Obama Snubs Medal of Honor Inaugural Ball - First Time in 50 Years

Robert

Active member
Obama Snubs Nation's Heroes, Becomes the First President to Skip Ball Honoring Medal of Honor Recipients in Over 50 Years

http://www.clevelandleader.com/node/8627

The Cleveland Leader

Barack Obama may have stumbled over his words briefly during his inauguration, but he made an even bigger blunder later Tuesday evening. The newly sworn-in President opted not to appear at what should have been one of the most important Balls on his agenda that evening - The Salute to Heroes Inaugural Ball.

The Salute to Heroes Inaugural Ball was begun in 1953 for President Dwight Eisenhower's inauguration. The event recognized recipients of the Medal of Honor, the nation's highest military award. There were 48 Medal of Honor recipients in attendance, who were undoubtedly disappointed by the Commander-in-Chief's failure to show. Over the past 56 years and 14 inaugurations, no President has skipped this event - until now.

The Salute to Heroes Inaugural Ball is sponsored by the American Legion, and co-sponsored by 13 other veteran's service organizations, including those such as the Paralyzed Veterans of America and the Military Order of the Purple Heart.

Instead of attending this ball honoring our nation's heroes, Obama was busy making stops at 10 other official balls. Obama and his wife's first stop was at the Neighborhood Ball. From there they went to the Home State Ball for Illinois and Hawaii, the Commander-in-Chief Ball, the Youth Inaugural Ball, and the Home State Ball for Delaware and Pennsylvania. They finished off the night with brief appearances at the Mid-Atlantic, Western, Midwest, Eastern, and Southern regional Balls.

Celebrities were a plenty at the balls, with Stevie Wonder, Shakira, Mary. J. Blige, Faith Hill, Jay-Z, Alicia Keys, Adam Levine, will.i.am, Sting, Mariah Carey, and Leonardo DiCaprio in attendance at the Neighborhood Ball. In addition, the other nine balls also featured a star-studded lineup including Kanye West and Kid Rock at the Youth Ball, Marc Anthony at the Western Ball, and Cheryl Crow at the Western Ball.

It was the party without all of the celebrities that Obama skipped. The very people who he sought to have support him during his candidacy and campaign, who have fought to protect this country, were snubbed in favor of publicity and the opportunity to rub shoulders - yet again - with the out-of-touch Hollywood elite.

-----

Search for yourself, this is the only article:

http://news.google.com/news?sourceid...-8&sa=N&tab=wn
 
I saw the prediction of this long before when others commented on his failure to face the flag at ceremonies, etc.

Why is everybody so surprised.
 
to all the men and women to ever EARN A Medal of Honor i not not only salute you:salute2:, but still see all of you as a "CELEBRITY" in my eyes.who needs hollywood actors and singers that say they support the military... i think we NEED our hero's that actually SUPPORTED AND FOUGHT FOR OUR COUNTRY, seen and heard from.They are the ones that need to be treated like a star, not these showboats...and yes this article pisses me off.:evil:
 
Would have lowered his cred with the left. But an appearance would have been proper. But no not surprising.
 
Big deal .....

Sorry guys .. big frigging deal. He and his wife stopped at over 10 different balls designed to celebrate the inauguration ... not the military - there are holidays set aside for that.

So Obama skipped this ball ... it isn't the end of the world and it doesn't mean a damned thing other than the fact he and his wife chose to go elsewhere. Even though I have the greatest respect for those who have won this nation's highest award, a newly elected President, his wife and his children only have so many hours in a day to celebrate an inauguration and can't be everywhere no matter how great you believe the ball to be. Besides, Presidential balls aren't meant to celebrate the military ... they are meant to celebrate the inauguration of a new President. What is so great about a ball that was started to celebrate another President (President Dwight Eisenhower), and HIS military career? Obama has never been in the military, and other than being the new "civilian" leader of the military (C-In-C), he has no connection with the military, nor does he owe the military anything at this time other than fair leadership and fair representation.

For darned sure, if he does that, it is more than we got out of the last President.
 
I dunno about that,, with the war going on, it seems to me that he is pretty deep in the military, he's just choosing not to put it on the frontlines of his agenda, but why would he? doesnt he plan to pull the military out of the war anyways? maybe it just gets to me a little bit, just because im so used to customs and curtesies
 
Chief can't say I agree, that was an Inaugaral Ball given in honor of the newly inaugurated POTUS. He could have stopped in for howdy and a glass of bug juice but he didn't. Fine his call, whatever. But he did make it to other balls where the photo-ops were better. Or I guess maybe it was change we needed him not stopping at this one. Whatever the case it's not in anyway surprising.
 
I am going to agree with the argument that this was a bad call on his behalf, it was a more worthy cause than some of the other "balls" he managed to attend.

I am not going to argue that there were a ton of these functions planned and that it was ludicrous to expect him to show up to all but I think he got his priorities wrong in missing this particular function.
 
Chief can't say I agree, that was an Inaugaral Ball given in honor of the newly inaugurated POTUS. He could have stopped in for howdy and a glass of bug juice but he didn't. Fine his call, whatever. But he did make it to other balls where the photo-ops were better. Or I guess maybe it was change we needed him not stopping at this one. Whatever the case it's not in anyway surprising.
M, 0 and M .....
I don't say you are completely wrong or that I completely disagree with your viewpoints. The point I was trying to make is .. worthy or otherwise, the fact remains .. he was celebrating his inauguration ... NOT celebrating the military or our war heroes .....we have holidays for that.

