Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

On CSPAN, the mod is saying that the oath of office has to be administered EXACTLY, or

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 » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
Mist Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-21-09 06:50 AM
Original message
On CSPAN, the mod is saying that the oath of office has to be administered EXACTLY, or
it may have to be done over. It thought I saw a number of posts yesterday saying that it was more a matter of once *'s term ends, Obama IS the next President. What's going on? Will there have to be a "do-over"?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
THUNDER HANDS Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-21-09 06:52 AM
Response to Original message
1. yes
four years from now
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bucky Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-21-09 06:54 AM
Response to Reply #1
5. As they said on Match Game, *that* is the definitive answer
Life would be easier if we could all just not pay attention to pissants. Sadly, under our form of government, pissants have the vote.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mmonk Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-21-09 07:22 AM
Response to Reply #1
18. Best answer award.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
alcibiades_mystery Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-21-09 06:52 AM
Response to Original message
2. The mod is an ignoramus
The oath isn't necessary at all.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
leftynyc Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-21-09 07:19 AM
Response to Reply #2
16. Actually it is
He must recite those words. What isn't necessary is having a SC judge (let alone the chief) administer it, anybody can - Michelle could have done it while they were on the parade route.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
merh Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-21-09 01:10 PM
Response to Reply #16
40. don't you know, it's part of the conspiracy
roberts was in on it, after all, O isn't a US citizen, he can't take the real oath, if he did he would have been struck down from above, zapped immediately by the powers that be.

:sarcasm:

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Connie_Corleone Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-21-09 06:53 AM
Response to Original message
3. Obama became President at noon, oath or no oath.
Edited on Wed Jan-21-09 06:53 AM by Connie_Corleone
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mist Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-21-09 06:56 AM
Response to Reply #3
6. That's what I was seeing posted around yesterday. Also remarks that
the oath is largely a formality. So it took me aback that so much was made of it by the CSPAN mod a few minutes ago. She went on about how the oath has to be administered "exactly," and said it may have to be re-administered. If this isn't so, CSPAN needs to get a smack-down!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bobbie Jo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-21-09 01:58 PM
Response to Reply #3
42. Correct. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
treestar Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-21-09 06:54 AM
Response to Original message
4. If it came to litigation, I doubt it would be found to have to be exact
As long as the spirit of the thing was accomplished. The law is not that technical. When it comes to Constitutional interpretation, it is likely that the intent was that the President swear that he will faithfully execute the laws, and if he did swear to that (which he did) that'll be good enough.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mist Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-21-09 06:58 AM
Response to Reply #4
8. Yes, but I hate the idea of freeps and other wingnuts making a BFD out of it. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CTyankee Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-21-09 07:45 AM
Response to Reply #8
20. With all of our problems facing us, I don't know why we have to even think about this.
If the wingnuts start a fight over it, they'll find out soon enough that the American people only view them with MORE contempt than they do now...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EraOfResponsibility Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-21-09 08:41 AM
Response to Reply #8
30. exactly not to mention it ruined what could've been a beautiful moment :(
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DearAbby Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-21-09 01:35 PM
Response to Reply #8
41. So if the Wing Nuts take this to the Supreme Court
Who is sitting Chief Justice on the Supreme Court...gonna admit he royally fecked up, and the oath has to be redone? Its a petty issue with what is facing this country.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NYC Liberal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-21-09 06:58 AM
Response to Original message
7. Oath is necessary for actually carrying out the duties of the office
"Before he enter on the Execution of his Office, he shall take the following Oath or Affirmation:"

But it's unclear if the 20th Amendment actually superseded that or not. It says: "The terms of the President and Vice President shall end at noon on the 20th day of January."

At any rate, a "do-over" would consist of Obama taking 30 seconds in his office with a judge and saying it. That's it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mist Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-21-09 07:03 AM
Response to Reply #7
10. So it sounds like the oath is required. True, a "do-over" is no biggie, but it should
probably be public. Why give freeps the grist?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
me b zola Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-21-09 08:37 AM
Response to Reply #10
29. Because it gives them something to do
...and makes them sound as petty & divisive as they are. I say let them chew on that bone.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
leftynyc Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-21-09 07:20 AM
Response to Reply #7
17. He doesn't need a judge
The white house cook could do it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Liberal In Texas Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-21-09 08:11 AM
Response to Reply #17
28. If the cook is a notary. Any notary or officer of the court can administer the oath or
Edited on Wed Jan-21-09 08:17 AM by LibInTexas
affirmation. I have to administer oaths on occasion for my job. It's required that I be a notary (state and federal).

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NYC Liberal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-21-09 03:17 PM
Response to Reply #17
44. As LibInTexas said, if they're notarized, sure.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
nc4bo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-21-09 07:02 AM
Response to Original message
9. These ignorassants (C-Span mod/Freeps) said nothing as gwb trampled all over
the Constitution and everything it stands for. EVERYTHING.

