Blog Open Thread: Your Thoughts on Barack Obama's Inauguration

Posted in * Economics, Politics, Office of the President, Politics in General, President Barack Obama

108 comments on “Blog Open Thread: Your Thoughts on Barack Obama's Inauguration

  1. Kendall Harmon says:

    The crowd is just astoundingly large, but I am worried about the degree to which Mr. Obama is being built up heading into the event.

  2. DonGander says:

    We’ve been fighting race-bias for 30 years. Right now I feel it was a total waste of time. Media is absolutely full of race, today (yesterday, and likely tomorrow).

    Don

  3. William P. Sulik says:

    I voted for McCain; Barack will be my President.

  4. montanan says:

    I second comment #3. While I am terribly worried about what this means in regards to abortion (and some other issues), I am thrilled for black americans and other americans with minority ethnicity and/or race. I’m thankful for some of what President Bush did and look forward to aspects of what soon-to-be-President Obama will do. I will pray for him and he deserves the goodwill of each of us.

  5. Ross says:

    After all the fuss about +Robinson’s “not particularly Christian” prayer, Rick Warren’s wasn’t all that much more “Christian.” He said a lot about God, but his only reference to Scripture that I caught was to quote the Shema, and he mentioned Jesus only once and only as a lead-in to the Lord’s Prayer.

    But I think that this is appropriate to the occasion, delivering a prayer to and on behalf of a multifaith and diverse nation. I thought both men delivered powerful and heartfelt prayers.

  6. palagious says:

    Get to work! 🙂

  7. Katherine says:

    I will pray for his safety and for right decisions and actions. I am very sad to read reports that one of his first actions may be to rescind the executive order which prevents American aid from being used to kill foreign babies, on the anniversary of the Roe decision. This would be a symbolically horrible beginning.

    On the other hand, it is right to celebrate this clear evidence that America is no longer a racially divided nation. I hope after this historic day we can stop focusing on this and get back to policy and substance.

  8. magnolia says:

    i voted for the environment and against sarah palin. i feel that this is the day that the America i grew up in and loved is forever changed and it saddens me; i have no choice but to accept it and know that in twenty five years i probably won’t recognize anything about it.
    thanks a lot bush, rove, cheney, gonzalez, delay, cunningham etc. etc.!

  9. Mike L says:

    I agree with you Kendall. The expectations of what he can do is practically raising him to saviour status. But the problems are so vast that the chances of his pulling it off to any great extent are slim. When those expectations come crashing back down to reality, what happens then?

  10. Pb says:

    Warren said that Jesus had changed his life and he prayed for forgiveness. That sounded Christian to me. Or at least better than prayer to the god(s) of our understandings – whatever that means.

  11. Old Pilgrim says:

    The former junior senator from Illinois…excuse me, the former president-elect…has not yet truly earned the privilege of command. His election is reminiscent of pre-1870s Britain when military commissions could be purchased.

  12. Kendall Harmon says:

    A solid inaugural speech. The poor chief justice fumbled the oath.

  13. John Wilkins says:

    #11… doesn’t matter if you think he earned it or not. He earned it by setting up the most powerful organization in recent history, which is how a democracy works. He did it by earning the trust of others who had earned the privilege of command.

    But for those who are free-marketeers, they should get to work and do what they do.

  14. phil swain says:

    This too shall pass.

  15. Sidney says:

    Maybe the chief justice should have just started the oath all over again when he screwed up (then confusing Obama), to give everybody a clean recitation for history. Neither one is ever going to want to watch the video of that again, and that’s a shame.

  16. Karen B. says:

    I have posted some prayers for President Obama and our country over at [url=http://anglicanprayer.wordpress.com/2009/01/20/prayers-for-our-country-and-president/]Lent & Beyond[/url]. I am praying that the Lord will guide and protect our new President, and for grace to trust in the Lord in the midst of this change in government, knowing that it is He who holds our leaders in His hand.

  17. Mark Johnson says:

    Wonderful, historic, inspiring – I’m not sure I’ve ever been so proud of my country as I am right now — what a great day for all Americans who were once told that they couldn’t be something because of circumstances beyond their control. I love the image of Martin Luther King Jr. dancing and singing with all the saints and civil rights martyrs in Heaven.

  18. Carolina Anglican says:

    I thought Rick Warren’s prayer was an earnest and faithful prayer. He was introduced as “Dr. Warren,” something I didn’t know about him.

    I also think the general mood of Republicans is quite gracious to Pres. Obama that is a stark contrast to 8 years ago. I hope this will help steer the country in the right direction. I agree with Kendall about the amount of hype and expectation for someone. I would like to see him begin by stopping the blame-everyone-else-but-yourself game that our politicians play.

  19. Sarha7nj says:

    My throat closed up and tears pricked my eyes with Rick Warren started the Lord’s Prayer (driving home from MOPS with 2 year old chirping in the back seat) but I was grateful to recite it along with millions.

  20. Brian from T19 says:

    I am very sad to read reports that..

    Don’t believe everything you read.

    …clear evidence that America is no longer a racially divided nation.

    Don’t believe everything you hear.

    I thought it was a great Inauguration and an excellent speech. I appreciated Rick Warren using the Jewish, Muslim, Hispanic and Christian titles for Jesus.

