Obama media honeymoon over on day 2?

I suspect this will just be the first of many instances in which those who threw their full-throated support behind Obama discover that they and the Greatest President of All Time did not share a common definition of a great number of the words and phrases that constituted Obama's soaring – yet ever nebulous – rhetoric.

Gee, the empty suit can't even repeat the words to the oath correctly and now nobody can watch him try to do it on the second try.

For the sake of the country, I hope he does well but just don't get your hopes up too high.

be lucky this wasn't the Bush Admin - this is what would have happened (or not in the case)
1. There wouldn't be a do-over.

2. If there happend to be ameeting between Bush and the Chief Justice it would be blown off by the press secratary and you yould be told that the president would not divulge to contents of the conversation.

So, be thankful that there were even pool reporters, you would not have been given that with Bush.

Wow...after 8 years of the Bush administration hand-cuffing the press to cover only the bits that Bush allows to be released and after being given false information and made to 'push' it to the public and mandating that only certain questions and certain reporters be approved to ask the questions; after 8 years of this and now the press is worred about not being able to cover a 2nd swearing in ceremony?! Perhaps the press should grow a pair and work on that journalism thing that has escaped them over the past decade.

Heaven forfend that the possibility be admitted that President Obama was simply trying to spare Chief Justice Roberts aggravation of embarrassment. But, personally, I think that the four journalists were on Bill Ayers' payroll, the official depiction was cleverly photoshopped, and the REAL chief justice is now in a man-sized vault at the Naval Observatory with a certain bona fide Kenyan birth certificate.

Get over yourselves. If you'd done anything useful during the last eight years, maybe somebody would care that you didn't get to make a carnival out of this.

It's a ceremony and that's it. Get over it.

We have a loooooong way to go before the media's honeymoon with Obama can be declared over. I'm more concerned about the media's reluctance to criticize a treasury choice who failed to pay his full taxes for four of the last 7 years, than I am about their access issues (which they've had for a good part of the election anyway). Is that the best man Obama can find to, among other things, oversee the IRS??? The honeymoon phase is still alive and well; hope it doesn't last forever. We need some real thinkers in the media who are ready to just quit toeing the industry line.

And this is how the republic ends -- to great applause.

Ah, a nice lesson on appeasement for the media...

Since you acted like such sycophant lap-dogs for Obama during the campaign, when you should have been asking a few more questions and properly vetting The One's dubious and opaque history, it's hard to try and demand your dignity now .

Obama knows he owns you, so he treats you with arrogant contempt. Since he no longer respects nor fears the press, Barack now even hectors reporters to "not waste their question", and tells them when they've "got enough pictures", and even to "get back on the bus"- ouch.

Maybe next time you'll do your Constitutionally-implied duty that came with the right of a free-press, and investigate both candidates properly... and maybe, someone will again respect you.... because we don't, either.

http://reaganiterepublicanresistance.blogspot.com

Gee, the empty suit can't even repeat the words to the oath correctly and now nobody can watch him try to do it on the second try.

For the sake of the country, I hope he does well but just don't get your hopes up too high.

Posted by: Phil | January 22, 2009 2:45 PM
Is Obam addicted to a teleprompter?

Phil - if you are refering to President Obama as the "empty suit" you are sadly mistaken - John Roberts screwed up the oath and our VERY SMART president realized it.

The corporate media needs to get over itsself. They spent eight years eating up and spitting out all of the propaganda that BushCo tossed out and they helped the BushCo Republicans start an unnecessary war in Iraq by selling it for them.

If they're upset, then we all should be happy.

As television journalists pointed out ad nauseum on inauguration day, the oath is not a requirement to the President-Elect becoming President. If he never took the oath, he still would be President. I'm not certain why Obama even had a do-over, as it only opens the door to the kind of catty remarks we're seeing here. Are the media really this starved for Obama news that they cared whether they could witness a completely meaningless repeat of the oath?

Phil: oath do-over, necessitated by Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts' muffing the constitutionally prescribed language on Inauguration Day.

Next time bother to read the piece. It was not Obama's fault, it was Roberts.

The test of openness and transparency isn't whether every prima donna reporter is invited to an event. It's whether the public knew about something. We did, right away. End of story. Shut up.

