The 2008 Presidential Inauguration

[redfirebird2008]

Anyone watching the Colbert Report? :hehe:

It is sad that the idiots at FOX News had to pull the 'I'm not sure if he's really the President or not'...

Chris Wallace, what a dolt. Read the 20th Amendment, jackass. Talk about speaking without thinking first.

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 3rd 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.

Way to go Chris Wallace! :hehe:

[Matt]

Anyone watching the Colbert Report? :hehe:

It is sad that the idiots at FOX News had to pull the 'I'm not sure if he's really the President or not'...

President Mang :lmao:

[Matt]

He was referring to Limbaugh, who explicitly stated on his radio show this week that he is rooting for the President to fail. And the reason people like him want the President and consequently the country to fail is because they don't give a damn about the country. It's about their ideology above all else. Country be damned if a Democrat's failure proves that conservatism is better or a Republican's failure proves that liberalism is better. This line of thought is treasonous regardless of which direction it's coming from. I disagreed with many of Bush's policies but I hoped they would work, including the Iraq War. I hoped it would work out. I still have hope that it will work out in the long run.

Well, as long as Rush has enough money to keep his bottle of oxyes filled, why does he give a damn if our country fails?

[redfirebird2008]

Well, as long as Rush has enough money to keep his bottle of oxyes filled, why does he give a damn if our country fails?

That was exactly the thought that came into my mind when I finished posting that. He makes $50 million per year or however much it is. He doesn't give a damn if the country completely fails. The sad thing though is he has a heavy influence on a lot of average Americans who aren't rich and can't afford to have America fail as a whole.

[Marx]

Chris Wallace, what a dolt. Read the 20th Amendment, jackass. Talk about speaking without thinking first.

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 3rd 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.

Way to go Chris Wallace! :hehe:

FOX News doesn't like to pay attention to facts. I think that's pretty well known by this point. :cwink:

[Matt]

That was exactly the thought that came into my mind when I finished posting that. He makes $50 million per year or however much it is. He doesn't give a damn if the country completely fails. The sad thing though is he has a heavy influence on a lot of average Americans who aren't rich and can't afford to have America fail as a whole.

I think the sheer ever changing nature of our government and economic system will keep us from ever becoming a Mexico or Cuba. So I don't think the country failing as a whole is possible. She'll get knocked down, but she'll always get back up. While she is down though, her people can hurt a lot...and Rush will just laugh and pop his pills.

[souvlaki]

The inauguration speech wasn't like anything he had done before. (At least, not to me anyway.) There was no soaring rhetoric. It was on point and direct. It was exactly what it needed to be. You can't please everyone.

That was why I didn't initially think it was one of his best speeches. The speeches he gave with the "soaring rhetoric" are more instantly pleasing, but this one had more substance, and like you said, he said exactly what he needed to say. And it had plenty of lines in there that I think will be remembered for a long time.

You know it's funny, I just went back and rewatched it trying to find excerpts that I think will be remembered but found myself quoting a ridiculous portion of the speech, and most were quite large excerpts. On a whole it was probably the best inauguration speech in my lifetime. Hell, even if he gave a complete dud of a speech, he already has a catalog of speeches that will be remembered for years to come and is likely to have several more I'm sure.

[Marx]

That was why I didn't initially think it was one of his best speeches. The speeches he gave with the "soaring rhetoric" are more instantly pleasing, but this one had more substance, and like you said, he said exactly what he needed to say. And it had plenty of lines in there that I think will be remembered for a long time.

You know it's funny, I just went back and rewatched it trying to find excerpts that I think will be remembered but found myself quoting a ridiculous portion of the speech, and most were quite large excerpts. On a whole it was probably the best inauguration speech in my lifetime. Hell, even if he gave a complete dud of a speech, he already has a catalog of speeches that will be remembered for years to come and is likely to have several more I'm sure.

I think that there are alot of memorable lines in his inaugural. I think it was the best one in my lifetime as well. He really made sure that everyone was included. (And the fact that he spoke to people outside of our country as well as in, speaks volumes.)

[dnno1]

Anyone watching the Colbert Report? :hehe:

It is sad that the idiots at FOX News had to pull the 'I'm not sure if he's really the President or not'...

Chris Wallace, what a dolt. Read the 20th Amendment, jackass. Talk about speaking without thinking first.

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 3rd 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.

Way to go Chris Wallace! :hehe:

http://www.latimes.com/media/alternatethumbnails/photo/2009-01/44641688-21193811.jpg
President Obama retakes the oath of office
again at the White House.

Apparently he took the oath of office again just to make sure no one questions Justice Roberts flubbing of his lines on Tuesday.

[p4poetic]

LOL yes. *saves picture for future reference*

oh and how did this thread get 40 pages so quickly? I leave for one second...

Mrs.Huxtable was a hottie.


http://i56.photobucket.com/albums/g174/Restless_Casualty/Phylicia%20Rashad/PhyliciaAllen.jpg

She still looks good

http://img172.imageshack.us/img172/431/phyliciarashad1846527ho4.jpg

Also, Michelle Obama's eyebrows make her look so incredibly sinister.I've been saying that!! The arch make her look evil. With better make up and eye brows, she has potential. I wouldn't say she is ugly, but considering how handsome Obama is, I sadly can see why some people say she's isn't "good" enough for him [appearance wise]. But oh well, that doesn't matter.

Wasteful spending in one area does not justify wasteful spending in another. I thought this was all about change. Its funny how the definition of change changes whenever the old definition doesn't suit an Obama supporter.

"I thought we were going to stop spending money we don't have on frivilous and unneccessary things, isn't that change?"

"Well Bush spent billions in Iraq!"

"I thought we were going to stop playing partisan blame games, isn't the change?"

"Umm, change is more about a change of spirit that anything else!"

"What the hell does that even mean?"

"Change damnit!"

Wrong.

Trillions.

If he decided to staff the Cabinet entirely with newcomers....that would be change...but having a number of former Clinton staffers on the team just means same beat with a different colored drum....

No, you guys would say he is appointing inexperienced people in his cabinet and we're all doomed, lol.

[p4poetic]

So apparently the theme of Obama's speech tomorrow, is according to the news, "Responsibility." Am I the only one who sees the irony of this with a 150 million inauguration and ten different balls?

You do realize that every inauguration has 10 different balls and millions expense?

m-tmRNP9S9E

lol, this feels like ages ago.

http://img413.imageshack.us/img413/8388/clintoninaugural8268252pv8.gif


Thank you for posting those pictures p4poetic! :yay:

You're welcome. :yay:

[dnno1]

If he decided to staff the Cabinet entirely with newcomers....that would be change...but having a number of former Clinton staffers on the team just means same beat with a different colored drum....

As long as they are not the same clowns that were in the previous (Bush) administration, that's change.

[Matt]

http://www.latimes.com/media/alternatethumbnails/photo/2009-01/44641688-21193811.jpg
President Obama retakes the oath of office
again at the White House.

Apparently he took the oath of office again just to make sure no one questions Justice Roberts flubbing of his lines on Tuesday.

NO BIBLE! NOT PRESIDENT! :cmad: :cwink:

[BlackLantern]

1. that MLK/Obama photoshop is ridiculous looking

2. I've said that I think the whole inauguration ceremony/balls thing is frivolous, regardless of who it is...

3.Change is not just plugging in previous political puppets(whatever the party)....why didn't Obama go out and try to recruit some private citizens with experience in those areas....??

[BlackLantern]

edit double post

[Marx]

NO BIBLE! NOT PRESIDENT! :cmad: :cwink:

No. The nuts will take it further than that...

NO BIBLE! HE'S A MUSLIN'...A TERR'IST!!!!!1111ONE!ONEONE!!!!!!!!!!!!1111111 :cmad:

:cwink:

[Matt]

So I finally got around to watching the inauguration. Like his policies or hate them, one cannot deny watching an African American take the oath of the presidency was one of the most touching moments of their life time.

[Matt]

No. The nuts will take it further than that...

NO BIBLE! HE'S A MUSLIN'...A TERR'IST!!!!!1111ONE!ONEONE!!!!!!!!!!!!1111111 :cmad:

:cwink:

:lmao:

[redfirebird2008]

So apparently CNN has filed some kind of legal complaint that they weren't notified of the do-over oath today because as usual they wish they could have caught it on camera.

Are people really having that hard of a time accepting that he's the President? Read the frickin' Constitution people! He's legally the President and there's not a damn thing they can do about it. Let the man begin doing his job instead of having to put up with this BS every day. We've been talking about how the media would "backfire" on him but I don't think that's the problem. The media is obsessed with the stupid little crap. They're going to try to keep him as distracted as possible from actually working. Sheesh. The next big thing they'll be freaking out over will be the damn dog.

[redfirebird2008]

argh...double post.

[souvlaki]

So apparently CNN has filed some kind of legal complaint that they weren't notified of the do-over oath today because as usual they wish they could have caught it on camera.

Are people really having that hard of a time accepting that he's the President? Read the frickin' Constitution people! He's legally the President and there's not a damn thing they can do about it. Let the man begin doing his job instead of having to put up with this BS every day. We've been talking about how the media would "backfire" on him but I don't think that's the problem. The media is obsessed with the stupid little crap. They're going to try to keep him as distracted as possible from actually working. Sheesh. The next big thing they'll be freaking out over will be the damn dog.

That is CNN in a nutshell now. In the last four years they've become the TMZ of cable news.

