Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Obama retakes oath of office after flub

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU
 
LoZoccolo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-21-09 06:54 PM
Original message
Obama retakes oath of office after flub
Source: MSNBC

WASHINGTON - President Barack Obama retook the oath of office at the White House on Wednesday after a blunder during Tuesday's inauguration.

Chief Justice John Roberts stumbled slightly over the 35-word constitutionally prescribed oath of office as he swore in Obama as the 44th president.

Read more: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/28780417 /
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Connie_Corleone Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-21-09 06:56 PM
Response to Original message
1. And the freepers last howl turns into a lonely whisper.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
nichomachus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-21-09 07:11 PM
Response to Reply #1
12. Not at all
They will simply start complaining that any actions he took or orders he signed between noon yesterday and tonight were illegal. They are assholes and they have nothing going for them but this petty nonsense.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Wetzelbill Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-21-09 08:39 PM
Response to Reply #12
32. It's a little alarming that you can think like them
Just who are you anyway? :)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
nichomachus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-21-09 10:17 PM
Response to Reply #32
48. I remember the Clinton years all too well
This is how the Freepers acted for the eight years of the Clinton presidency. Nothing was so petty they couldn't turn it into a constitutional crisis.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Yavin4 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-21-09 10:37 PM
Response to Reply #48
53. Four Words: White House Travel Office
I heard so much nonsense over that trite piece of bullshit during the Clinton years.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Wetzelbill Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-21-09 10:51 PM
Response to Reply #48
55. oh for sure
It'll happen some more, without a freaking doubt. They shrugged at serious abuses with Bush, now if somebody slips on a banana peel you can bet Obama will practically be impeached for it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
alfredo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-22-09 01:06 PM
Response to Reply #12
91. they are now howling about him not having his hand on a bible at the
second swearing in.


They are also upset over something Jay Z said at some private party on Tuesday. I don't know what he said and I don't care. I'd wish they'd get upset over veterans sleeping on the streets, or children going hungry.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
onehandle Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-21-09 06:56 PM
Response to Original message
2. 30+ years of Roberts. Thanks, Ralph. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
depakid Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-21-09 07:34 PM
Response to Reply #2
22. What a bizarre thing to say
The cowardly Democrats in Congress confirmed him- rather than block the appointment.

Which is EXACTLY what Nader said they would do- EXACTLY what they did with Thomas & Scalia -and just about every other extremist nominee Bush put before them.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
onehandle Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-21-09 07:58 PM
Response to Reply #22
26. Bush and Gore are Exactly the Same!
I'm sorry, all I could hear was buzzing. Did you say something?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
depakid Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-21-09 08:05 PM
Response to Reply #26
27. That's not what Nader said
And if you were informed (or honest) about it- you wouldn't make that statement.

Moreover- in case you hadn't noticed, the Roberts confirmation hearings ocurred in September of 2005- after an election in which Nader can't be said to have been a factor.

It's amazing to me that after all this time- and after so many Democratic capitulations and craven efforts to enable far right policies, that people still don't get it.

Nader wouldn't have had a constituency in the first place if Clinton & Congress hadn't abandoned traditional Democratic values.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
onehandle Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-21-09 08:19 PM
Response to Reply #27
30. Yeah, that's right. It's Clinton and Congress that forced Nader to spend weeks in Florida in 2000.
I'll let the hundreds of thousands of widows, widowers, and orphans in Iraq know that it's not Nader's fault in the least.

Nader is the living example that the far left can be just as irresponsible as the far right.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
depakid Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-21-09 08:32 PM
Response to Reply #30
31. Whatever
Keep thinking shallowly- if you've haven't figured it the political dynamics out by now, you're probably never going to.

Create a political vacuum by championing NAFTA & the WTO, go on an accounting, financial, energy & telecommunications degregulation frenzy, etc. -and someone's going to fill it.

