|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
ManintheMiddle
Joined: 20 Oct 2008
|
 Posted: Wed Jan 21, 2009 8:36 pm Post subject: NOTICE THE SERIOUS PROBLEM WITH OBAMA'S OATH OF OFFICE? |
 |
|
In the first moments of Obama's presidency (he became president at noon before being actual sworn in, as often happens) we witnessed a flub of the lines in the oath of office. Both Roberts and Obama messed up.
But did you happen to notice the more serious problem with the oath-taking?
No, not the fact that today Obama's staff decided to have him retake the oath with Roberts.
No, not the fact that the Lincoln Bible wasn't there; indeed there was no Bible.
No, not the fact that the Chief Justice and the new President made gaffes.
Instead, it was the mainstream media's reaction to the swearing-in ceremony. (Only FoxNews commentators got it right, not surprisingly).
CNN's Wolf Blitzer and Anderson Cooper were nearly tripping over their own words decrying and ridiculling Justice Roberts for not even being able to manage 35 words properly.
But it was actually Obama who threw things off, jumping the gun by repeating the first words of the pledge before Roberts was finished.
Now I don't for a minute blame Obama for this, given he was probably nervous and the event has been so hyped up, with some in the media likening him to a new Messiah.
What I dislike is that they didn't give Roberts the benefit of the doubt because they were carried away by their emotions. This gives journalism a bad name and of course neither had the decency to retract their accusation after viewing the replay.
Then this jewel of journalism again today:
| Quote: |
WASHINGTON � After the flub heard around the world, President Barack Obama has taken the oath of office. Again. Chief Justice John Roberts delivered the oath to Obama on Wednesday night at the White House � a rare do-over. The surprise moment came in response to Tuesday's much-noticed stumble, when Roberts got the words of the oath a little off, which prompted Obama to do so, too.
Don't worry, the White House says: Obama has still been president since noon on Inauguration Day.
Nevertheless, Obama and Roberts went through the drill again out of what White House counsel Greg Craig called "an abundance of caution."
This time, the scene was the White House Map Room in front of a small group of reporters, not the Capitol platform before the whole watching world.
"We decided that because it was so much fun ...," Obama joked to reporters who followed press secretary Robert Gibbs into the room. No TV camera crews or news photographers were allowed in. A few of Obama's closest aides were there, along with a White House photographer.
Roberts put on his black robe.
"Are you ready to take the oath?" he said.
"Yes, I am," Obama said. "And we're going to do it very slowly."
Roberts then led Obama through the oath without any missteps.
The president said he did not have his Bible with him, but that the oath was binding anyway.
The original, bungled version on Tuesday caught observers by surprise and then got replayed on cable news shows.
It happened when Obama interrupted Roberts midway through the opening line, in which the president repeats his name and solemnly swears.
Next in the oath is the phrase " ... that I will faithfully execute the office of president of the United States." But Roberts rearranged the order of the words, not saying "faithfully" until after "president of the United States."
That appeared to throw Obama off. He stopped abruptly at the word "execute."
Recognizing something was off, Roberts then repeated the phrase, putting "faithfully" in the right place but without repeating "execute."
But Obama then repeated Roberts' original, incorrect version: "... the office of president of the United States faithfully."
Craig, the White House lawyer, said in a statement Wednesday evening: "We believe the oath of office was administered effectively and that the president was sworn in appropriately yesterday. Yet the oath appears in the Constitution itself. And out of the abundance of caution, because there was one word out of sequence, Chief Justice John Roberts will administer the oath a second time."
The Constitution is clear about the exact wording of the oath and as a result, some constitutional experts have said that a do-over probably wasn't necessary but also couldn't hurt. Two other previous presidents have repeated the oath because of similar issues, Calvin Coolidge and Chester A. Arthur. |
Notice how he blames Roberts but then later contradicts that claim, acknowledging that Obama screwed up first, which he did.
Amazing: even when signposting the event, the liberal journalists put their spin on it.
The announcer also screwed up by saying that Aretha Franklin was going to sing "God Bless America." I wish she had because I prefer it to "My Country Tis of Thee," which uses the melody from the British national anthem.