[spideyboy_1111]

so after doing some reading today...

Wow... some people don't realize how ignorant and racist they come off... it's like they try to dance around it... but come on...? how can anyone tell me McCain would have been a better choice?

Obama is the friendlier, the first president i could honestly say i could trust, the first president that i've actually seen take charge and also be that of a family man at the same time. And for me it's not the color of his skin at all.. he's got energy thats amazing, and he's not an old fart with a personal agenda. I don't think we've seen anyone like this since Kennedy.

[Matt]

Maybe for some of us who don't support him its not the color of his skin, but you have no problem accusing us of being racist :whatever:

[Malice]

That is CNN in a nutshell now. In the last four years they've become the TMZ of cable news.

Most of you know I didnt suppurt Obama...but I thought the original was fine
:)
Screw CNN

[badgonegood]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090122/ap_on_go_pr_wh/obama_oath_do_over


WASHINGTON – After the flub heard around the world, President Barack Obama has taken the oath of office. Again. Chief Justice John Roberts delivered the oath to Obama on Wednesday night at the White House — a rare do-over. The surprise moment came in response to Tuesday's much-noticed stumble, when Roberts got the words of the oath a little off, which prompted Obama to do so, too.
Don't worry, the White House says: Obama has still been president since noon on Inauguration Day.

Nevertheless, Obama and Roberts went through the drill again out of what White House counsel Greg Craig called "an abundance of caution."

This time, the scene was the White House Map Room in front of a small group of reporters, not the Capitol platform before the whole watching world.

"We decided that because it was so much fun ...," Obama joked to reporters who followed press secretary Robert Gibbs into the room. No TV camera crews or news photographers were allowed in. A few of Obama's closest aides were there, along with a White House photographer.
Roberts put on his black robe.

"Are you ready to take the oath?" he said.
"Yes, I am," Obama said. "And we're going to do it very slowly."
Roberts then led Obama through the oath without any missteps.

The president said he did not have his Bible with him, but that the oath was binding anyway.
The original, bungled version on Tuesday caught observers by surprise and then got replayed on cable news shows.

It happened when Obama interrupted Roberts midway through the opening line, in which the president repeats his name and solemnly swears.

Next in the oath is the phrase " ... that I will faithfully execute the office of president of the United States." But Roberts rearranged the order of the words, not saying "faithfully" until after "president of the United States."

That appeared to throw Obama off. He stopped abruptly at the word "execute."
Recognizing something was off, Roberts then repeated the phrase, putting "faithfully" in the right place but without repeating "execute."
But Obama then repeated Roberts' original, incorrect version: "... the office of president of the United States faithfully."

Craig, the White House lawyer, said in a statement Wednesday evening: "We believe the oath of office was administered effectively and that the president was sworn in appropriately yesterday. Yet the oath appears in the Constitution itself. And out of the abundance of caution, because there was one word out of sequence, Chief Justice John Roberts will administer the oath a second time."

The Constitution is clear about the exact wording of the oath and as a result, some constitutional experts have said that a do-over probably wasn't necessary but also couldn't hurt. Two other previous presidents have repeated the oath because of similar issues, Calvin Coolidge and Chester A. Arthur.

__ Associated Press writer Phil Elliott contributed to this report.



:csad: Gosh I knew this crap was gonna happen. It's already started. Sadly Obama wont be able to do ANYTHING without everyone over his shoulder.

If he's caught eating anything over 100 calories he'll be promoting "bad dieting and healthcare" for America :whatever:.

[spideyboy_1111]

Maybe for some of us who don't support him its not the color of his skin, but you have no problem accusing us of being racist :whatever:

until people give me a good, logical reason, one that is bigger than anything McCain... (because lets face it, those were the only choices of who would be president) i'll listen.. but all i really have been hearing is the McCain/Palin camps fueled garbage about Barack and Muslim, and the "end of the world" because of him. Now Policies are something i'll listen to.. as long as the argument is how McCains makes more sense then Barack's.. and even then it will probably be debatable.

But if its anything "world ending" i will label those people ignorant and racist deep down.

[Handsome Rob]

What? I don't see any story here. "Technicalities" are important in our legal system--President Obama and Chief Justice Roberts were just covering their bases and making sure the oath was administered in accordance with the law.

[Bathead]

Just shows me that Obama is smart enough to realise there are idiots out there that would raise a stink, and I suspect he just didn't want to deal with a useless distraction. The truth is, he was officially president at noon on inauguration day even though he hadn't taken the oath yet. Noon on inauguration day is the LEGAL switch of power from the former to the new president. The oath is just a formality, not a legal necessity. The retaking of the oath was just to head off the inevitable complaints from the Obama haters.

[Nitehawk013]

So...anyone who disagrees with you is a racist then?

Since your criteria of what is "debateable" is really wrapped up in simply your opinion of what is logical, good and bigger than McCain.

[Handsome Rob]

until people give me a good, logical reason, one that is bigger than anything McCain... (because lets face it, those were the only choices of who would be president) i'll listen.. but all i really have been hearing is the McCain/Palin camps fueled garbage about Barack and Muslim, and the "end of the world" because of him. Now Policies are something i'll listen to.. as long as the argument is how McCains makes more sense then Barack's.. and even then it will probably be debatable.

But if its anything "world ending" i will label those people ignorant and racist deep down.

OK, here's a reason: I'm a conservative. McCain is not. Obama certainly is not. Between the two of them, though, McCain has more conservative beliefs. So, considering that I believe that a government run by conservative principles is better than one that is not, I believe McCain would have been the better choice.

Did you see what I did there? No mention of race or world-ending . . . not even once!

[spideyboy_1111]

So...anyone who disagrees with you is a racist then?

Since your criteria of what is "debateable" is really wrapped up in simply your opinion of what is logical, good and bigger than McCain.

did i say that ? no.. i said if they can dislike him on policies thats fine... i just implied that whether there better or not is debatable.. but if your answers are policy based then no, you are not racist

but i've gotten alot of "o no obama's president, prepare for the end of the world" or... "here come the muslims" or "lets see how long our new president lives" or "i guess they are mov'n on up" crap that its annoying the hell out of me. All that is, is ignorance.

[spideyboy_1111]

OK, here's a reason: I'm a conservative. McCain is not. Obama certainly is not. Between the two of them, though, McCain has more conservative beliefs. So, considering that I believe that a government run by conservative principles is better than one that is not, I believe McCain would have been the better choice.

Did you see what I did there? No mention of race or world-ending . . . not even once!

well i'd prefer more of an answer then just "conservative" :o

[Nitehawk013]

How about I am a federalist at heart and believe in a small Federal Government dedicated to national defense. Obama looks to continue the anti-Federalist notion of the ever expanding Federal Government by adding more and more programs to babysit and coddle more and more people. He also appears perfectly fine with allowing the continued growth of the Fed in regards to trampling what should be individual states rights to govenr themselves without Federal intrusion.

Further, I am a social and fiscal conservative. Obama, nor McCain really, fit the bill for either case. Moreso for Obama since if he did manage to institute all his glorious "programs" the cost would make GWB appear to be a tightwad. On the social side, Obama will do nothing to prevent baby murder (er..abortion. My mistake) or support the voice of the majority in banning gay marriage.

Really, the reasons are pretty numerous for disliking and not supporting the guy. And the only racist remarks lately have come from Obama himself and the bitter fossil Lowery that he allowed to spew racist garbage in his benediction.

[Malice]

I honestly wouldn't have cared.
Nervousness caused the original problem in the first place.
Glad he got it redone to eliminate any questions

[Malice]

so after doing some reading today...

Wow... some people don't realize how ignorant and racist they come off... it's like they try to dance around it... but come on...? how can anyone tell me McCain would have been a better choice?

Obama is the friendlier, the first president i could honestly say i could trust, the first president that i've actually seen take charge and also be that of a family man at the same time. And for me it's not the color of his skin at all.. he's got energy thats amazing, and he's not an old fart with a personal agenda. I don't think we've seen anyone like this since Kennedy.

Disagreement, is not racism.

I for one did not vote for Obama, his ideas on a socialist America frankly scare the hell outa me. That being said, I do see this as a huge and monumental moment in US history. I want the US to succeed...to do that, Obama needs to succeed. Now, I am still going to criticize Obama every step of the way, on decisions I dont agree with (just like I would with anyone else in the position)

Lets not confuse racism for critisicm. Remember, we criticize, because of what has been said in the campaaign.

[spideyboy_1111]

Disagreement, is not racism.

I for one did not vote for Obama, his ideas on a socialist America frankly scare the hell outa me. That being said, I do see this as a huge and monumental moment in US history. I want the US to succeed...to do that, Obama needs to succeed. Now, I am still going to criticize Obama every step of the way, on decisions I dont agree with (just like I would with anyone else in the position)

Lets not confuse racism for critisicm. Remember, we criticize, because of what has been said in the campaaign.

no im calling racism and ignorance when i see it. when people say "obama" is going to bring destruction to the world... i deem them ignorant, when they say anything black related, i deem them racist.

[redfirebird2008]

What? I don't see any story here. "Technicalities" are important in our legal system--President Obama and Chief Justice Roberts were just covering their bases and making sure the oath was administered in accordance with the law.

The law, aka the United States Constitution, made him the President before he ever took the oath. The oath was administered 5 minutes after 12 PM. Well, the 20th Amendment of the Constitution states that the current President's term ends and the new President's term begins at exactly 12 PM. The oath isn't mentioned in there at all. Even a conservative judge like Scalia will quickly reject this if a right winger tries to take it to court, just like Scalia has quickly rejected the lawsuits stating Obama isn't eligible for the Presidency.

[spideyboy_1111]

How about I am a federalist at heart and believe in a small Federal Government dedicated to national defense. Obama looks to continue the anti-Federalist notion of the ever expanding Federal Government by adding more and more programs to babysit and coddle more and more people. He also appears perfectly fine with allowing the continued growth of the Fed in regards to trampling what should be individual states rights to govenr themselves without Federal intrusion.

Further, I am a social and fiscal conservative. Obama, nor McCain really, fit the bill for either case. Moreso for Obama since if he did manage to institute all his glorious "programs" the cost would make GWB appear to be a tightwad. On the social side, Obama will do nothing to prevent baby murder (er..abortion. My mistake) or support the voice of the majority in banning gay marriage.

Really, the reasons are pretty numerous for disliking and not supporting the guy. And the only racist remarks lately have come from Obama himself and the bitter fossil Lowery that he allowed to spew racist garbage in his benediction.

considering your from ohio this shocks me.. considering i grew up in ohio and everything i've described has comes from the mouths of people i know there.

[Nitehawk013]

iM NOT SAYING THERE ARE NOT PEOPEL WHO DISLIKE oBAMA BASED ON HIS RACE. i AM SAYING THAT THE ONLY PEOPLE WHO HAVE REPEATEDLY BROUGHT UP oBAMA'S RACE ON THE CAMPAIGN, DURING THE ELECTION AND THEN THE INAUGURATION are Obama and those he included to speak at the inauguration.

Ooops. Forgive me. I forgot I had Capslock on.

[spideyboy_1111]

iM NOT SAYING THERE ARE NOT PEOPEL WHO DISLIKE oBAMA BASED ON HIS RACE. i AM SAYING THAT THE ONLY PEOPLE WHO HAVE REPEATEDLY BROUGHT UP oBAMA'S RACE ON THE CAMPAIGN, DURING THE ELECTION AND THEN THE INAUGURATION are Obama and those he included to speak at the inauguration.

Ooops. Forgive me. I forgot I had Capslock on.

and i'm telling you, they are NOT the only people. did you not hear about the hanging "obama ghost" in ohio? there's been a hell of alot of racial remarks on his opposing side. Hell palin supporters wanted the man dead.

[Nitehawk013]

Palin supporters reportedly said to kill him at a rally. And then when pressed for proof no one could provide any at all. That is called heresay, not fact.

And Obama ghosts? That sounds similar to the crackpot in Cali who had the Palin mannequin hanging in his front yard for Halloween.

What you call racism, might just be political hatred. Why must the left always try to make it about race?

[spideyboy_1111]

Palin supporters reportedly said to kill him at a rally. And then when pressed for proof no one could provide any at all. That is called heresay, not fact.

And Obama ghosts? That sounds similar to the crackpot in Cali who had the Palin mannequin hanging in his front yard for Halloween.

What you call racism, might just be political hatred. Why must the left always try to make it about race?

someone posted a link a while ago where you can hear people saying kill him..

i also guess you missed the youtube video of the man with the "Obama monkey"

[Nitehawk013]

Never saw any Obama Monkey video. Nor do I care to. A few examples of nitwits does not make an entire body of opposition racist.

Obama monkeys are likely as offensive to Obama supporters as claims that Palin's baby wasn't really hers, or the other assorted lies thrown at her were to her supporters.

[spideyboy_1111]

Never saw any Obama Monkey video. Nor do I care to. A few examples of nitwits does not make an entire body of opposition racist.

Obama monkeys are likely as offensive to Obama supporters as claims that Palin's baby wasn't really hers, or the other assorted lies thrown at her were to her supporters.

ummm hating someone for the way they are made, compared to frivolous "rumors" are 2 different things. And just because you didn't see it.. doesn't mean it exist. Plus i wasn't trying to prove if an entire side was racist (i never said that), just that some people have been very racist towards obama.

sIgv992NZs0
fieGfc6DL7k
GNFokenPInk
rKD4JDW5SFk

[Paradoxium]

I would also like to point out to Paradoxium and Malice (who chose to scream 'the sky is falling' yesterday because of the inauguration day stock plunge,) that today's trading largely recovered yesterday's losses.

As has been the case with every inauguration, stocks tumble with every change in office. Those losses are usually recovered the next day.

*now, back to regularly scheduled programming :oldrazz:*Dude, we covered our bases well before that. I said there will be dead cat bounces, Malice went as far as saying it might go up. No surprise considering what we see today. It will trend downwards for a while.

[Holiday]

To me, this is a non story and I don't think it should even have a thread.

[SuBe]

I did like the take on it I heard today, that yesterday he declared an Executive Order for Tranparency, then didn't allow the Press to witness the event.

Way to get that Transparency out there, Barry.

[dnno1]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090122/ap_on_go_pr_wh/obama_oath_do_over



:csad: Gosh I knew this crap was gonna happen. It's already started. Sadly Obama wont be able to do ANYTHING without everyone over his shoulder.

If he's caught eating anything over 100 calories he'll be promoting "bad dieting and healthcare" for America :whatever:.

http://www.latimes.com/media/alternatethumbnails/photo/2009-01/44641688-21193811.jpg
President Obama retakes the oath of office
again at the White House.

Apparently he took the oath of office again just to make sure no one questions Justice Roberts flubbing of his lines on Tuesday. Now they are saying that he didn't swear on the Bible. I don't think you are required to do that.

[The Incredible Hulk]

The law, aka the United States Constitution, made him the President before he ever took the oath. The oath was administered 5 minutes after 12 PM. Well, the 20th Amendment of the Constitution states that the current President's term ends and the new President's term begins at exactly 12 PM. The oath isn't mentioned in there at all. Even a conservative judge like Scalia will quickly reject this if a right winger tries to take it to court, just like Scalia has quickly rejected the lawsuits stating Obama isn't eligible for the Presidency.

yup, you hit it right on the head. The oath is pretty much just a ceremonial formality. The Consititution made him President before Chief Justice Dumbass ever botched the oath,

[dnno1]

yup, you hit it right on the head. The oath is pretty much just a ceremonial formality. The Consititution made him President before Chief Justice Dumbass ever botched the oath,

:hehe:

[Nitehawk013]

They both botched the oath. Obama said it wrong even after Roberts corrected himself. It really was not a big deal.

[SuBe]

yup, you hit it right on the head. The oath is pretty much just a ceremonial formality. The Consititution made him President before Chief Justice Dumbass ever botched the oath,
That's uncalled for.

[The Incredible Hulk]

That's uncalled for.

It's plenty called for. And for the record I thought Roberts was a dumbass well before he administed the oath of the Presidency. He's completely unqualified to be leading the Superme Court. His written opinions are convoluted and self-contradictory.

[dnno1]

He is free to say what he wants. Lord know how many people have said worse. I myself think the guy did it on purpose.

[Nitehawk013]

It's plenty called for. And for the record I thought Roberts was a dumbass well before he administed the oath of the Presidency. He's completely unqualified to be leading the Superme Court. His written opinions are convoluted and self-contradictory.

Hmm. On one hand you have a man who is chief justice of the United States Supreme court. Obviously a man who knows the law, has proven to know it, was tried and had his appointment reviewed and criticized by many yet was confirmed, was successful in law long before being appointed and enjoyed that success for years.

On the other you have an internet forum member.

I'm curious why some nobody would feel qualified to say a Supreme Court chief justice was dumb and his opinions are convoluted? Perhaps it is the opinion of that forum poster that is convoluted and tainted by his own overblown feeling of self-importance.

[.Rorschach.]

http://news.aol.com/political-machine/2009/01/21/is-obama-really-president-after-oath-flub/?12=1

Leave it to Fox News

[Sebastos]

I did. I just wanted anyone other than John McCain in office. McCain is a good man, I just don't think he has the charisma required to lead this nation. I hope Palin runs in 2012. I may vote for her.

If McCain won he it would have been like we were living in the 20th century, the man was so out of touch with the next generation ...if he needs charisma and you want to vote for Palin then she needs brains, let alone classes in speech. I felt sorry for Republicans wanting to vote for their candidate again after it was their own party that messed up the country.

Seriously Obama is the right man for this time, that's why we're getting him for eight years I think. :up::up:

[JAK®]

Hmm. On one hand you have a man who is chief justice of the United States Supreme court. Obviously a man who knows the law, has proven to know it, was tried and had his appointment reviewed and criticized by many yet was confirmed, was successful in law long before being appointed and enjoyed that success for years.

On the other you have an internet forum member.

I'm curious why some nobody would feel qualified to say a Supreme Court chief justice was dumb and his opinions are convoluted? Perhaps it is the opinion of that forum poster that is convoluted and tainted by his own overblown feeling of self-importance.
Democracy is based on the right for normal people to judge their leaders.

[redfirebird2008]

Here is the audio recording of Obama re-taking the oath:

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/r6IiEp2R3s4&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/r6IiEp2R3s4&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

[Sebastos]

http://news.aol.com/political-machine/2009/01/21/is-obama-really-president-after-oath-flub/?12=1

Leave it to Fox News

Pathetic morons, leave it to them to keep spinning. :whatever:

Mistakes happen, plain and simple.

[redfirebird2008]

Pathetic morons, leave it to them to keep spinning. :whatever:

Mistakes happen, plain and simple.

I bet that moment was embarrassing for Mike Wallace, having to watch his son engaging in conspiracy theories without any proof even though the Constitution clearly leaves out the oath as a REQUIREMENT for the transfer of power. The transfer of power happened at 12 PM EDT on Tuesday, which was 5 minutes before they even attempted the oath.

[Matt]

Hmm. On one hand you have a man who is chief justice of the United States Supreme court. Obviously a man who knows the law, has proven to know it, was tried and had his appointment reviewed and criticized by many yet was confirmed, was successful in law long before being appointed and enjoyed that success for years.

On the other you have an internet forum member.

I'm curious why some nobody would feel qualified to say a Supreme Court chief justice was dumb and his opinions are convoluted? Perhaps it is the opinion of that forum poster that is convoluted and tainted by his own overblown feeling of self-importance.

I'd assume it is because Hulk is a bar certified lawyer, thus, he too has a knowledge of the law and from my understanding is also very successful. Therefore I'd say he is more qualified than any of us to critique Roberts.

Anyhow, this has been discussed in inauguration. Closing.

[Matt]

Spideyboy, enough is enough. People can disagree with Obama and not be racist. We've actually all done really well in here when it comes to discussion of race with most posters being very mature about it. Please quit trying to stir the pot by indirectly calling people racist for disagreeing with Obama.

[Matt]

If McCain won he it would have been like we were living in the 20th century, the man was so out of touch with the next generation ...if he needs charisma and you want to vote for Palin then she needs brains, let alone classes in speech. I felt sorry for Republicans wanting to vote for their candidate again after it was their own party that messed up the country.

Seriously Obama is the right man for this time, that's why we're getting him for eight years I think. :up::up:

I'm predicting four years...and really by no fault of his own. Expectations are ridiculously high for this man. And frankly, I think for the next four years we are going to continue to feel the pain from Bush and some Clinton policies and basically nothing Obama can do will turn it around. He himself admits it will take at least 5 years to see real improvement (of course, every first term president says that). But his supporters do not listen. A good amount of them truly do expect everything to just be fixed. It won't work that way. That will create a fair amount of disillusion.

Plus I expect a Romney run in 2012. Sure, he's been coy so far...but he's already been to Iowa (twice) and New Hampshire since November. Romney is charasmatic, young, and is renowned as an economic guru. If the economy is not improved drastically, he could very well take the White House out from right under Obama.

[redfirebird2008]

Hey Matt, can you move those posts from the locked thread to this one? Or at least, the one I posted with the YouTube audio recording of Obama and Roberts re-doing the oath?

[Malice]

no im calling racism and ignorance when i see it. when people say "obama" is going to bring destruction to the world... i deem them ignorant, when they say anything black related, i deem them racist.

That is just stupidity.
We, the people who did not support him, disagreed with his platform.
He is black.
His wife is black.
his children are black.
He is the first black president
He is wearing a black suit.
He has black hair.

I deem myself racist now.

[Nitehawk013]

If it is Romney that gets the nod, then I predict and would happily put money on the fact that the same left that said it was disgraceful to attack Obama for Rev Wright or suspicion of being Muslim will unleash everythign they have on Romney for being Mormon.

[Nitehawk013]

That is just stupidity.
We, the people who did not support him, disagreed with his platform.
He is black.
His wife is black.
his children are black.
He is the first black president
He is wearing a black suit.
He has black hair.

I deem myself racist now.

I heard he refuses to sign documents with anything other than a black ink pen.

I must be racist too now.

[Matt]

Hey Matt, can you move those posts from the locked thread to this one? Or at least, the one I posted with the YouTube audio recording of Obama and Roberts re-doing the oath?

yep.

[Malice]

If it is Romney that gets the nod, then I predict and would happily put money on the fact that the same left that said it was disgraceful to attack Obama for Rev Wright or suspicion of being Muslim will unleash everythign they have on Romney for being Mormon.

I imagine so...
Its retarded....but unfortunate

[Malice]

I heard he refuses to sign documents with anything other than a black ink pen.

I must be racist too now.

*falls of chair laughing*

[Matt]

If it is Romney that gets the nod, then I predict and would happily put money on the fact that the same left that said it was disgraceful to attack Obama for Rev Wright or suspicion of being Muslim will unleash everythign they have on Romney for being Mormon.

They absolutely will. But its alright. Romney isn't McCain. He is a far savvier campaigner. Romney, I think, despite his douchebaggery (which a good loss like the 2008 primary can often take care of in politicans, look at Al Gore. 90 % less douchey since his loss), is going to run a very optimistic, Reagan-esque campaign. He will give very detailed plans on how to fix the economy...and that will not only get Conservatives on his side, but if there is not substantial improvement under Obama, it will get a good portion of middle and lower class moderates and independents on his side...and that will spell out the downfall for President Obama. That said...in 2020, I anticipate Obama's return to office.

[redfirebird2008]

Thanks for moving the posts, Matt. :)

[Marx]

If it is Romney that gets the nod, then I predict and would happily put money on the fact that the same left that said it was disgraceful to attack Obama for Rev Wright or suspicion of being Muslim will unleash everythign they have on Romney for being Mormon.

I imagine so...
Its retarded....but unfortunate

They absolutely will. But its alright. Romney isn't McCain. He is a far savvier campaigner. Romney, I think, despite his douchebaggery (which a good loss like the 2008 primary can often take care of in politicans, look at Al Gore. 90 % less douchey since his loss), is going to run a very optimistic, Reagan-esque campaign. He will give very detailed plans on how to fix the economy...and that will not only get Conservatives on his side, but if there is not substantial improvement under Obama, it will get a good portion of middle and lower class moderates and independents on his side...and that will spell out the downfall for President Obama. That said...in 2020, I anticipate Obama's return to office.

An Obama-led campaign in 2012 will not be attacking Romney on the basis of religion. To suggest otherwise, is ridiculous.

[Matt]

An Obama-led campaign in 2012 will not be attacking Romney on the basis of religion. To suggest otherwise, is ridiculous.

Obama won't. Left PACs will. Especially if things start to look desperate. Plus look at what John McCain became when things got desperate for him.

[Marx]

Obama won't. Left PACs will. Especially if things start to look desperate. Plus look at what John McCain became when things got desperate for him.

Call me naive, but I just do not believe that religious attacks from the left will take place. (At least, not from anyone that has a shred of credibility.)

As for John McCain, his entire campaign was disgusting.

[redfirebird2008]

The left is currently blaming Prop 8's passage in California on Mormons. Never mind all those Obama voters who chose to vote for it.

[Marx]

The left is currently blaming Prop 8's passage in California on Mormons. Never mind all those Obama voters who chose to vote for it.

Considering the massive amount of money that the Mormon church dumped into the Prop 8 campaign, I would say that blame is completely warranted. :dry:

[Matt]

Call me naive, but I just do not believe that religious attacks from the left will take place. (At least, not from anyone that has a shred of credibility.)

As for John McCain, his entire campaign was disgusting.

I disagree. Mormonism is only slightly above scientology in the "Religions its okay to attack in the main stream," category. The far left PACs will tear him apart as a whack job with a crazy cult religion.

[BlackLantern]

Mormons seem to be very inclusive....if you aren't a Mormon, you can't attend certain functions or do certain things....I saw a thing on TLC where a girl was marrying a Mormom and her family was not allowed to attend because they were not Mormons...I believe they did two ceremonies to accomodate, but still...seemed silly

[Marx]

I disagree. Mormonism is only slightly above scientology in the "Religions its okay to attack in the main stream," category. The far left PACs will tear him apart as a whack job with a crazy cult religion.

If the shoe fits...

:cwink:

[Marx]

That's not true. There are extremes of religion, and then there are more open versions of religion.

[Addendum]

The crazy part is subjective, but religions are cults

[Matt]

Mormons seem to be very inclusive....if you aren't a Mormon, you can't attend certain functions or do certain things....I saw a thing on TLC where a girl was marrying a Mormom and her family was not allowed to attend because they were not Mormons...I believe they did two ceremonies to accomodate, but still...seemed silly

Its my understanding that Mormonism like any religion has varying sects. I'm sure not all Mormons are that extreme, but there are ones who are undoubtedly out there. I'm not sure where Romney falls on the Mormon extremism scale.

[Marx]

Its my understanding that Mormonism like any religion has varying sects. I'm sure not all Mormons are that extreme, but there are ones who are undoubtedly out there. I'm not sure where Romney falls on the Mormon extremism scale.

I think Romney has his own level of crazy within the Mormon Church.

[The Senator]

I was at the inauguration.

I froze my ass off for nine hours. I had to fight to get to the porta-potties. I had to cram newspaper in my shoes to insulate my feet. I had to endure Rick Warren's awful invocation and witness John Roberts screw up the oath of the presidency. I spent two hours trying to leave the National Mall and had to hail for a cab on a highway.

Yet, despite these awful occurrences, the experience was well worth it. There were millions of people-- and I even dare to claim there were more than the 1.8 million estimate-- all of whom were united behind the new president. Bush and Cheney got their final goodbye from the American public in the form of a loud, continuous boo. And it was truly wonderful to see history made.

[Marx]

I was at the inauguration.

I froze my ass off for nine hours. I had to fight to get to the porta-potties. I had to cram newspaper in my shoes to insulate my feet. I had to endure Rick Warren's awful invocation and witness John Roberts screw up the oath of the presidency. I spent two hours trying to leave the National Mall and had to hail for a cab on a highway.

Yet, despite these awful occurrences, the experience was well worth it. There were millions of people-- and I even dare to claim there were more than the 1.8 million estimate-- all of whom were united behind the new president. Bush and Cheney got their final goodbye from the American public in the form of a loud, continuous boo. And it was truly wonderful to see history made.

I'm glad to hear that you were able to go man! That's great! Where were you on the mall?

As for Rick Warren, I found it laughable that he was preaching about respect and tolerance. It should also be noted that Bishop Robinson's prayer two days prior was not televised.

[SuBe]

That was a Drive By Jmaning.

[Marx]

That was a Drive By Jmaning.

:funny:

[The Senator]

I'm glad to hear that you were able to go man! That's great! Where were you on the mall?

Right behind the Capitol reflecting pool, in front of the first teleprompter.


As for Rick Warren, I found it laughable that he was preaching about respect and tolerance. It should also be noted that Bishop Robinson's prayer two days prior was not televised.

Warren pronounced the names of the Obama girls as if they were tiger cubs. Additionally, his insistence that we will all be judged by the Lord seemed out of place. Oh well-- he was booed, too, so it's not like many people there took him seriously.

[Raiden]

Right behind the Capitol reflecting pool, in front of the first teleprompter.



Warren pronounced the names of the Obama girls as if they were tiger cubs. Additionally, his insistence that we will all be judged by the Lord seemed out of place. Oh well-- he was booed, too, so it's not like many people there took him seriously.

Glad to see you back, Jman. I hope you'll stick around. :yay:

[Handsome Rob]

The law, aka the United States Constitution, made him the President before he ever took the oath. The oath was administered 5 minutes after 12 PM. Well, the 20th Amendment of the Constitution states that the current President's term ends and the new President's term begins at exactly 12 PM. The oath isn't mentioned in there at all. Even a conservative judge like Scalia will quickly reject this if a right winger tries to take it to court, just like Scalia has quickly rejected the lawsuits stating Obama isn't eligible for the Presidency.

That doesn't take away from the Oath still being a requirement as laid out in the Constitution. Article II, Section 1: "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."

If it were nothing, why would Roberts/Obama go through the trouble of redoing it?

[redfirebird2008]

That doesn't take away from the Oath still being a requirement as laid out in the Constitution. Article II, Section 1: "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."

If it were nothing, why would Roberts/Obama go through the trouble of redoing it?

Because Obama's lawyers are being ultra cautious about it. It is nothing. He was the President before the bumbled oath (which was Roberts' damn fault). The right wing (like you) are the only people trying to turn this into a serious matter because you don't even think the guy is a citizen.

[souvlaki]

Because Obama's lawyers are being ultra cautious about it. It is nothing. He was the President before the bumbled oath (which was Roberts' damn fault). The right wing (like you) are the only people trying to turn this into a serious matter because you don't even think the guy is a citizen.

Yeah, re-doing it was kind of pointless if the purpose was to calm down the far right. After all, you can't become President if you are not a natural born citizen so Obama isn't President anyhow. :cwink:

[Matt]

Wait! That Obama Hussein is a Muslim for-in-er!?! Damn illegals, they took r jrrrrbs!

[The Senator]

That Muslim desecrated the Bible. He should have been sworn in on the Quran! :cmad:

[redfirebird2008]

That Muslim desecrated the Bible. He should have been sworn in on the Quran! :cmad:

Didn't you get the memo? President Lincoln was not a Christian. He was a Muslim too. That "Bible" they used on Tuesday was actually President Lincoln's secret Quran!

[Addendum]

That doesn't take away from the Oath still being a requirement as laid out in the Constitution. Article II, Section 1: "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."

If it were nothing, why would Roberts/Obama go through the trouble of redoing it?

So some will have one less thing to ***** about

[Raiden]

So some will have one less thing to ***** about

If Obama didn't redo his Oath, then his distractors will spend the next 4 years crying about how he's not properly sworn in and cannot be considered as our real Commander-In-Chief. They will find other things to b***h about, but not this one.

[SuBe]

If Obama didn't redo his Oath, then his distractors will spend the next 4 years crying about how he's not properly sworn in and cannot be considered as our real Commander-In-Chief. They will find other things to b***h about, but not this one.
Just like how the Far Left claimed that Bush stole the election in 2001? Even though the Supreme Court called it for him?

[Raiden]

Just like how the Far Left claimed that Bush stole the election in 2001? Even though the Supreme Court called it for him?

I don't think Obama retaking the Oath is the same as the Supreme Court rejecting recount in Florida so Bush can be declared the President.

[SuBe]

I don't think Obama retaking the Oath is the same as the Supreme Court rejecting recount in Florida so Bush can be declared the President.
Neither do I, but not everyone on the Left thought the same thing as a few did either. I don't give a crap, he's President. Woot, they messed up, big deal, it doesn't change anything. Back to business.

[redfirebird2008]

Just like how the Far Left claimed that Bush stole the election in 2001? Even though the Supreme Court called it for him?

That's not a valid comparison. Obama won in a near-landslide and became President at 12 PM regardless of the damn oath. The 20th Amendment specifically says that the transfer of power occurs at 12 PM. He hadn't said the oath yet because they were behind schedule, but he was still the President as soon as the clock struck noon. You're essentially trying to compare Inauguration Day with an election contest. That's not the same thing. It's apples and oranges. The thing I will agree with you is the constant whining from the left about the Supreme Court's decision is going to be similar to the constant whining about Obama's citizenship and his oath of office.

[SuBe]

That's not a valid comparison. Obama won in a near-landslide and became President at 12 PM regardless of the damn oath. The 20th Amendment specifically says that the transfer of power occurs at 12 PM. He hadn't said the oath yet because they were behind schedule, but he was still the President as soon as the clock struck noon. You're essentially trying to compare Inauguration Day with an election contest. That's not the same thing. It's apples and oranges. The thing I will agree with you is the constant whining from the left about the Supreme Court's decision is going to be similar to the constant whining about Obama's citizenship and his oath of office.
52% is a near landslide?

I understand. I don't care that they mess up. It's no big deal. Back to work. Christ, I would be a studdering fool if I was speaking infront of 2 Millions people in 20 degree weather too. Cut them some slack.

I find more offense in that he didn't invite the Press to view the 2nd Oath, the day after he said that stuff about Transparency.

[redfirebird2008]

52% is a near landslide?

I understand. I don't care that they mess up. It's no big deal. Back to work. Christ, I would be a studdering fool if I was speaking infront of 2 Millions people in 20 degree weather too. Cut them some slack.

I find more offense in that he didn't invite the Press to view the 2nd Oath, the day after he said that stuff about Transparency.

Electorally speaking it was a near landslide. And it was actually closer to 53%, not 52%. It was 52.9% to be exact. But nice try on rounding down.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_election,_2008

A 53% to 46% victory is a pretty strong one in a country that is as divided as it is.

[Marx]

Just like how the Far Left claimed that Bush stole the election in 2001? Even though the Supreme Court called it for him?

Don't even get me started on that election... :cmad:

[SuBe]

Don't even get me started on that election... :cmad:
Sensitive are we?

If Bush wasn't President the last 8 years, Obama wouldn't be President today.

[Kelly]

This is true....

[Marx]

Sensitive are we?

I will never forget that election night and the weeks following it.

If Bush wasn't President the last 8 years, Obama wouldn't be President today.

And I do thank George W. Bush for Barack Obama. :cwink:

[SuBe]

I will never forget that election night and the weeks following it.


And I do thank George W. Bush for Barack Obama. :cwink:
Both Political Parties are at fault on this one.

[Raiden]

52% is a near landslide?

I understand. I don't care that they mess up. It's no big deal. Back to work. Christ, I would be a studdering fool if I was speaking infront of 2 Millions people in 20 degree weather too. Cut them some slack.

I find more offense in that he didn't invite the Press to view the 2nd Oath, the day after he said that stuff about Transparency.

As Redfirebird said, it was more like 53% against McCain's 46%, and 53% for a black candidate with a name like Barack Hussein Obama is actually quite impressive.

[SuBe]

As Redfirebird said, it was more like 53% against McCain's 46%, and 53% for a black candidate with a name like Barack Hussein Obama is actually quite impressive.
Of course it's impressive, everything about Barry is impressive. From his shoes to his hair, he's just impressive. Did you hear that speech he gave? That's impressive "for a black [man] with a name like Barack Hussien Obama". Even the fact that he was elected Senator is quite impressive "for a black [man] with a name like Barack Hussien Obama".

Do you see how ridiculous that is. It doesn't matter that he is Black, he is the President, he should be "not judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character". Heard that before?

Sorry, maybe you should edit your post, it smells a little like Racism.

[BlackLantern]

the term Reverse racism is silly....lets just call it racism....and SuBe, you're dead on...I won't give the man a pass or condemn him because of his race, but I won't cut him any slack because of it

[SuBe]

the term Reverse racism is silly....lets just call it racism....and SuBe, you're dead on...I won't give the man a pass or condemn him because of his race, but I won't cut him any slack because of it
Exactly. It doesn't matter what race he is, only his actions can determine what kind of man he is.

[Kelly]

Exactly. It doesn't matter what race he is, only his actions can determine what kind of man he is.

He wears nice suits though......:o That says alot to me....

[SuBe]

He wears nice suits though......:o That says alot to me....
You are such a girl. :woot:

[Marx]

So does anyone think that Obama should have let cameras in while he was 'retaking' the oath? Instead of just print media? There are alot of people condemning him for it because 'it goes against his vow of government openness'.

What's your opinion?

[Kelly]

So does anyone think that Obama should have let cameras in while he was 'retaking' the oath? Instead of just print media? There are alot of people condemning him for it because 'it goes against his vow of government openness'.

What's your opinion?

Nah, a pic is just fine.....

[Raiden]

So does anyone think that Obama should have let cameras in while he was 'retaking' the oath? Instead of just print media? There are alot of people condemning him for it because 'it goes against his vow of government openness'.

What's your opinion?

It's not like Obama did not allow any media in, just that he only allowed print media in. It's not a big deal imo. We already seen the picture and the articles on his 2nd Oath, and that is more than enough.

[Kelly]

You are such a girl. :woot:


Hey, theres much more to character than just character....












:huh:

[redfirebird2008]

So does anyone think that Obama should have let cameras in while he was 'retaking' the oath? Instead of just print media? There are alot of people condemning him for it because 'it goes against his vow of government openness'.

What's your opinion?

I think the media are being whiney little punks. This guy has done more for them in the last few days than any President has done in a long time to let them access the records of his administration and the administrations that preceded him.

[redfirebird2008]

It's not like Obama did not allow any media in, just that he only allowed print media in. It's not a big deal imo. We already seen the picture and the articles on his 2nd Oath, and that is more than enough.

There's an audio recording of it too.

[Handsome Rob]

Because Obama's lawyers are being ultra cautious about it. It is nothing. He was the President before the bumbled oath (which was Roberts' damn fault). The right wing (like you) are the only people trying to turn this into a serious matter because you don't even think the guy is a citizen.

ARE YOU KIDDING ME??

Let's run back through the timeline, here:

badgonegood posts an article about the second oath. He states: ":csad: Gosh I knew this crap was gonna happen. It's already started. Sadly Obama wont be able to do ANYTHING without everyone over his shoulder.

If he's caught eating anything over 100 calories he'll be promoting "bad dieting and healthcare" for America :whatever:.

Hence, it looks like badgonegood thinks this is going to be a big deal (or the start of one). I disagree, thinking it's not a big deal, so I say:


"What? I don't see any story here. "Technicalities" are important in our legal system--President Obama and Chief Justice Roberts were just covering their bases and making sure the oath was administered in accordance with the law."Notice how I said "I don't see any story here" and "just covering their bases."

Then, you say:


The law, aka the United States Constitution, made him the President before he ever took the oath. The oath was administered 5 minutes after 12 PM. Well, the 20th Amendment of the Constitution states that the current President's term ends and the new President's term begins at exactly 12 PM. The oath isn't mentioned in there at all. Even a conservative judge like Scalia will quickly reject this if a right winger tries to take it to court, just like Scalia has quickly rejected the lawsuits stating Obama isn't eligible for the Presidency.I don't question the Amendments, but I do note that they don't remove the requirement of taking the oath. So, I say:


That doesn't take away from the Oath still being a requirement as laid out in the Constitution. Article II, Section 1: "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."

If it were nothing, why would Roberts/Obama go through the trouble of redoing it?To which you responded:


Because Obama's lawyers are being ultra cautious about it. It is nothing. He was the President before the bumbled oath (which was Roberts' damn fault). The right wing (like you) are the only people trying to turn this into a serious matter because you don't even think the guy is a citizen.Now, this strikes me as curious. I think you're making some assumptions about me. Allow me to refute:

1. Obama's lawyers being ultra-cautious? Yeah, I basically said that in my first post when I said they were "covering their bases" (see the bold above). So, we're actually in agreement there.

2. President before the bumbled oath. I never questioned Obama's legitimacy to the Presidency. I only pointed out that the oath is a requirement (I never said he wasn't President until he said it--correctly or not), and I'm glad they made sure it was done correctly. Maybe you don't care about something like that, but I do.

3. Trying to turn this into a serious matter. Well, not exactly. See when I first said "I don't see the story here" in my first post? If I think it's a non-story, do you think it's possible that I would also think it not a big deal? They redid the oath, so Obama did everything required for his Inauguration. I see no reason for any controversy to come out of this. I never did.

4. You don't even think the guy is a citizen. And I said he wasn't a citizen where? I thought his birth certificate issue was a little suspect, sure, but I was satisfied by the resolution of it. Obama is the lawful and legitimate President. I've never said he wasn't. And, if he's the legitimate President, then he's met the requirements according to the Constitution, as far as I'm concerned.

[p4poetic]

Wait! That Obama Hussein is a Muslim for-in-er!?! Damn illegals, they took r jrrrrbs!

President Hussein will ruin America! We've just lost our country, and I'll be holding my flag upside for the next 4-8 years.

And I've read people say things that don't sound that much different. There ARE people calling him by Hussein. :facepalm

I will never forget that election night and the weeks following it.


And I do thank George W. Bush for Barack Obama.

Kind of like without Joel Schumacher, we'd never get Christopher Nolan's Batman movies.

Of course it's impressive, everything about Barry is impressive. From his shoes to his hair, he's just impressive. Did you hear that speech he gave? That's impressive "for a black [man] with a name like Barack Hussien Obama". Even the fact that he was elected Senator is quite impressive "for a black [man] with a name like Barack Hussien Obama".

Do you see how ridiculous that is. It doesn't matter that he is Black, he is the President, he should be "not judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character". Heard that before?

Sorry, maybe you should edit your post, it smells a little like Racism.

Um, I don't think you got that person's message at all. After all the hell Obama caught for his name (and especially for possibly being a Muslim, and this is meant to be negative) the unlikelihood for becoming a president of the United States, a country notorious for its race relations, because of his race, post 9/11 view on Muslims, etc. -- yes it is impressive that he managed to be elected by more than 50% of the vote.

[Kelly]

Wait, he's not Muslim?



YOU MEAN I VOTED FOR A CHRISTIAN......?


What the heck....

[redfirebird2008]

Wait, he's not Muslim?



YOU MEAN I VOTED FOR A CHRISTIAN......?


What the heck....

OH NOES...ARE YOU SERIES????? :hehe::hehe::hehe:

[Addendum]

Don't wrong me

[spideyboy_1111]

Spideyboy, enough is enough. People can disagree with Obama and not be racist. We've actually all done really well in here when it comes to discussion of race with most posters being very mature about it. Please quit trying to stir the pot by indirectly calling people racist for disagreeing with Obama.

no offense, but you clearly didn't read my posts too well... because i clearly stated what was racist and what was not. :o

[spideyboy_1111]

That is just stupidity.
We, the people who did not support him, disagreed with his platform.
He is black.
His wife is black.
his children are black.
He is the first black president
He is wearing a black suit.
He has black hair.

I deem myself racist now.

wait wait wait... when people DO say racist things.. such as the youtube videos... and people DO say it's because he IS black... according to you, it's stupid for me to deem those people racist? Like i said, I call it when i see it. I'm perfectly fine with those who don't like him for his policies... what im not ok with are those who don't like him for any reason BUT his policies.

And there's a pretty decent percentage of people who did not like him due to racial reasonings, i've shown that. You can't say "We who did not vote for him" you can only say YOU.

[spideyboy_1111]

The left is currently blaming Prop 8's passage in California on Mormons. Never mind all those Obama voters who chose to vote for it.

actually we've been blaming both, thank you very much :)

[Kelly]

Yes both have been blamed, but it is disproportionate.....Mormons have been blamed the most, or at least the most in front of cameras....

[Metamorpho1977]

I will never forget that election night and the weeks following it.


And I do thank George W. Bush for Barack Obama. :cwink:

Kind of like we can thank all of those democrats from the 70s for Ronald Reagan. So, Barack Obama is the democratic answer to Ronald Reagan.

[spideyboy_1111]

Yes both have been blamed, but it is disproportionate.....Mormons have been blamed the most, or at least the most in front of cameras....

Which they have the right to... they donated a hell of alot of money, and were the most outspoken about it. Most of the propaganda was driven and fueled by them. If the mormon church didn't donate the money they did, there campaign would have been very weak against ours... swaying many votes back on to us.

The mormons really mind **** the public when they created lies about the teaching of homosexuality in elementary school.

[Kelly]

Which they have the right to... they donated a hell of alot of money, and were the most outspoken about it. Most of the propaganda was driven and fueled by them. If the mormon church didn't donate the money they did, there campaign would have been very weak against ours... swaying many votes back on to us.

The mormons really mind **** the public when they created lies about the teaching of homosexuality in elementary school.


Yes, we've been through all of that, quite extensively. I simply stated that they seemed to be receiving the majority of the blame, at least as far as the media shows.

As far as having the right to speak out against the church, speak out against their teachings, using the media to speak out against the church as well, and other venues.....yep I agree you have that right.

But does that mean that in order for you to have that right, members of this church do not have that right?

[redfirebird2008]

Kind of like we can thank all of those democrats from the 70s for Ronald Reagan. So, Barack Obama is the democratic answer to Ronald Reagan.

LOL, there was one Democrat President in the 1970's: Jimmy Carter. The other two Presidents were Republicans: Nixon and Ford.

[spideyboy_1111]

Yes, we've been through all of that, quite extensively. I simply stated that they seemed to be receiving the majority of the blame, at least as far as the media shows.

As far as having the right to speak out against the church, speak out against their teachings, using the media to speak out against the church as well, and other venues.....yep I agree you have that right.

But does that mean that in order for you to have that right, members of this church do not have that right?

i believe in freedom of speech, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. In order for this to be in affect, i don't believe in others taking happiness from others, nor do i believe in laws created by those who would be unaffected by the law they are fighting.

Gay Marriage affects no one but those getting married. Religious "morals" should not affect our government, nor should it affect those lives in which do not follow such religion.

no one should be allowed to dictate anthers life, unless it's causing harm to others. And one who believes gay's cause harm by being gay, there bigots and ignorant.

[bunk]

I found these pretty interesting. Word clouds comparing Obama's inaugural speech to other past speeches. Sorry if it's been posted already.



Obama's

http://img297.imageshack.us/img297/8815/obamaonblackpu0.jpg

Bush's second

http://img297.imageshack.us/img297/1497/bushspeechou9.jpg

Clinton's second

http://img297.imageshack.us/img297/7563/clintonspeechfk5.jpg

Reagan's first

http://img297.imageshack.us/img297/157/reaganfirstic5.jpg

Lincoln's first

http://img297.imageshack.us/img297/3705/lincolnfirstmg4.jpg

Lincoln's second

http://img297.imageshack.us/img297/9118/lincolnsecondvv2.jpg

[Marx]

BREAKING NEWS!

WILLIAMS COMPOSITION PIECE PLAYED AT THE INAUGURATION WAS A RECORDING, NOT LIVE


The somber, elegiac tones before President Obama's oath of office at the inauguration on Tuesday came from the instruments of Yo-Yo Ma, Itzhak Perlman and two colleagues. But what the millions on the Mall and watching on television heard was in fact a recording, made two days earlier by the quartet and matched tone for tone by the musicians playing along.

The players and the inauguration organizing committee said the arrangement was necessary because of the extreme cold and wind during Tuesday’s ceremony. The conditions raised the possibility of broken piano strings, cracked instruments and wacky intonation minutes before the president’s swearing in (which had problems of its own).

“Truly, weather just made it impossible,” Carole Florman, a spokeswoman for the Joint Congressional Committee on Inaugural Ceremonies, said on Thursday. “No one’s trying to fool anybody. This isn’t a matter of Milli Vanilli,” Ms. Florman added, referring to the pop band that was stripped of a 1989 Grammy because of its lip-synching, making it synonymous with the practice.

I'm not really suprised considering how cold it was. But still...

[Sebastos]

I'm predicting four years...and really by no fault of his own. Expectations are ridiculously high for this man. And frankly, I think for the next four years we are going to continue to feel the pain from Bush and some Clinton policies and basically nothing Obama can do will turn it around. He himself admits it will take at least 5 years to see real improvement (of course, every first term president says that). But his supporters do not listen. A good amount of them truly do expect everything to just be fixed. It won't work that way. That will create a fair amount of disillusion.

Plus I expect a Romney run in 2012. Sure, he's been coy so far...but he's already been to Iowa (twice) and New Hampshire since November. Romney is charasmatic, young, and is renowned as an economic guru. If the economy is not improved drastically, he could very well take the White House out from right under Obama.

It was pathetic for a man like Romney to lower himself saying Palin was more qualified than him. Seriously, the legths these Republicans went to. :whatever:

[Matt]

This is worse than the Ashley Simpson lip-syncing on SNL scandal! The horror! :wow: But seriously...the media just doesn't want to let their golden egg laying chicken that was the inauguration go away. They will still be talking about the inauguration at mid-term elections.

[Marx]

It was pathetic for a man like Romney to lower himself saying Palin was more qualified than him. Seriously, the legths these Republicans went to. :whatever:

I was shocked that Romney sunk that low. I still don't know how he could keep a straight face through any of it.

[Marx]

This is worse than the Ashley Simpson lip-syncing on SNL scandal! The horror! :wow: But seriously...the media just doesn't want to let their golden egg laying chicken that was the inauguration go away. They will still be talking about the inauguration at mid-term elections.

:lmao:

[Matt]

It was pathetic for a man like Romney to lower himself saying Palin was more qualified than him. Seriously, the legths these Republicans went to. :whatever:

Romney did what he needed to do to ensure Republicans do not hate him. He will stay on good terms with the party in exchange for a small sound bite and in 2012 he won't have to completely foresake his beliefs to kiss up to the far right like a certain McCain. If McCain of 2000 ran against Obama in this election...well...I think we'd be looking at a very different electoral map. But McCain kissed so much far right ass he got lost in it.

[redfirebird2008]

This is worse than the Ashley Simpson lip-syncing on SNL scandal! The horror! :wow: But seriously...the media just doesn't want to let their golden egg laying chicken that was the inauguration go away. They will still be talking about the inauguration at mid-term elections.

:hehe:

So true. If the media actually did their job, this country would be in a lot better shape right now.

[Sebastos]

I was shocked that Romney sunk that low. I still don't know how he could keep a straight face through any of it.

Romney did what he needed to do to ensure Republicans do not hate him. He will stay on good terms with the party in exchange for a small sound bite and in 2012 he won't have to completely foresake his beliefs to kiss up to the far right like a certain McCain. If McCain of 2000 ran against Obama in this election...well...I think we'd be looking at a very different electoral map. But McCain kissed so much far right ass he got lost in it.

It wasn't just Romney either, it was other Republicans too. Like Coleman. :whatever: I don't know, I just don't want to see a Republican in office for the next years to come. They shouldn't even be labeled the Republican party, they should be labeled the "Cynical Party."

[Marx]

It wasn't just Romney either, it was other Republicans too. Like Coleman. :whatever: I don't know, I just don't want to see a Republican in office for the next years to come. They shouldn't even be labeled the Republican party, they should be labeled the "Cynical Party."

I think a full blown 'Religious Right' label would be better.

[Sebastos]

Whichever suits best. :o

[p4poetic]

That is just stupidity.
We, the people who did not support him, disagreed with his platform.
He is black.
His wife is black.
his children are black.
He is the first black president
He is wearing a black suit.
He has black hair.

I deem myself racist now.

You didn't mention his mother, who is white :grin:

This is worse than the Ashley Simpson lip-syncing on SNL scandal! The horror! But seriously...the media just doesn't want to let their golden egg laying chicken that was the inauguration go away. They will still be talking about the inauguration at mid-term elections.

Hell, they still talk about the 'controversies' from the primaries.



So true. If the media actually did their job, this country would be in a lot better shape right now.

But...the MSM is liberal!! They're all in the tank for Obama! He's The Messiah.

Romney did what he needed to do to ensure Republicans do not hate him. He will stay on good terms with the party in exchange for a small sound bite and in 2012 he won't have to completely foresake his beliefs to kiss up to the far right like a certain McCain. If McCain of 2000 ran against Obama in this election...well...I think we'd be looking at a very different electoral map. But McCain kissed so much far right ass he got lost in it.

When was the truly great Republican president? Before they lost their way. I was so disappointed to see McCain sell out to get the nomination. He became the very thing he spoke out against in 2000.

[souvlaki]

Kind of like we can thank all of those democrats from the 70s for Ronald Reagan. So, Barack Obama is the democratic answer to Ronald Reagan.

Hopefully he is a better President than Reagan.

[Nitehawk013]

Hopefully he is a better President than Reagan.

Reagan sat over the largest period of prolonged peace time economic growth in American history.

I know it is "cool" for lefties to hate him because he tried to destroy the Unions (they need to be destroyed entirely), but Reagan was one of the greatest Presidents EVER.

[Chris Wallace]

Reagan created disastrous economic programs & wanted to launch nukes from space.

[souvlaki]

Reagan sat over the largest period of prolonged peace time economic growth in American history.

I know it is "cool" for lefties to hate him because he tried to destroy the Unions (they need to be destroyed entirely), but Reagan was one of the greatest Presidents EVER.

:lmao: :lmao: :lmao:

[souvlaki]

I mean seriously, I wouldn't even put him in the top 10.

[Chris Wallace]

20.
http://i24.photobucket.com/albums/c5/Alicabob/Random%20Stuff/1168882797791.gif

[redfirebird2008]

Reagan created disastrous economic programs & wanted to launch nukes from space.

Not to mention his funding of Bin Laden and shall we forget the Iran Contra scandal? People gloss right over those two things. Well look at two of the biggest threats in the world today.

[redfirebird2008]

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v480/soonerhoosier/ClarenceThomasasleepatInauguration.jpg

[Matt]

Scalia looks like the old wrestling announcer Jim Ross, only instead of a cowboy hat he is wearing some douche bag leather hat.

[Kelly]

And they are all freezing their asses off.......I don't blame the frowns...

[The Senator]

Reagan sat over the largest period of prolonged peace time economic growth in American history.

I know it is "cool" for lefties to hate him because he tried to destroy the Unions (they need to be destroyed entirely), but Reagan was one of the greatest Presidents EVER.

No... I dislike him because he is responsible for supply-side economics, which essentially deflated our economy. He also prolonged the HIV/ AIDS crisis for YEARS before he even acknowledged it was a disease which needed federal funding to combat; he oversaw a corrupt weapons trade with Iran; and he also deregulated the airline industry, which explains why the airlines are able to hijack our wallets with ridiculous "baggage check" charges due to "fuel costs" or what have you.

OH-- and it is impossible for me to hate him for destroying the Soviet Union, since he had NOTHING to do with it. The Soviet Union suffered an economic downfall which peaked during Reagan's presidency. Even if Reagan wasn't president, the Soviet Union would have collapsed before the turn of the century.

[Marx]

PURPLE TICKET TURMOIL EXPLAINED
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/01/23/purple-ticket-turmoil-wha_n_160150.html

So, what on Earth happened to the now-legendary holders of Purple Inaugural Tickets? Answering this question may ultimately require the re-opening of the X-Files. However, unsatisfied with the accounts we've read thus far, we've taken it upon ourselves to ask those who endured the ordeal to tell us their stories, in the hopes that we might divine some idea of what happened on Inauguration Day.

What follows is an informed reconstruction of the logistical mayhem on and around the Mall on Inauguration Day. It is stitched together from hundreds of accounts, some of which are quoted at length. This shouldn't be considered an official account by any means, and we welcome any information that furthers our understanding of what happened (particularly if it contradicts the standing account).

That said, here are our key findings, unpacked in more detail below.

CORE PLANNING FAILURES

1) Severe shortage of crowd control tools -- law enforcement, volunteers, signage, and barriers -- around the Mall. The few officials helping to direct traffic were pulled away from their spots early in the morning, overwhelmed by the crowd size, or visiting from out of town and not prepared to give directions around Capitol Hill. This shortage of knowledgeable assistance exacerbated logistical problems throughout the day.

2) The gates opened far too late in the morning. Though the official ticketed gates did not open until 8AM, people began arriving at the Mall in large numbers between 4AM and 5AM and were able to gain access to ticketed areas, with or without tickets. As the morning progressed, ticketholders stood in long lines while non-ticketholders continued to find unauthorized paths to enter the Mall.

This explanation is entirely too long to post, but it is interesting.

[Kelly]

Feinstein was ROYALLY pissed about that.....



I think #2 was the main problem.....

[Superman]

Reagan sat over the largest period of prolonged peace time economic growth in American history.

I know it is "cool" for lefties to hate him because he tried to destroy the Unions (they need to be destroyed entirely), but Reagan was one of the greatest Presidents EVER.You forgot three little words in your post "In My Opinion" because that's all it is Your Opinion.

[Kelly]

You forgot three little words in your post "In My Opinion" because that's all it is Your Opinion.


Yeah, and no one has ever forgotten those 3 words around here before....:whatever:

Damn Supes even when you are actually giving good advice, you sound partisan....lol

[Chris Wallace]

Not to mention his funding of Bin Laden and shall we forget the Iran Contra scandal? People gloss right over those two things. Well look at two of the biggest threats in the world today.

I don't gloss over it. I was just getting warmed up. He was a terrible actor, a horrible governor & a horrendous president. Period. How anyone can say otherwise is beyond me.

[redfirebird2008]

I don't gloss over it. I was just getting warmed up. He was a terrible actor, a horrible governor & a horrendous president. Period. How anyone can say otherwise is beyond me.

I wasn't saying that you were glossing over it, but that his supporters gloss right over it.

[Chris Wallace]

They also gloss over the fact that when questioned about supplying terrorists, he simply said he didn't remember.

[Matt]

Well in all fairness, Reagan may have been telling the truth on that one..........What? Too soon?

[redfirebird2008]

Well in all fairness, Reagan may have been telling the truth on that one..........What? Too soon?

OHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!! Ouch! :wow::hehe:

[Chris Wallace]

Well in all fairness, Reagan may have been telling the truth on that one..........What? Too soon?

What are you talking about? He WAS telling the truth. I don't know why it was considered big news that he had Alzheimer's in '97 when he CLEARLY had it in '87!

[Excel]

They also gloss over the fact that when questioned about supplying terrorists, he simply said he didn't remember.

Thats why one shouldnt vote for old guys. :up:

[Matt]

Thats why one shouldnt vote for old guys. :up:

:facepalm

Who Excel voted for for vice-president:

http://i19.photobucket.com/albums/b168/Kateskiss/Joe_Biden_official_photo_portrait_2.jpg

Age when he took office: 66

Ronald Reagan's age when he took office: 69


Disease Excel, Biden, and Reagan all have in common:


http://i50.photobucket.com/albums/f340/mariopradojr/Biden-foot-in-mouth.jpg

There are plenty of good reasons to trash Reagan, McCain, Republicans or whoeveryou want to trash Excel. Age really isn't one of them. Many-a-70 year old men are much smarter and sharper than you.

[Excel]

Broseph, you took that comment far too seriously ;) :up:

[Handsome Rob]

http://i50.photobucket.com/albums/f340/mariopradojr/Biden-foot-in-mouth.jpg



Since when did Cotton "I killed fitty men!" Hill become a surgeon? :huh:

[Nitehawk013]

Reagan sure was horrible. I mean just look at what happened under his Presidency.

http://www.heritage.org/Research/taxes/BG1414.cfm Yes it is a Right wing site BUT BEFORE you scream bias, it quotes an entire report form the Joint Economic Committee from April 2000.

And nothign to do with the collapse of the USSR? Are you serious? Yeah it was an economic collapse that killed them. A collapse fueled by the fact that they were spending themselves into oblivion by trying to keep up with OUR weapons and defense spending. Had Reagan not initiated the massive defense build up, the USSR wouldn't have spent themselves to death in trying to keep up with us.

As far as "Star Wars" goes, that was a brilliant idea that was ahead of it's time. It would be nice to have that missle shield now wouldn't it? What with China talking about having long range nuclear strike capabilities along with many other not-so-friendly nations. It would be nice to have that system in space to knock down any missles they sent at us.

Funding of radicals in the middle east at the time was a good idea. YES it proved to be bad in the long term, but at the time it was good. Why go fight the battle ourselves when we can simply arm people already on the ground to fight the much worse threat? Why have our soldiers die, when we can simply back a force that is already fighting the enemy?

Reagan's only flaw in my mind was his wierd fear of Alien invasion.

[spideyboy_1111]

As far as "Star Wars" goes, that was a brilliant idea that was ahead of it's time. It would be nice to have that missle shield now wouldn't it? What with China talking about having long range nuclear strike capabilities along with many other not-so-friendly nations. It would be nice to have that system in space to knock down any missles they sent at us.



trust me.. if we could have a shield like that today, we WOULD have a shield like that today. our technology is not advanced enough, and probably wouldn't be today, if all our nation did was try to fun it from Regan's presidency till now.

Invisible Force Field "walls" are pure science fiction imo.

[Nitehawk013]

Force fields I agree are a bit far fetched. The counter measures arem of Star Wars could likely have been accomplished IMO. There are some brilliant minds in the defense industry out there.

Just look at some of the stuff on "Future Weapons". That is the declassified stuff and it blows my mind. The stuff still in development and kept under wraps is likely mindblowing. It's all about the funding, and the funding is determined by what an administration feels is a priority.

[Malice]

Hey, everything was sci-fi and far fetched till its built...

[Nitehawk013]

Exactly. I would not have really believed we had a type of "Ray gun" until I saw it.

I can't remember what it is called, but they developed the non-lethal crowd dispersal "ray". It projects a beam of a type of rays (can't recall what type now) that hits a group of targets. They said it immediately heats them up and feels like when one opens a hot oven door and the heat hits you in the face. It makes you jump back and disperse to get away form the feeling.

No one would have thought we had such a thing until that company produced.

[spideyboy_1111]

Force fields I agree are a bit far fetched. The counter measures arem of Star Wars could likely have been accomplished IMO. There are some brilliant minds in the defense industry out there.

Just look at some of the stuff on "Future Weapons". That is the declassified stuff and it blows my mind. The stuff still in development and kept under wraps is likely mindblowing. It's all about the funding, and the funding is determined by what an administration feels is a priority.

my biggest problem with any sort of "force field" would be that fact how would aircraft be able to get through? but not missiles?

I do however think we could have missiles that immediately target incoming missiles to cause them to explode overseas.

[spideyboy_1111]

Exactly. I would not have really believed we had a type of "Ray gun" until I saw it.

I can't remember what it is called, but they developed the non-lethal crowd dispersal "ray". It projects a beam of a type of rays (can't recall what type now) that hits a group of targets. They said it immediately heats them up and feels like when one opens a hot oven door and the heat hits you in the face. It makes you jump back and disperse to get away form the feeling.

No one would have thought we had such a thing until that company produced.

i heard about that a while ago...

it's either the same thing i've heard of or its something else.. but it causes a natural reaction in your body to jump back, and take off running

[Nitehawk013]

That's it. It is the darndest thing. They showed it on Discovery. They fired it into a crowd of trained soldiers and they either fell down or started walking/running out of it's line of fire. They couldn't resist it.

[spideyboy_1111]

That's it. It is the darndest thing. They showed it on Discovery. They fired it into a crowd of trained soldiers and they either fell down or started walking/running out of it's line of fire. They couldn't resist it.

yeah i think i first heard about it 3 or 4 years ago... i find alot of that military stuff very interesting...

much like the genetically combining a goat and a spider, in an attempt to make goats "milk" webbing... so they could make a better bullet proof vest

there was something else really weird like that too, but i forget what it was

[Chris Wallace]

Hey, everything was sci-fi and far fetched till its built...

That's an interesting argument.

[Gilpesh]

kMN86uG3zHs
Better quality: http://www.funnyordie.com/videos/ae73278a00/high-five-inauguration

And yes. I thought this was important. :o