Political science 101.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
juno jones Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-22-09 07:25 AM
Response to Reply #31
65. I considered voting for Nader because Clinton's
Edited on Thu Jan-22-09 07:44 AM by juno jones
welfare reform had hurt many single mothers some of whom were close friends of mine. Clinton's triangulating definitely benefitted the repubs more than it did dems or liberals. Gore had not yet set himself apart from that, I percieved that he ran on those same platforms.

For the books I didn't vote for anyone that election. I was homeless, was having troubles getting registered and worked thru election day without noticing it was election day (I had the proverbial three jobs at the time). Basically, I woke up one day and it was 'mourning in America'.

On edit: 8 * years later, I do wish Gore had been in that office, yet he would not have been the man he has become. I don't think he would have won a nobel prize and become as influential, respected and dare I say, loved as he is. The nobel-winning Gore, the enviromentalist Gore I would have likely voted for had he run. Early in the primaries many of my friends were hoping for just that.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ken Burch Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-21-09 10:10 PM
Response to Reply #30
43. If there'd been no DLC takeover of the Dems, there would have been no Green Party
It's time to admit that progressives did nothing to deserve the way the party treated us in the Nineties.

A non-conservative Dem would have beaten Bush the First too, simply by standing up to the smears(unlike Dukakis). We could have won by fighting for our values. It was not a choice of surrender or defeat.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CreekDog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-22-09 09:15 AM
Response to Reply #43
84. Nader was fighting Democrats during the Carter Administration
just to be clear.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ken Burch Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-22-09 02:22 PM
Response to Reply #84
94. He was working with Carter some of the time.
Granted, Ralph did always have kind of a contrary side.

And it was never just about Ralph as an individual. It was about the whole way progressives were treated by the party in the 90's. We were blamed for everything bad in the past and kept totally out in the cold. Really, if you treat people like that, what right do you have to expect loyalty to them. You can't diss folks and then demand they not respond just because you're dissing them slightly less than the others.

It's time for the party to admit(and I think the actions of this new administration are a partial admission of this)that progressives never deserved the arrogant, punitive way the Democratic party dealt with them in the 90s.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tarc Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-21-09 10:14 PM
Response to Reply #27
46. If Nader hadn't been a petty bitch, we would be winding up 8 years of Gore right about now
Stop being a little pissant apologist.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
david13 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-21-09 10:21 PM
Response to Reply #46
51. Why blame Nader.
Why not blame Gore?
dc
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lutefisk Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-21-09 11:39 PM
Response to Reply #51
58. I'd blame Gore...
...if the election was a close race between Bush and Nader and Gore stayed in the race in states in which he could only act as a spoiler and throw the election to Bush. Gore would have been one delusional, arrogant son of a bitch to do something like that, for sure.
:hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DissedByBush Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-21-09 11:49 PM
Response to Reply #46
60. "Spoilers"
If it hadn't been for Ross Perot we'd have had eight years of Daddy Bush.

Spoilers, a.k.a. people getting involved in the democratic process, threaten the more closely-aligned major party's win so that party had better pay attention to the issues raised by the potential spoiler or risk losing the election. It is the closet thing we will get to a real democracy not ruled by two parties that all too often act in concert for their own good instead of that of the people.

The Democratic Party didn't listen to Nader in 2000. The Republicans didn't listen to Perot in 1992. Both lost.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
juno jones Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-22-09 08:02 AM
Response to Reply #60
67. By that token,
Edited on Thu Jan-22-09 08:02 AM by juno jones
One of the coming schisms in the republican party might well center around Ron Paul. He wasn't quite a spoiler, yet he certainly emerged as someone who will probably run again with a certain amount of support, except I think he'll be a libertarian next time.


The Ron Paul supporters in our area were slow to take down signs and are leaving the bumper slickers on.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DissedByBush Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-22-09 10:19 PM
Response to Reply #67
98. Ta-da!
2012 to the Democrats unless the Republicans get their act together, which I doubt.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
depakid Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-22-09 01:28 AM
Response to Reply #46
61. Some people never learn
Hopefully, Obama & the Democrats in Congress get it this time around, or the base may well keep their boots in the closet- rather than on the ground- and then stay home on election day.

