Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies > Elections
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 01-20-2009, 03:49 PM
 
Location: Turn Left at Greenland
17,764 posts, read 39,753,878 times
Reputation: 8253

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by carolinacowboy View Post
i'm not a conspiracy nut, but did anyone else catch it? He stumbled during his repeating and taking of the oath. He said the main part backwards too. Even after the officer repeated it back to him a second time, he still said it back wrong. I'm surprised they did not require him to state it correctly. After all, it is more then just a ceremony, it is a declaration of the official presidential duties. Years ago when i was sworn in as a le officer, every single specific word had to be stated correctly.
oh no!!!!! Somebody file a lawsuit!!!!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 01-20-2009, 03:52 PM
 
Location: here
24,873 posts, read 36,198,006 times
Reputation: 32726
Quote:
Originally Posted by CarolinaCowboy View Post
I'm not a conspiracy nut, but did anyone else catch it? He stumbled during his repeating and taking of the oath. He said the main part backwards too. Even after the officer repeated it back to him a second time, he still said it back wrong. I'm surprised they did not require him to state it correctly. After all, it is more then just a ceremony, it is a declaration of the official Presidential duties. Years ago when I was sworn in as a LE officer, every single specific word had to be stated correctly.
someone probably already said this, but NBC reported that the oath was given to him incorrectly. He probably had it memorized and the chief justice screwed it up.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-20-2009, 03:53 PM
 
Location: Santa Monica
4,714 posts, read 8,465,436 times
Reputation: 1052
The Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States of America screwed it up.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-20-2009, 03:54 PM
 
Location: here
24,873 posts, read 36,198,006 times
Reputation: 32726
Quote:
Originally Posted by bentlebee View Post
Well Obama did correct him self and it was funny to watch...he was very excited and clumsy, but who wouldn't be nervous....for all the Bush haters I will add something to hate Bush even more for...Bush did a better job being sworn in!

I wish the president good luck and great that he got what he wished for!
Well, gee, certainly taking to oath is the most important thing a president can do...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-20-2009, 03:56 PM
 
19,198 posts, read 31,493,607 times
Reputation: 4013
Quote:
Originally Posted by pw72 View Post
If you read the transcript, it is clear they BOTH got it wrong. First, Roberts said it wrong. Obama then paused, Roberts read it correctly, then Obama repeated it wrong. Case closed. We have a new President.
It doesn't matter at all in the grander scheme of things, but if the point is to be debated, here is the annotated transcript...

ROBERTS: ... that I will execute the office of president to the United States faithfully...
No, that's wrong. The correct wording is ... that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States. Roberts has misplaced the word "faithfully" and switched an "of" to a "to".

OBAMA: ... that I will execute...
Obama begins the recitation as Roberts had administered it, pausing over the error as Roberts tries to correct...

ROBERTS: ... faithfully the office of president of the United States...
Still wrong...it's faithfully execute, but Obama has already said execute...

OBAMA: ... the office of president of the United States faithfully...
Obama completes Roberts' original version, correcting the "to" to "of".

The two of them proceed through the remainder of the oath.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-20-2009, 04:02 PM
 
273 posts, read 343,054 times
Reputation: 72
I feel terrible for Obama that Roberts has screwed that bit up for him....Not exactly an iconic swearing in.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-20-2009, 04:03 PM
 
Location: Earth
24,620 posts, read 28,302,818 times
Reputation: 11416
Here's the most important part of his taking the oath: http://images.politico.com/global/09...artoon_600.jpg.
People proudly supporting our new President.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-20-2009, 04:06 PM
 
Location: Land of 10000 Lakes +
5,554 posts, read 6,743,530 times
Reputation: 8575
Quote:
Originally Posted by DC at the Ridge View Post
Am I losing it, or is this utterly incoherent?
Utterly, trust me.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-20-2009, 04:12 PM
 
Location: Near Manito
20,169 posts, read 24,350,249 times
Reputation: 15291
Quote:
Originally Posted by Old Gringo View Post
A speech impediment isn't an indicator of low IQ.
But the ability to speak in complete sentences often is nearly always an indicator of higher intelligence. Roberts does so, consistently. He listens, he thinks, and he replies logically and gracefully. It is a pleasure -- and a refreshing change, given the classlessness of most contemporary public figures -- to listen to him speak.

I'm sure Mr. Obama enjoyed what Justice Roberts had to say today -- gaffes and all!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-20-2009, 04:13 PM
 
790 posts, read 1,734,005 times
Reputation: 482
Isn't this along the lines of how many Obama critics also said he would be sworn in using a Koran? I saw a Bible under his hand
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies > Elections
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top