[JNL]

You can’t have it both ways.

The argument is that Obama did not say the oath exactly as written in the Constitution. The oath as written does not contain “so help me God”.

If the requirement is that the oath was be taken EXACTLY as written, adding “so help me God” is an issue as well.

It’s a really dumb argument.

[mnehring]

It’s a really dumb argument.

When you hope for change, you grasp on dumb things.

[The Sons of Liberty]

You can’t have it both ways.
The argument is that Obama did not say the oath exactly as written in the Constitution. The oath as written does not contain “so help me God”.

No. Anything said after the prescribed oath is something else. If he omitted the "So Help Me GOD" and started into his specch by saying "Ladies and Gentlemen ..." that would not be part of the oath.

[DouglasKC]

You can’t have it both ways. The argument is that Obama did not say the oath exactly as written in the Constitution. The oath as written does not contain “so help me God”. If the requirement is that the oath was be taken EXACTLY as written, adding “so help me God” is an issue as well. It’s a really dumb argument.

That's silly. It's like saying you can speak before or after the oath or the oath isn't valid. The point is that anything said before or after isn't part of the oath. But changing the words in the oath changes the oath.