How dare they even think they have any right to talk about what is right and what is not.

Fucking hypocrites the lot of them and WE, the PEOPLE, need to remind ALL of them of this, loudly and often.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ilsa Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-21-09 07:03 AM
Response to Original message
11. Since President Obama knows his Constitutional law, I'm sure he would
have told the Chief Justice, "Let's do it again, and this time let's get it right" if there was any question in his mind about the legality of his presidency.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mist Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-21-09 07:12 AM
Response to Reply #11
12. True. Besides, Obama did wait for Roberts to get the wording right! nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
UnrepentantUnitarian Donating Member (887 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-21-09 07:12 AM
Response to Reply #11
13. Good point, Ilsa!
Also yours too, nc4. He said the words, as suggested by the Chief Justice of the SCOTUS. Even if the order was not exact, he said the oath and swore to its intent and purpose.



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rasputin1952 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-21-09 07:14 AM
Response to Original message
14. As was stated, on at least 2 occasions in the past, the Oath
was re-taken in private later.

According to the Constitution, Article II, Section 1, (last paragraph):

Before he enter on the Execution of his Office, he shall take the following Oath or Affirmation:-"I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my Ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States"

Cut and dried, in order for the President to fulfill his duties, sign anything into Law or enact any Executive decisions, he must take said oath. As stated, at least twice, the Oath had been re-given immediately following the new President's address.

There are no requirements or recommendations as to who may give the Oath, Lyndon Johnson was given the Oath on AF1 after a judge in the area was found.

As for the gaffe Chief Justice Robert's pulled, I think it would be incredibly embarrassing if this would be taken to any some sort of legal challenge. Having a Chief Justice recuse himself because he made a verbal gaffe, showing the world that a USSC judge can't recite a basic part of the Constitution would be incredible...and funny as hell, since this was a bush appointment.

All things considered, this was mended immediately following President Obama's Inaugural Address.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CTyankee Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-21-09 07:50 AM
Response to Reply #14
21. Actually, I am not sure that Johnson had to take the oath. He already took the oath as VP
and his accession to the presidency on the death of a sitting president should just about do it...I think LBJ did it to calm the waters so to speak after the trauma of the assassination of JFK.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rasputin1952 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-21-09 08:00 AM
Response to Reply #21
25. There is a slight difference in wording...
president vs vice president. To me, it makes no difference, but to a lawyer, it would make all the diffeence in the world. Precednts had been set by all previous VP's elevated to president by the death/resigantion of the Chief Executive.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rasputin1952 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-21-09 08:00 AM
Response to Reply #21
26. Dupe post...
Edited on Wed Jan-21-09 08:01 AM by rasputin1952
:blush:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
leftynyc Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-21-09 07:18 AM
Response to Original message
15. For all we know
It was done prior to the event or even after the event. Roberts certainly isn't required to be there and Michelle could have easily given him the oath to recite while they were dressing for the balls. He just has to recite the words - there are no other obligations that must be met. Can we put this nonsense to rest now?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Caretha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-21-09 07:37 AM
Response to Original message
19. Let's think about this
with a small example. If you mess up your marriage vows, and I imagine a whole lot of ordinary folks including freepers have, does that mean you're not married? I don't think so. President Obama DID NOT mess up his oath.

This is a non-issue. And all I have to say to anyone and all idiotic knuckle draggers who bring it up in my presence will be...

Don't you dare! Don't you fucking DARE go there!!!

I've put up with almost more than I can stand for the last 8 years of criminals daily and blatantly breaking the law and ignoring the constitution, and I've got one nerve left and suggest no one so much as rub it the wrong way. In fact I think I have PTSD.

def: Post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) is a disorder that can develop following a traumatic event that threatens your safety or makes you feel helpless. Most people associate PTSD with battle-scarred soldiers and military combat is the most common cause in men but any overwhelming life experience can trigger PTSD, especially if the event is perceived as unpredictable and uncontrollable.

Following a traumatic event, almost everyone experiences at least some of the symptoms of PTSD. Its very common to have bad dreams, feel fearful or numb, and find it difficult to stop thinking about what happened. But for most people, these symptoms are short-lived. They may last for several days or even weeks, but they gradually lift.

Still waiting to exhale.

Caretha
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Patsy Stone Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-21-09 07:53 AM
Response to Reply #19
22. Princess Diana screwed up Prince Charles' name during the vows.
Unfortunately for her, it apparently didn't negate that marriage.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CTyankee Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-21-09 07:53 AM
Response to Reply #19
23. You are entitled to some R & R, Caretha. As are we all. I have long said that
living in the Bush presidency is like being in an abusive relationship, constantly fearing or being pummelled by a partner we can't get away from.

