Don't Take that Oath

Don't Take that Oath, Obama

by Mark Bazer

Barack Obama Inauguration 2009. Don't Take that Oath, Barack Illustrated by Dick Locher

Let's begin with some presidential trivia that my father, the most eminent presidential historian in Toledo, Ohio, and surrounding suburbs, recentlytold me:

On Jan. 20, Barack Obama will be sworn in as our nation's 44th president but he'll only be the 43rd person to occupy the office.

"Please tell me immediately why that is!" I hear you screaming.

OK, OK, here's the answer: Grover Cleveland served two non-consecutive terms, making him both our 22nd and our 24th presidents.

Interesting, but just barely, right? I know when my dad shared this tidbit with me, I had been hoping for a somehow juicier answer that one of our early presidents was part bald eagle or something.

Still, it's a useful fact to know, especially if you're one of those people who likes correcting others.

Personally, I'm hoping for a new piece of presidential trivia come Inauguration Day. I'm hoping Barack Obama becomes the first person elected president to refuse to take the Oath of Office.

In other words, I hope he turns down the job.

Don't get me wrong I like and admire Obama and even ventured out to Grant Park on Election Day, where, amid the countless Obama T-shirt vendors, I carved out a nice niche selling sweater vests with Joe Biden's face on them.

But that said, and for all Obama's clearly evident wisdom and sound judgment, I just don't know if president of the United States is the ideal job for him.

Rather, at his inaugural ceremony, I'd like to see Obama politely ask Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts to put away the swearing-in Bible . . . and then announce that instead of becoming president, he plans to devote the rest of his life to being a permanent presidential candidate.

I can see only an upside to this.

Barack Obama was, after all, a great, inspiring candidate a candidate who energized a whole new generation of voters. Just think of all the future generations he could energize as a permanent presidential candidate.

He also defeated the mighty Clinton machine and as a permanent presidential candidate would be the best chance years from now of knocking Chelsea out of the Democratic primaries.

And, above all, at least for me, he was a joy to watch as he calmly faced off against a he-could-spontaneously-combust-at-any-moment John McCain in the debates. I'm sure if we asked nicely, McCain would agree to an unending series of monthly debates against a permanent presidential candidate Obama, serving as the Washington Generals to Obama's Harlem Globetrotters.

Certainly, all of the above should sound better to Obama supporters than four years of having a President Obama make more decisions along the lines of having conservative pastor Rick Warren baby-sit his kids, or whatever it is he's asked him to do. (I haven't been following the news as closely since the election.)

Even if a President Obama makes mostly good decisions like keeping Guantanamo Bay open, but with Rod Blagojevich the only prisoner one has to worry how effective he can be given the mess he's inheriting.

Sure, some of his goals for the country are clearly doable. Many Americans, for example, will heed his call for national service, as they get laid off and have more time on their hands.

But at the end of his first term, will Obama be blamed if the Taliban aren't gone, if all our troops aren't out of Iraq, if the housing market isn't thriving, if failure to subscribe to your local daily newspaper isn't a jailable offense?

The bad news is that the chances are slim that Obama will take my advice to opt to keep running for the presidency rather than becoming the president.

But the good news is that, if history's any guide, Obama may avoid my pessimistic predictions and lead this country into a bright new age, or at least one in which the economy improves enough that I no longer find myself actually feeling bad for big-box retailers.

Checking in again with my father, the most eminent presidential historian in Toledo, Ohio, and surrounding suburbs, I learn that some of our greatest presidents have followed some of our worst, provided they belonged to different parties. Democrat Franklin Roosevelt followed Republican Herbert Hoover. Republican Abraham Lincoln followed Democrat James Buchanan. And FDR and Abe both seemed to do all right.

So, now it's Barack Obama's turn to put this formula to the test. In the meantime, I'll be eagerly awaiting his run in 2012.

Mark Bazer is a columnist and associate editor for international syndication for Tribune Media Services. He also hosts "The Interview Show," a live talk show at The Hideout in Chicago.

NEWS & CURRENT EVENTS ...