Jan 21, 2009
President Barack Obama Retakes The Presidential Oath Of Office
Just to be sure

President Barack Obama summoned Supreme Court Chief Justice John G. Roberts, Jr. to the White House earlier this evening in order to retake the presidential oath of office that Chief Justice Roberts flubbed at yesterday’s swearing in ceremony. As you may recall, it appeared that Obama fumbled the words of the presidential oath of office but it turned out that it was Roberts who made the mistake. In order to ensure that his presidency would not have any sort of controversy (no matter how minute) from the start, Obama thought it would be prudent to retake the oath of office “out of an abundance of caution”:


President Obama retook his oath of office Wednesday after Chief Justice John Roberts flubbed while delivering it at Tuesday’s inauguration. The second oath — also administered by Roberts — took place at 7:35 p.m. Wednesday in the White House’s Map Room. Roberts asked Obama whether he was ready. “I am, and we’re going to do it very slowly,” Obama replied. The do-over was aimed at dispelling any confusion that might arise from Tuesday’s take — in which “faithfully” was said out of sequence — and erase any question that Obama is legally the president. However, per the Constitution, Obama became president at noon Tuesday without taking the oath. “We believe that the oath of office was administered effectively and that the president was sworn in appropriately yesterday,” White House counsel Greg Craig said Wednesday in a written statement. “But the oath appears in the Constitution itself. And out of an abundance of caution, because there was one word out of sequence, Chief Justice Roberts administered the oath a second time,” the statement read. On Tuesday, Roberts, apparently working without a copy of the oath handy on the Capitol steps, started out by reciting a six-word phrase, but Obama broke in halfway through and repeated the first three. That seemed to throw the chief justice off stride, and he proceeded to mix up the order of the words in the next phrase.

The Constitution sets out the language that should be used in the oath: “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.”

Roberts moved the word “faithfully” back nine spots, and used “to” instead of “of.” That threw the president off base, and he smiled and paused to collect his thoughts, then decided to follow Roberts’ lead. But the chief justice at the same time attempted to correct himself. Here’s how Tuesday’s oath went:

Roberts: … that I will execute the office of president to the United States faithfully …

Obama: … that I will execute …

Roberts: … the off — faithfully the pres — the office of president of the United States …

Obama (at the same time): … the office of president of the United States faithfully …

The two got the rest correct, including the nonobligatory “So help you God?” “So help me God.” Reporters, bloggers and others weighed in on the flub. The New York Post offered this headline: “Roberts is the Oaf of Office.” A Washington Post reader complained in a letter to the editor: “What could have been a moment for the ages was marred by Mr. Roberts’ thoughtlessness. News outlets will report that the first words of our new president were “confused.” Whether through design or an amazing lack of preparation, Justice Roberts’s behavior was a disgrace.” And Fox News anchor Chris Wallace said: “We’re wondering here whether or not Barack Obama in fact is the president of the United States. They had a kind of garbled oath. It’s just conceivable that this will end up going to the courts.” In a congressional luncheon after Tuesday’s swear-in, Roberts and Obama exchanged words, and the chief justice appeared to tell the president, “It was my fault.” Before Wednesday’s do-over at the White House, Obama, waiting on a couch, joked that “we decided it was so much fun … ” After a flawless recitation, Roberts smiled and said, “Congratulations again.” “Thank you, sir,” the president replied. After a smattering of applause, Obama quipped that “the bad news for the [press] pool is there’s 12 more balls.” Roberts has made no public comment on becoming tongue-tied Tuesday.

LOL! Now that President Obama is the boss, he is going to ensure that things get taken care of in the proper way, to HIS satisfaction. Well done. Leave it to the morons on FOX News to make something out of nothing. President Obama officially became President of the United States at the stroke of noon on January 20, 2009 despite the fact that he had yet to take the oath of office. But, I don’t blame him for taking care of biz and taking the oath again. He’s nothing if not a perfectionist :)

[Source]

Like PITNB on Facebook

29 Comments. Add Yours

1 2
  1. Gadfly says:

    I happen to be a humble servant in a profession in which oath’s are taken very seriously. I do not expect anyone who reads this blog to understand how much swearing allegiance to an oath means to some; as I am just one person with very simple ways so it really doesn’t matter.

    Bottom line: I hope that President Obama is graced with the soundest of wisdom and the sincerest of council to make good decisions for this country.

    However, the oath President Obama fiddled with he should know stone cold. Period. All Presidents should. This is an unarguable point. The Chief Justice should have to say that oath from beginning to end in one shot, and then the President should recite it back perfectly in my humble opinion. Wouldn’t that show a little more “give-a-crap” factor? How much does an oath you swear to really mean if you can’t remember it anyways? Just do it again, blame it on someone else, and get it over with. Take Two right?

    But then again, oath’s are just a bunch of words, and the Constitution is just a living document… right? America is a big evil monster? President Obama is gonna make every single one of your dreams come true?

    I think a lot of people don’t understand that in the phrase “Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness” – “pursuit” is an action verb; requiring action on YOUR part. You are not just entitled magically to happiness.

    On a few separate notes, how about that prayer from Mr. Rick Warren eh?

    And regarding news channels, if you do not think the press was biased one way or another you’re a nincompoop. Source: http://www.mrc.org/SpecialRepo.....xecSum.asp

  2. Gadfly says:

    Oh, where’s the bible in the “take two” oath?

    Oops. Take Three?

  3. NS says:

    Wow, Gadfly, pretentious much?

  4. Ella says:

    News channels are all biased. I happen to think Fox is more biased than some. I think people are making a big deal out of nothing. No matter who messed it up on Tuesday, it has now been redone. Either way Obama is still our President.

    @Gadfly-
    Just because someone stumbled that means Obama or the Chief Court Justice doesn’t give a crap? So if someone is getting married and they stumble over their vows that means they don’t care about their marriage? That is a bunch of crap, in my own humble opinion.

    @JJ
    Obama is not anyone’s Savior or Messiah and I think people should stop inferring that people think he is. What is wrong with having hope? What is wrong with being excited that the first black man has been sworn in as the President of the United States? While I understand that some people may be putting all their eggs in one basket so to speak, I don’t think people expect him to do anything superhuman or to wave a magic wand and fix everything Bush and his administration screwed up.
    To call him a Savior is to set him up for failure and that is not at all fair to him or to this country, because his failure is our failure.

  5. lauren says:

    Ella — on your third point: exactly! The only people who keep referring to Obama as a Messiah or Savior, and saying he’s magically going to fix everything, are the right-wingers! The rest of us are just hopeful that we now have a president who respects the Constitution, the rule of law, and the rest of the world. He inspires us to try to improve the world, as well. This doesn’t make him the freaking Son of God or anything, and I wish they’d stop harping on that.

  6. Emily says:

    BTW… the bible is not required, but most Presidents choose to use one due to tradition! So no..there will probs not be a take 3..sorry!

  7. Michelle says:

    @CB – I agree Chris Wallace is a tool. So if Fox News. Clearly those people were not required to take any sort of history or government courses ever or they would have known that the oath is basically a public formallity and tradition than anything else. You gotta love that pretty much as soon as Wallace said that, Fox News was all over it… The only reason I even saw the Fox thing was bc my sister had on that channel. I was flipping between CNN and MSNBC (MSNBC was having problems staying in on my cable network) Anyway you gotta love a President that’s thorough!

  8. Keimo says:

    Um, JJ…….FOX HAS NOT “SUDDENLY been a bunch of biased idiots”. WE, THE PEOPLE have been saying that for a looooong time! LMAO!!!!

1 2

Leave a Reply

It's easier to leave comments when you register for an account, where you can also select your own profile photo. Already have a PITNB account? Then sign in.

Notify me of followup comments via e-mail. You can also subscribe without commenting.