As happened in 1994.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ken Burch Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-21-09 10:07 PM
Response to Reply #22
42. That is true. There was no excuse for a single Democratic vote for Roberts
It was enough that his own kind would put him in.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tomp Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-22-09 09:15 AM
Response to Reply #22
85. absolutely true. nader-bashing is insane (i.e., out of touch with reality,...
...delusional).
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Journeyman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-21-09 06:56 PM
Response to Original message
3. Correcting Republican errors right from the "get-go". . .
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Amerigo Vespucci Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-21-09 06:57 PM
Response to Original message
4. So the freeps can relax and kiss our collective arse now.
He's "legal."

He's OUR President.

Sit down, shut the fuck up, and enjoy the ride, my little lurking freeplets.

:rofl:

:patriot:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
superconnected Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-21-09 07:18 PM
Response to Reply #4
14. Really you should give the freepers the option to leave the country
if they don't like it.

After all, we're "gay" and "socialist" now. Welcome to the New America Freepers, you are now led by a black man. :)



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Amerigo Vespucci Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-21-09 07:30 PM
Response to Reply #14
17. YES! Freeps, leave this Gay Socialist Black country of you wanna...
...and, as always, don't let the good Lord hit ya where he split ya on the way out.

It's been REAL!

:rofl:

:patriot:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Quiz Master Donating Member (34 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-21-09 08:13 PM
Response to Reply #14
29. Nah, I implore them to stay!
An enjoy the company of a president who is INTENTIONALLY funny.

Or maybe they really do prefer this to yesterday's sweetness, which is just a little sad.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ken Burch Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-21-09 10:14 PM
Response to Reply #29
45. They must stay, so we can send them to "education camps"
(I'd say "re-education camps", but that would imply these people had been educated already.)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ken Burch Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-21-09 10:11 PM
Response to Reply #14
44. We're gay, MUSLIM and socialist. Get it right wouldya?
(note: my apologies to any actual gay Muslim socialists who may be reading this thread. You folks deserved better than the hate you got in this last campaign.)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
woodsprite Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-22-09 07:51 AM
Response to Reply #44
66. Isn't it 'Muslin' - at least according to the guy in the Balt Sun comments section. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
marshall Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-22-09 08:43 AM
Response to Reply #44
82. That combination could only exist in the US
At least out in the open.

We are getting some things right.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
superconnected Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-22-09 05:41 PM
Response to Reply #44
96. And non-believers now!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ken Burch Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-22-09 06:34 PM
Response to Reply #96
97. Right. Gay Muslim ATHIEST Socialists.
Add "From Mars" and you'd have a great low-budget horror film.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
YOY Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-21-09 10:48 PM
Response to Reply #14
54. They didn't bat a fucking eye when they told us to do that.
At the same time, where the fuck could they go? What country actually shares their sick and twisted values...oh Iran...but "they's arabs!!!" <---Don't correct me...I'm mocking Freeps.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mnhtnbb Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-21-09 06:57 PM
Response to Original message
5. They're talking about it on Lou Dobbs on CNN
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
xxqqqzme Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-21-09 06:57 PM
Response to Original message
6. What a disappointment for the morans.
Guess they have to make due w/ the birth certificate conspiracy.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bluestateguy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-21-09 07:02 PM
Response to Original message
7. Obama was president "to the United States " for one day
Now he is president "of the United States".
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
elocs Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-21-09 07:05 PM
Response to Reply #7
9. Obama took care of this, but Roberts' flub will haunt him the rest of his life.
It will now be brought up at each and every presidential inauguration.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Raine Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-21-09 07:04 PM
Response to Original message
8. This is good so we don't have hear during his whole term
that he isn't really the president. :eyes: :think:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
1776Forever Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-21-09 07:07 PM
Response to Original message
10. Cheif Justice Roberts the HEAD of the Judicial Branch couldn't get it right? Disgusting!
Edited on Wed Jan-21-09 07:07 PM by 1776Forever
This is not like someone in a local pub forgetting the words to a song....

