See FoxInSocks' reply on that thread:
Jeez, I detest Obama’s ideas as much as the next guy, but this is silly. What’s sillier is a bunch of “scholars” actually sat around and debated the topic. Do it again in private, just to be safe? C’mon, gimme a break. ...... 3 posted on Tuesday, January 20, 2009 10:51:07 PM by FoxInSocks
Since both you and these scholars with nothing better to do tonight are so obssesed with the EXACT ORDER of the words in the Constitution, why are you, after I have asked on two separate posts, still avoiding answering the question I posed:
"If switching the position of an adverb from the exact text of the Constitution classifies as a "violation of the oath" then what does inserting the entire phrase "so help me God" that is not even in the Constitution classify as?"
First of all my main point is and always has been that Obama folded on doing the right thing under pressure.
"If switching the position of an adverb from the exact text of the Constitution classifies as a "violation of the oath" then what does inserting the entire phrase "so help me God" that is not even in the Constitution classify as?"
Most would say that it's added at the end so as not to make a difference.
And are you really making the case that the exact wording of the Constitution means nothing?