It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Obama is sworn in for second time

page: 3
2
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 21 2009 @ 11:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by asmeone2
reply to post by converge
 


It's kind of sad how hung up we get on the religion of our politicians, I really do not care what they beleive, so long as they do not show the members and ideals of their religion undue priority when making their political decisions.


You do know the Converge and myself was just having a laugh right?

You did read our small back and forth, didn't you?




posted on Jan, 21 2009 @ 11:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by jd140

Originally posted by asmeone2
reply to post by converge
 


It's kind of sad how hung up we get on the religion of our politicians, I really do not care what they beleive, so long as they do not show the members and ideals of their religion undue priority when making their political decisions.


You do know the Converge and myself was just having a laugh right?

You did read our small back and forth, didn't you?


Yes, I was not trying to attack, just stating that that is my opinion. A general commentery.

It is not the religious beliefs of a person that I care so much about, as it is how he approaches his political office.



posted on Jan, 21 2009 @ 11:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by monkcaw
Wouldn't it deliciously evil if the first oath was taken over a bible, just for the cameras...but the second oath, the real one, was sworn over a koran using his legal name barry soetoro.

I wouldn't put it past this dirty usurper.


The Constitution says nothing about a bible being a requirement. In fact, it would be unconstitutional (irony) if it did since the 1st Amendment forbids the establishment of any religious governance.

Also, Lyndon Johnson didn't swear on a bible, he swore on Kennedy's Roman Catholic missal.

The rest of your post, well I just feel sorry for you mostly that this is something that you even consider or care about.



posted on Jan, 22 2009 @ 12:31 AM
link   
I think it's amusing that the very first thing he said as President can be labeled the first "Barackism." Or would it be "Obamaism?"

Either way, the situation is nothing more than that: Amusing.

Let's hope he keeps it up. I have a feeling that our country has been driven too far left after eight years of leaning too far right, and we'll need the entertainment.



posted on Jan, 22 2009 @ 12:37 AM
link   

Originally posted by mattifikation
I think it's amusing that the very first thing he said as President can be labeled the first "Barackism." Or would it be "Obamaism?"


I believe the first thing he said as President was "Yes I am" in response to "Are you ready to take the oath?"


I agree that it was funny, mainly because Justice Roberts forgot the exact words of the oath.



posted on Jan, 22 2009 @ 12:40 AM
link   
Sworn in a second time huh. I wonder if they made any adjustments to the smallprint while you guys weren't looking, I hope not



posted on Jan, 22 2009 @ 12:46 AM
link   

The president said he did not have his Bible with him, but that the oath was binding anyway.


www.msnbc.msn.com...

How interesting,

OH well just another coincidence.

Creepy



posted on Jan, 22 2009 @ 12:48 AM
link   
reply to post by Stormdancer777
 

The bible is not a requirement...

In fact, the "so help me god" is not even in the text, Presidents have only been saying that out of tradition.



posted on Jan, 22 2009 @ 01:07 AM
link   

Originally posted by converge
reply to post by Stormdancer777
 

The bible is not a requirement...

In fact, the "so help me god" is not even in the text, Presidents have only been saying that out of tradition.


Hello converge, this whole election cycle has creeped me out from the beginning

and now they want Lieberman to apologize to Obama and Biden?

Three and a half years, mark my words.



posted on Jan, 22 2009 @ 01:10 AM
link   
The Astrological chart for the Jan 20th 12:07pm inauguration of Barack Hussein Obama has a void of course Moon in late Scorpio. This is a very poor placement. It suggests a lack of effectiveness and potentially a premature end to his term. Other void of course Moon inaugurations have been Roosevelt's third term, Kennedy's, Nixon's second term, and Clinton's second term. As an Astrologer I was looking to see if there were any Astrologer's on Obama's team, who would recommend a delay of his taking of the Oath of Office. Though this would have been very difficult, because the end of the previous president's term is legally noon. As it was, Biden was the Commander in Chief for 6 minutes. I was watching and began to wonder if YoYo Ma was going to jam for a half an hour. But whether orchestrated or not the Chief Justice and Obama flubbed the Oath. Did it count? Just to make sure, they redid the Oath a second time Jan 21st at 7:35pm in the Map Room of the White House. This is a much better chart for Obama's first term of office. Rather than a Scorpio void of course Moon, which indicates a lack of productivity, secretiveness, and power struggles, the chart has a Sagittarius Moon. The Sagi Moon indicates idealism, honesty, and striving for long range goals.



posted on Jan, 22 2009 @ 01:14 AM
link   
reply to post by Isispriest
 



Amazing, the day of the inaugural I kept saying he is going to be late ,it must be at noon,

Why is it always at noon?

Now we can argue which one was valid.


I have been putting this off, but I should do the cabalist numerology chart for barack Hussein Obama

[edit on 013131p://bThursday2009 by Stormdancer777]



posted on Jan, 22 2009 @ 01:29 AM
link   
Just for the record. It was Obama who corrected Roberts. Roberts flubbed his lines.



posted on Jan, 22 2009 @ 03:35 AM
link   
reply to post by xSMOKING_GUNx
 



I heard that he did not use a Bible, the second time, because he used a Koran instead. Any truth in this?

Quote:
In contrast to the first oath-taking, Mr Obama did not swear on a Bible...
Endquote.
news.bbc.co.uk...

Ralf



posted on Jan, 22 2009 @ 07:25 AM
link   

Originally posted by monkcaw
reply to post by xSMOKING_GUNx
 


Wouldn't it deliciously evil if the first oath was taken over a bible, just for the cameras...but the second oath, the real one, was sworn over a koran using his legal name barry soetoro.

I wouldn't put it past this dirty usurper.


I see your point, and to be honest there are a heap of people who are hoping for any kind of situation, even remotely similar to arise for them to sink their teeth in to.

Unfortunately for them I am sure they will have to accept some far more sinister situations over the course of the next few years.



posted on Jan, 22 2009 @ 07:43 AM
link   
Obama voted against Justice Roberts conformation.
Maybe this whole flubed oath, reOath thing was
Pay Back!



posted on Jan, 22 2009 @ 07:58 AM
link   

Originally posted by asmeone2
Probably just to stop someone from challenging his legitimacy over the fumble the first time.

Yep. No conspiracy here. The original oath got botched due to nervousness on Inauguration Day and so, in order to keep the buzz down, they redid it. WITHOUT the bible this time. Hmmm ... conspiracy afterall!
Just kidding.



posted on Jan, 22 2009 @ 09:03 AM
link   

Originally posted by Lebowski achiever
Just for the record. It was Obama who corrected Roberts. Roberts flubbed his lines.


Just for the record.

President Obama started reciting the line of a six word phrase at the third word, while CJ Roberts was still giving the first line. The interruption hung him up and he did a good job recovering. Considering he couldn't start over and the hundreds of millions watching him.



posted on Jan, 22 2009 @ 09:07 AM
link   
This whole mess could have been avoided if someone would have just called the mulligan at the time and started over. Big Deal.

I think most people in attendance were waiting for the actual hand of God to fall upon his son Obama during the ceremony anyway. No one would have noticed the mulligan.



posted on Jan, 22 2009 @ 09:14 AM
link   

Originally posted by jd140
Just for the record.

President Obama started reciting the line of a six word phrase at the third word, while CJ Roberts was still giving the first line. The interruption hung him up and he did a good job recovering. Considering he couldn't start over and the hundreds of millions watching him.


What does it matter? They were both obviously nervous.

Justice Roberts apparently recognized that he was the one that erred.


During a luncheon after the inauguration ceremony, Mr. Roberts could be seen on camera telling the president that the mistake was “my fault.” So he agreed to travel to the White House on Wednesday evening for a ceremony that was not announced until it was over. ― source



posted on Jan, 22 2009 @ 10:53 AM
link   
The first oath wasn't ligit! Then they do another one behind closed doors without the Bible. Why did they decide not to use the Bible and break from tradition on the second oath? They couldn't find one?



new topics

top topics



 
2
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join