This is the Chief Justice of Supreme Court of the United States!

Chief Justice of the United States
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The Chief Justice of the United States is the head of the judicial branch of the government of the United States, and presides over the U.S. Supreme Court. The highest judicial officer in the country, the Chief Justice leads the business of the Supreme Court and presides over the Senate during impeachment trials of the President. In modern tradition, the Chief Justice also has the duty of administering the oath of office to the President.

The current chief justice is John G. Roberts, Jr., who was nominated by President George W. Bush and took office on September 29, 2005 upon his confirmation by the U.S. Senate.

The salary of the Chief Justice is set by Congress, and it is slightly higher than that of the Associate Justices. As of 2008, it is $217,400 per year.

.........

You better believe if they gave me $217,400 a year I would have gotten it right the 1st time!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
booksenkatz Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-21-09 07:11 PM
Response to Reply #10
13. His decision to go without notes shows his flippant attitude towards this occasion
I know that people get nervous, I know that people (fill in the blank), but damn it, you do not do these things without notes. You do NOT.

Unless you don't give two shits.

I know that in the grand scheme of things, it matters not at all, but I felt as though he marred a very special moment for Barack. Those words are MAGIC words to the ears of a patriot, and Roberts wiped his ass on those words.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
1776Forever Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-21-09 10:14 PM
Response to Reply #13
47. Thank you - you said it very well. I agree with you - no respect for the occasion or the office!
:thumbsup:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tomp Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-22-09 09:16 AM
Response to Reply #13
86. agreed. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
leftynyc Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-22-09 07:07 AM
Response to Reply #10
64. And he just had the nerve
to ask for a raise. Another incompetent bush appointment.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Sultana Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-21-09 07:08 PM
Response to Original message
11. Damn, that Roberts.... How dare he fuck up the Oath.
:grr: :nuke: :grr: :nuke: :grr: :nuke: :grr:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
PfcHammer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-21-09 07:20 PM
Response to Original message
15. Roberts is a filthy SOB cut from the same cloth as
Scalia
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
zeemike Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-21-09 07:30 PM
Response to Original message
16. My cynical and suspicious mind says
That Roberts did it on purpose hoping Obama would not notice.
sometimes what appears to be simply a mistake is really a scheme.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
onenote Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-21-09 09:17 PM
Response to Reply #16
36. To exactly what end, other than to make Roberts look bad?
It was a reparable error, even assuming it was an error. In fact, the odds are pretty strong that someone has misstated a required oath for some office somewhere at some time, and yet, as best as I can tell, there is no case law that says that a minor error in the wording of an oath -- even one specified by law - invalidates the oath.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
zeemike Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-22-09 06:06 AM
Response to Reply #36
62. Haven't you noticed that that is what they do?
They make a big deal out of even the smallest of things to build a case against their oponants...
Remember Gore and the "invented the internet", and how he wore earth tones? And how he was a slum Lord because of a pluming problem in a house he rented?
And I could go on and on with examples.
Frankly I think Obama understands this game thy play and did not take it lightly...and I think he is wise to do so.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LeftHander Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-22-09 08:10 AM
Response to Reply #16
81. No....I think that was the biggest moment in Roberts life...
And he knew it....and he cracked under pressure. Sitting in court room is much different than reading to a million or two people and billions more via TV in the most historic inauguration in American history. It was nerve wracking I bet....some folks would passout of sit frozen at such a moment.

