Obama to accept unlimited corporate money for inauguration

Considering the problems that we’re facing today, this is a very poor way to start a second term.  Keep in mind that those donors, who are the least in need, such as Wall Street CEOs, are actively lobbying to gut the social system. They shouldn’t be be involved in the inauguration.  Sure they’re accepting mild tax increases but for them, it’s an easy price to pay. Too easy, really.

While I wouldn’t blame Obama for the runaway greed of the Moocher Class, he’s done very little to stop it.

Now we have the problem of Democrats including Obama reportedly ready to accept another painfully bad dealwith the Moocher Class. If true, it stinks as

us capitol building inauguration

Capitol via Shutterstock.

much as the the piddly Dodd-Frank Wall Street reform following the 2008 meltdown. It’s something, but hardly what anyone would expect following such a crisis.

The economic situation today is not a result of the middle class and poor. The problems that we face today are primarily a result of wars that we didn’t need or could afford, plus radical tax cuts that we couldn’t afford. The financial benefits of recent decades has all gone to the corporate elite and it’s not even close.

So to read that Obama is going to accept unlimited corporate cash for his second inauguration, apologies in advance if I’m not impressed. It’s more of the same from the president who promised change, but has been too much about staying the course.

Is this the change anyone voted for?

President Barack Obama will accept unlimited corporate contributions to help finance his 2013 inauguration, a shift from 2009, when corporate funding was barred and per-person donations were capped at $50,000.

The president’s inaugural committee made the decision, which was first reported by Politico, because, they said, contributions from individuals alone would not raise enough to cover the price tag of all the events.

“Our goal is to make sure that we will meet the fundraising requirements for this civic event after the most expensive presidential campaign in history,” Addie Whisenant, spokesperson for the Presidential Inauguration Committee, said in a statement.

Maybe it’s just me, but people who need such expensive, flashy events look so fragile and weak. If you need this to boost your ego, grow up. If it’s not about someone’s delicate ego, I’m at a loss for why it’s so important.


An American in Paris, France. BA in History & Political Science from Ohio State. Provided consulting services to US software startups, launching new business overseas that have both IPO’d and sold to well-known global software companies. Currently launching a new cloud-based startup. Full bio here.

Share This Post

  • Ford Prefect

    It was this line, which is often used to draw false equivalencies in order to smear critics:

    If it were Romney, how many of the inauguration critics here would have spoken up?

    That line suggests we don’t care about Romney’s corruption and thusly are being somehow disingenuous in criticizing Obama. O-bots think simply putting Romney’s name in a sentence somehow justifies anything Obama does. As in:

    “It’s all okay because… Romney!”

  • JohnKeahey

    Believe I said : “I don’t like what Obama is doing for his inauguration either . . .”. Where do you get that I feel “it’s perfectly okay for Obama to do it as well”?

  • samizdat

    I wrote in Pfc. Bradley Manning, and then voted for him. Fuck Drone-bama!

    Hell, Drone-bama is even more of a blood-sucking whore than your hero GW Bush…or is your hero that sage of the libertarian intelligentsia (lol), Ron Paul?

  • samizdat

    The Community Reinvestment Act canard? Really? LOL!

  • jomicur

    Incredible, just fucking incredible. He’ll dun them for money for ritzy parties to stroke his ego and schmooze his super-rich friends, but he won’t fight for severe tax hikes on them to keep the country afloat. Now we have to wait and see which far-right evangelist he invites to speak. I hope the mass of suckers who voted for President Obomney are happy with what they’re getting.

  • ezpz

    Not even so lite, just more articulate.

  • A reader in Colorado

    I agree with everyone else: Skip the inauguration, say the oath, do the bare minimum required,, and go back to work.

    Having a party while the American people are suffering, with the intent to inflict more suffering, is obscene.

    And if he or the White House staff want a party, they can do pot luck on their own dime and right out of their own pockets. That’s what real Americans do.

  • A reader in Colorado

    Because caviar and foi gras is expensive.

  • Max_1

    Especially AFTER the election…

  • Max_1

    Choosing the lesser of two evils again…
    … Ignoring the other choice; THE GREATER GOOD!

    Keep defending Bush lite…

  • Max_1

    Or the first time around…

  • Ford Prefect

    (Laughing, he reaches for the fire extinguisher which is always at his side)

  • A reader in Colorado

    You really, really do. In fact, every time I think of you, I think of someone whose hair is on fire. :D

  • Ford Prefect

    It would work if Wal-Mart provided healthcare to their workers, eh? But with 1/3 of their workers on public assistance, that seems like a low-probability way of getting healthcare, much less putting food on the table!

    You’re right though, I AM being overly dramatic. It’s not like denying healthcare to people ever killed them, right? Especially the 80,000 who die for that very reason each year!

    I tell ya, I really go overboard sometimes.

  • A reader in Colorado

    It’s not killing old people. It’s simply not giving them any medical care unless they’re rich enough to afford Obamacare, or poor enough and properly located, or until they turn, like near 70. After all, near 70 year olds don’t need medical care. Stop overdramatizing.

    You make it like Obama wants to kill old people. He doesn’t want that, he just wants a modest waiting period for near 70 year olds to get any medical care.

  • A reader in Colorado

    Yep.

  • Ford Prefect

    Many, many likes!

    It sucks being right, sometimes.

  • A reader in Colorado

    Many people said he was a corporate stooge before the election. Many people wet the bed about deliberately conjured evil kewpie doll Romney.

    So, this is what you voted for. This is what you asked for. This is what you asked people to vote for, corporate greed and control without limit. This is what, in fact, you supported. And you were told in advance this would happen.

    The people who said that the election would free the liberal bluebird of happiness that was supposedly Obama’s heart were wrong. The Obama administration is an administration of corporate stoogery. Many people said there would be no stopping the avalanche of Republicanesque droppings from the Obama administration after the election. Many people were right about that.

    And until the bed stops being wet, until people stop playing terror games with party kewpie dolls, it’ll get worse and worse. It can only get worse.

  • nicho

    Nice try. That Fox talking point has been debunked over and over and over.

  • http://adgitadiaries.com/ karmanot

    pitty

  • http://adgitadiaries.com/ karmanot

    ditto and very like.

  • http://adgitadiaries.com/ karmanot

    Is certainly giving old Clinton a run for the money.

  • Ford Prefect

    Oh sure he does! He knows how to throw the elderly, disabled, poor and children under the bus! He’s quite proud of his talent for those cutbacks!

  • Sweetie

    Who the f cares?

    A crook’s a crook.

  • Ford Prefect

    Indeed. Of course, what’s missing from the discourse is how this entire phony “crisis” is so constrained that the only possible results will be a lose-lose for most people. If Obama and the GOP do what they say they want to do, it means more recession, higher unemployment and the resulting increase in the deficit… which will require more cutting, an even deeper recession and an even higher deficit. Wash, rinse, repeat as needed to turn us all into paupers.

    In the mean time, the wars will continue apace, the war budget will grow accordingly and that will require even deeper cuts to economically productive spending with each round of “fiscal responsibility.”

    Whether it’s raising taxes on “the little people,” or simply raising the retirement age… it’s all a lose-lose. I would be willing to bet that most Americans would prefer a minor tax increase than having to work until they die. So it’s odd that Democrats are the one pushing the most toxic position, that we have to force people to work until they die in order to avoid a minor tax increase! Democrats, it seems, hate the non-rich enough to want to cull the herd.

    Four years from now, methinks the Democratic Party will be largely finished as a broad-based political institution. The corporate front will still be there, but as people watch their family members perish under Obama’s austerity program, they’ll not care much who runs for preznit or any other office. In order to avoid that, MSNBC will really have to ramp up the FEAR thing to 11.

  • Sweetie

    Hey, Becca… Did you know it is clear we must enter an era of austerity?

  • Sweetie

    You mean neoliberal agenda, the same agenda that every president has been pushing for as long as I’ve been alive?

  • Sweetie

    Straw man alert. False equivalency alert. Putting words into people’s mouths that are untrue alert.

  • ezpz

    Many of us did NOT vote for him this time around.

  • ezpz

    lol

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100003386080045 John doe

    The REPs control the house, think of it as the board members controlling the Corp. The REPs are fighting him every step of the way. But finally Boehner looks like him is caving.

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100003386080045 John doe

    Bring it back to the Clinton years, where economic growth was at its highest in 40 years.

  • bytebear

    So, as with the US Budget, Obama doesn’t know how to cut back.

  • SoSuMi

    Thats exactly right. When taxes go up on EVERYONE next year because of Obamacare alone, we’ll see how many of the Obamazombies are still enamored with him and the liberal agenda he’s pushing. Of course, the republicans will take the blame for it, main stream media will push the story and the koolaid drinkers will keep drinking.

  • bytebear

    Is this the Obama you voted for?

  • SoSuMi

    Hate to break this to you but housing policies, insisted upon by democrats, are what brought this country to its knees in 2008, not Bush policies. You need to put down the koolaid and do some reading.

  • SoSuMi

    Funny, he’s relying on evil corporate types, you know, those folks he’s been vilifying for the last 4 years, to fund his lavish inauguration. Just get sworn in and be done with it. Didnt he have a big shindig 4 years ago?

  • nicho

    Please tell me you’re just copying that from Obamabot literature and that you don’t really believe that shit.

  • Ford Prefect

    Hmm. So you’re saying that because Romney would have openly demonstrated his crooked nature, that it’s perfectly okay for Obama to do it as well? That’s a novel argument in favor of official corruption!

  • Naja pallida

    Seems to me, that if he’s already President, he doesn’t need a second inauguration, and he could simply say that out of respect for the economic disaster we’re still mired in, they won’t be wasting time, effort and money with what amounts to nothing more than rich and connected people drinking and partying.

  • ezpz

    Funny you mention that site. I used to be a big fan of that site back in the day – during the Bush years, but then….I had to totally get away from it. I rarely go there, though I did see something the other day that kind of surprised me. Maybe it was the piece you’re referring to. Ugh, now I’ll have to go check. Thanks! ;)

  • Ford Prefect

    Indeed. It’s not like he campaigned on killing old people by raising the Medicare eligibility age. But he’s been clear about wanting to kill old people that way for over a year now. He just doesn’t put it that way. Instead, he cries about not getting enough credit from the NYTimes for wanting to kill old people.

    Karoli, over at Crooks & Liars, is really angry at Jon Chait for his defense of Obama’s own positions. Karoli, of course, is a massive O-bot who simply wouldn’t hear Obama’s own statements about social insurance, prior to the election. Now, of course, she thinks Chait is actually president and HE will be the one to screw her out of the benefits she’s been paying for her whole working life.

    So she’s very mad at Chait, but not the guy who’s been pushing these toxic, murderous policies all along.

  • ezpz

    *If* is the biggest two letter word in the dictionary. Obama won. Romney lost. It’s a straw man argument to say what Romney would or would not have done. Completely irrelevant to this.

  • JohnKeahey

    I don’t like what Obama is doing for his inauguration either, but does anyone really believe Romney would not have done the same thing had he been elected? If it were Romney, how many of the inauguration critics here would have spoken up?

  • ezpz

    ‘Bring it back up’ to WHAT?

    Never mind; you’ll probably c/p the list of ‘accomplishments’ propaganda straight from the 0bama web site. Spare me and save yourself the trouble.

  • fast eddie

    Obama is turning out to be one of the “slickest” crooks is nation has ever seen.And he’s doing it right in front of you,nice going America for voting this buffon into office!!

  • Indigo

    Maybe the Mayan Calendar transition from one galactic age to another is a harbinger of this vast imperial presidency forming before our very eyes?

  • ezpz

    Oy givalt!

  • The Man

    What planet are you on? Obama has failed on every promise he’s made, EVERY one. I suggest you check your facts. Obama is a complete failure in all he has promised. End of story. If he’s our CEO, we’re screwed.