  21. Old Pilgrim says:

    Dear John #13,
    I was simply expressing my opinion. I regard national defense, a subject not dear to the former president-elect’s heart, as the number one job of any president. This one has no personal experience, or interest from what I can tell. Regarding your other comment, that his organizational skills earned him the job, the same could be said of Karl Rove. What you describe is not democracy, it is technocracy…at best…at worst it is simply the skillful manipulation of a mob by a tech-savvy oligarchy. Chicago and the Late Roman Republic have many political similarities. O tempora! O mores!

  22. Katherine says:

    #20, I hope he won’t do what is reported about foreign abortion money. We will have to judge him on what he does, not on reports.

    Are you saying that America is just as divided as ever? I’ve seen this change over the course of my life; when I began kindergarten, racial segregation was the law of the land in many states. The evidence is quite clear that Obama’s ancestry was a secondary issue for most voters, except for some who, perhaps understandably, voted for him because of it. Will America ever be perfect? No.

  23. Eugene says:

    Great day! Great speech, and I loved the benediction. What a heartfelt prayer…..

  24. azusa says:

    “I appreciated Rick Warren using the Jewish, Muslim, Hispanic and Christian titles for Jesus.”
    Er, that’s ‘Aramaic, Arabic, Spanish and English versions’ of the name. You’ll find Christians in all these language groups. Christians from Chinese (‘Yeh-su’) and most other linguistic groups have been cruelly excluded by this homophonic pastor.

  25. Jeffersonian says:

    [blockquote]But for those who are free-marketeers, they should get to work and do what they do. [/blockquote]

    No kidding. Somebody’s gotta pay the tab for all these goodies.

  26. dcreinken says:

    This election has re-focused members of my congregation to a renewed commitment to church, family, and country. They are not as cynical as they were, and I can see visible change in the aspirations of our youth. To me, this is a very good day to be an American.

    Whether or not we are being set up to have our expectations dashed, I would rather have them dashed than not have them at all. Who knows how much of what needs to be done can be done, but if we try, at least some of it will be.

    Dirk Reinken

  27. Choir Stall says:

    If race shouldn’t be the issue then why do most people make more noise about Mr. Obama being the first African American president than about his voting record?
    How can Mr. Obama justify (or permit) a record 100+ million dollar inaugural when tens of thousands are losing jobs each week? While thousands are losing homes each month? And while others are suffering so intolerably? Roosevelt had a quiet, simple inaugural during his time of crisis. Is this the change that people voted for?
    Anyway…he’s in. He’s my President so long as he upholds the Constitution’s design for us: “life (for all), liberty, and the pursuit of happiness”.
    Best prayers and wishes. Get to work.

  28. Karen B. says:

    I tuned in too late to catch Rick Warren’s prayer. So, I was glad to find it now on You Tube. Great prayer, I thought!

    [url=http://video.google.com/videosearch?q=Rick+Warren&hl=en&emb=0&aq;=-1&oq;=#q=Rick Warren invocation&hl=en&emb=0&st=day]Rick Warren’s invocation[/url]

  29. dcreinken says:

    #27, I think the same can be asked of churches that have gold and silver, priceless artwork, and amazing vestments of the finest materials. (Or amazing stock portfolios and real estate holdings.)

    People need ceremony and pageantry to lift their aspirations.

    As for race, I think it’s impossible for it not be an issue. The history of race in this country and of American ideals that got is to this moment is undeniable and cannot be ignored. While I don’t think today solves the issues of race in the US, it changes the conversation entirely.

    Dirk Reinken

  30. azusa says:

    Obama has rhetorical skill and he can certainly use a teleprompter, but I found the speech rather cold and imperious, lacking human warmth, as Obama himself does (the mark of a driven man). Bush’s ’05 speech was marked by hubris, and so is Obama’s in its own way. A little humility before Almighty God, the source of all authority, is no bad thing.

  31. Brian from T19 says:

    What you describe is not democracy, it is technocracy…at best…at worst it is simply the skillful manipulation of a mob by a tech-savvy oligarchy.

    So are those who were “manipulated” too stupid or easily influenced to have the vote? Where is the democracy in your idea?

  32. SpringsEternal says:

    I just hope everybody gets that he’s human and going to make mistakes, and that things take time. Everybody I watched it with seems so excited and hopeful and happy and certain that tomorrow we’re going to wake up and everybody find a million dollars under their pillow.

  33. Jeffersonian says:

    I don’t know, Brian, why not ask [url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manufacturing_Consent:_The_Political_Economy_of_the_Mass_Media]Noam Chomsky?[/url]

  34. Brian from T19 says:

    Are you saying that America is just as divided as ever? I’ve seen this change over the course of my life; when I began kindergarten, racial segregation was the law of the land in many states. The evidence is quite clear that Obama’s ancestry was a secondary issue for most voters, except for some who, perhaps understandably, voted for him because of it. Will America ever be perfect? No.

    I think we have made significant improvements. But you said …clear evidence that America is no longer a racially divided nation.

    I agree with some of the posters above (though not their vitriol) that the fact that we are celebrating the President’s race proves that there is still a need to distinguish.

  35. Frances Scott says:

    didn’t watch it…no TV reception here…glad it is over. Lets get back to reality and let the man do the job he was elected to do.

  36. Katherine says:

    #34, no, I think it proves that the media still think it’s a big deal (race), and they need something to talk about. Most people, like me, live in racially mixed neighborhoods served by racially mixed schools and work in racially mixed offices, stores, or factories. We’re only racially divided any more if we want to be, in our own minds.

    After this moment of media hype and, I think, some justified celebration about the issue, Obama becomes the President. Not the black one, just the President.