I cannot tell you the times I yearned to go live in Europe and had little fantasies, but reality brought me back to earth...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Caretha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-21-09 07:56 AM
Response to Reply #23
24. Thanks CT
I also have to go to the dentist this morning, so my "one last nerve" is a little jangled this morning.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CTyankee Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-21-09 08:50 AM
Response to Reply #24
31. Take care. Keep warm.
Let's just relax and savor the moment.

I know, it hasn't jelled yet with me either...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ITsec Donating Member (477 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-21-09 08:05 AM
Response to Original message
27. OK so if he does it over...
what else are the Freepers and Wingnuts going to find to bitch about?

Crimanies.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kenziemom06 Donating Member (52 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-21-09 10:18 AM
Response to Original message
32. It's always gonna be something...
some people are just never going to let him be -- remember what they did to the Clintons? it's going to be one thousand times worse for Obama -- we MUST be vigilant and remind them that it's THEIR TURN to be voices in the wilderness!!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DeschutesRiver Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-21-09 11:54 AM
Response to Original message
33. Obama is a constitutional law professor type and a lawyer
Edited on Wed Jan-21-09 11:59 AM by DeschutesRiver
I bet a billion bucks that the oath has already been re-administered in a 20 second re-do with witnesses, and videotaped. Problem solved. That is just how you tie up loose ends when stuff like this happens, and Obama is a guy who knows that well. I have complete faith in him that he has already done the necessary.

Non-issue already, but if it gives the freepers something to do with their time now that the birth certificate fake scam has ended, then I'd let 'em chew over this and hold out hope for as long as they wish before lowering the boom on them. Which is what happened with the phony birth cert. deal.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
suston96 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-21-09 12:19 PM
Response to Original message
34. I believe Obama said all the words... although he paused for the CJ to catch up....nt
Edited on Wed Jan-21-09 12:33 PM by suston96
Edited:

It didn't go exactly that way. Here's a transcript of the Roberts-Obama verbal tango (complete with stepped-on-feet):

ROBERTS: Are you prepared to take the oath, Senator?
OBAMA: I am.
ROBERTS: I, Barack Hussein Obama...
OBAMA: I, Barack...
ROBERTS: ... do solemnly swear...
OBAMA: I, Barack Hussein Obama, do solemnly swear...
ROBERTS: ... that I will l execute the office of president to the United States faithfully...
OBAMA: ... that I will execute...
ROBERTS: ... faithfully the office of president of the United States...
OBAMA: ... the office of president of the United States faithfully...
ROBERTS: ... and will to the best of my ability...
OBAMA: ... and will to the best of my ability...
ROBERTS: ... preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.
OBAMA: ... preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.
ROBERTS: So help you God?
OBAMA: So help me God.

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/44/2009/01/20/inaugura...
ROBERTS: Congratulations, Mr. President.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
question everything Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-21-09 12:56 PM
Response to Reply #34
38. Was it appropriate to address him as "Senator"?
since he resigned his office shortly after the elections?

Or do senators carry this title for the rest of their lives - unless something better came?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
anigbrowl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-21-09 01:07 PM
Response to Reply #38
39. Yes. Former senators are addressed as Senator (unless they enter a new office).
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BumRushDaShow Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-21-09 12:26 PM
Response to Original message
35. Executive Branch employees
actually sign a document with the oath (which can be administered orally as an option as well and is witnessed) upon employment. So I would think that Obama had already signed similar before the formal, oral oath ceremony. Note that when they swore in Senators, they had the oral oath but also "signed the book" with the written one.

If anyone recalls early footage of Obama walking through Capitol corridors before joining up with Pelosi, et al, to go out on the dais for the swearing-in - where at the initial showing of him, he had a fearful and pensive look on his face as he walked - THAT is when I think he had just had the power of the office transferred to him.

Fortunately before he actually went outside, he had calmed himself somewhat and summoned up the strength to hide the nervousness.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Sebastian Doyle Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-21-09 12:49 PM
Response to Original message
36. Freeper "logic"
OK: Having a dumbass occupy an office he was NOT elected to for 8 years, starting two wars based on lies, shredding the Constitution, nominating other unqualified idiots to the Supreme Court, and bankrupting the country.

Not OK: Previously mentioned unqualified idiot Supreme Court judge fucks up two words on the Presidential Oath of Office, so the President (who won in an electoral landslide, and was supported in person by millions at his inaguration) is now "illegitimate".

Yeah, keep drinking that Sterno, you goddamn morans. :eyes:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tigereye Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-21-09 12:49 PM
Response to Original message
37. he becomes POTUS at noon regardless, I think
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DavidDvorkin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-21-09 02:06 PM
Response to Original message
43. So all those guys who added "so help me God" at the end of the oath
weren't legitimately sworn in.

According to that logic.
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 Thu Jul 24th 2014, 08:36 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) 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