  • ugg_ugg

    I honestly believe these
    Corporate donors are doing a lot of secrete wishful thinking. Obama is on the
    path to do good—for America. If helping Corporations involves helping,
    especially the poor and middle class and it involves needing to help
    Corporations and Investors, then so be it. Whatever it takes to do the right
    thing, Obama will do it.

  • ezpz

    I know. After all the blatant advocating for his reelection, after nothing (or worse) about third party candidates, and after all the bashing of the ‘other guy’ form bad red team, this righteous indignation is a bit hard to take.

    “The first time someone shows you who they are, believe them.”

    ~Maya Angelou

    He showed us who he was, and in this regard, the first time may have been when he opted out of federal funding for the general campaign back in ’08, after promising to accept federal funds.

    (Too bad I overlooked it then and fell for all the hope hype. I certainly didn’t get fooled again, though.)

  • http://www.rebeccamorn.com/mind BeccaM

    And with both parties talking about the essential necessity of long-term austerity, they’re going to throw these lavish and excessive Potlach parties why exactly?

    We truly have entered the era of Bread and Circuses…only without the bread.

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100003386080045 John doe

    The US is a Corporation, Bush almost ran in into the ground. And it took Obama to slowly bring it back up. The people have chosen their CEO “President”, twice.

  • Ford Prefect

    They can afford it, since they receive generous corporate welfare benefits!

  • nicho

    Why doesn’t he just sell tickets to the people who want to come? That should cover the cost. Why should his cronies and hangers on get to eat and drink on someone else’s dime?

  • Ford Prefect

    Oh please. Look, if you voted for Obama, you voted for this. “Change” was so 2008. That wasn’t even a part of this year’s campaign, if you were paying attention.

    Here’s the other things Obama Voters voted for:

    1) Slashing away at SS.
    2) Raising the retirement age.
    3) More and worse recession and more unemployment, not less.
    4) A plunging standard of living, so the rich can lower their tax rates.
    5) Probable wars on Syria and Iran.

    And many, many more.

    So it’s not surprising that he’s going to use the inauguration as a way of laundering corporate money. Those are his real constituents after all! So please forget the fainting couch stuff. You voted for this. All of it!

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100000259671914 Robert Chambers

    He now wants to have it in private and not viewed by the public. Probably doesn’t want to swear to uphold the Constitution since he isn’t anyway

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100000259671914 Robert Chambers

    Let the TV companies pay for it just like they do for sports

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100000259671914 Robert Chambers

    Let him run a corporation then and not the U.S.

  • ezpz

    Ah, you answered my question to self in my edited comment above.
    Thanks!

  • ezpz

    America IS ‘footing the bill’ for something that does NOT have to be so lavish, especially when there are so many jobless, homeless, and otherwise struggling to make ends meet…

    Quoted in the linked piece above:

    “The president’s inaugural committee made the decision, which was first reported by Politico, because, they said, contributions from individuals alone would not raise enough to cover the price tag of all the events.

    (my emphasis)

  • Naja pallida

    Currently, Thomas Jefferson spinning in his grave is what powers the lights in the east wing.

  • nicho

    Where do the corporations get the money from? They just raise prices to support the bribes to politicians.

  • nicho

    When Thomas Jefferson was inaugurated for his first term, he walked to the Capitol from his boarding house and afterwards, walked back there for dinner.

  • nicho

    That part is paid for by the government. He’s collecting money for the numerous extravaganza “balls” all over the district.

  • Naja pallida

    So that’s what all the meetings with CEOs has been about. He was fund raising.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Papo-Casey/1398086239 Papo Casey

    And if he didn’t take corporate money to pay for the inauguration you’d complain about America footing the bill for this “lavish party,” as if he’s the only president to ever have an inauguration.

  • ezpz

    The bots on Huff are defending this by trying to make a false point: that he’s taking corporate money INSTEAD of taxpayer money. Well, looks like he’s taking both.

  • worfington

    How much should it cost to put your hand on a book and swear to uphold the constitution? A few thousand to pay for Secret Service protection and a few more for crowd control, maybe? Say $100,000 for the day.

© 2014 AMERICAblog News. All rights reserved. · Entries RSS