Do you believe Justice Roberts bobbled the oath accidentally or was it intentional?

A BUZZFLASH NEWS ALERT
by Chad Rubel

We are all human beings, all capable of making mistakes. And this is especially true in a pressure situation.

But sometimes you have to look at circumstances and wonder, "Was that really a mistake?" Perhaps, as fancy psychological experts will tell us, the subconscious may have more of an impact than we really give credit for, so we end up making mistakes in certain situations without consciously thinking about it.

Such was the scenario on Tuesday, say just after noon on Tuesday in Washington, DC. Two people, with the attention of the world, but only one of them leading the presentation. And that person chose consciously or subsconsciously to work without notes.

Of course, we are speaking of Chief Justice John Roberts, whose role is to administer the oath to the incoming president of the United States.

The other major oath of the day went very smoothly. The senior Associate Justice, John Paul Stevens, at 88, gave a pleasant oath that required way more words than Roberts had to struggle with.

But did Roberts bungle the oath on purpose? Or did he mess up subconsciously filled with emotion over having to administer the oath to Barack Obama? After all, Obama was one of 22 senators not to vote to confirm Roberts to the Court.

Regardless of political viewpoints, the pattern has been clear where extreme right-wing justices don't put aside politics when ruling from the bench or conducting themselves in public. After all, then Chief Justice William Rehnquist said to President Clinton in 1993 after swearing him in, "Good luck, you'll need it."

The Supreme Court later ruled that the Paula Jones case would not "distract" from the presidency, thus giving Ken Starr the opening he needed to set impeachment in motion.

And of course, Rehnquist, Scalia, et al. went against every judicial precedent in their most political decision to grant George W. Bush the presidency, despite the likelihood that if all the votes were counted, Clinton's vice president, Al Gore, would be the winner.

The right-wing went nuts (even though Roberts was clearly at fault and actually messed up the words a second time), portraying Barack Obama as illegitimate since the oath wasn't read properly. And it's not as if Roberts has to worry about job security. Roberts turns 54 on Tuesday in a lifetime job.

(The oath was retaken flawlessly but that won't be the lasting impact, especially among the right wing.)

If you are willing to assume the possibility that perhaps it was an innocent mistake, consider that Stevens, a Republican selected by Gerald Ford, and 34 years older than Roberts, was flawless. Subconsciously or not, there is that possibility that there was some malice involved.

But let us know what you think. Was it an innocent mistake or was there more to it?

A BUZZFLASH NEWS ALERT

Technorati Tags: Alerts