His face was flushed. Cheeks red and other areas pale. He was freaking out inside.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pleah Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-21-09 07:31 PM
Response to Original message
18. Turley on Olbermann said that two other Presidents took the oath twice, also.
He didn't name them, though.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
onenote Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-21-09 09:21 PM
Response to Reply #18
37. Eisenhower and Reagan
Edited on Wed Jan-21-09 09:26 PM by onenote
Why? Because January 20 fell on a Sunday in 1957 and in 1985. And the public ceremonies were held on January 21, but a private ceremony administering the oath was held on the 20th. Actually, it has happened several other times. Rutherford Hayes had a private ceremony on March 3 and a public ceremony on March 5. Chester Arthur also was sworn in both privately and then a couple of days later, publicly (he succeeded Garfield when Garfield was assassinated).
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pleah Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-21-09 09:59 PM
Response to Reply #37
40. Thank you very much!
:hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tesibria Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-21-09 07:32 PM
Response to Original message
19. Obama retakes the oath of office after a busy first day
Source: McClatchyDC

WASHINGTON Chief Justice John G. Roberts was ushered into the Map Room of the White House on Wednesday night to re-administer the oath of office to President Barack Obama because the original oath on Tuesday had a word out of sequence.

White House spokesman Robert Gibbs said the move was made out of "an abundance of caution" in consultation with White House Counsel Greg Craig. Obama's second swearing-in, devoid of the pomp of the initial event, took place at 7:35 p.m. in the presence of a few aides and a press pool. The chief justice was wearing a court robe. "Are you ready to take the oath?" Roberts said. "I am," Obama said, "And we're going to do it very slowly."

Read more: http://www.mcclatchydc.com/227/story/60448.html



... Lest there be any doubt ....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dflprincess Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-21-09 07:32 PM
Response to Reply #19
20. I hope Roberts just read it rather than trying to reciting it
Maybe he'll be inspired and read the rest of the Constitution as well.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
alsame Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-21-09 07:32 PM
Response to Reply #19
21. "And we're going to do it very slowly". What he didn't add was
"Because you're another incompetent Bush appointee".
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Gormy Cuss Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-21-09 07:44 PM
Response to Reply #19
23. Not the first time it's happened.
Both Chester A. Arthur and Calvin Coolidge took the oath twice.

Justice Roberts should have used a script the first time.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pleah Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-21-09 07:54 PM
Response to Reply #23
25. I'm glad you know the other two Presidents that took the oath twice.
Thanks. :)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Wizard777 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-21-09 07:44 PM
Response to Original message
24. The should have told the Republicans If you have another 160 million we'll do it over again.
We know how fond they are of do overs.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kmdemqueen Donating Member (226 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-21-09 08:07 PM
Response to Original message
28. Does this matter
I don't believe people are making a big deal about this. I even caught that yesterday. What can you say , you know who Roberts was appointed by. That says everything.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RamboLiberal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-21-09 09:09 PM
Response to Original message
33. Good grief - CNN makes somewhat of a big deal about them not letting
in TV cameras on AC360 at top of hour. But they did play the audio with pic of Roberts administering the oath to Obama in the map room.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
proust78 Donating Member (54 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-21-09 09:09 PM
Response to Original message
34. Does this mean he gets to be prez for 8 years? Woot woot!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mac56 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-21-09 09:13 PM
Response to Original message
35. I'm surprised it was even necessary.
I understood that Obama would have become president at noon yesterday, whether he took the oath or not. I always thought the oath is just a formality. Do I have this wrong?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
onenote Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-21-09 09:27 PM
Response to Reply #35
38. the oath is required by the constitution
whether a minor misstatement of the wording would actually nullify the oath is pretty dubious, but rather than have it be an issue, the simple answer was to take it again.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
truthisfreedom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-21-09 09:36 PM
Response to Reply #38
39. Now watch the freeps claim his executive orders on the first day don't count.
More do-overs? Hee-hee!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Politicalboi Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-21-09 10:01 PM
Response to Original message
41. I saw the picture
Edited on Wed Jan-21-09 10:02 PM by Politicalboi
But didn't see the bible. Was he really using the Koran? LOL! What is he hiding? What do we know about President B.Hussein Obama? :sarcasm: Let the Pitty Party Begin!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Historic NY Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-21-09 10:18 PM
Response to Original message
49. Its a damn good thing we have a Constitutional scholar at the helm...
cause the CJ is a worthless twit.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
david13 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-21-09 10:19 PM
Response to Original message
50. Calvin Cooliedge & Chester Arthur
took the oath over, as it was flubbed.
Roberts is an idiot. Even an idiot ought to be able to do it right.
But. Obama should have said wait a minute Judge, let's start again and get this right.
Two of the best of politics, Obama, America's best politician, and Roberts, America's Chief Justice, idiot or not, and they can't do it?
Nader. Obama didn't have any problem with Nader, did he?
Well now, why is that?
dc
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
muriel_volestrangler Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-21-09 11:47 PM
Response to Reply #50
59. Nader? You're trying to spin this into a positive for Nader???
I'll give you a '10' for the most incredible bit of acrobatics ever attempted on a bulletin board. :eyes:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
zehnkatzen Donating Member (769 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-21-09 10:22 PM
Response to Original message
52. Great. Our Takeover Plans Are Complete ...
... now we proclaim the socialist worker save-the-whales green-recycling union-run adequate-pay-for-everyone accessable-health-care gay-marryin' people's paradise that we always wanted to have!

