Chief Justice Roberts Botched the Oath of Office!

Hmmmm, are you really asking if it matters if they followed the US Constitution or not?

The oath isn't actually addressed in the Constitution- the wording anyway. The President becomes president at 11:00 am EST regradless if the Oath has been taken or not (I know that seems weird- but its true). The other side of that is that it doesn't have to be a Justice that swears in the President- whoever the President-Elect chooses can do it. I guess the short answer is yes I care about following the law of the land but I don't think raking Roberts or Obama over the coals for a wording issue is that big a deal. In the end the wording was still wrong- "faithfully" should have come at that start not the end but that's how they did it- So here's my question- Does that mean that Obama isn't the president because of wording? Thanks

Then what does Article 2, Sec. 1 Paragragh 8 of the US Constitution mean to you? "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." True though, it doesn't have to be the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court.

True, a bit embarrassing for Prs. Obama, a sign of incompetence for Roberts. I wonder if he'd take it so lightly if a lawyers was as flippant with decorrum in the Supreme Court as he was there.

I'm not offended at all. In fact, now that is has been corrected, to me it's just the first of many, many Obamaisms to come.

Para- why are you so offended by something so little- Roberts wasn't flippant he made a mistake and I'm sure many lawyers have tripped over their words in his court more than once- it's the Supreme court and that would be a little scary even for the best lawyer.

To be fair dj it wasn't O'Bama who actually flubbed it was Robert's Then O'Bama didn't know what to do.

True, people flub things up, usually at the most embarrassing time possible... that's why I wonder if this should just be chalked up to the first of many, many, many, Obamaisms of his administration. What would I have done? I would have collected myself and started over. Back when I was getting ready to re-enlist in the Army, I took the time to memorize the oath (which is significantly longer than the President's Oath of Office). I asked the officer conducting the oath to recite the whole thing, then I would repeat it back to her. Of course, if I looked like I wasn't going to be able to recite it completely and flawlessly, the officer would have started reciting line by line as usual. What is interesting is, if a servicemember messes up a line, the oath has to be done over. I think we should at least hold our president to the same standard as we do our servicemembers. Seriously, do you think the incompetent press would have ever let a Republican president live this kind of mistake down? Oath of Service: ''I, _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. So help me God.'' Oath of Office of President of the US: "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."

Do you think they could go after Roberts without shedding negative light on Obama? Personally though, I think it's more that they really don't care about the oath or the US Constitution. From some of the other comments in this thread, they are not alone.

If the press were so liberally biased then why aren't they all over Roberts? Annie