Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Brush - off your Tin Foil Hat

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 (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
TWiley Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-21-09 11:52 AM
Original message
Brush - off your Tin Foil Hat
I took Monday and Tuesday off from work to enjoy the inauguration. Two things concerned me while I watched the tube. First was Chief Justice Roberts totally fucking up the 38-word presidential oath, and later in the evening when the Obama's were virtually abandoned in the parade viewing structure. I could see the First Lady's breath, and she was noticeably cold. WTF? I felt like calling and saying .... hey, the First Lady is cold. Run a couple extension cords to the building and get some heat out there.

Of greater concern was the obvious absence of the joint chiefs in the viewing booth. The showed up individually to salute their troops as they walked by, but NONE stayed with the President Elect. Are our military leaders a bunch of pussies and cannot handle the cold, or was the freezing out of Obama some kind of message.

When I returned to work today, the racists greeted me with clenched fists and chants of "Black Power" as I walked by. The talk around the shop was that Obama was not a legitimate president due to the oath fuck-up, and that our armed forces were not obligated to obey his command. I remember the tension between the military and JFK years ago, and how pissed off the president got when the South Vietnamese president got assassinated while in CIA custody.

Does anyone know why the Joint Chiefs would not join our president during the parade?

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
nichomachus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-21-09 11:56 AM
Response to Original message
1. My guess is
that the parade was running really late. Most of these people had been on the go since early morning and had to leave the area, fight their way through horrendous traffic, clean up, change, and then fight their way back to attend the inaugural balls that night. So, in order to do that, they had to leave early.

The Obamas had no such problems (a) because they were already home and (b) when the president's motorcade decides to go somewhere, all other traffic is stopped. Even then, they didn't show up at some of the balls until after midnight.

You need to cut them some slack. I really don't think it was about the cold.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Warpy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-21-09 11:56 AM
Response to Original message
2. Maybe he's already talking about putting them on a diet
which is something this country desperately needs to do, trim that bloated Pentagon budget by eliminating fat cat pet projects at first and eventually redefining the military's purpose as a defensive force instead of an imperial one.

It's either that or they're a bunch of wusses.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TWiley Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-21-09 03:01 PM
Response to Reply #2
17. Well, he did bitch-slap bush with some carry-over to them.
close gitmo, no more pre-emptive invasions, new leadership, pull out of Iraq and so on .....
I am sure they were thrilled.

I do think the oath fuck-up was no mistake. I do think it could be related.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
marylanddem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-21-09 11:57 AM
Response to Original message
3. The absence of the Joint Chiefs disturbed me, too -

As did Roberts' monumental fuckup. The Obamas looked downright lonely in that big empty building, albeit with two freezing secret service guys behind them. Wasn't it supposed to be heated? What the hell was going on with all that?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TWiley Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-21-09 02:29 PM
Response to Reply #3
10. Yes, My feeling exactly
Mr. Obama's children were freezing too. Why couldn't those military big-shots whip up some kind of heat? Oh, maybe they are too important for that, not enough warrior worship?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Javaman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-21-09 11:57 AM
Response to Original message
4. you're right, this is a tinfoil hatter for sure.
you are reading waaaaay to much into it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
KittyWampus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-21-09 11:59 AM
Response to Original message
5. If the Joint Chiefs had been told they were to be at a certain spot during the parade
they would have been there.

PERIOD.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TWiley Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-21-09 02:31 PM
Response to Reply #5
11. Yes, maybe they are simpletons and need a bit of direction.
sheesh. I would think it would come naturally to stand with the new President-elect and be man enough to freeze right along with him.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
firedupdem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-21-09 11:59 AM
Response to Original message
6. I hate racist people. I told my son to call me immediately if he
has one issue today.