Let's hope that BHO in fact will have an open administration. The fact that the 2nd oath was done rather secretly, then only revealed AFTER the fact, with no video recording of the event (e.g., no C-SPAN or some other pool reporting), one picture with an audio recording, calls into question the level of openness.

In this comes AFTER BHO signed an executive order yesterday suggesting that his administration was going to be, using the favorite words of the "beltway" folks, transparent.

This smacks of the work of the Democratic Party's own version of Karl Rove, Rahm Emmaneul.

How about this reaction? For something as simple as a do-over, the larger the number of people involved, the longer the event takes.

I for one applaud the man on his priorities. There are too many crises to face to deal with shepherding a large group of reporters through and around a simple do-over.

Let the man work!

Ah, now it is the "yeah, but if it was Bush..." defense that is the new crutch of the Obama supporters:

"Perhaps the press should grow a pair and work on that jounalism thing..." - written by the same person who blames Bush for "handcuffing" the press.

Bush was "mandating that only certain questions and certain reporters be approved to ask the questions" - even though it was recently divulged that Mr. Obama PRACTICES THE EXACT SAME POLICY, so much as keeping a list with him at the podium of who should be called on.

Funny, but the sycophantic press writes one less than adoring piece about the savior and immediately the blind defense begins, with the obligatory "Bush's fault" defense somehow thrown in for good measure.

Too humorous and too predictable.

"- John Roberts screwed up the oath and our VERY SMART president realized it. "

If you watched the bumble, you will see that Obumblehead started repeating right after Roberts' said his name. Roberts' was still talking and was probably thrown off by your not very smart obumblehead...Just admit that odumba screwed up!

Roberts (a Bush appointee) got it wrong first....makes sense though. After all it must have been really hard to put the Constitution back together after it was shredded by the Bush Administration.

Really people? You're upset because he didn't let you see him say a couple sentences that we all heard him say already? This was a formality people!!!! We just had 8 years of complete silence from the white house and their press staff and this is what you're outraged about?

And for Inky, get it right, your republican Cheif Justice is the one who screwed up the words which is why they did it a second time.

This is why the press is no longer being taken seriously... this is the crap they're making an issue out of. And you're all eating it up!!!!! BAH BAAAAAH SHEEP!!!!!

PML - I'm guessing that you never administrated an oath ~ I did it thousands of times as a city clerk. The key is to speak in short sentences. Most people start with "I, George of the Jungle" and stop. Obama expected that. Guess he's more experienced that this than Roberts... :)

Does anyone remember how many times it took George Bush to repeat the 30 second oath? I'm thinking it was once in Jan. 2001 and once in Jan. 2005. Of course, most 2nd & 3rd graders have it memorized these days so you can say even Bush could do it.

As television journalists pointed out ad nauseum on inauguration day, the oath is not a requirement to the President-Elect becoming President. If he never took the oath, he still would be President.

Television journalists are nauseating, certainly. But they don't know much about the law.

The Constitution, in Article II, Section 1, paragraph 8 says:

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."

The 20th Amendment says:

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.

Note that the 20th Amendment doesn’t say when the term of the President begins – just when it ends. The Constitution couldn’t say that the next President’s term begins on that date and time because it’s entirely possible that the election might not be decided by then, either because of election disputes or because nobody got a majority of Electoral Votes and it got thrown into the House (which did once happen).

Combine these two parts of the Constitution and it seems clear that the President’s term begins when he takes the oath and ends at noon on January 20th of the appropriate year. The news anchors should try reading the Constitution. It seems to me that the most charitable interpretation would be that he would be President but would not be able to sign anything or perform an official act until he took the oath written in the Constitution – and since it appears in the Constitution in quotes it seems that to be legal it would have to be taken exactly as given there. “Before he enter on the execution of his office” seems pretty plain to me.

Ah...As if one single wingnut could even stand to see it ONE MORE TIME.

The press are a bunch of crybabies.

For press conferences, events, etc., it is appropriate that the press be well represented so that questions from a broad base can be heard.

For the re-oathing ritual (a political and administrative bit of butt covering), having a small pool contingent to witness, report and photograph the event is well more than enough.

Having 40 reporters there (instead of 4) would not have revealed anything more than what was revealed.

THis is a non-story. Correspondents should instead concentrate on how Obama is promising to be far more open with both the press and public regarding information that actually affects the operations of government.

Obama screwed up the oath of office when the teleprompter went into fast forward mode---that's why Obama jumped in too fast.

It's Obama's fault.

Paulo

Obama stumbled the oath? Well fool me once!

It's amazing how quickly people are willing to jump in when they don't know the whole story. #1 Roberts (a Bush legacy) screwed up the oath. He went too long in the opening and mixed up the words. Obama stopped and started because he knew Roberts screwed up. Second, Obama only did it again to quell the crazies on the far,far right. Fox commentators had already started in on how they doubted that Obama was really the President because the oath wasn't said exactly word by word. They conveniently didn't read the constitution that the new President takes power at noon on the 20th. It has nothing to do with taking the oath, but they did it again anyway. Dotting the i's and crossing the T's.
The TV people are upset because they missed an interesting item for their brodcasts that they could have plumbed for a few minutes. It's really an inconsequential matter that they're crying because they missed out on it. No policy was issued and no press conference was held. It was covered by the press, but no video. God forbid!

And it is still Bush's fault!! You lefty nitwits need to get over it. Obama lives and dies on his own merits. BTW, this whole thing is much ado about nothing. It was a second, really unnecessary since the error in no way changed the meaning of the oath, recitation of the oath so who cares!!!

Does anyone remember how many times it took George Bush to repeat the 30 second oath? I'm thinking it was once in Jan. 2001 and once in Jan. 2005. Of course, most 2nd & 3rd graders have it memorized these days so you can say even Bush could do it.

Posted by: PML | January 22, 2009 4:15 PM
What a great plan you have to lift us out of the miserable economy. Bravo. Is it too late to put fine Republicans like you in office?

And it is still Bush's fault!! You lefty nitwits need to get over it.
Posted by: chris | January 22, 2009 5:05 PM

You hit the nail on the head. If Clinton had only reeled in the hateful left, things would have been much better.

Remember during campaign when VP got upset because he was asked questions he did not like and the team made notice the station would never have contact. Who knows many have pushed for the reporter to be fired just as the governor is accused.

John Roberts screwed up the oath and our VERY SMART president realized it.

Posted by: Bill | January 22, 2009 3:30 PM

Bill,

While that is true, Obama "screwed up" by repeating Roberts "screw up" even after Roberts began to correct himself.

It seems as if BOTH Roberts and Obama were laughing about it - "what does it really matter, right" - only to realize that, like a marriage vow, it DOES matter. Words MATTER.

As for the "transparency" of the second oath, it would be one thing if NO REPORTERS had been notified. Not everyone gets to witness EVERY aspect of EVERY presidential moment - official or otherwise. It sounds as if the "uninvited" are upset that they weren't "chosen." Take a number and get in line. Many other writers weren't "chosen" for your cushy jobs.

So this is much ado about nothing.

They call themselves journalists when they behave more like paparazzi.
With the many glaring failures to report what is actually news, I wouldn't call any who were excluded Journalists unless I also spat at the ground in punctuation.

What is the most funny is all the liberal dillwipes still trying to cover up for the Ossiah by pointing other people to look at Bush.

Here is a fact, Bush isn't in office. Your are up at the plate, if you can't play ball, go back to the dugout.

What a bunch of losers. Many of us voted for Obama, and as of now we wished we hadn't

What is the most funny is all the liberal dillwipes still trying to cover up for the Ossiah by pointing other people to look at Bush.

Here is a fact, Bush isn't in office. Your are up at the plate, if you can't play ball, go back to the dugout.

What a bunch of losers. Many of us voted for Obama, and as of now we wished we hadn't

Puleeze people! The man needs to get down to the business of running the country. How much more time would have been spent allowing each and every journalist or film crew admittance to the event? For gosh sakes, it was reported. Heck, even I knew that there was a second oath taking.

Objecting to not being able to witness the re-swearing in? What a trivial objection! I suppose they will want to witness and report every time Obama sharpens a pencil.

What a bunch of losers. Many of us voted for Obama, and as of now we wished we hadn't

Posted by: Tankgirl | January 22, 2009 5:46 PM

Oh please....I was born at night but it wasn't last night. This loser calls BS. Even at the start of the crisis you bozos were blaming Clinton. It's always Clinton, Clinton, Clinton with you guys and now after 3 days exit of Bush.....hey...he isn't the president anymore?

Reaching . . . and missing. This is a lot of posturing. And the quote from a Cspan guy is useless. That's a person that makes a living providing live feeds. He's going to be cranky.

When I read a while back that bo's choice for a.g. was the guy who got the behind-scenes-pardon for Marc Rich, the fugitive financier who made BIG donations to Hillary Clinton's first campaign, I shrugged and said 'what else is new?'.

Now bo says with an EQUALLY straight face that his choice for Secretary of the Treasury is a guy who didn't pay his S.S. or Medicare taxes for 3 years, I thought- 'this is a joke, right?'

(can you say 'vetting' boys and girls?)

(Sleuth that I am) I immediately detected something fishy, not wonderful here.

then I remembered

democrats are immune to embarrassment

that explains it

Kinda strange to limit access to the entity that got him elected in the first place.

None of the public have heard empty suit take a valid and legal oath to be President of the United States. On the second try a day later, the illustrious judge forgot to offer a Bible for the would be president to put his hand on, and swear before God to be truthful in the oath he was speaking. There is no Bible in the one photo offered as proof. Obama has his arm down at his side. He's still not the President because the second oath was legally invalid, but maybe he planned it that way. So everything he signed into law is still invalid. Did he graduate from Harvard law school? Or did he buy his degree?

Trickle-Down Terry, the great defender of Laissez -Faire Capitalism which has failed us yet again, speaks. What's a joke is that dems will have to spend the next couple of decades cleaning up the Neo-pugs mess.

Take the test.

FIRST QUESTION: Who IS the actual and lawful 44th President of the USA?

ANSWER: Joe Biden

Biden was initially the Acting President for at least 5 minutes under either the Constitution’s Article 2 or the Constitution’s 20th Amendment, from 12:00 Noon 1/20/09, having already taken his Oath of Office and before Obama completed his ‘oath’ at approximately 12:05 PM, 1/20/09. Under the 20th Amendment if the President-elect shall have failed to qualify, or alternatively under Article 2 if the President is unable to discharge the powers and duties, at the time fixed for the beginning of the term, being 12:00 Noon 1/20/09, which ability and/or qualification includes that he take the Article 2 oath “before he enter on the execution of his office,” then either the Presidency shall devolve on the Vice President under Article 2 or the Vice President shall act as President under the 20th Amendment. (The importance of the oath in ‘commencing’ an ‘Obama Presidency’ — rather than merely the 1/20/09 Noon time — is confirmed by the re-take of the ‘oath’ by Obama at the White House on 1/21/09 after the first ‘oath’ was NOT administered by Justice Roberts NOR recited by Obama in the words as required under Article 2.)

This is significant because at such time that the Supreme Court finally rules on the merits on Obama’s disqualification as not being an Article 2 “natural born citizen” (clearly he is NOT), Biden’s automatic status (without needing to take a separate Presidential Oath) of being President would be predicated upon four different bases: First, having been Vice President under Article 2; second, having been Vice President-elect under the 20th Amendment; third, having been actual President in the hiatus before Obama took the ‘oath(s)’; and fourth, retroactively deemed President during the full period of the Obama usurpation so that the acts of the Federal Government under the usurpation can be deemed authorized and/or ratified by Biden’s legitimacy.

SECOND QUESTION: Who will be the 45th President?

ANSWER: Hillary Clinton

One must assume that Bill and Hillary Clinton have been aware of all of the above. Biden’s wife recently “let the cat out of the bag” on the Oprah Show that both Biden and Hillary had considered alternatively Veep or Secretary of State, in either case, setting up Hillary to be President on a vote of the Democratic Congress if need be.

THIRD QUESTION: Is Obama an unwitting victim of this troika or a knowing participant?

ANSWER: Yet undetermined.

Very imaginative, Ted.

When the media starts covering Obama's effective 180 on medical marijuana, allowing the dea to continue to conduct raids on dispensaries legal under local laws, THEN I'll care about your opportunity to cover meaningless photo ops.

If you aren't willing to do your job, at least shut up.