How glitzy shoud Obama’s inauguration be? How much money should be spent? The New York Times provides historical perspective:
The most elaborate presidential inaugural parade took place during one of the nation’s biggest economic expansions. In 1953, in the postwar boom, the newly sworn-in president, Dwight D. Eisenhower, led a parade up Pennsylvania Avenue with 73 bands, 59 floats, 350 horses, 3 elephants, an Alaskan dog team and military vehicles. There were 25,000 marchers on foot; the entire parade lasted four and a half hours. It was deemed so excessive that subsequent parades were limited to 15,000 marchers.
Perhaps the most austere inauguration was in 1945, when the nation was still at war and Franklin D. Roosevelt, beginning his fourth term, was in failing health. There was no parade; he took the oath on the South Portico of the White House in a ceremony that lasted just 14 minutes. He wanted chicken a la king to be served for lunch to his guests, but his housekeeper said she could not keep it hot, and instead served cold chicken salad, rolls, coffee and cake, unfrosted. Wartime rationing meant no butter for the rolls.
It is safe to say that Mr. Obama’s inauguration will fall somewhere in between.
Given the state of the economy, it would wise to keep the conspicuous consumption to a minimum.
I remember a NY Times article about the Bush ’04 inaugural ball (do they still call it that, the second time ’round?) with anecdotes from horrified bartenders describing guests asking for “Texas Sangria”: merlot and 7-Up.
I think Obama’s inauguration should just be BYOB.
Each term gets “inaugurated.”
Why we don’t inaugurate the presidents according to the proper meaning of the term (say, by killing some animals and reading the bumps on their livers) is beyond me.
They could have a barbecue.