vt.Buzz ~ a political blog

Political notes from Free Press staff writers Terri Hallenbeck, Sam Hemingway and Nancy Remsen

1.15.2009

Going to the inauguration

Gov. Jim Douglas will be attending Barack Obama's inauguration next week. He had initially said it looked like too much of a logistical nightmare to get around, but today he said that had been resolved so that he thought it wouldn't be too bad.

Most of the states' governors will be there, he said, as they were for George Bush's last inauguration.

Senate President Pro Tempore Peter Shumlin will also be making the trip, he said Wednesday.

- Terri Hallenbeck

posted by vt.Buzz | 4:06 PM |

Comments:

How embarrassing for Vermont. President Obama, meet the nation's whitest and most neo-con governor alive.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 4:25 PM, January 15, 2009

If you think of Vermont as an asylum, you should leave.

I love Vermont and its people. It's too bad that the Republicans in this state keep disparaging it.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 5:06 PM, January 15, 2009

Maybe Douglas and Shumlin can carpool to DC in one of Shumlin's Porsches.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 10:59 PM, January 15, 2009

I love Vermont and its people, too.

It's too bad that the loony ultraleft wing politicians in the state embarrass us.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 11:19 PM, January 15, 2009

Nobody is loonier and more embarrassing than the Vermont GOP.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 7:22 AM, January 16, 2009

Pollina is just as loony. Now that he's done campaigning, he's disappeared from trying to help Vermonters, like he said he wanted to.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 8:16 AM, January 16, 2009

You didn't really believe that , did you?

But just watch he will run again and be a pain in everyones side - especially the voters!

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 8:23 AM, January 16, 2009

Shumlin is embarrassing

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 8:26 AM, January 16, 2009

Some of you kool-aide drinkers try driving around the country with Vermont plates. All we ever hear are comments about Vermont being a bunch of left wing looney tunes and "are you really from the Socialist State of Vermont?"

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 8:52 AM, January 16, 2009

I will say only that I am from "up north". Once people know you're from Vermont the first thing is usually "oh yeah, those are the loons that don't punish child molesters!" or "isn't Vermont the highest taxed state?". Years ago when there was a certain amount of pride in being from Vermont, people would comment about the great skiing or the maple syrup. I get sick of explaining how the state is not reflective of it's natives, but has been taken over by leftist flatlanders living off daddy's trustfund. Lots easier to just not admit where you're from.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 9:01 AM, January 16, 2009

When I drive around the country with my green license plates I get lots of smiles from people who love Vermont.

Vermont is great. So are the people who live here.

If you really hate it so much, just leave. Nobody is forcing you to be here.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 9:31 AM, January 16, 2009

Vermont is not the problem- it is the people who move to Vermont and think they can take it over and most do not have to make a living in Vermont.
Some Vermonters are forced to leave because of high taxes caused by expensive social programs.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 9:45 AM, January 16, 2009

I think that the people are the greatest thing about Vermont.

I like my neighbors who have lived here their entire lives.

I like my neighbors who just moved here last year.

They are all really wonderful people. Each of them brings something unique to the community.

I'm sorry that you don't value your neighbors. If you are embarassed to live here, you have the option to move.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 10:16 AM, January 16, 2009

I am one of those neighbors who has lived here all my life and I too like my neighbors until they want to change Vermont.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 10:55 AM, January 16, 2009

But Vermont has always changed.

Change is good.

Vermont used to be filled with sheep farmers. We changed.

It used to be we didn't have paved roads. We changed.

It used to be that dairy farmers didn't have bulk tanks. We changed.

Our world is changing fast. Vermont will change too.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 11:50 AM, January 16, 2009

"Change" in itself is not necessarily good. I would rather have the sheep than jw.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 12:20 PM, January 16, 2009

The only constant is change.

If Vermont's economy didn't change from being dependent on sheep, everyone here would have starved – because the economy changed and it became much cheaper to grow wool in other places.

You might not like change, or the people who bring it ... but it's going to happen.

The people who are prepared for change (and the people who drive change) will be much better off than the people who resist it.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 12:32 PM, January 16, 2009

Vermont is a great state, better than most. Things are going downhill here, of course, just not as fast as elsewhere.

What our the problems in Vermont? Growing sprawl and traffic, more crime, high taxes, less concern for fellow humans, poor job options, etc. But as I say, it is worse elsewhere.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 6:30 PM, January 16, 2009

And just HOW could it be worse elsewhere? You have just named most of the worst case scenarios!

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 6:48 PM, January 16, 2009

Markowitz for Governor

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 10:19 PM, January 16, 2009

Amazing how the GOP trashes Vermont and the people who live here.

They hate it here ... and they don't want it to change ... they are so confused that they can't even think straight.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 11:09 PM, January 16, 2009

The "trash" is not the natives that have lived here and appreciate live and let live; the "trash" are the obnoxious, pushy New Yorkers and their kind that have to stick their BIG noses into everything that goes on, from what businesses that can be built, to what color someone wants to paint their house.

TAKE BACK VERMONT!!!

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 6:57 AM, January 17, 2009

These anons should read their posts- "we love Vermont so let's embrace change"!!!
If you love Vermont- why try to change it?

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 7:29 AM, January 17, 2009

That is right and that is why you should elect Deb Markowitz Governor

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 9:44 AM, January 17, 2009

Try or not, Vermont is going to change.

Like the rest of the world, Vermont has always changed. It will always change.

You can prepare for change and embrace it -- or you can be left behind.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 12:03 PM, January 17, 2009

It's like saying that you don't want the weather to change -- and getting angry with the people who are preparing for it!

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 12:28 PM, January 17, 2009

"Going to the inauguration!" Makes me wonder where all the outrage is about spending $150 million or so on this farce from the libs that were so petulant and having hissy fits over Bush spending a quarter of that amount 4 years ago! Pat? Bernie? Crazy Howie?

I thought so.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 6:38 AM, January 18, 2009

There goes Bubba making stuff up again.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 9:35 AM, January 18, 2009

Go Deb!

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 11:34 AM, January 18, 2009

Shumlin...Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha......

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 11:35 AM, January 18, 2009

Real Vermonters? Unless your a native American one can not claim to be a real Vermonter. Change...yes the state has changed. Two things are certain in a human life, death and change. Nothing remains the same..Take Vermont Back? O.k. how about back to when this area was submerged in water? Jeezum crow...change is what makes life interesting. Douglas and his fan club just can not wrap their heads around ideas that work for Vermont. If they love Vermont stop trying to convert it to a northern Florida type of place. It is a oxymoron. Peace and happy MLK. Liberal, progressive and proud!!!

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 8:01 AM, January 19, 2009

Obama is actually spending slightly less than Bush did four years ago. The Obama figures include the cost of security; the Bush figures do not.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 12:49 PM, January 19, 2009

You might mention that you got your figures from Media Matters and MSNBC, both arms of the democrat party and totally partisan. I have seen no data anywhere else that would even approach Obama's now-predicted $170 million cost!

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 1:58 PM, January 19, 2009

And your sources are the Washington Times and the AP, both in the tank for the Repubs. Typical comparison of apples and oranges.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 2:41 PM, January 19, 2009

Super Bowl commercials this year are costing 6 million a minute--just to put celebrations in perspective.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 3:13 PM, January 19, 2009

Shumlin for Governor.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 5:31 PM, January 19, 2009

. . . of Shumlinland.