  37. Militaris Artifex says:

    Kendall and Mike L.,

    I have had the same question since before the election, when it became clear that many were voting for him not because they necessarily thought that he was the most qualified, but because of the chance to vote for an American of African ancestry. Personally, I think it may even have been the ultimate deciding factor in his being elected. If so, there is an old adage which would explain the seemingly excessive jubilation—”[i]Dance with who brung you[/i].”

    Blessings and regards,
    Martial Artist (Keith Toepfer)

  38. dcreinken says:

    #36, I would question whether most people live in racially mixed neighborhoods outside of major urban areas. If you do live in such a neighborhood, have you spoken to your neighbors about what this election means to them? My congregation is racially mixed, split right down the middle (and has been for 40 years), and while most have moved beyond focusing on skin color, there is no denying that Obama’s election and today rank among the top 5 highlights of their lives.

  39. gdb in central Texas says:

    B from T19 said:
    “So are those who were “manipulated” too stupid or easily influenced to have the vote?”
    Yes. Now what’s your next question.

  40. Katherine says:

    #38, there’s no doubt that people are getting a big moral boost today from seeing a man of part-African ancestry take the oath of office. I wouldn’t want to take away from that or deny them the joy of the moment. But the point is that he’s only a man, and he will, I hope, be judged on what he does and not on media hype or on his ancestry. We’ve reached the point where this is possible, and that’s wonderful.

    I’d like to see the media give up its race focus from here forward. It would be more constructive and healthier for all of us if they can.

  41. State of Limbo says:

    Although I did not vote for Pres. Obama, he is my president and I am watching the coverage. I too am amazed by the vast sea of humanity who have stood in the freezing cold for hours to witness this inauguration.

    As the NBC commentators predicted, this was not a State of the Union address, it did not contain substantive plans by which improvements would be carried out. It played well. I pray he can flesh out these changes and bring them to fruition.

    The gentleman needs to work on his punctuality. Everything was delayed about 16 to 20 minutes because they left Blair House late.

    The media needs to focus less on what Mrs. Obama and the girls are wearing, but this has been a trend for a number of years.

    Pastor Warren’s prayer was fine. I think, for the occasion it covered the bases. It definitely had more substance than that of +Robinson.

  42. Pageantmaster Ù† says:

    The thing which struck me most were the prayers led by Pastor Rick Warren and Rev Joseph Lowery. Good Christian leadership and an appropriate dedication. Excellent.

  43. dcreinken says:

    #40, I agree. And given what needs to be done, I suspect he will be judged objectively on his presidency rather than on his heritage, but that is always going to be a part of his story, and now our story as a country.

  44. Katherine says:

    For instance, from the speech, here is Obama’s core view of government:[blockquote]The question we ask today is not whether our government is too big or too small, but whether it works – whether it helps families find jobs at a decent wage, care they can afford, a retirement that is dignified. Where the answer is yes, we intend to move forward. Where the answer is no, programs will end. And those of us who manage the public’s dollars will be held to account – to spend wisely, reform bad habits, and do our business in the light of day – because only then can we restore the vital trust between a people and their government.[/blockquote]This is not the founding vision of our nation. It is, rather, a vision of an all-encompassing state whose job is cradle-to-grave care for its citizens. I disagree with this vision. I think the race issue in the campaign has obscured the more important questions of what the basic purpose of our form of government is. I hope to see this debate come back into focus.

  45. writingmom15143 says:

    a stumble in the inaugural oath to affirm that those chosen to lead our nation are still human…a testimony in the invocation to affirm that jesus is still our lord…what a blessing to have shared this moment with my children.

  46. clayton says:

    #44, it doesn’t say that where the programs aren’t working, new programs will be created – it says that they will end. What’s wrong with that, exactly?

    And, as the NYT pointed out, Obama just swore an oath to protect and defend a Constitution that counted him as 3/5 of a person when ratified. I think that calls for a little celebration, myself. It shows that when we get things wrong as a nation, we can fix them, and this is about as fixed as that mistake can get!

    Every bride is beautiful, and every president-elect is a figure of hope. Whatever else it is, 2009 will not be boring!

  47. dcreinken says:

    #44, I can see your point. However, the passage you quoted is why I did vote for Obama. I don’t believe in limited government just to have limited government (nor do I believe in large government just to have a large government). I do hope that whatever government we have is efficient and effective at what it’s supposed to do. As I’ve seen it, whoever has been President in my lifetime has favored big government. They just disagreed on which part of government should be “big.” Regardless of the vision of the founders, it’s up to each generation to shape our country and government to be what it needs to be in the age in which we live. The constitution of today isn’t the constitution that was given us, and I think that’s a good thing.

    Dirk Reinken

  48. Dacama says:

    The cynic in me….SSDD

  49. GrandpaDino says:

    Though I did not vote for him, Mr. Obama is now my president. I watched the swearing-in at Truro and participated in the prayer service afterwards.

    Mr. Obama said: “The time has come to reaffirm our enduring spirit; to choose our better history; to carry forward that precious gift, that noble idea, passed on from generation to generation: the God-given promise that all are equal, all are free, and all deserve a chance to pursue their full measure of happiness.”

    Sadly, I understand that he intends to sign the so-called “Freedom of Choice Act” which will make it easier to ensure that unborn children have NO chance to pursue THEIR full measure of happiness.

  50. Frances Scott says:

    dkreinken, I live at the end of the road about 12 miles from a town of maybe 200. I live in a racially mixed neighborhood. I have not yet had opportunity to speak with my two black neighbors but I am quite sure that neither of them voted for Obama…both are staunch issues people.

  51. flaanglican says:

    BCP, p. 820:
    19. For the President of the United States and all in Civil Authority

    O Lord our Governor, whose glory is in all the world: We commend this nation to thy merciful care, that, being guided by thy Providence, we may dwell secure in thy peace. Grant to the President of the United States, the Governor of this State (or Commonwealth), and to all in authority, wisdom
    and strength to know and to do thy will. Fill them with the love of truth and righteousness, and make them ever mindful of their calling to serve this people in thy fear; through Jesus Christ our Lord, who liveth and reigneth with thee and the
    Holy Spirit, one God, world without end. Amen.

  52. writingmom15143 says:

    flaanglican…AMEN!

  53. flaanglican says:

    That doesn’t mean I won’t disagree and suggest different courses of action, as a citizen of the United States. Trust me, I will, and probably frequently. But I offer the BCP prayer sincerely, nevertheless.

  54. Franz says:

    #27 wrote (in part): “Anyway…he’s in. He’s my President so long as he upholds the Constitution’s design for us: “life (for all), liberty, and the pursuit of happiness”.”

    Actually, the phrase, “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness,” does not (I repeat NOT) appear in the Constitution. Read it.

    This is important, because too many people (including many Obamacans) think that the Federal Government has an obligation to secure our “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.” It doesn’t. The Constitution outlines the form of government for the Federal Union, and then limits its power.

    The phrase “Life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness,” appears in the Declaration of Independence, which is a very different document, serving a very different purpose.

  55. Brian from T19 says:

    Ted Kennedy just had a siezure and had to be taken iout of the lunch. Sen. Byrd was also in need of medical attention

  56. Brian from T19 says:

    After this moment of media hype and, I think, some justified celebration about the issue, Obama becomes the President. Not the black one, just the President.

    I see your point.

  57. John Wilkins says:

    #44 – yes – an alternative: people living in squalor; an education only for the privileged; poverty for the elderly; sickness and misery for the lower-middle class. Child labor when possible. And no more week-ends for the workers. We could live in Brazil if we wanted. Or Mexico.

    Of course – we have had for the last 8 years an administration intent on showing that Government shouldn’t work, and is prone to fail miserably. And yes, if you were to say government doesn’t work, the last 8 years would be a pretty good example of that.

    Let’s see what Obama can do.

  58. Jeffersonian says:

    [blockquote]This is important, because too many people (including many Obamacans) think that the Federal Government has an obligation to secure our “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.” It doesn’t. The Constitution outlines the form of government for the Federal Union, and then limits its power. [/blockquote]

    In theory, yes. In practice in post-constitutional America, there are the only the most feeble of limits remaining.

  59. Jeffersonian says:

    [blockquote] #44 – yes – an alternative: people living in squalor; an education only for the privileged; poverty for the elderly; sickness and misery for the lower-middle class. Child labor when possible. And no more week-ends for the workers. We could live in Brazil if we wanted.[/blockquote]

    I used to…it’s a lovely place with gracious people. Oh, and it finally embraced a free market economy after decades of unwieldy socialist claptrap that closely resemble your typical nostrums, John: socialist healthcare, socialized housing, government-run industry, etc. Now it’s actually thriving.

  60. Vincent Lerins says:

    I really enjoyed both the invocation and benediction. I like how Rick Warren kept the prayer Christian centered, but acknowledge Judaism and Islam through the reading of the Shema and the phrase “merciful and compassionate.” I only hope he doesn’t see Christianity as only one of many faiths instead of THE faith. Lowry’s benediction was also great, especially the end.

    As for the Chief Justice, I think he fumbled on purpose. The Supreme Court has rejected two cases to review if Obama was really born in the US. If there is good evidence that Obama was foreign born and Justice Roberts knows that Obama isn’t eligible to take office, he could be sued. Quick solution, administer an incorrect oath. He’s in the clear.

    Vincent

  61. Old Pilgrim says:

    Dear Brian from T19 (comment #31),

    I see others have partially replied for me, but I owe you a response directly. When I said that organizational skill at worst was the skillful manipulation of a mob by a tech-savvy oligarchy I was addressing the issue of the wielder of the organizational skill; nothing was expressly implied about those who were manipulated…though I could wish that more voters had been less emotional in last year’s presidential campaign. Consider the following proposition: Although I may be willing to accept the saying that Lancia has never produced a bad car, I cannot accept the notion that democracy has never produced a bad president…check your favorite history book. Democracy isn’t perfect; and it needs self-criticism more than it needs self-congratulation…particularly on this day.

  62. Alta Californian says:

    I am no constitutional stickler, but I have to admit I found a couple of the details irritating. For starters, he took the oath at about 12:05. Were we theoretically without a president for 5 minutes? Or, as Biden had been sworn in by noon, was he acting president for those technical minutes? Or was Secretary Gates, who was designated as the emergency back-up should anything go wrong?

    I also cringed when the Chief Justice flubbed the oath. They could have rehearsed it a few more times. It was a mistake that no doubt gladdened the heart of every English major, as I believe it eliminated the split infinitive (“to faithfully execute”) from the official version. Unfortunately, I am now counting the minutes until fringe bloggers start insisting that Obama is not legitimately president because the oath was constitutionally defective. (If I were him I’d do it again, with exactly the right words, with the Chief Justice, majority and minority leadership and key witnesses, preferably before issuing a single order).

