1/20    NY Times opinion        username/pw:  nty42322
        http://www.nytimes.com/2005/01/21/opinion/21herbert.html
        "In January 1945, with World War II still raging, Franklin Roosevelt
        insisted on a low-key inauguration. Already gravely ill, he began his
        address by saying, "Mr. Chief Justice, Mr. Vice President, my friends,
        you will understand and, I believe, agree with my wish that the form
        of this inauguration be simple and its words brief." Times have
        changed. President Bush and his equally tone-deaf supporters spent the
        past few days partying hard while Americans, Iraqis and others
        continued to suffer and die in the Iraq conflagration. Nothing was too
        good for the princes and princesses of the new American plutocracy.
        ... As the well-heeled Bush crowd was laughing and dancing in tuxedos
        and designer gowns, the situation in Iraq was deteriorating to new
        levels of horror. The Black Tie and Boots Ball was held on the same
        day that 26 people were killed in five powerful car and truck bombs in
        Baghdad."
        \_ I don't know if I agree with your point, but I think it's pretty
           darn cool and considerate that you posted a user/pass.  -John
        \_ As if you cared when sanctions were killing Iraqis. C'mon
           you won't admit it but if Kerry won, there'd be just as many
           balls, just as big of a parade, and with Kerry's tone - even
           longer speeches.
        \_ It's obvious that the NYT and you, the poster, obviously know
           nothing about history. May I remind you that William Henry Harrison
           died from pneumonia due to giving out a 2 hour speech in bad
           weather and having attended no less than half a dozen balls
           commencing that night? This kind of commentary is the usual
           leftist drivel is the sort of crap that just plain undermines
           the Democrats. Before you believe in something, or before you
           post, try actually doing some research on the history of
           inaugration. And lest you be too ignorant to forget, LBJ's
           inaugration was hardly a small affair. The point, for the denser
           of the crowd, is that there is nothing different about
           this inaugral that is different from those performed since
           the beginning of this country. Attempting to dredge up
           one which actually IS and attempting to discredit the current
           one, however, is just really bad journalism. (William Henry Harrison,
           for the clueless on the MOTD, was our 9th president and served
           for some 30 odd days before dying).
           \_ So your point is that it's OK for Bush to have an extravagant
              inauguration while Americans and Iraqis are dying in his
              mistaken war because most other presidents are just as bad?
              Or is your point that Harrison was stupid and so its OK for
              Bush to be stupid too?  Why shouldn't people who have
              loved ones in Iraq be upset with the president for celebrating
              while people are dying?  -!op
              \_ I don't think that's his point.  Not that I particularly like
                 the idea of any Bush inauguration, low key or not, I think
                 his point is that you're being hysterical.  -John
           \_ You're right.  They do have the right to party it up while
              Iraq is turning to shit.
        \_ FDR was Stalin's best friend.  In fact FDR was jealous
           of Stalin because he was a more effective collectivist.
           So perhaps if FDR spent more time reflecting on his
           objectives rather than worrying about appearances,
           Eastern Europe would have not been subject to 50 years
           of Soviet rule, who were equivalent if not worse
           than the Nazis, and the Cold War may have been averted.
           Let's not forget the NYTimes glorified, almost deified,
           Uncle Joe during the '30s and '40s.
           \_ And the Republicans used to be for the little guys, and the
              Dems were the party of choice for crypto-Klansmen. So what?
              You think the same guys who were writing those glowing reviews
              of Uncle Joe are still writing the OpEd page for the NYTimes?
              \_ In spirit yes... except they are secular Jews and
                 gays.
                 \_ +5 self troll!
                    \_ have you ever seen any of the board of NYTimes
                       editors?  It is not a troll just a simple
                       fact of life.
                       \_ Is William Safire a gay Jewish man?
                          \_ you leftists are fed this propaganda from
                             the NYTimes and you don't even know who
                             ths source is.  Yes Safire
                             is Jewish.
                             \_ This thread has really diverged.  If you
                                wish, you may start another thread about
                                your argument, since it's hard to tell how
                                serious you're even taking yourself.
                                \_ Does anyone know when the motd anti-semite
                                   came on board?  I don't remember all these
                                   weird tinfoil hat-ish rants about Jews
                                   starting until very recently...
                                   \_ How do you know I'm not Jewish?
                                      I am moderately pro-Isreal...
                                      But I am not going to ignore
                                      obvious constructs of our society.
                                      Do you really think AIPAC is
                                      larger than any other lobby
                                      except AARP for fun?