Obama Sworn in take 2

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by MacNut, Jan 22, 2009.

  1. MacNut macrumors Core

    MacNut

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2002
    Location:
    CT
    #1
    By Ed Henry
    CNN Senior White House Correspondent
    http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/01/22/obama.henry/
     
  2. Sky Blue Guest

    Sky Blue

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2005
    #2
    oh my gorsh! me didnae use a BIBLE!

    He's a muslin!
     
  3. MacNut thread starter macrumors Core

    MacNut

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2002
    Location:
    CT
    #3
    This became a big issue today at the press briefing.
     
  4. Sky Blue Guest

    Sky Blue

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2005
    #4
    I am already tired of the phrase "An abundance of caution."
     
  5. jonbravo77 macrumors 6502a

    jonbravo77

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2008
    Location:
    Phoenix, AZ
    #5
    Ah, this must be the crisis that another thread eluded to. This was not a ceremony, this was just making sure that things are right. I think the media is taking this way to far. This same thing has happened in the past with 2 other presidents Calvin Coolidge and Chester Arthur. They just wanted to make sure that everything is legit.

    This is not as huge of a deal as the media would like everyone to believe. And yes he was constitutionally President when he took the oath the first time. It was just lawyers doing a CYA.
     
  6. calculus Guest

    calculus

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2005
  7. it5five macrumors 65816

    it5five

    Joined:
    May 31, 2006
    Location:
    New York
    #7
    Well he was constitutionally President before he took the oath. At 12 noon that day he was President. The oath is unnecessary ceremony.
     
  8. jonbravo77 macrumors 6502a

    jonbravo77

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2008
    Location:
    Phoenix, AZ
    #8
    Actually the oath is Constitutionally necessary. It says the President has took take the oath. The noon thing is to ensure that the country does not run without one of the branches in tact. The President still has to take the oath of office.
     
  9. dukebound85 macrumors P6

    dukebound85

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2005
    Location:
    5045 feet above sea level
  10. MacNut thread starter macrumors Core

    MacNut

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2002
    Location:
    CT
    #10
    The oath is where a president swears to uphold the law, so it is necessary.
     
  11. XnavxeMiyyep macrumors 65816

    XnavxeMiyyep

    Joined:
    Mar 27, 2003
    Location:
    Washington
    #11
    First Justice Roberts screws up, then there's no Bible involved. Let's hope they don't make him retake the oath over and over again for his first year in office, because obviously, the oath is the most important part of the presidency and must be executed without flaw.
     
  12. jonbravo77 macrumors 6502a

    jonbravo77

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2008
    Location:
    Phoenix, AZ
    #12
    Correct, however, there is no where in the constitution that states a bible or any other object has to be involved.
     
  13. calculus Guest

    calculus

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2005
    #13
    I would say that it's more important to have a president who actually does uphold the law...
     
  14. arkitect macrumors 601

    arkitect

    Joined:
    Sep 5, 2005
    Location:
    Bath, United Kingdom
    #14
    Re-oathed?

    Such an ugly, ugly word. *shudder*

    What was wrong with saying: "Obama sworn in for second time."
     
  15. XnavxeMiyyep macrumors 65816

    XnavxeMiyyep

    Joined:
    Mar 27, 2003
    Location:
    Washington
    #15
    Haha, I should've used a smiley face.:p Personally, I think it's rather irrelevant. The first time was good enough.

    As calculus said, it's more important that they actually uphold (or improve, then uphold) the law
     
  16. it5five macrumors 65816

    it5five

    Joined:
    May 31, 2006
    Location:
    New York
    #16
    Well, I am wrong. Thank you for correcting me. Although, he did have the option between an oath and an affirmation, right?
     
  17. MacNut thread starter macrumors Core

    MacNut

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2002
    Location:
    CT
    #17
    better?
     
  18. atszyman macrumors 68020

    atszyman

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2003
    Location:
    The Dallas 'burbs
    #18
    That's the title of his next book...
     
  19. jonbravo77 macrumors 6502a

    jonbravo77

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2008
    Location:
    Phoenix, AZ
    #19
    Yes, but the oath is saying the words the affirmation is saying "yes" to the same words. So in my opinion, kinda the same thing. Same words are spoken either way.
     
  20. Blue Velvet Moderator emeritus

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2004
    #20
    Don't worry. I'm sure 'prudence' is just around the corner. She hasn't been let out to play a lot recently by Gordon Brown.
     
  21. remmy macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jul 1, 2007
    #21
    maybe he just wanted to do it again, just for fun.
     
  22. PlaceofDis macrumors Core

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2004
    #22
    he should have been just fine with the first oath. but i understand wanting to cover your *** given the way politics can be played.

    is this a big deal? not nearly as much as the media would like you to think.
     
  23. Counterfit macrumors G3

    Counterfit

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2003
    Location:
    sitting on your shoulder
    #23
    Fixed. Leave it to Fox to bring up the "He might not actually be the President, this could go to court." line.
     
  24. smt1192 macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2007
    #24
    If a Republican did it, the news would be all over it, although I m glad that the news isn't making a big deal out of it.
     
  25. jonbravo77 macrumors 6502a

    jonbravo77

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2008
    Location:
    Phoenix, AZ
    #25
    You should have watched CNN's coverage of the press conference this morning. You might not be saying that the news isn't making a big deal out of it. Watching the reporters in that room you would have thought that this is the crisis of the century.
     

Share This Page