So, what actually happened? First, did Obama flub the oath, if so, did Roberts flub it as well? Lets have a look at the transcript:

ROBERTS: I, Barack Hussein Obama…
OBAMA: I, Barack…
ROBERTS: … do solemnly swear…
OBAMA: I, Barack Hussein Obama, do solemnly swear…
ROBERTS: … that I will execute the office of president to the United States faithfully…
OBAMA: … that I will execute…
ROBERTS: … faithfully the office of president of the United States…
OBAMA: … the office of president of the United States faithfully…
ROBERTS: … and will to the best of my ability…
OBAMA: … and will to the best of my ability…
ROBERTS: … preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.
OBAMA: … preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.
ROBERTS: So help you God?
OBAMA: So help me God.
ROBERTS: Congratulations, Mr. President.

The transcript makes clear that Justice Roberts made a mistake first, then corrected it, after which President Obama repeated the mistake not the correct version. In other words, both flubbed the oath, Roberts corrected himself, Obama did not.

More important than the flub, though, is that the message stays the same; the meaning of the sentence does not change. Shorter; there’s no use in debating the issue since it doesn’t matter whether Obama flubbed it and if so why.

©2009 PoliGazette. All Rights Reserved.

Did you see how red Joe Biden got? Talk about loose lips sink ships.

Jill Biden said on the Oprah show that she wanted her husband to be vice president instead of secretary of state, chiefly because it would involve less travel.

"If you're secretary of state, you'll be away, we'll never see you, you know," she said, describing how she and her husband had talked about it.

"I'll see you at a state dinner once and awhile. But I said, if you are vice president, the entire family, because they worked so hard for the election, they can be involved. They can come to our home. They can go to events, they can be with us all the time. And that's what's important to us," she said.

Biden, seated at his wife's side, looked sheepish and tried to shush his wife after she made the remark.

Via / ABC News and Reuters

Un zapatazo en contra de todas la guerras, not just the ones overseas, pero also the ones within and against communities here in the U.S. For New Orleans, the fronteras, the barrios, Iraq and Afghanistan.

Un zapatazo con tacon for Oscar Grant, Marcelo Lucero, all of those raided by ICE, all the children separated from their parents, for those young men of color sent to the front lines, for all those without health insurance and papers. For all those behind walls: prison walls, border walls, walls of poverty.

Time to feel my feet on the ground and dig into the earth with my toes and walk and work.

Throw your shoe up on your site and link to the shoe throwing throwdown at My Ecdysis.

February 24: VwV was launched in February of 2008 and one of our first posts was titled, “After Fidel, Cuban bloggers discuss US candidates.” The post compiled Cuban bloggers thoughts on what the new U.S. president would do with the new leader of Cuba and so Obama’s infamous “without pre-conditions” line began, which haunted him throughout the campaign.

March 21: After videos of Obama’s reverend were brought to the public, the now President-elect delivered, arguably, one of the most memorable speeches in history on racism. VwV’s post, “World moved by Obama’s speech on race,” highlights what bloggers throughout the world had to say after hearing Obama’s thoughts on race.

April 17: As the first African-American president of the U.S., it was crucial for VwV to get the thoughts of African bloggers on Obama. In the post titled, “A letter from Africa,” bloggers throughout the large continent shared their opinions on the then, Democratic contender for nomination.

June 9: As America’s summer heated up, so did the presidential campaign but throughout the world. In the post, “Global: The world has a say!” VwV’s editor compiled a list of Web sites that allowed non-Americans to vote who they think is best for the states.

June 19: The rapid growth of technology played a major role in the 21st century presidential campaign. In the post, “Global: I’m voting Republican” covers what world bloggers thought about a controversial film by Charlie Steak.

August 29: This was the day the world was introduced to Sarah Palin – the governor of the U.S. state closest to Russia and John McCain’s Republican running mate. Without much information about the Republican VP pick, bloggers simply commented about McCain’s pick being a woman as compiled in the post, “The world reacts to Sarah Palin’s VP nomination.”

October 10: Race was not only prevalent on the Democratic campaign trail but also on the Republican, as rallies became heated. The post, “Racism on the Republican Trail?” includes just a few of the comments that were fluttering through the blogosphere about remarks made during Republican rallies.

October 24: The rise of technology returns with the post, “Dear American Voter: an international persepective.” The post covers Link TV’s project that allowed non-Americans to send letters to American voters via videos. The post includes just some of the prevalent thoughts of the voices without votes.

November 4: Mainstream media outlets weren't the only ones covering “breaking news.” As soon as word got out that Dixville, New Hampshire, was the first county to close their polls and count their votes, the blogosphere was on it. This post, “Dixville notch makes global blogosphere history” quotes the excitement of some bloggers and skepticism of others.

November 9: And, after it was all said and done…bloggers began to look back and analyze how Obama ran a successful campaign. In the post, “Social media and the making of the president,” analyses were offered by bloggers in three different countries of how social media played such a major factor in the campaign.

On the lighter side of the campaign, our silliest moments include: Tina Fey as Sarah Palin; Sarah Palin’s conversation with “Sarkozy;” And, Joe the unlicensed plumber.

A friend had emailed me overnight to ask “So, what’s the atmosphere like over there?”

My immediate reaction was: “Erm, well, I don’t really know. Because I haven’t been out in the thick of things yet”.

I arrived at K’s house yesterday and we spent the afternoon/evening chatting, sleeping, eating and watching live footage of Obama and Biden’s journey from Philadelphia to DC. See, sometimes it’s just enough to be in the right country because you actually get to see things like that as they happen .

But actually, I realise that it’s not just that my yesterday was low-key. Based on my journey through the city at lunchtime (from Dulles Airport to the NE area, zip code 20002 if you want to look it up) and also on the news reports I’m seeing - where poor freezing newsreaders are standing on the Mall, with the Capitol building behind them - I can say that the atmosphere in DC yesterday was, surprisingly, also very muted.

Said newsreaders are standing on a fairly empty Mall; and as our airport shuttle bus made its way through the city yesterday, the streets were really very quiet. Mind you, that always freaks me out about American cities (bar New York): where are all the pedestrians? (In this case: inside, probably, as it’s sub-zero temperatures.)

All this will undoubtedly change today, however - as a) I will be entering the thick of it, to b) go to the massive concert being held on the steps of the Lincoln Memorial. It kicks off at 1.30pm our time (for the duration of my stay over here, “our time” will be Washington time ) and they’re expecting a crowd of 500,000.

You can watch the concert live on www.hbo.com. I’m presuming that means you can watch it live on the site internationally, also. If so, it kicks off at 6.30pm UK time.

Watch out for me. I’ll be the one in a coat, hat and scarf.

And here was Barack’s full speech in Baltimore:

As the reporter and my friend K both noted, it’s almost as if Obama is still campaigning. And as I replied, it strikes me that this because he truly wants a sea-change in the country. He genuinely wants Americans to reach out and help each other more, to look after each other and work together; to change the mood of a nation beyond doing so with intangible feelings like hope and optimism. As Obama said on the night of November 4th, his election is just the beginning. And as a result he will, perhaps, have to keep drilling his vision - or rather: the practical application of his vision - into the American people. I doubt he will ever let up. And I don’t think that’s a bad thing.

*Update* Just found footage from Delaware, including Joe’s full introductory speech. Gotta love around 5 minutes, where all the white secret service agents appear, followed by their black President. Magical :

Although the goal of campaign financing laws can count on general support, the laws themselves cannot. Especially conservatives complain that these laws are in breach with the first amendment guaranteeing the freedom of speech.

Ironically, liberals supported the campaign finance reforms Obama and his top donors circumvented successfully last year. Liberals argued for years that Big Money had too much influence. They favored laws that would limit the amount an individual could give to one candidate.

Not only did these donors circumvent campaign finance laws, the WaPo adds that Team Obama new about it and actively used these donors to receive more. He turned to these top-donors ‘repeatedly [...] in financing his campaign, transition and inauguration,’ the article says.

Approximately 100 families and individuals are involved. They donated at least $100,000 each to Obama’s campaign and separate committees ‘independently’ working for an Obama victory. ‘The families gave to as many as five committees, records show, and 27 of the 94 families also bundled money from others, collecting millions of dollars on top of their personal donations.’

‘Among the supporters were well-known families such as the Rockefellers, as well as lesser-known backers such as New Yorker Frank Brosens, a leader in the hedge fund industry, who raised $500,000 for Obama’s campaign and inauguration in addition to the $182,000 he gave with his wife, parents and three sons.’

Although there is certainly nothing wrong with donating to a cause one believes in, the records show that campaign financing laws are ineffective. Clever and savvy rich individuals are able to circumvent the law and can give hundreds of thousands of dollars nonetheless; directly and indirectly.

Campaign finance laws have been disastrous. They add little to nothing; yet, they infringe on individuals’ right to the freedom of speech. The article shows that abolishing these laws is the best way forward; that way, the playing field will be leveled once again and it will simplify oversight of campaigns.

©2009 PoliGazette. All Rights Reserved.

2 days left…

…and the excitement and anticipation in this town is palpable. I have my warm clothes, the wool socks, the hat and gloves all ready for Tuesday. I’ve got my walking route planned for the 3 mile hike over the Potomac and onto the Mall. Let’s hope the weather has mercy on us and warms up a bit.

So here, instead, was Keith Olbermann’s coverage of it (ie the conference in nice, palatable chunks broken up by comment/sarcarsm/fact-correction):

Followed by Richard Wolffe’s input:

This man really hates being president. He really fucking hates it. All those people who said that Bush was a front for Cheney? Never believed it until this conference.

I tried to find a transcript of the conference online--but so far, this video clip of "Bushisms" is the only thing I can find.

It's sort startling to me--the reporter seems think these -isms are so cute and funny--I find them more than a bit horrifying.

Maybe someday, the press will catch up with the rest of humanity and realize it's not funny when a president talks about great job done as people drown.

As the Huffington Post piece notes, however:

“As pointed out by Think Progress, Dawn Johnsen, Obama’s choice to lead the Office of Legal Counsel, has said that the next president should avoid “any temptation to simply move on.” Here is the relevant quote:

‘We must avoid any temptation simply to move on. We must instead be honest with ourselves and the world as we condemn our nation’s past transgressions and reject Bush’s corruption of our American ideals. Our constitutional democracy cannot survive with a government shrouded in secrecy, nor can our nation’s honor be restored without full disclosure.’”

Obama’s response to this issue strikes me as his usual pitch-perfect politics. The man is naturally forward-thinking, that rare breed: an optimistic and (yes) hopeful politician. But he also seems to hold certain strong beliefs and values (such as ‘torture is wrong’). So how do you balance those things? How do you look forward - get the country to be excited and optimistic and hopeful with you - while also look backward, at the horrific, dark realities of what has been performed in your name?

And while I understand this pitch-perfect playing - and realise that what Obama is mooting now won’t necessarily reflect his actions in the upcoming weeks and months - I think there’s a lot to be said for being unable to truly move forward without addressing the issues of the past. And I think there’s even more to be said for not letting Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld et al get away with the crimes they committed. We’ll see.