I didn't like them being left by themselves viewing the parade. All those empty chairs with names on them. Fuckers. Anyway, the President and First Lady and the Biden's stood the entire time and acknowledged every band that came by. If any of them purposely froze them out, they look like petty fucking assholes.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TWiley Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-21-09 02:34 PM
Response to Reply #6
14. Yes they showed absolute CLASS
They stood there alone and acknowleged ALL participants. I heard they even requested a GLBT entry for the first time also.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bdamomma Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-21-09 03:22 PM
Response to Reply #14
22. The GLBT band was great.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
glitch Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-21-09 12:03 PM
Response to Original message
7. I thought the inaugural parade was brutal, but I've never bothered to watch one before.
Are they always that long? It should have lasted 2 hours at the most, IMO. Preferably 1 hour.

Who organizes it anyway?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
elocs Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-21-09 12:07 PM
Response to Original message
8. This is DU and tinfoil hats never need brushing.
They are always polished and at the ready.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TWiley Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-21-09 02:32 PM
Response to Reply #8
13. eh eh .... i got clear-coat on mine .... it has a feather on the side too !
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
elocs Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-21-09 03:09 PM
Response to Reply #13
19. Oooo, now that I'd like to see but does it have batteries? n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
eowyn_of_rohan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-21-09 02:42 PM
Response to Reply #8
15. And that's not necessarily a bad thing
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
elocs Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-21-09 03:14 PM
Response to Reply #15
20. Cry "wolf" too often when there is none there and see who believes when one is at the doorstep.
It's not necessarily a good thing either.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
eowyn_of_rohan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-21-09 05:53 PM
Response to Reply #20
23. Mistrust has been a valid concern for the past 8 years
and a healthy skepticism has served us well. Those who cried "e-voting fraud" over the last election were deemed tinfoilers.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
elocs Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-21-09 06:29 PM
Response to Reply #23
24. There were many things posted here that went far beyond any healthy skepticism.
Because someone is right about 1 thing out of 10 does not make them a prophet or prescient. Even a stopped clock is right twice a day and if you predict gloom and disaster long enough you will eventually be right, but have little credibility.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LiberalEsto Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-21-09 12:29 PM
Response to Original message
9. Security issues, perhaps?
Like not wanting all the top honchos in one spot, just in case?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TWiley Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-21-09 02:31 PM
Response to Reply #9
12. Yes, maybe but I did not hear any reports.
All the stands on either side were vacant also.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
4lbs Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-21-09 02:42 PM
Response to Original message
16. The Joint Chiefs were actually Cheney-bots that Evil Dick was controlling from his wheelchair.
:D
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TWiley Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-21-09 03:02 PM
Response to Original message
18. This just in from another thread :
The presidential oath of office should be re-administered to Barack Obama because of his flub during Tuesdays swearing-in ceremony, legal experts say.

Because of a mistake by Chief Justice John Roberts, Obama transposed one of the words in the oath. He should have said he will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, but instead repeated Roberts cue and said he will execute the Office of President of the United States faithfully.

Josh White of the Washington Post noted: The presidential oath of office is required of a new president before he can execute his power, and the Constitution is clear that its 35 words must be spoken exactly.

Jonathan Turley, a professor of constitutional law at George Washington University, told the Post: He should probably go ahead and take the oath again. If he doesnt, there are going to be people who for the next four years are going to argue that he didnt meet the constitutional standard.

(Excerpt) Read more at newsmax.com ...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bombero1956 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-21-09 03:18 PM
Response to Original message
21. where was the heat
I did see heat registers near the windows. At a cost of $2.8 million it should have had heat and a bathroom.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
salguine Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-21-09 06:53 PM
Response to Original message
25. It's possible that it was a security measure. The Secretary of Defense was
deliberately not at the inauguration because if his position in line of succession. It's very unusual to have the first three people in linethe President, Vice President, and Speaker of the Houseall together in a large outdoor gathering like yesterday's, simply because they don't want them all together often in a public setting like that, in case something happens. That's specifically why Gates wasn't present yesterday.

It's possible that they didn't want to whole Joint Chiefs together in one spot in public like that for the same reason.
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 Dec 18th 2014, 06:12 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) 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