SIDERUM wrote:the whole world watching CNN!!!

The announcement was made simultaneously by several networks, so I wouldn't take CNN's Atlanta location as particularly significant. Plus, I agree with Deb that Obama is the centerpiece of the chart, not the location of the news announcers (the messengers).

I'm grateful for the discussion actually, because I did wonder where best to set that chart.

Hi, Deb

At least to me, you yourself have answered this in the sports forum:

Well, just what you said really. It's a fumbling approach based on my view that the chart is for an event at that time, at that place, and that the 'spirit' of the place is characterised by the home team. I can understand the argument about giving the asc to the favourites, and I do have respect for that, but at the moment this is the perspective that resonates the strongest.

So I would stick to Chicago for what is worth. If the chart should be set in Washington it would have been placed in washington.

Of course I am not really sure if this kind of charts are really important in astrological prediction, but this is my take on this.

The inaugeration will take place in Washington DC,so for that chart one would look at DC. But Obama ran his entire campain out of chicago and that is significant because people generally move presidential campains to Washington or to New York (which was where George Washington held office, the white house wasn't built yet) for the winning of the election I would think that 'Where' the canididate was and where he gave his speech (in this case chicago, for McCain Phoenix) Would be where the Action was centered? on the person?

JFK was assasinated in Texas, an INTERNATIONAL incident! I dont think you would look at that chart for DC or for the BBC or CBS(California) would you? the action happened for/with/too that person ergo you look at that location.

I would think? yes?

In case it has skipped notice, I'd like to suggest everyone look at the 00 Aquarius on each of the charts.... I dont know why but I just realized myself ... Not certain what I"d open a topic on for that, but willing to make it another topic...

Granny

Posting to this thread for future reference.

Barrack Obama oath of office administered at 12:05 pm EST 20 January 2009

They mentioned on CNN that Barack became president as of noon even though the oath hadn't been administered. Apparently it's in the Constitution that the president elect officially becomes president at that moment.

Granny_Skot is right on timing.

I watched the inauguration live on BBC News online like many others. Obama's taking of the oath was slightly delayed and I noted this was completed at 12.05 local time.

I think the oath is a formal requirement before a person becomes
President. The technical process seems to be around noon, the president-elect is sworn in by the Chief Justice, using the form mandated in the Constitution that goes like "I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States."

The constitiution makes no reference to God in the oath of office.

If the oath of office is a mere technicality why has every President since George Washington done it? One might argue its the oath thats more crucial than the timing. When John F Kennedy was assasinated Lyndon Johnson was not declared the new President until he was sworn in by the Chief Justice in a plane!

And no the whole world wasn't watching CNN! The BBC is tops!

Mark

Because they "flubbed" it, they decided to do it over again. Does anyone have the data on Obama Oath, take 2?

Curtis

7:35 PM, 21 January 2009.

its on the other thread. Granny