would be different...

[Seward]

joe,

Oh jeez. I could pretty clearly make the same argument about you. You are a fundamentalist modern liberal. Your views are clouded by your ideology. Etc. That way basically lies sterility in discussion.

Adopting an unwarranted tone of superiority...

Tones are in the eye of the beholder; as such, its pretty useless to make arguments about them.

[John]

bigbigslacker,

Aside from VIPS who will be well away from the crowd, only a nut or a dellusional idiot like Joe would come to this thing. It is a terrible confluence of self entitlement (I want to see history and you can't stop me) and child like faith in the government's ability to take care of people.

[bigbigslacker]

BTW, if anyone with low self-esteem wants to feel like they have a real life, I'll pay ya $100 to come re-tile my bathroom.

[stuartl]

If we had invested in a robust poublic transportation infrastructure you would not be able to say that.

As opposed to the huge money hole that is the DC Metro.

Don't get me wrong, I appreciate the rest of the country providing me easy access to the city. Thanks!

[LurkerBold]

Aside from the fact these will largely be people stupid enough to have voted for Obama, any inaugural crowd is frightening. "My guy won. Hurray fur us! I feel soooo part of it! This is history"

Sore loser?

And I see you like to exploit workers. No shock there. Try calling the union and get some workers who care about their work and you're bathroom!

[Paul]

It's a bit disconcerting to have a president that people like.

Give it time, joe, give it time.

[Paul]

Yeah, what would Washington DC know about hosting large political events?

Look how the bailout's going. Is that not a large political event?

[LurkerBold]

I guess many of you will not be happy until you see something like this here.

[John]

"I guess many of you will not be happy until you see something like this here."

that is a fake picture. Everyone in the entire world loves Obama and now by extension loves the US for electing him. There is no way anyone other than a few rightwing dead ender lunatics are burning his picture.

[LurkerBold]

Jon, it is obvious that they are clutching their religion too tightly.

[LurkerBold]

It must be a real picture. I saw it on the internet.

[Pro Libertate]

A core American value is to distrust and be wary of politicians. When that value seems to be fading, I worry about our future. Obama is just another iteration of this brand of faith-based politics. If only you believe enough in him, all your wishes will come true.

I read that some Iranians did, in fact, burn an Obama picture. They did that not because of any particular Obama animus, but so that they could yell, "First!"

[Seward]

stuartl,

More to the point, over the past ten to fifteen years we've seen dramatic growth in the level of money allocated to roads and other like projects. Despite all the hand wringing about the state of our transportation system it is flush with oodles of federal dollars.

[Mo]

I read that some Iranians did, in fact, burn an Obama picture. They did that not because of any particular Obama animus, but so that they could yell, "First!"

So now that Iranians are becoming more like blog commenters, can an Iranian DONDEROOOOOOOO or Lonewacko be far behind?

[joe]

Surely there is one piece of legislation out there where all or most of its provisions can be explained by pure altruism?

Surely, you understand that there are more options for explaining support for legislation than "altruism" and "public choice theory."

And by "surely" I mean "Is there any possible hope that..."

[Seward]

joe,

And surely you must imagine that I am not claiming - and never have - that those are the only sources of such desires. Nevertheless, I've observed that altruism in some form is the main way that politicians describe their policy proposals.

The universal I have claimed is this: that legislation always has in significant part (or, rather major part) concentrated beneficiaries (with all that this entails about lobbying, etc.). Maybe you ought to stick to attacking that.

As I noted above, the fact that modern liberals are so up in arms about campaign finances probably demonstrates my point better than anything, BTW.

BTW, something I forgot to mention earlier re: your comment on Marx was this: that libertarians acknowledge that the rich (and other stratas) of society will and do use government for their own benefit (and vice versa). That's one of the reasons why libertarians dislike large governments. Because large governments are the home of business cartelization; we see this today throughout Europe and the U.S. Monopolistic practices, keeping down competitors, hindering innovation, etc. these are all the practices associated with large governments and the beneficiaries of those governments.

[SIV]

Mike G. | January 13, 2009, 9:19am | #
Giving Lonewacko a hat tip is like giving Hitler the Sudetenland.

Mike G FTW!

I'm not reading any further as there is too much troll after that.

[-]

what a crock of shit this bastard is

[JW]

I just read this thread from the bottom up. It's a helluva lot more interesting waiting to see what everyone is all riled up over....

And for the record, I'll be home, snugged in and not even thinking about going into to DC, ignoring the ceremony, and thinking about how cool a 3-day work week is.