Anyway, what did you think of this or the rest of the ceremony? |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Jandar
Joined: 11 Jun 2008
|
| Posted: Wed Jan 21, 2009 8:52 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Ummm  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
NoExplode
Joined: 15 Oct 2008
|
| Posted: Wed Jan 21, 2009 10:58 pm Post subject: Re: NOTICE THE SERIOUS PROBLEM WITH OBAMA'S OATH OF OFFICE? |
|
|
| ManintheMiddle wrote: |
In the first moments of Obama's presidency (he became president at noon before being actual sworn in, as often happens) we witnessed a flub of the lines in the oath of office. Both Roberts and Obama messed up.
But did you happen to notice the more serious problem with the oath-taking?
No, not the fact that today Obama's staff decided to have him retake the oath with Roberts.
No, not the fact that the Lincoln Bible wasn't there; indeed there was no Bible.
No, not the fact that the Chief Justice and the new President made gaffes.
Instead, it was the mainstream media's reaction to the swearing-in ceremony. (Only FoxNews commentators got it right, not surprisingly).
CNN's Wolf Blitzer and Anderson Cooper were nearly tripping over their own words decrying and ridiculling Justice Roberts for not even being able to manage 35 words properly.
But it was actually Obama who threw things off, jumping the gun by repeating the first words of the pledge before Roberts was finished.
Now I don't for a minute blame Obama for this, given he was probably nervous and the event has been so hyped up, with some in the media likening him to a new Messiah.
What I dislike is that they didn't give Roberts the benefit of the doubt because they were carried away by their emotions. This gives journalism a bad name and of course neither had the decency to retract their accusation after viewing the replay.
Then this jewel of journalism again today:
| Quote: |
WASHINGTON � After the flub heard around the world, President Barack Obama has taken the oath of office. Again. Chief Justice John Roberts delivered the oath to Obama on Wednesday night at the White House � a rare do-over. The surprise moment came in response to Tuesday's much-noticed stumble, when Roberts got the words of the oath a little off, which prompted Obama to do so, too.
Don't worry, the White House says: Obama has still been president since noon on Inauguration Day.
Nevertheless, Obama and Roberts went through the drill again out of what White House counsel Greg Craig called "an abundance of caution."
This time, the scene was the White House Map Room in front of a small group of reporters, not the Capitol platform before the whole watching world.
"We decided that because it was so much fun ...," Obama joked to reporters who followed press secretary Robert Gibbs into the room. No TV camera crews or news photographers were allowed in. A few of Obama's closest aides were there, along with a White House photographer.
Roberts put on his black robe.
"Are you ready to take the oath?" he said.
"Yes, I am," Obama said. "And we're going to do it very slowly."
Roberts then led Obama through the oath without any missteps.
The president said he did not have his Bible with him, but that the oath was binding anyway.
The original, bungled version on Tuesday caught observers by surprise and then got replayed on cable news shows.
It happened when Obama interrupted Roberts midway through the opening line, in which the president repeats his name and solemnly swears.
Next in the oath is the phrase " ... that I will faithfully execute the office of president of the United States." But Roberts rearranged the order of the words, not saying "faithfully" until after "president of the United States."
That appeared to throw Obama off. He stopped abruptly at the word "execute."
Recognizing something was off, Roberts then repeated the phrase, putting "faithfully" in the right place but without repeating "execute."
But Obama then repeated Roberts' original, incorrect version: "... the office of president of the United States faithfully."
Craig, the White House lawyer, said in a statement Wednesday evening: "We believe the oath of office was administered effectively and that the president was sworn in appropriately yesterday. Yet the oath appears in the Constitution itself. And out of the abundance of caution, because there was one word out of sequence, Chief Justice John Roberts will administer the oath a second time."
The Constitution is clear about the exact wording of the oath and as a result, some constitutional experts have said that a do-over probably wasn't necessary but also couldn't hurt. Two other previous presidents have repeated the oath because of similar issues, Calvin Coolidge and Chester A. Arthur. |
Notice how he blames Roberts but then later contradicts that claim, acknowledging that Obama screwed up first, which he did.
Amazing: even when signposting the event, the liberal journalists put their spin on it.
The announcer also screwed up by saying that Aretha Franklin was going to sing "God Bless America." I wish she had because I prefer it to "My Country Tis of Thee," which uses the melody from the British national anthem.
Anyway, what did you think of this or the rest of the ceremony? |
You're probably a Republican wankster, but you are right. I voted for the guy, started a thread about the Oath in Current Events, and my fellow Democrats are slamming me. I love Obama, but the white-guilt God-worship of him does make me ashamed to be white. (Not that I'd ever trade places with Obama  ) I mean, it's not a big deal, he screwed up the oath, but now it's like Animal Farm. He Did Not Screw Up Oath. You remember wrong. All Hail Obama. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mindmetoo
Joined: 02 Feb 2004
|
| Posted: Thu Jan 22, 2009 3:45 am Post subject: |
|
|
Obama jumped the gun (you'd be cooler under this amazing pressure?). Roberts flubbed his lines.