Yesss. Exxcellent!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pasto76 Donating Member (835 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-21-09 10:53 PM
Response to Original message
56. just like to remind the freepers of the improptu poll we did a few years back
wherein hundreds of DU'ers had actually served, and a large portion of that having served in combat.

Maybe a few dozen freepers could claim any service, and it was mostly air force and navy POGE jobs.

SUCK IT.

SGT PASTO
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NavyDavy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-22-09 02:24 PM
Response to Reply #56
95. sorry dude but without the navy and the air force who soften up
enemies and save footsoldiers lives we may not have been as successful as we have been in many confilicts. so kiss my navy arse.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
poverlay Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-21-09 11:31 PM
Response to Original message
57. No bible. Does that mean that this is no longer a "Christian Nation"? n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dreamnightwind Donating Member (863 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-22-09 06:53 AM
Response to Original message
63. payback?
Roberts' flub was probably an accident, but I believe Obama voted against confirming Roberts to the Supreme Court. Interesting.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
undeterred Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-22-09 08:08 AM
Response to Original message
68. Obama Sworn In Again, Using the Right Words
Source: Washington Post

In golf, they call it a mulligan. A do-over. There's no formal name for what President Obama and Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. did last night.

After flubbing his one role on Inauguration Day -- administering the oath of office to Obama -- Roberts traveled to the White House to re-administer the oath. Just to make sure.

"We decided it was so much fun . . .," Obama joked while sitting on a couch in the Map Room. Obama stood and walked over to make small talk with pool reporters as Roberts donned his black robe.

"Are you ready to take the oath?" Roberts asked. "I am, and we're going to do it very slowly," Obama replied.



Read more: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/20...



:shrug: well at least nobody can complain about that now
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
truthisfreedom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-22-09 08:08 AM
Response to Reply #68
69. Rockin! I knew he'd do it over.
This is one thing he can't afford to screw up.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FiveGoodMen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-22-09 08:08 AM
Response to Reply #69
72. That's right. Never give the bastards anything they can use against you!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ThisThreadIsSatire Donating Member (697 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-22-09 08:08 AM
Response to Reply #68
70. And the asshole wonders why Obama voted against his
nomination to the Court.