Whether it is surprising or not, business as usual in Washington DC needs changing. GW Bush has done more to sully the Office of the Presidency than any other President I can think of (Slick Willy included). I realize there are those who will disagree ... but ... I make that statement as one who believes that America has lost much of it's 'shine' before the rest of the world. I am hopeful that Obama can restore our standing and 'shine' before those who used to look to America as the beacon of liberty and freedom in the world .. but .. due to 8 years of tarnish and an unjustified war, now view America as just another bully on the world stage. He has given the impression to those seeking liberty and freedom that America's streets are NOT paved with gold .. but .. are nothing more than mud streets (figuratively speaking).

AND FOR THAT, I HAVE NOTHING BUT DISDAIN AND DISRESPECT FOR GW BUSH.
 
M, 0 and M .....
I don't say you are completely wrong or that I completely disagree with your viewpoints. The point I was trying to make is .. worthy or otherwise, the fact remains .. he was celebrating his inauguration ... NOT celebrating the military or our war heroes .....we have holidays for that.

While I agree with this I still believe he made a bad move in not making a token appearance.


Whether it is surprising or not, business as usual in Washington DC needs changing. GW Bush has done more to sully the Office of the Presidency than any other President I can think of (Slick Willy included). I realize there are those who will disagree ... but ... I make that statement as one who believes that America has lost much of it's 'shine' before the rest of the world. I am hopeful that Obama can restore our standing and 'shine' before those who used to look to America as the beacon of liberty and freedom in the world .. but .. due to 8 years of tarnish and an unjustified war, now view America as just another bully on the world stage. He has given the impression to those seeking liberty and freedom that America's streets are NOT paved with gold .. but .. are nothing more than mud streets (figuratively speaking).

AND FOR THAT, I HAVE NOTHING BUT DISDAIN AND DISRESPECT FOR GW BUSH.

I think you are incorrect I think the USA lost its shine to much of the world decades ago and I really doubt that the third world have changed their views any, they would take the first floating crate or banana box to get anywhere but where they are now.

However I think what has finally happened is that America itself has finally realised that they are not the shining beacon of hope that they once thought they were and it has been a bit of a kick in the nuts.

To a large degree I think GWB accelerated this realisation but he wasnt entirely responsible for it as it pretty much happened in the late 70s and early 80s, for example I don't think much of the USA realises that many people outside the USA thought that Gorbachev made Reagan look positively ludicrous.
 
Well Chief we won't agree on this. So I'll just say I don't agree with his decision and leave it at that.
 
All I know is that were I a wartime President, I would skip Babs Striesand and Andrea Mitchell and take a little time to salute war heroes. I think it clearly demonstrates the differences between the "End The War" set and the "Win The War" set and with which one he prefers to associate himself. No surprises there.
 
All I know is that were I a wartime President, I would skip Babs Striesand and Andrea Mitchell and take a little time to salute war heroes. I think it clearly demonstrates the differences between the "End The War" set and the "Win The War" set and with which one he prefers to associate himself. No surprises there.

The problem is that the "Win the war" set are somewhat deluded because it is impossible to win something that has no defined end.

Technically the "Global war on terror" will only be won when terrorism is wiped out worldwide and realistically that will never happen unless you can stabilise all of the worlds nations which will never happen by military means.

I agree that he should have gone to the event if for no other reason than expediency but I do not see his ideas to pull out of Iraq and concentrate on Afghanistan as a bad move.
 
MontyB's basically got me covered on this one... Regardless of whether the ball was for Eisenhower or not, the fact remains that anyone in that room is more important than ANY celebrity. Pledging bi-partisanship doesn't start with ignoring the vets of our country...
 
The problem is that the "Win the war" set are somewhat deluded because it is impossible to win something that has no defined end.

Technically the "Global war on terror" will only be won when terrorism is wiped out worldwide and realistically that will never happen unless you can stabilise all of the worlds nations which will never happen by military means.

I agree that he should have gone to the event if for no other reason than expediency but I do not see his ideas to pull out of Iraq and concentrate on Afghanistan as a bad move.

That's your opinion, guy and I certainly disagree with it. I suspect I'm not alone. Back to the subject at hand however, I feel this snub was just the tip of the iceberg. There's plenty more where that came from, I'm sure. So far even though it's only been two week or so, all I can do is shake my head in disbelief at what has come out of this administration.
 
That's your opinion, guy and I certainly disagree with it. I suspect I'm not alone. Back to the subject at hand however, I feel this snub was just the tip of the iceberg. There's plenty more where that came from, I'm sure. So far even though it's only been two week or so, all I can do is shake my head in disbelief at what has come out of this administration.

Of course it is my opinion, as neither of us are privy to Obama's reasons we are all just stating our opinions, as to whether this is the tip of the iceberg or not who knows in a democratic society he has other areas to to focus on not just the military so perhaps this is a sign that under his presidency the military will just be another branch of government.

I tend to feel though that as a "pro-republican" you would shake your head in disbelief no matter what he had done or does in the future.
This is now the fun part of aministration change, all those that bitched at Bush now get to defend the office and vice versa.
 
Personally I think that far, far too much is being read into this. Perhaps by others perhaps with an agenda of their own.

As important as we all feel that we, and our personal wishes are, there are going to be times when someone or some thing gets forgotten by somebody somewhere.

I do feel that President Obama, is not so insensitive as to have made a conscious decision to purposely snub this event. As good or bad as we may believe him to be, he is still a politician an I have no doubt that he would be fully aware of the consequences of such an act.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top