Because people will whine and complain Obama retook the oath.
The end. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ManintheMiddle
Joined: 20 Oct 2008
|
| Posted: Thu Jan 22, 2009 4:27 am Post subject: |
|
|
mindmetoo snarled:
| Quote: |
| Obama jumped the gun (you'd be cooler under this amazing pressure?). Roberts flubbed his lines. |
Maybe not; but it wasn't my point, now, was it? Unless you have SRD (selective reading disorder), you'll notice that I didn't in the least fault Obama and I acknowledged that Roberts goofed too.
But it was likely precipitated by Obama's overeagerness. So while what transpired doesn't amount to a hill of beans, the media reaction is yet again indicative of its love-fest for this man and its outright bias.
Only a partisan wouldn't notice that.
And speaking of partisans, I am not nor have I ever been either a registered Republican or Democrat, as my username suggests.
Break out of your binary mindset, bruddah, and smell the flowers of paradise.
Hot chick in your avatar, by the way. Looks like Shu Qi, the Taiwanese *beep*-cum-B movie star. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mzeno
Joined: 12 Oct 2008
|
| Posted: Thu Jan 22, 2009 9:51 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Obama did not not interrupt Roberts. Roberts STOPPED speaking after he said "Obama". Obama then began, "I, Barack Obama," and was then interrupted by Roberts, who continued, talking OVER Obama. The phrases, "I Barack Obama, due solemnly swear, " are traditionally recited separately, not as one line. It was Roberts mistake all the way. Can somebody please link the video? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
caniff
Joined: 03 Feb 2004
Location: All over the map
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
canuckistan
Mod Team
Joined: 17 Jun 2003
Location: Training future GS competitors.....
|
| Posted: Thu Jan 22, 2009 10:00 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Must be a conspiracy. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mzeno
Joined: 12 Oct 2008
|
| Posted: Fri Jan 23, 2009 5:56 am Post subject: |
|
|
| oops. Just watched the video. Obama does interrupt Roberts during the first line. I'm doubling up on my medication today! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
hogwonguy1979
Joined: 22 Dec 2003
Location: the racoon den
|
| Posted: Fri Jan 23, 2009 6:59 am Post subject: |
|
|
and your and the folks on fix noise complaint about him not doing the second oath with his hand on the bible is??????????
there in nothing in the constitution about being sworn in on a bible. how many other federal employees are sworn into their office on the bible? uh not many again not a constitutional requirement
also the powers of the presidency automatically fell to obama at one second past noon on jan 20. he didnt have to be sworn in that is a mere formalilty. lbj was president for about 90 minutes after kennedy was declared dead before he was sworn in. the law has been modified so there is no loss of leadership.
and oh yeah if it was an issue joe biden had already been sworn in as vp at about 11:55am and hes not running to the courts to say hes president.
stop reading those tom clancy novels and watching fix noise folks |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
khyber
Joined: 16 Jan 2003
Location: Compunction Junction
|
| Posted: Fri Jan 23, 2009 7:40 am Post subject: |
|
|
| I guess this is what we can expect after Bush the Ass was called on his flubs. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mises
Joined: 05 Nov 2007
Location: retired
|
| Posted: Fri Jan 23, 2009 7:42 am Post subject: |
|
|
| 4 threads on this... Almost sitcky territory. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Kuros
Joined: 27 Apr 2004
|
| Posted: Fri Jan 23, 2009 9:07 am Post subject: |
|
|
| mises wrote: |
| 4 threads on this... Almost sitcky territory. |
I notice certain posters gravitate towards issues with higher noise-to-substance ratios than others. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ManintheMiddle
Joined: 20 Oct 2008
|
| Posted: Fri Jan 23, 2009 9:09 am Post subject: |
|
|
mzeno unclouded his head:
| Quote: |
| oops. Just watched the video. Obama does interrupt Roberts during the first line. I'm doubling up on my medication today! |
Cheer up, you're now qualified to work for CNN.
Mr. Mediocre Ohio State University alum wrote:
| Quote: |
| watching fix noise folks |
FoxNews was the only network which got it right. But, hey, you don't even watch, so how would you know? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