BTW, has anyone confirmed the reports that Bush had his fingers crossed when he took the oath?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MiddleRiverRefugee Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-22-09 08:08 AM
Response to Reply #68
71. Just in case no one thinks the Oath is all that big a deal...
Edited on Wed Jan-21-09 10:13 PM by MiddleRiverRefugee
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Historic NY Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-22-09 08:08 AM
Response to Reply #68
73. I have to sign an oath book every year before I act...
it used to be read to us but now we are allowed to read it and sign ourselves. It is witnessed.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
david13 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-22-09 08:08 AM
Response to Reply #68
74. Obama
should have had the sense to say to him "Wait, Judge Roberts, let's do that again, only this time ...
DON'T SCREW IT UP!"
dc
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
onenote Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-22-09 10:11 AM
Response to Reply #74
89. Obama, of course, had the sense not to say that.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FightingIrish Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-22-09 08:08 AM
Response to Reply #68
75. Something isn't right about Roberts's screw-up
We all get tongue-tied and transpose words at times but the construct he used, "president to the United States" is hard to explain. Do you ever say "president to..." anything? What was he thinking?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lonestarnot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-22-09 08:08 AM
Response to Reply #75
76. He is just a fucking idiot! Dirty bastard!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
GoddessOfGuinness Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-22-09 08:08 AM
Response to Reply #75
78. I know I'm going to get panned for this, but...........
It sounded to me like President Obama may have been a little quick to start speaking, which would explain his "and we're going to do it very slowly" comment today. Obama jumped the gun, then Roberts screwed up by saying "President to the United States". It was freezing outside. Obama was most likely tired and excited at the same time. Roberts, administering his first oath of office to a president, was undoubtedly excited too, and probably could have used a cheat sheet.

I don't like Roberts any more than anybody else here, but I think this was not that big a deal.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
undeterred Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-22-09 08:08 AM
Response to Reply #78
80. I agree.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
onenote Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-22-09 10:11 AM
Response to Reply #78
88. it was a minor fender bender, not a train wreck
and it was, as you suggest, the result of a combination of things. Traditionally, the CJ says "I, (name of president-elect) do solemnly swear" and then pauses, at which point the p-e repeats that part of the oath before the CJ continues to the next part. However, Roberts paused a moment after the "I, Barack Hussein Obama" part and Obama jumped in just as Roberts was going to continue with the "do solemnly swear" part. I heard a recording the other day of an earlier swearing in -- maybe BUsh I, where the p-e almost did the same thing -- started to repeat before the CJ was finished. Once Obama and Roberts had gotten a bit tongue tied, their concentration was off, making for a rather bumpy, but not terribly flawed, rendition of the oath. I'm glad Obama repeated it just so the issue could be put to rest. But I'm still waiting for anyone to cite to a court case finding that the minor misstatement of a required oath (whether required by federal or state law) nullified that oath. Its likely, if not downright certain, that in the history of oath taking, this isn't the first time someone has rearranged a word or two.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
GoddessOfGuinness Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-22-09 01:39 PM
Response to Reply #88
92. Those who would take delight in impeding Obama's presidency
have already started their gum-flapping. It's not surprising.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
muriel_volestrangler Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-22-09 08:08 AM
Response to Reply #68
77. And thus the RW conspiracy theory for the next 4 years is born
Why? Because they didn't use a bible this time. So the rabid basement-dwellers will be convinced this was all a plot which Roberts was in on so that Obama could get away with not swearing on a bible for the 'real' oath.

I expect they'll claim he had a microfilm Koran hidden between his fingers before too long.

Freepland has already made up a claim that Condi Rice was president from 12:00 to 12:01, and so she was the first black (and female, for that matter) president.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HopeHoops Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-22-09 08:08 AM
Response to Reply #68
79. And research-challenged FOX will probably claim nothing he did before the 2nd oath taking is legal.
FOX should really consider hiring someone who knows how to use "The Google", but that might introduce facts into the mix - never mind.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tomp Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-22-09 09:10 AM
Response to Original message
83. great. i feel better now, but...
...why was biden's oath different? his contained the phrase "...against all enemies foreign or domestic...". why not obama's?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
guitar man Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-22-09 09:21 AM
Response to Original message
87. that'll shut 'em up!
:rofl:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
marshall Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-22-09 10:13 AM
Response to Original message
90. Better safe than sorry
They both seem to have taken it with a good sense of humor.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JohnWxy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-22-09 02:06 PM
Response to Original message
93. I hope justice WArren can read better than he can memorize - jerk!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Mon Jul 28th 2014, 01:51 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC