Trump is building a ballroom in the East Wing
Impeach him, I say! Or perhaps sue him for something or other?
And yet now and then on the left there are surprising voices of reason on this, for example Shaun King on X:
I actually think it’s a great idea to build a big ballroom on the White House grounds.
It’s virtually impossible to hold events of any size there and they are always wasting millions on tents and heaters and chairs and lights and everything else.
Stop acting like you have some emotional attachment to the East Wing. You don’t.
Ah, but “acting like” when it’s politically expedient is one of the main tools of the left these days – and although it’s certainly not limited to the left, it is pretty much their stock in trade.
Although no, Obama wasn’t worse, at least not in terms of White House renovations.
Here’s a history of previous White House renovations. Some of them were before my time – actually, most of them were. But did anybody gave a rat’s patootie at the time?
NOTE: I do remember Jackie Kennedy’s renovations of White House decor, and the televised tour she gave. And I remember the intense shock I felt at the time, young though I was, on hearing her breathy almost Marilyn Monroe-ish voice. Here’s an article on her White House changes, and here’s a short clip from the tour:
It’s admittedly a crowded field but this has to take the title for the stupidest TDS outragefest of the second Trump administration.
Emotional attachment is all some of these people have, and to a building — a part of a building’s annex to an annex — that they’ve never been to, nor probably ever seen. No one ever hung out on 15th Street longingly looking at the East Wing.
With the danger of snipers at any public gathering these days, the thought of holding events at the White House in outdoor tents scares me. An enclosed “ballroom” sounds a whole lot safer for everyone involved, including the support staff as well as the invited guests. (I put ballroom in quotes as I doubt there will be large fancy and formal dances going on, but certainly other events with lots of participants.)
I think my parents had a book that was a link-in to that program with Jackie K. – showing the various rooms as completed. The book also had some pictures of how the whole inside had been essentially gutted, with the outside shell, with the steel beams installed and earthmovers at work on the ground level. The internal structure was truly in such awful shape, what with pianos and bathtubs in danger of falling through the floors!
Apparently the planned ballroom isn’t that far out of line, considering that the wing where it is supposed to be situated is relatively new … mid-20th century, anyway.
I recall reading that for certain splashy official events in the Obama administration, they had to rent and set up lavish tents, with chairs, tables, decorations, lights and all.
So, are the commenters having a cow about the Trump ballroom going to post any such reminiscences. Of course not. History began with Trump.
I don’t recall if I’ve stated my position here before or not, but I am one hundred percent certain that if a Democrat president presented the exact same program it would be lauded by those who currently condemn it.
Ah, but “acting like” when it’s politically expedient is one of the main tools of the left these days – and although it’s certainly not limited to the left, it is pretty much their stock in trade.
We now have a new word describing that, popular among the GOP congresspersons. They are being performative. Where is the GOP equivalent of James Carville, instucting them to speak plainly.?
Sgt Mom, the gutting of the WH was done in the Truman admin.
Dems are BatS crazy
I think I’ve heard a recording of Mrs. Kennedy’s voice only once before. Here’s her sister five years later:
==
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lgY_XyV_jqw
==
People who attended boarding schools or finishing schools prior to about 1955 often have a distinctive accent. I think her sister had more of it than she did.
==
Caroline Kennedy’s way of speaking is that of the generic professional-managerial class. It does not have a regional element or a particularly patrician element. It’s not girlish at all, either. Some women maintain a girlish voice well into middle age.
==
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zqFR-ZW93sk
For some reason the linked Hill article on the history of WH renovations felt it necessary to clarify that all presidents going back to Teddy Roosevelt are, in fact, “former” presidents. (If one has to be so technical, shouldn’t dead ones be identified as, “the late President Xxx”?
Here’s Edith Bouvier Beale (1917-2002), a paternal-side first cousin of Jackie’s. You can detect an element of New York City in her accent.
==
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1So13PraUZw&list=RD1So13PraUZw&start_radio=1
I am loving the meltdowns the left is having over Trump building a ballroom where the east wing of the white house was.
All I gotta say is they are missing the opportunity of a lifetime if they don’t play “Big Balls” by AC/DC at the inaugural event at the Trump Ballroom.
Maybe they could follow that up with Ballroom Blitz by Sweet?
Democrat politicians are attempting to use this as a distraction from the fact they are responsible for the government shutdown and looming loss of services (SNAP, etc.). Non-politicians that are crying about it are simply TDS sufferers.
It’s ridiculous for our Executive residence/office complex NOT to have a permanent facility for large events. The US government hosting State dinners in a tent? This space will be well-used for many decades by many administrations.
Mrs. Kennedy’s voice was indeed interesting. She had the Northeast/British habit of adding “r” to words ending in “a,” in this case, the Truman and Eisenhower “chiner.”
I remember that Kate, people adding “r” to the ends of words, from my childhood in Connecticut.
@ Kate > ” She had the Northeast/British habit of adding “r” to words ending in “a,” in this case, the Truman and Eisenhower “chiner.” ”
I noticed that the first time she said “china,” but the second and later times she did not append the “r” — perhaps the training slipped for a moment?
Per Art Deco > “People who attended boarding schools or finishing schools prior to about 1955 often have a distinctive accent.”
And pronunciation is a large part of that.
For my own amusement, I have a story about our Welsh choir director who would sing a phrase to us, and then wonder why the daft Americans insisted on “hearing” an “r” at the end of some Welsh words (where none actually appeared), and thus mishearing, misspelling, and mistranslating the actual words in the song.
I told him that American singers were always, always, always told NOT to sing the final “r” of a word unless it was meant to be rolled (which is never on an Anglo-Saxon-descended word, but customary in almost every other language).
So whenever we hear a neutral phoneme at the end of a word (uh, or schwa), we always assume there is a silent “r” following it in the printed lyric.
That seemed to make sense to him.
So…it started off with “It will cost 200 million” and “be near the (East Wing)but not touching (the East Wing), which I am a big fan of.”
Next it was “250 million” and “we’ll just be taking down the facade of the East Wing” in September.
Now, it’s 300 million and the entire East Wing is rubble. There don’t seem to be any consultations with planning committees, no effort at historical preservation or attempt to reuse artifacts like the marble floors or the crown molding, not even basic safety precautions for the demolition workers like hard hats or asbestos removal masks. Even taking pictures is banned.
Gee, I wonder why people are upset. /s
There don’t seem to be any consultations with planning committees, no effort at historical preservation or attempt to reuse artifacts like the marble floors or the crown molding, not even basic safety precautions for the demolition workers like hard hats or asbestos removal masks. Even taking pictures is banned.
==
The term ‘seem’ is doing a lot of work here.
BJ:
I assume you’re aware that the East Wing is a separate building and of fairly recent vintage, and that the ballroom will enable the White House to host large official functions without the present need for tents and port-a-potties for the guests:
Even the WaPo seems to think it’s okay to do this.
Why do you care how much it cost to do it? It’s not taxpayer money; it’s donors.
Does BJ know what the minimum construction PPE standards are much less what is required for asbestos abatement or what a crown molding is (it isn’t for a king’s crown)?
I doubt it. A trackhoe with the right end effector on the boom is pretty effective, quick, and safe way to demolish temporary light construction buildings. A water mist can be used to suppresses/control demolition-prodeced dust. Get er done.
Some cold water mist to suppress the demolition produced hysteria.
https://freebeacon.com/politics/counterpoint-calm-down-no-one-cares-about-the-white-house-renovation/
And check out some of the comments on this rather short post.
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/photos-inside-making-trumps-ballroom-look-construction-progress
Why are the Democrats so mad that Trump is doing the building, which may be completed before he leaves office? Because “Under Democrat Congress control the project would be over a billon not including change orders and would take 10 years to complete if that. The Democrats are mad for not getting any payola.”
Good grief.
Leftism really is a mental disease.
https://jonathanturley.org/2025/10/27/wrecking-ball-politics-swalwell-calls-for-destructive-pledge-from-democratic-presidential-candidates/
“Rep. Eric Swalwell, D-Calif., did the impossible last week: he reached a new low in American politics. Previously, Swalwell mocked a female senator after she complained about being threatened by leftists. However, even on the Swalwell scale, it is hard to measure the depths of a member who calls for potential presidents to pledge to demolish the Trump ballroom as a litmus test for office. Consider that for a second. According to Swalwell, Democrats will only consider politicians who promise to destroy a $300 million building to appease the lowest common denominator of their party.”