Saturday, I posted here and at Redstate about the cost of the inaugural relative those of President Clinton. I mentioned that relative to inflation, Bush's inaugural was no more expensive than his predecessor's. Well, the Washington Times confirms this today. My numbers were a little off from the final official tally of Clinton's second inaugural. The Times reports Clinton's second inaugural cost 25% more than Bush's second. I heard this discussed on C-SPAN today also.
Either we just had the same thought, or...maybe the Times' Mr. Curl is a Redstater?
UPDATE: Hat tip to Erick Erickson, Redstate contributor and MSNBC blogger who picked up the story and posted it at Hardblogger.