I actually laughed when watching the inauguration. I mean it was only a short paragraph. But he stumbled on it and couldn't repeat it right. Guess I'd be nervous too.
Guess they were worried about it 'cause he had to do it over again in a private ceremony. I hate Bush's dumb-ass but he at least got that right!
So, all of the executive orders he signed on the first day of his presidency did they count since the first inauguration swearing in was flawed?
Food for thought
Mary
Lol saw my Buddha Loves You of a french teacher watching that during class... Hilarious!!!
They both messed up lol. The guy wasn't saying it right a couple times as well.
Quote from: loki7714 on January 22, 2009, 10:07:41 PM
Lol saw my Buddha Loves You of a french teacher watching that during class... Hilarious!!!
They both messed up lol. The guy wasn't saying it right a couple times as well.
I sure didn't type Buddha Loves You there lol. That's interesting/hilarious... Wondered why everyone was always saying that :cookoo: :dunno_white:
I didn't know that it automatically did that either! I wrote it a couple of times inferring it was the acceptable format for another set of wirty dords!
Some moderator got creative!
Mary
He was already technically sworn in well before the Inauguration ceremony.......SOP it's all for show.
lol the "oaf of office" as well. im waiting for the press to criticise the inauguration at 170m, like they did bush's at 40m :dunno_white:
I'm waiting for you people to realize that he and Rahm 'I'm above the law so I get to be in charge of it' Emanual do actually plan to impose involuntary servitude upon EVERY citizen of this nation. I'm waiting someone in the Secret Service to man the f%$k up and tell him he can't have his f%$king blackberry because it is a MASSIVE f%$king security risk. I'm waiting for 3.5 years from now when the GOP unfurls their plan and presents a near infallible (in comparison) strong republican, most likely governor (no I'm not talking about Palin) for the Presidency. I'm waiting for someone to realize that Communism is a flawed ideal by it's very nature and nothing Obama can do will change that. I'm waiting for a mass wave of testicular fortitude and common sense to hit DC, but failing that I'll settle for a well timed comet.
and im waiting for frankie to blow sunshine up obamas ass and explain everythign as a type/mistake or rw conspiracy. well maybe not blow sunshine up his ass. maybe that was a bit strong, but the rest i stand by
Quote from: loki7714 on January 22, 2009, 10:09:52 PM
Quote from: loki7714 on January 22, 2009, 10:07:41 PM
Lol saw my Buddha Loves You of a french teacher watching that during class... Hilarious!!!
They both messed up lol. The guy wasn't saying it right a couple times as well.
I sure didn't type Buddha Loves You there lol. That's interesting/hilarious... Wondered why everyone was always saying that :cookoo: :dunno_white:
Ass
f%$k
shaZam!
c@%t
chicken
@$$hole
Buddha Loves You
I just woke up, so I can't think of any more... but I still wanna know what word that was. lol
awe shaZam!!!!!!
I forgot what word I typed in last. :(
Justice John Roberts said it incorrectly, and Obama had to decide if he should say the words in the correct order, or in the order Roberts incorrectly said them. Roberts did not have a cheat card or TelePrompter and was going solely from memory. D'oh!
There is no written-in-stone procedure for the Inauguration of a new President. In the past, presidents have only had the words read to them, and they responded with a simple, "I will."
Quote from: spc on January 22, 2009, 10:14:31 PM
He was already technically sworn in well before the Inauguration ceremony.......SOP it's all for show.
under the constitution he does not have to be sworn in, it happens at noon. it is my understanding that the chief justice screwed up and not the president.
What Constitution do you read frankie, because my copy reads
Art. 2, Sect. 1-8
'Before he enter the execution of his office, he shall take the following oath or affirmation:--" I do solemnly swear that I will faithfully execute the office of the President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States"'
I suggest you find a copy and read it, hell grab a few hundred and stand outside the Capitol building passing them out............nobody inside there has read it in a long damn time.
I just think it was funny that he stoped after saying " I will faithfully execute " :2guns:
IF the oath was not administered that morning (It's possible John Roberts isn't the biggest Obama fan) it just means Biden was technically President for a little while..........It would be hard to contest any of the EO's issued and he could just reissue them anyway.
Quote from: Caffeine on January 23, 2009, 06:41:37 AM
Justice John Roberts said it incorrectly, and Obama had to decide if he should say the words in the correct order, or in the order Roberts incorrectly said them. Roberts did not have a cheat card or TelePrompter and was going solely from memory. D'oh!
There is no written-in-stone procedure for the Inauguration of a new President. In the past, presidents have only had the words read to them, and they responded with a simple, "I will."
Correct!
oh my goodness
nancy boy
Damn what's the other one!
Edit:
Buddha Loves You
Ha! I got it!
They must at least take the oath. Don't know if that means repeating or just affirming it.
Didn't mean this to stir up a political fire storm just thought it was kinda interesting!
Mary
forget about the billions we're throwing away over seas, billions going up in smoke as loans to gm/banks, and nit pick about a simple swearing in.
is obama an idiot ? maybe, but a different league of idiot from W. Maybe even a different solar system of idiots.
