Obama's Inauguration - and First Speeches/Travel

[August1991]

From what I understand, the US Supreme Court Chief Justice will inaugurate Barack Hussein Obama, Obama's choice of inauguration name, using the same Bible that Abraham Lincoln used for his inauguration.

(President-elects choose their inauguration name. James Earl Carter was inaugurated as Jimmy Carter. The Lincoln bible has been stored in the Library of Congress, but never re-used for an inauguration. Most presidents use personal Bibles. JFK, for example, used a Catholic family bible brought from Ireland in 1850.)

Then, Obama will travel first to Canada - and then to a Muslim country for a major speech.

The visit to Canada could happen before the end of April, given that Obama insiders last month announced plans for the president-elect to deliver a major speech in a Muslim capital, likely within the first 100 days of his presidency.

Link

----

From this, I reckon that Obama wants to bring us all together. He wants to appeal to traditionalists and to bring into the fold the poor, frustrated and angry. Obama thinks this will make the world a better place.

Some battles are not so simple. (Mohammed Atta came from a rich Saudi family.)

The Allies didn't win the Second World War in Europe because the US president was named Franklin Delano Roosevelt. The Allies defeated Italian and German Fascism because young men from Australia, America, Russia and other countries were prepared to lose their lives.

----

While driving recently though Pennsylvania (or was it Kentucky?) on an Interstate, I saw suspended from an overpass an American flag hung upside down with the phrase "Obama Will Fail".

America won't fail.

But I hope that America (and western civilization) does not have to pay for an expensive learning experience of one of its leaders.

Edited January 15, 2009 by August1991

[August1991]

Hmmm.

Nobody has responded to this thread. Well, I'll respond to myself.

----

First, Obama seems to believe that the World Trade Center is no longer in Manhattan because some people on this planet are humiliated, poor or misguided.

Second, the fact that Mohammed Atta was a wealthy Saudi bothers me. I have met people like Atta (they did not feel humiliated, poor nor misguided) and I was surprised to learn later their personal beliefs.

[Shady]

I'm looking forward to Obama's Immaculate Inauguration. I always enjoy these types of large historical political events, even if I feel luke warm at best towards the new President-elect. I agree with your assessment on the holes associated with Obama's outlook on terrorism, but, the holes in his assessment of economics may end up being more significant. I'm interested to hear his explaination of how borrowing and spending trillions of dollars will lead to great economic prosperity.

[jdobbin]

I'm interested to hear his explaination of how borrowing and spending trillions of dollars will lead to great economic prosperity.

Why? You were never interested in the answer from Bush.

Edited January 17, 2009 by jdobbin

[jdobbin]

But I hope that America (and western civilization) does not have to pay for an expensive learning experience of one of its leaders.

You mean like Bush who wanted to be the domestic President and watched the towers come down?

[Topaz]

I liked Obama the very first time I saw him on Oprah and I hope he is for real and not another Bush. There are some people that think, like past presidents, Obama is nothing more that a puppet, a front man controlled by special interest groups, foreign banks, and corporate powers who are pushing for globalization and the world government. I hope the job doesn't change him and he sticks to his believes.

[bush_cheney2004]

I liked Obama the very first time I saw him on Oprah and I hope he is for real and not another Bush....

Maybe that explains Dion's fall from grace...he was never on Oprah.

I will like Obama more after he bombs somebody for human rights.

Edited January 18, 2009 by bush_cheney2004

[Shady]

Why? You were never interested in the answer from Bush.

Wrong. My biggest annoyance with President Bush was his liberal spending habits. Unfortunately, over the next few years, Obama's gonna make him look like a piker.

I hope the job doesn't change him and he sticks to his believes.

You know what he believes? Please fill in the rest of us, cause all I see him ever doing, is trying to be all things, to all people. Moistens his finger, and sticks it up in the air.

Anyways, another thing I'm really looking forward to seeing at Obama's Immaculate Inauguration, is a reference in his speech to global warming, while everyone is hip deep in snow, and trying to survive the most brutal of cold temperatures.

[BubberMiley]

I'm looking forward to Obama's Immaculate Inauguration. I always enjoy these types of large historical political events, even if I feel luke warm at best towards the new President-elect.

I don't think "lukewarm at best" means the same thing as "consumed with vile hatred."

[Shady]

I don't think "lukewarm at best" means the same thing as "consumed with vile hatred."

I absolutely agree. Fortunately, when it comes to Obama, all I'm consumed with is, truth, substance, and consistency. If you wanna see vile hatred, read through several of the Sarah Palin treads from a few months back.

[BubberMiley]

I absolutely agree. Fortunately, when it comes to Obama, all I'm consumed with is, truth, substance, and consistency. If you wanna see vile hatred, read through several of the Sarah Palin treads from a few months back.

Really? Can you find a post as bad as, say, one that proposes making porn with Palin's daughters, as you did with Obama?

Didn't think so.

[Smallc]

If you wanna see vile hatred, read through several of the Sarah Palin treads from a few months back.

I don't think that most of us hated Sarah Palin. I think it was more that we were deathly afraid of her ever having any sort of power over the US Senate and government.

[BubberMiley]

I don't think that most of us hated Sarah Palin. I think it was more that we were deathly afraid of her ever having any sort of power over the US Senate and government.

Exactly. If there's one thing we've learned from the last eight years is that the Christian Right is so consumed with abortion politics, they'll elect anyone that matches their ideology on this matter, even if that person is so totally unqualified they'll drag the whole country into the toilet. They haven't learned, but fortunately the rest of the country has.

Both Palin and Bush seem like very nice, charming people, but they just don't have what it takes to be president.

Edited January 18, 2009 by BubberMiley

[sharkman]

I don't think that most of us hated Sarah Palin. I think it was more that we were deathly afraid of her ever having any sort of power over the US Senate and government.

And that was greatly influenced by BDS. The hatred of Bush and what Bush hath wrought, and seeing that Palin seems to be like Bush scared those who think Bush was a disaster.

The idea Bubber mentioned about electing anyone on the basis of abortion seems strange being that the left elected the least experienced president in modern history, at a time when the US needs a very experienced hand, because he's black.

Edited January 18, 2009 by sharkman

[BubberMiley]

The idea Bubber mentioned about electing anyone on the basis of abortion seems strange being that the left elected the least experienced president in modern history, at a time when the US needs a very experienced hand, because he's black.

I think they need an experienced hand because of the situation they're in, not because he's black.

But the left didn't elect Obama; a majority of Americans did.

[bush_cheney2004]

...But the left didn't elect Obama; a majority of Americans did.

The "Christian Right" did not elect Bush; a majority of Americans did.

[BubberMiley]

The "Christian Right" did not elect Bush; a majority of Americans did.

He didn't get a majority in 2000, and barely one in 2004.

[Shady]

I don't think that most of us hated Sarah Palin. I think it was more that we were deathly afraid of her ever having any sort of power over the US Senate and government.

And that's a fundamental misunderstanding of American government. The President doesn't have power over the other branches of government, it's an equal check.

Exactly. If there's one thing we've learned from the last eight years is that the Christian Right is so consumed with abortion politics.

Not at all. After 8 years of President Bush, abortion hasn't changed. But yes, there are many who are concerned over the killing of innocent unborn children. Damn them to hell!

Anyways, back to the immaculate inauguration. Has anyone else noticed the GIANT hyocrisy of the leftwing mainstream media? Back during Bush's inaugurations, they were obsessed over the cost, and if it was the right thing to be doing during troubled economic times. But apparently that's all been forgotten. There's no mention of the Messiah's inauguration costs (largest ever) during a massive economic recession. It doesn't seem to be an issue anymore. Hmmm, I wonder why?

[Shady]

He didn't get a majority in 2000, and barely one in 2004.

You're clearly uninformed. He received 4 million more votes than John F Kerry. Who by the way, served in Vietnam.

[bush_cheney2004]

He didn't get a majority in 2000, and barely one in 2004.

A majority is a majority....unless you have different math in Canada. Ooops...sorry...I forgot how sensitive that term is for our neighbours to the north at this present time.

Bush prevailed under the same constitutional processes as Obama. Oh, and he can only serve a maximum of two terms....just like President Bush.

[Smallc]

And that's a fundamental misunderstanding of American government. The President doesn't have power over the other branches of government, it's an equal check.

I know that. She was going to be Vice President. That would have made her President of the Senate. She also would have been a 72 year old heartbeat away from the ability to use executive orders. I don't want her anywhere near either of those things.

[bush_cheney2004]

I know that. She was going to be Vice President. That would have made her President of the Senate. She also would have been a 72 year old heartbeat away from the ability to use executive orders. I don't want her anywhere near either of those things.

Why not? What difference would it make to you (in Canada)? Executive orders are created all the time....FDR issued a real duesy.

Edited January 18, 2009 by bush_cheney2004

[Smallc]

Why not? What difference would it make to you (in Canada)? Executive orders are created all the time.

Because I fear for my neighbours ....and because I'd like stem cell research to finally start to move forward in the US again...and because I really just don't agree with any single thing that the Governor talked about....

[bush_cheney2004]

Because I fear for my neighbours ....and because I'd like stem cell research to finally start to move forward in the US again...and because I really just don't agree with any single thing that the Governor talked about....

That's not rational....would you have felt the same way about FDR because of internment camps?

The US doesn't owe you accelerated progress on stem cell research; the US has certainly contributed more to the effort than Canada, with or without "executive orders".

[guyser]

Anyways, back to the immaculate inauguration. Has anyone else noticed the GIANT hyocrisy of the leftwing mainstream media? Back during Bush's inaugurations, they were obsessed over the cost, and if it was the right thing to be doing during troubled economic times. But apparently that's all been forgotten. There's no mention of the Messiah's inauguration costs (largest ever) during a massive economic recession. It doesn't seem to be an issue anymore.

http://www.abc2news.com/news/local/story/M...2A.cspx?rss=702

http://www.democratandchronicle.com/articl...36/1041/OPINION

Hmmm, I wonder why?

Because you never looked, and checking would have not fit your bias.