    I found the rest to be somewhat anti-climactic. I thought the speech was good, though not his most inspiring delivery. I liked the invocation, and even more the benediction. The size and diversity of the crowd was awe inspiring. I was actually moved much more by the Lincoln Memorial concert. It was Renee Fleming’s “You’ll never walk alone” that brought me to tears.

    I still think it a great day. God bless us all.

    In any case, we now have an answer to McCain’s question: Who is Barack Obama?

    The President of the United States.

  63. Phil says:

    I can’t help but wonder reading John Wilkins’ number 57: why do people of his ideological stripe have such contempt for the ability of ordinary citizens to conduct their lives as they see fit? Why does he feel Americans are so stupid and/or venal that they will always produce the “wrong” results unless the State steps in and decides for them, and administers their lives for them? I find his view of Americans not only arrogant in the extreme, but frightening.

  64. Branford says:

    I didn’t hear Roberts mess up – I heard Obama seem to forget what he was to say, and Roberts start to repeat it for him and fumble on that. Both men made mistakes, both men are human, and we now have a new president. No harm, no foul, no big deal.

  65. clayton says:

    #62, already happened two comments before yours!

  66. Ladytenor says:

    #62, I believe you’ll find the first salvo of the “he’s not president because of the defective oath” argument at #60. Presented as speculation, of course, with reference to the “he’s not president because he wasn’t born in Hawaii” argument.

    As to the 12:05 thing; I do know that President Bush’s term ended at noon. If I remember my history lessons correctly, the vice president becomes president immediately upon the death of the president. The oath is administered at the earliest convenience (in 1963, on Air Force One) but the actual transfer of power is not delayed for the oath. So I would say that Obama was president immediately at noon. That said, it might be a good idea to repeat the oath as you suggested, just to shut up the conspiracy theorists.

  67. flaanglican says:

    #66, let’s put this issue immediately to rest. Yeah, I had the same question but I looked it up.

    Here’s Section 1 of the 20th Amendment to the Constitution:
    “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.”

    In other words, Barack Obama immediately became President at noon.

  68. Br. Michael says:

    67, I agree and this is silly. Johnson became President the minute Kennedy died, notwithstanding the oath was given later.

  69. Choir Stall says:

    Franz 54:
    I noted “upholds the Constitution’s design…” but didn’t attribute “life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness” as a direct quote from that document.
    The Constitution is designed to ensure life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness through defining and deliberate restraining of powers. Restraining the government and limiting power is the design of the Constitution, which is the best way to ensure life, liberty, and the pursuit of our destinies (happiness). Right?

  70. Kendall Harmon says:

    I should have mentioned that I loved the John Williams musical piece and the group rendered it beautifully. Their fingers must have been very cold.

  71. flaanglican says:

    #69, that’s the Declaration of Independence. While the Declaration is something we should all live up to as the founding document of our nation, it’s not our governing document. I agree that the Constitution was designed to limit the power of government. You can look no further than the 10th Amendment to the Constitution, “Powers not delegated to the United States, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.”

  72. Br. Michael says:

    71, the entire constitution is an exercise in fragmenting power. If the coordinate branches of government beat up on each other then they can’t beat up on the people. At least that’s the theory.

    The one thing the founders hadn’t counted on was the rise of the party system. If they had thought that might happen they probably would have fragmented that. For example, the executive and the congress can’t be controlled by the same party. But they didn’t and we have what we have.

  73. Vincent Lerins says:

    No, I did NOT say that Obama was not president because of a ‘defective’ oath. I voted for Obama. He IS the President of the United States. All 59 of them…LOL (that was a reference to an Obama campaign stumble).

    However, I was giving a possible answer to why Roberts stumbled over the oath of office. Philip Berg has brought two cases before the Supreme Court in the past weeks. They were rejected. Also, there are other cases pending in various states and in DC concerning proof of Obama’s birth location. Roberts (and all the justices) has knowledge of all of this. If it comes out that Obama was ineligible for the presidency and Roberts violated the Constitution by swearing in Obama, he will be in hot water! That’s why I think Roberts fumbled over the oath. Technically, he can say he didn’t administer the proper oath of office. Also, the fact that Obama became president at 12 noon because the Inauguration was behind schedule is quite interesting. Has the inauguration ever been behind schedule?

    Personally, I don’t want Berg or anyone else undermining the President. However, this could come in handy if Obama tries to pull a draft or some extremely unpopular tactic. This could be used to rein Obama in from extreme actions.

    Vincent

  74. Brian from T19 says:

    why do people of his ideological stripe have such contempt for the ability of ordinary citizens to conduct their lives as they see fit? Why does he feel Americans are so stupid and/or venal that they will always produce the “wrong” results unless the State steps in and decides for them, and administers their lives for them?

    The same reason that people of your ideological stripe try to pass amendments to ban same-sex marriage 😉

  75. Catholic Mom says:

    My understanding is that, as said before, the president becomes the president at 12:00 noon. No oath is required. If a nuclear attack occured at 11:59 and everyone scattered to the four winds, there would be no question who was president. It would be the president-elect as of 12:00 noon. I believe this is only a ceremonial requirement.

  76. flaanglican says:

    The inauguration ceremony went late. Chief Justice Roberts administered the oath for the first time in front of millions of people (counting TV). President Obama got confused. And, yes, he was already President at noon as stated in the 20th Amendment to the Constitution. Let’s move along, shall we?

  77. William P. Sulik says:

    Regarding the flub of the oath. I suspect a lot of it had to do with the booming echos of their co-mingled voices from hundreds, if not thousands of speakers. Specifically, I think when Roberts began his first line, the echos hit him just after he uttered the President’s name and inadvertently paused:

    ROBERTS: I, Barack Hussein Obama…
    OBAMA: I, Barack…
    ROBERTS: … do solemnly swear…

    After that, I don’t think either one could separate the echos from the speech. Nothing was intentional. Roberts should have used a written text and did stumble (misplacing the “faithful”).

    http://tinyurl.com/7bxsrf

    Please be charitable folks.

  78. Phil says:

    Brian #74, those amendments are passed by the people, who your side then attempts to overrule via unaccountable judges. Thank you for making my point, though.

  79. Alta Californian says:

    Apparently a commentator on Fox just said something.

    Branford, he did, I just listened to it again, Roberts moved “faithfully” to the end of the sentence. Obama then paused, either forgetting, or being slipped up by the change. They both laughed it off, but I don’t like giving the nuts (of either extreme) more fodder.

    66 and 67, then there you go. He became President the moment Bush’s term expired. But can he execute the office without saying the proper oath? Article II, Section 1 states:

    [blockquote]”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.'” [/blockquote]

    Like I said, not really a stickler (as evidenced when I got the verbiage wrong in my first comment – “will faithfully execute” – which is not a split infinitive after all), but I’ve grown awfully tired of conspiracy theories (particularly the “foreign born” one).

    I see the fundamental error in my ways, though. By pointing out my irritation with the slip, I’m drawing attention to it…which is irritating me more. Thanks all, I need to take a walk.

    Phil, it’s not about controlling peoples lives, but about offering a helping hand to those in need. Argue about whether that’s the proper role of government, but don’t accuse someone of arrogance. There’s enough of that going around. And your #78 is entirely incoherent. An elected government helping the poor is meddling in people’s lives, but an amendment passed by the people regulating who a person can marry is not? You’re the one making John’s point.

  80. Alta Californian says:

    Let me put that last point differently. I guess what you’re saying is that representative government cannot interfere in other people’s economic lives, but the voters themselves, by referenda, can regulate other people’s personal lives. Is that what you’re saying?

  81. Choir Stall says:

    Keith Olberman, Susan Russell, Rachael Maddow, et al promote themselves as enlightened folks for seeing the issues and voting for Mr. Obama. Yet, look at the childish barbs, jibes, and digs that they can’t stop coming from their throats and keyboards about President Bush. THIS seems to be the main way that too many liberals deal with “dissent” from their points of view. Didn’t Mr. Obama have something to say about all of this? Will they EVER “put away childish things”? The absolute disrespect towards Mr. Bush going on tonight on liberal TV tells me that we may have come a long way racially, but we haven’t moved much in putting away elitism in this country.
    Sickening.

  82. libraryjim says:

    RE: Rick Warren’s invocation: sounded too much like a ‘civics lesson’, started good, ended good, but the middle could have been shortened and improved.

    Re: Rev. Lowery prayer: started strong, but deteriorated quickly. If Rick Warren’s was a civics lesson, Lowery’s was a trip down folk song memory lane! Bad rhymes and all, and focused too much on race at the end:

    “we ask you to help us work for that day when black will not be asked to get back, when brown can stick around — (laughter) — when yellow will be mellow — (laughter) — when the red man can get ahead, man — (laughter) — and when white will embrace what is right.”

    I think both got so caught up in the “Obamamania” of the day, they forgot Who they were really there to thank!

  83. Sick & Tired of Nuance says:

    I thought Obama’s speech was Ok. However, I was really annoyed with Rev. Lowery’s racism at the event.

    [blockquote]“We ask you to help us work for that day when black will not be asked to get in back, when brown can stick around, when yellow will be mellow, when the red man can get ahead, man; and [b]when white will embrace what is right,[/b]” –Reverend Lowery[/blockquote]

  84. Phil says:

    Alta Cal,

    In the case of gay “marriage,” I think, with a vanishingly small number of exceptions, this has been opposed by both the people’s elected representatives and by the people themselves through referenda, etc. As I said, it’s taken unelected judges to ram the innovation down our throats, through such specious reasoning as supposing John Adams and Sam Adams – who wrote the Massachusetts Constitution – obviously meant for men to “marry” men all along. This reality is entirely consistent with what I (not John, and not Brian) originally wrote: “Why does he feel Americans are so stupid and/or venal that they will always produce the “wrong” results unless the State steps in and decides for them, and administers their lives for them?”

    As far as the benevolent government simply offering a helping hand to those in need – not controlling our lives – are you really telling me the tens upon tens of thousands of lines in the Federal Register are all for that purpose: “offering a helping hand to those in need?”

  85. BillB says:

    #63

    Because Liberals know they are smarter and better than the majority. Therefore they need to tell everybody how to live rather than give people their freedom to choose.

  86. John Wilkins says:

    #84, given that most white people embraced racism until the law changed, it does make some sense. I mean, after all, do we want white to embrace what is wrong? I think most whites were simply indifferent for a few hundred years. No?

    #58 – perhaps. But it took a socialist to realize the dream you think its living. Do you know who Lula is? The military and the corporations did everything they could to prevent him from doing the right thing. You might want to examine his work a bit more closely. He’s probably the original Obama.

  87. Vincent Lerins says:

    #82 and 84:
    Rev. Lowry was referencing the old saying: If you are black, get back! If you are brown, stick around. If you are white, you are alright! It’s an old saying about race relations and color relations in particular. Brown are the mixed people or “light-skinned” people. I remember that was something my parents would comment on as I was growning up. Lowry wasn’t being divisive. He actually expanded the saying to be inclusive. That was probably the most memorable part of the days events for me!!

    Vincent

  88. Sarah1 says:

    This has been an interesting thread. I didn’t see the inauguration so cannot comment on that.

    Mike L,

    RE: “But the problems are so vast that the chances of his pulling it off to any great extent are slim. When those expectations come crashing back down to reality, what happens then?”

    Not to worry, I think. No matter what Obama does or does not do, he will not fail. He cannot fail as he has made history, and the media won’t allow it. So be assured. Obama. Will. Not. Fail. No matter what he does.

    DCReinken,

    RE: “I would question whether most people live in racially mixed neighborhoods outside of major urban areas.”

    Like Katherine, I also live in a racially mixed neighborhood. Africans behind me, then a white family, then a mixed Polish American family, then a black family, then a mixed Hungarian family, then another black family, then a white single older male, then a Hispanic family, then a white single female.

    There — I just went around my circle surrounding my house. I’ve met all of them but the new black family, to whom I am taking their welcoming cookies.

    From my perspective, Obama’s race has been a yawner, and disinteresting to me — other than the fact that it is a great blessing for those minorities who have needed this. I am very glad for them.

    The media has way hyped it — and that makes me irritable because of course they’re acting as if white Southern females like me are deeply bigoted. But that’s just what they need to feel important and superior, and I have the satisfaction of knowing that their numbers and viewers are plummeting and that they will be gradually going out of business as they should.

    Katherine,

    RE: “This is not the founding vision of our nation. It is, rather, a vision of an all-encompassing state whose job is cradle-to-grave care for its citizens. I disagree with this vision. I think the race issue in the campaign has obscured the more important questions of what the basic purpose of our form of government is.”

    I completely agree. But since the Republicans bought into the same vision as Barack, only slightly less, I’m fine with the Democrats getting their shot. I think it’s going to be pretty bad as Barack implements the practices and policies of his own foundational worldview as much as is pragmaticall possible — but we deserve it. Maybe Republicans will repent — who knows.

  89. Pete Jensen says:

    I am struck by the difference between this Inauguration and in 2001.

    http://www.youtube.com/v/cAp6YAPtC2c

    I don’t think any comment is necessary.

  90. Katherine says:

    I think, in all charity, that we have reached the point where “John Wilkins,” who is, I think, an Episcopal priest, should be regarded as a troll and his comments ignored. Just within the past few days he said, apparently meaning it, that FiF people think the prayers of men are worth more to God than the prayers of women; that the Bush administration was “intent on showing that Government shouldn’t work;” and that the vast majority of whites didn’t give up racism until forced to do so by the law. Either deliberately or through error he assigns the worst motives, many of them laughably off-target, to all sorts of people. I hope at some point that his vision will clear.

  91. Militaris Artifex says:

    [i][b]63. Phil[/b][/i],

    You asked [blockquote] why do people of his ideological stripe have such contempt for the ability of ordinary citizens to conduct their lives as they see fit? [/blockquote] You need to read up on why some of our fellow citizens subscribe to [i]progressivism[/i], as well as: the articles of faith that make up the [i]progressivist[/i] creed, what the [i]progressivist fallacy[/i] is, and why it is a fallacy. Two good places to start are (1) F. A. Hayek’s [i]The Fatal Conceit: The Errors of Socialism[/i], and (2) Jonah Goldberg’s [i]Liberal Fascism[/i], which title is not the oxymoron that the [i]ignorati[/i] might suppose it is.

    Blessings and regards,
    Martial Artist (Keith Toepfer)

  92. Militaris Artifex says:

    [i][66] Ladytenor[/i],

    You wrote: [blockquote] If I remember my history lessons correctly, the vice president becomes president immediately upon the death of the president. The oath is administered at the earliest convenience (in 1963, on Air Force One) but the actual transfer of power is not delayed for the oath. So I would say that Obama was president immediately at noon. [/blockquote] First, no one died, and Sen. Kennedy graciously held his medical episode until the luncheon thus ensuring the accuracy of that observation. Second, [i][b]if your statement is precisely correct[/b][/i], and if death is not the only initiator of succession, then the Vice President would have become President at noon, inasmuch as Mr. Obama was, at that time neither the Vice President nor the President, but still only the President-elect. So the question becomes, who was Vice President at 12:00:01, Mr. Cheney or Mr. Biden?

    [i]N.B.[/i], as hopefullly indicated by the conditional clauses, I am not challenging your conclusion, simply pointing out that you have posited something of an oxymoron in your reasoning.

    Blessings and regards,
    Keith Toepfer

  93. Militaris Artifex says:

    [i]71. Br. Michael[/i],

    You assert [blockquote] The one thing the founders hadn’t counted on was the rise of the party system. [/blockquote] Not to be contentious, but I think they also severely underestimated the degree of mendacity and venality to which elected politicians would be drawn by the blandishments of political power associated to the offices of Senator and Representative. The two party system which we now see instantiated is very much the fruits of those characteristics.

    Blessings and regards,
    Keith Toepfer

  94. libraryjim says:

    Vincent,
    He did NOT say “IF you are white you are alright”. He said “Let the white embrace what is right”. The implication I and many others got was that if you are white you are currently NOT doing what is right, and need to start. It was a racist statement, pure and simple,and had no place in this event, which is clearly a transcendence of racial issues.

  95. Ladytenor says:

    #98 Martial Artist, I think we may be going at cross-purposes here. Allow me to clarify my reasoning. At the exact moment JFK died, LBJ became president–the fact that he took the oath later did not mean that the nation went an hour or two without a president. If it was possible for the presidency to pass, oath-free, from Kennedy to Johnson, it must therefore possible for the presidency to pass, oath-free, from Bush to Obama. Bush didn’t die, of course, but his term did expire precisely at noon. For that matter, Dick Cheney did not cease to be Vice President at 11:58 even though Biden took the oath first.

    I had read in the paper that the inauguration schedule called for Obama to take the oath at about 11:56, to avoid just this sort of consternation. Unfortunately, they ran late. But even if Obama had taken the oath at 11:56, his term would not have begun until noon. The mechanism of transfer is the time the term expires (or the time the [i]president[/i] expires, in the case of Kennedy/Johnson), not the oath itself.

  96. Militaris Artifex says:

    Ladytenor,

    I don’t disagree with your conclusion, particularly given [i]flaanglican[/i]’s citation, in comment [i]67[/i], of the relevant part of the 20th Amendment to the consitution. I hadn’t read the latter when I posted my earlier comment directed toward yours. I primarily thought your conclusion didn’t necessarily follow from the facts you cited, but I didn’t disagree with your conclusion. My apologies for any confusion.

    Blessings and regards,
    Keith Toepfer

  97. Vincent Lerins says:

    #95 libraryjim,

    You are blowing this way out of proportion. That’s not what Lowry meant. So, the white people that worked with him in the civil rights movement, do they need to start embracing what is right from Lowry’s perspective? Of course not. From Lowry’s perspective, they are already embracing what is right. I don’t know your background, so you may not be familiar with the “black get back” saying. If you were, you definitely would not have reached the conclusion you did when you heard the benediction. In fact, I had to explain the context of that part of the benediction to non-black friends at my inauguration day party. The African-Americans in attendance started to laugh when they heard that part of Lowry’s prayer. Those who were white and Indian wondered why we were laughing. I explained the background of the saying and they got it! No one reached the conclusion that Lowry was being racist. They understood that he was being inclusive.

    Lastly, the structure of the section of Lowry’s prayer is a play on the old black get back saying.

    [b] If you are black, get back [/b]

    [i] [we ask you to help us work for that day when black will not be asked to get in back] [/i]

    [b] If you are brown, you can stick around [/b]

    [i] [when brown can stick around] [/i]

    (Lowry included other groups)
    [i] [,… when yellow will be mellow … when the red man can get ahead, man; ] [/i]

    [b] If you are white, you’re alright [/b]

    [i] [and when white will embrace what is right] [/i]

    I liked the prayer so much, I have printed out a copy will hang it on my wall next to a picture of Obama and his family.
    Of course, that picture is right next to my pictures of JFK, MLK and Jesus praying in the Garden. Just kidding!

    -Vincent

  98. libraryjim says:

    I remind you, Vincent, that unless you have spoken to Rev. Lowery, you don’t KNOW what he meant. However, many people ARE interpreting it the way “Sick & Tired” and I interpreted it.
    Further, you keep saying “if you’re white, you’re alright”. That is NOT NOT [b]NOT[/b] what he said, which is why it is racist in sentiment.

    If Rev. Lowery did not mean it in a racist way, let him get on CNN and MSNBC and the other media outlets and set the record straight. Otherwise, ours is a valid interpretation.

  99. libraryjim says:

    Woo hoo, I got post #100!

    Anyway, one blogger thought Lowery was praying for more Whites to become Right, that is conservatives. I can live with that.

  100. Vincent Lerins says:

    LibraryJim,

    “White, you’re alright” is the last part of the old ‘black get back’ saying. Lowry played on those words when he said, “and when white will embrace what is right.”

    You are free to hold your own interpetation, just like anyone is free to believe evolution is a valid interpetation of the earth’s creation. However, we all know which is the correct interpretation.

    Vincent

  101. libraryjim says:

    Yep. Google lowery prayer racist or any combination of those words and see how many disagree with you. Even I was surprised at the number of hits.

  102. libraryjim says:

    But again, whether or not that is the way the saying goes, Wright, er, sorry, Lowery did not say those words. Thus when you quote those words as from Lowery, you are incorrect. He should be evaluated on what he actually said not what someone else said.

  103. libraryjim says:

    Sorry, the use of Wright was wrong. But all the talk of Lowery’s use of right being right or wrong got confusing. The Left think it’s right, the Right think it was wrong. so whether you think it right or wrong tells if you are right or left, right?

  104. Alta Californian says:

    Looks like they’ve fixed the oath problem. According to Politico, the Chief Justice came to the White House this evening and carefully readministered the oath correctly. No doubts now. I think this was wise.

  105. Catholic Mom says:

    Obama joked that they did it “because it was so much fun the first time.”

  106. Catholic Mom says:

    Someone just emailed me the following:

    There are no rules against a do-over. When questions were raised about whether it was proper for Calvin Coolidge to have been sworn in by his father, a notary public, after the death of Warren G. Harding in 1923, Coolidge took the oath again from a federal judge.

  107. libraryjim says:

    I agree with Alta that this was a good thing. It heads off any potential controversy later on. So no matter if it was the idea of the President, the Chief Justice or both — Good idea!

    Now I read that there are some complaining because they did not use a Bible for the oath!