:)
Quote from: spc on January 23, 2009, 07:39:18 AM
What Constitution do you read frankie, because my copy reads
Art. 2, Sect. 1-8
'Before he enter the execution of his office, he shall take the following oath or affirmation:--" I do solemnly swear that I will faithfully execute the office of the President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States"'
I suggest you find a copy and read it, hell grab a few hundred and stand outside the Capitol building passing them out............nobody inside there has read it in a long damn time.
i think you may want to check...it is noon on the 20th with or without the oath
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. That if from Article two section one.
Well, I would go into detail myself but here is a good description from WIKIPedia
The 20th Amendment, however, states that the terms of the President and Vice President shall end at noon on the 20th day of January and the terms of their successors shall then begin.
It has been suggested[by whom?] that the wording of the 20th Amendment, which makes no reference to the oath, superseded the requirement set out in article two of the Constitution, that the oath be taken before the President begins the discharge of his duties.[citation needed]
It has also been suggested, however, that the oath is still necessary, because the 20th Amendment only stipulated that the four year presidential term of office shall start at noon on January 20th, not that the President shall enter upon the exercise of his Office at that moment. The start of the term does not exactly coincide with the new President entering upon the execution of his duties. President Washington's first four-year term, for instance, began on March 4th and ended exactly four years later, but he only assumed the Presidency on April 30th, when he took the oath of office. Vice-Presidents succeeding to the Presidency also assume office to finish a term that has long started. So the start of the term does not coincide with "enter[ing] in the execution of the Office".
Not really an issue though cause every president since the 20th amendment has recited the oath!
I like history and government stuff!
mary
yup. i just hope he knows what hes doing and teh consequences of said actions as he does them. no one here knows what the consequewnces of his actions are
Quote from: spc on January 22, 2009, 10:39:22 PM
I'm waiting for you people to realize that he and Rahm 'I'm above the law so I get to be in charge of it' Emanual do actually plan to impose involuntary servitude upon EVERY citizen of this nation. I'm waiting someone in the Secret Service to man the f%$k up and tell him he can't have his f%$king blackberry because it is a MASSIVE f%$king security risk. I'm waiting for 3.5 years from now when the GOP unfurls their plan and presents a near infallible (in comparison) strong republican, most likely governor (no I'm not talking about Palin) for the Presidency. I'm waiting for someone to realize that Communism is a flawed ideal by it's very nature and nothing Obama can do will change that. I'm waiting for a mass wave of testicular fortitude and common sense to hit DC, but failing that I'll settle for a well timed comet.
Technically, communism is a wonderful idea...never been done before, either.
Quote from: yamahonkawazuki on January 22, 2009, 10:26:13 PM
lol the "oaf of office" as well. im waiting for the press to criticise the inauguration at 170m, like they did bush's at 40m :dunno_white:
http://mediamatters.org/columns/200901170003 (http://mediamatters.org/columns/200901170003)
I don't doubt that the final cost will exceed the 2005 Bush affair but I
do doubt the difference will be anything like the numbers you cite.
Quote from: makenzie71 on January 24, 2009, 06:51:20 AM
Technically, communism is a wonderful idea...never been done before, either.
Communism can't be an effective method until you rid the human race of several of the key factors that make us human, thus it is inherently flawed.
I think it could actually be pulled off on a small scale. But yeah, as a whole, mankind can't do it...that's why the star trek scenario where everyone is equal and happy won't ever happen.
so, we seem to agree the "theory of communism" isn't horrible. so, can we take anything or learn anything from this "flawed theory" and use it to better ourselves? not just as individuals but as a nation, even as a world?
No, it is far to slippery of a slope to put even one foot over the edge.
Communism is too far out of reach. It's Utopian. We'd have to turn ourselves into something akin the "borg" to pull it off...but then that whole domination of the universe would probably interfere.
Quote from: makenzie71 on January 24, 2009, 08:04:48 AM
I think it could actually be pulled off on a small scale. But yeah, as a whole, mankind can't do it...that's why the star trek scenario where everyone is equal and happy won't ever happen.
but thats what many want :dunno_white: still awaiting its supporters ( maybe theyre still scratchign their heads trying to find something not assinine which supports it?, i await tehir answers, adn the chance to critique it/them
btw anyone remember his promise of no earmarks?, well teh "stimulus plan" is full of em. but hey anyone who believes 100% of what a politician says is either blowing sunshine up their arse, or is somewhat naive., heh i dont think anyhne here fits that description
this is by far, one of the most ridiculous and completely pointless conversations / arguments i've ever read.
just my $0.02
can you elaborate?
(http://planetsmilies.net/obscene-smiley-7202.gif) (http://planetsmilies.net)
Quote from: gearman on January 24, 2009, 07:21:38 AM
Quote from: yamahonkawazuki on January 22, 2009, 10:26:13 PM
lol the "oaf of office" as well. im waiting for the press to criticise the inauguration at 170m, like they did bush's at 40m :dunno_white:
http://mediamatters.org/columns/200901170003 (http://mediamatters.org/columns/200901170003)
I don't doubt that the final cost will exceed the 2005 Bush affair but I do doubt the difference will be anything like the numbers you cite.
Fair enough. ill agree to that. ive not the numbers in front of me. ill edit this post when i do. from several sources, instead of 1. so to imply fairness. or fair reporting. ANYHOO the main thing, well hellsits not even a gripe. but a ruckus was raised over the bush inauguration, btu nothing as of yet on the obama one :thumb: