yoda Posted January 21, 2009 Posted January 21, 2009 BTW the whole oath taking was just symbolic. He was officially president as of noon EST, oath or not.
cowboysfan Posted January 21, 2009 Posted January 21, 2009 BTW the whole oath taking was just symbolic. He was officially president as of noon EST' date=' oath or not.[/quote'] hmm-why did roberts call him senator then as he started the oath?.i think that threw obama immediately and it went downhill from there.
Macj Posted January 21, 2009 Posted January 21, 2009 hmm-why did roberts call him senator then as he started the oath?.i think that threw obama immediately and it went downhill from there. Because until the oath was administered he was still a Senator.
cowboysfan Posted January 21, 2009 Posted January 21, 2009 Because until the oath was administered he was still a Senator. looks like you are wrong again - http://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/constitution.amendmentxx.html
Ram Posted January 21, 2009 Posted January 21, 2009 But my God, this guy is an outstaning orator.. I havent seen too many speakers with so much force, depth and power in their words.
Macj Posted January 21, 2009 Posted January 21, 2009 looks like you are wrong again - http://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/constitution.amendmentxx.html Dont think so ---"Section 1. The terms of the President and Vice President shall end at noon on the 20th day of January, and the terms of Senators and Representatives at noon on the 3d day of January, of the years in which such terms would have ended if this article had not been ratified; and the terms of their successors shall then begin" So Obama would have been called 'President' regardless at Noon, it was around 11:45 when the oath was administered so he was still Senator.
King Tendulkar Posted January 21, 2009 Posted January 21, 2009 I had a stinking cold before his inauguration. Obama got inagurated. I went to sleep, woke up and guess what! I still had the stinking cold. Looks like things in the world haven't changed since Obama went in to power
cowboysfan Posted January 21, 2009 Posted January 21, 2009 Dont think so ---"Section 1. The terms of the President and Vice President shall end at noon on the 20th day of January, and the terms of Senators and Representatives at noon on the 3d day of January, of the years in which such terms would have ended if this article had not been ratified; and the terms of their successors shall then begin" So Obama would have been called 'President' regardless at Noon, it was around 11:45 when the oath was administered so he was still Senator. obama was sworn it 12:04 pm ET,i watched it live http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20090120103912AAc00gG
triam Posted January 21, 2009 Posted January 21, 2009 It's probably the DNC, and that is OK. I read that the actual festivities cost $50 mil, and the rest was for security. Well worth it, IMO. There is an article today on cnn.com showering praise on Mrs. Obama's "dance gown." The dress was designed by some Jason Wu, and has all kinds of baroque handiwork including Swarovski crystals etc. Well-deserved, of course. This is a once-in-a-lifetime event for them - they earned it. But, the same press roasted Sarah Palin over the coals for an expensive suit that she wore during the convention. The RNC paid for it, and she was slated to return it after the event. But she was not afforded the same courtesy that Mrs. Obama is getting today. While there is no denying Mrs. Palin's political ineptitude, there really was no excuse for the press' treatment of her as a person. These inconsistencies, and peoples' inability to see through them irk me. Was not the issue with Palin that she went against the Republican party and used funds from the party in an unauthorized way? That is the party didnt give the money to her so she can go ahead and buy clothes?
Holysmoke Posted January 21, 2009 Posted January 21, 2009 I had a stinking cold before his inauguration. Obama got inagurated. I went to sleep, woke up and guess what! I still had the stinking cold. Looks like things in the world haven't changed since Obama went in to power :hysterical::hysterical::hysterical:
fineleg Posted January 21, 2009 Posted January 21, 2009 I had a stinking cold before his inauguration. Obama got inagurated. I went to sleep, woke up and guess what! I still had the stinking cold. Looks like things in the world haven't changed since Obama went in to power dsr! :eyedance:
cowboysfan Posted January 22, 2009 Posted January 22, 2009 President Obama has retaken the oath of office after a mix-up during the inaugural ceremony, the White House says. http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/us_and_americas/us_elections/article5562727.ece
sandtest Posted January 22, 2009 Author Posted January 22, 2009 Folks, Obama is a great orator which proves even in modern time people can be convinced through oratory skills. India already has a Narendra Modi who backs-up his speech with action. But as usual our idiot media for no reason made a complete mess out of it by hounding Modi earlier. This is one of the major damages to India in 2009....leaders decide future of a nation and communist media robbed us our own Obama!
Brainfade Posted January 22, 2009 Posted January 22, 2009 Was not the issue with Palin that she went against the Republican party and used funds from the party in an unauthorized way? That is the party didnt give the money to her so she can go ahead and buy clothes? Not the way I read it. http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/23/us/politics/23palin.html Advisers to Ms. Palin said on Wednesday that the purchases — which totaled about $150,000 and were classified as “campaign accessories†— were made on the fly after Ms. Palin, the governor of Alaska, was chosen as the Republican vice-presidential candidate on Aug. 29 and needed new clothes to match climates across the 50 states. They emphasized, too, that Ms. Palin did not spend time on the shopping, and that other people made the decision to buy such an array of clothes. Republican officials said all the clothes would be given to charity after the campaign is over. If Ms. Palin kept the clothes, the $150,000 would have to be taxed as income, tax experts said. Had the purchases been made by the McCain campaign, it would be a conversion of campaign money into personal use, which is prohibited. The same rule does not apply to money from party committees. “The R.N.C. cleverly used the party committee’s money to avoid the liability that would have occurred if campaigns funds were used,†said Kenneth Gross, a lawyer who is an expert in campaign finance. Regardless, it was a political faux pas by the Republican party. It exacerbated her negative image to epic proportions.
Ram Posted January 22, 2009 Posted January 22, 2009 It's probably the DNC, and that is OK. I read that the actual festivities cost $50 mil, and the rest was for security. Well worth it, IMO. There is an article today on cnn.com showering praise on Mrs. Obama's "dance gown." The dress was designed by some Jason Wu, and has all kinds of baroque handiwork including Swarovski crystals etc. Well-deserved, of course. This is a once-in-a-lifetime event for them - they earned it. But, the same press roasted Sarah Palin over the coals for an expensive suit that she wore during the convention. The RNC paid for it, and she was slated to return it after the event. But she was not afforded the same courtesy that Mrs. Obama is getting today. While there is no denying Mrs. Palin's political ineptitude, there really was no excuse for the press' treatment of her as a person. These inconsistencies, and peoples' inability to see through them irk me. You musnt forget that it was the same press that shot her into stardom from literally nowhere, when she was nominated for the Vice-Presidency. Don’t forget, here was lady who was unknown to even most Americans till then, Governed a no-name state just below the arctic circle with a capital that had a population of 7500. And yet, in two weeks, she was the most recognizable face in the world. Who was responsible for it? The Press of course. So, if you’re fine with taking the good things the press has to offer, you must also be o.k with the nonsense that they’re going to dish out. Michelle, on the other hand, never gained such heights of popularity, which is why the press has been more accepting of her excesses.
Macj Posted January 22, 2009 Posted January 22, 2009 You musnt forget that it was the same press that shot her into stardom from literally nowhere, when she was nominated for the Vice-Presidency. Don’t forget, here was lady who was unknown to even most Americans till then, Governed a no-name state just below the arctic circle with a capital that had a population of 7500. And yet, in two weeks, she was the most recognizable face in the world. Who was responsible for it? The Press of course. So, if you’re fine with taking the good things the press has to offer, you must also be o.k with the nonsense that they’re going to dish out. Michelle, on the other hand, never gained such heights of popularity, which is why the press has been more accepting of her excesses. I think its different, Sarah Palin was catapulted into prominence because of her relative obscurity before. But she turned out to be pretty dull when it came to key issues. So everything she did or didnt do was raked over and over again and made fun of. Michelle Obama is now the Presidents wife and commands different parity when it comes to what she wears or who pays for it, no one ever cared for how much Mrs Bush's dresses costed the exchequer.
TheBoyPlunger Posted January 24, 2009 Posted January 24, 2009 I wonder who is footing the $170 MILLION bill for his inauguration when the country is in a recession? Absolutely!!He is ignoring the very thing that got him into the presidency. Till the economy tanked in September, this race was split right down the middle. And the total lack of media coverage on this is shocking. The messiah can do no wrong. The change you can really believe in - 400% increase in expenses on the inaugration expenses from 2005 to 2009 :giggle:. Meanwhile throw in a few crumbs for the left support base - Guantonomo(70% of the people are either against or don't care abt this), abortion. Surely he has something planned planned for the gays and the green warriors.
punjabi_khota Posted January 24, 2009 Posted January 24, 2009 Absolutely!!He is ignoring the very thing that got him into the presidency. Till the economy tanked in September, this race was split right down the middle. And the total lack of media coverage on this is shocking. The messiah can do no wrong. The change you can really believe in - 400% increase in expenses on the inaugration expenses from 2005 to 2009 :giggle:. Meanwhile throw in a few crumbs for the left support base - Guantonomo(70% of the people are either against or don't care abt this), abortion. Surely he has something planned planned for the gays and the green warriors. Don't worry my friend. Faux news is doing its best to spread the good word around. In 24 hours, they have declared that Obama presidency will doom America, Limbaugh hopes Obama fails, and they have also mentioned that America may not survive the first 100 days since terrorizers will surely finish it off before that.
Brainfade Posted January 24, 2009 Posted January 24, 2009 Absolutely!!He is ignoring the very thing that got him into the presidency. Till the economy tanked in September, this race was split right down the middle. And the total lack of media coverage on this is shocking. The messiah can do no wrong. The change you can really believe in - 400% increase in expenses on the inaugration expenses from 2005 to 2009 :giggle:. Meanwhile throw in a few crumbs for the left support base - Guantonomo(70% of the people are either against or don't care abt this), abortion. Surely he has something planned planned for the gays and the green warriors. You can check that box! http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/01/23/obama-signs-order-ending-_n_160483.html FWIW, I vehemently oppose giving taxpayer money to support abortions (don't ban them if you don't want to, but don't use taxpayers' money to support them). But, I am not surprised whatsoever. He has voted against a PBA-ban as an Illinois Senator, so this is par for the course.
Brainfade Posted January 24, 2009 Posted January 24, 2009 Don't worry my friend. Faux news is doing its best to spread the good word around. In 24 hours' date=' they have declared that Obama presidency will doom America, Limbaugh hopes Obama fails, and they have also mentioned that America may not survive the first 100 days since terrorizers will surely finish it off before that.[/quote'] Since when do you listen to (pseudo) conservative talk-radio?
Recommended Posts