If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(The New York Times)   Despite the best efforts of the GOP to block him, Obama recess appoints the first ever head of the Consumer Financial Protection Agency   (thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com) divider line 516
    More: Hero, President Obama, GOP, protection agency, chiefs, Republican, Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act, Ohio Attorney General, Richard Cordray  
•       •       •

2746 clicks; posted to Politics » on 04 Jan 2012 at 1:45 PM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



516 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-01-04 02:38:15 PM
did he find his balls while on vacation in Hawaii.....good job Mr. President!!!!!
 
2012-01-04 02:38:15 PM
"This position had not been filled for one reason: the agency it heads is bad for jobs and bad for the economy." - Boehner (new window)

So the GOP filibuster had nothing to do with the nominee. According to Boehner, Republicans would've filibustered any nominee, because they don't like the agency itself - which was, remember, created by an act of Congress. That's pretty much the definition of an illegitimate filibuster. Link (new window)

But it's Obama overstepping here. Riiiiiiiiiiiiight.
 
2012-01-04 02:38:27 PM

Jurodan: I wasn't aware that congress went into recess. I had actually heard that they weren't going into recess because they wanted to block any and all appointments. How and when did they screw the pooch on their own plans? Someone else mentioned a momentary lapse of a few seconds between congresses. Did he sign orders during that point? The article doesn't give me the details, more the pity.


They didnt, Obama just decided he can do what he likes.
 
2012-01-04 02:38:28 PM
WHAT?!?! Obama doing something every other president has done!!!

Isn't it time for Republicans to start impeachment proceedings or something?
 
2012-01-04 02:40:01 PM

Jake Havechek: Funk Brothers: Jake Havechek: Funk Brothers: I don't think Obama would enjoy getting impeached in an election year.

This is ridiculous and in violation of the Constitution. He goes ahead appointing a person without approval from Congress.

On August 1, 2005, Bush officially made a recess appointment of [John] Bolton, installing him as Permanent US Representative to the UN. A recess appointment lasts until the next session of Congress ends or until the individual is renominated and confirmed by the Senate.

Well at least Bush didn't have a tend with a Democratic majority during that time. Still this does not matter. This is illegal.

Oh please. Save your righteous indignation for something that is actually a big deal.


THIS IS A BIG DEAL.


Especially when this is an election year. Congress ties Obama down with articles of impeachment and then the birthers win in court removing Barack 'Hussein' Obama from the election ballot from state to state because he can't prove he is a natural born citizen.
 
2012-01-04 02:40:32 PM

I alone am best: Jurodan: I wasn't aware that congress went into recess. I had actually heard that they weren't going into recess because they wanted to block any and all appointments. How and when did they screw the pooch on their own plans? Someone else mentioned a momentary lapse of a few seconds between congresses. Did he sign orders during that point? The article doesn't give me the details, more the pity.

They didnt, Obama just decided he can do what he likes.


Oh I'm sure the GOP will get their lawyers right on that.

Hahahahahaha
 
2012-01-04 02:40:50 PM

Corvus: WHAT?!?! Obama doing something every other president has done!!!

Isn't it time for Republicans to start impeachment proceedings or something?


Could you name a president that has done a recess appointment while congress was in session? Not that it really matters the powers vested to this agency have to be approved by congress anyway. Good luck buddy, at least you will get a nice little office to sit in an twiddle your thumbs.
 
2012-01-04 02:41:35 PM

Darth_Lukecash: The fact is Obama waited as long as he could on this-he's finally pushing the big guns out now.


One year until the election, and he finally decides to stop acting like an abused spouse?
 
2012-01-04 02:41:49 PM

Dusk-You-n-Me: "This position had not been filled for one reason: the agency it heads is bad for jobs and bad for the economy." - Boehner (new window)

So the GOP filibuster had nothing to do with the nominee. According to Boehner, Republicans would've filibustered any nominee, because they don't like the agency itself - which was, remember, created by an act of Congress. That's pretty much the definition of an illegitimate filibuster. Link (new window)

But it's Obama overstepping here. Riiiiiiiiiiiiight.


Boehner can't vote for a Presidential appointment, that's the Senate's job. All he can do is cry.
 
2012-01-04 02:42:22 PM

HotWingConspiracy: I alone am best: Jurodan: I wasn't aware that congress went into recess. I had actually heard that they weren't going into recess because they wanted to block any and all appointments. How and when did they screw the pooch on their own plans? Someone else mentioned a momentary lapse of a few seconds between congresses. Did he sign orders during that point? The article doesn't give me the details, more the pity.

They didnt, Obama just decided he can do what he likes.

Oh I'm sure the GOP will get their lawyers right on that.

Hahahahahaha


They might, and would be right to do so. Im not keeping my hopes up for it.
 
2012-01-04 02:42:30 PM

I alone am best: Corvus: WHAT?!?! Obama doing something every other president has done!!!

Isn't it time for Republicans to start impeachment proceedings or something?

Could you name a president that has done a recess appointment while congress was in session? Not that it really matters the powers vested to this agency have to be approved by congress anyway. Good luck buddy, at least you will get a nice little office to sit in an twiddle your thumbs.


WRONG. Congress is not in session. it is only going in session every three days.
 
2012-01-04 02:42:47 PM

Weaver95: keylock71: Maybe today's Outraged Poster Du Jour can explain why the GOP hasn't allowed a vote on the nomination for six months and how that's not "subverting democracy"?

Because SOALISMS that's why.


Goddamn Soalists with well-heeled shoes always trying to ruin the country... : )

---

So, none of the peanut gallery in here biatching and moaning about this wants to take a crack at the questions I asked?
 
2012-01-04 02:42:56 PM

Funk Brothers: Especially when this is an election year. Congress ties Obama down with articles of impeachment and then the birthers win in court removing Barack 'Hussein' Obama from the election ballot from state to state because he can't prove he is a natural born citizen.


...therefore Sarah Palin becomes President...
 
2012-01-04 02:44:12 PM

HotWingConspiracy: LOL

Preventing a democratic government from functioning properly is good for democracy, eh teabagger?

Republicans don't want to work, so Obama will. Americans like people that get the job done.


I love it that your idea of constitutional theory is reduced to "suck it, lol!" I hate to rain on your parade, but Obama is not "a democratic government." Conflating the two is dangerous.

And, by the way, wtf excuse does he have for not waiting for an actual recess? Just curious if you have an answer to that.
 
2012-01-04 02:44:14 PM
Obama just got another mark against the do nothing Republican Congress.

They refused to hold a vote on a nominee for 6 months, and then try and say they are in session when everyone is actually at home drinking scotch and opening presents.

Now, he gets to trot out that they are purposely obstructing and doing nothing but obstructing, AND the Republicans are forced to defend Wall Street yet again.

I wonder when they will mention just how many seats are being held up by Republicans?
 
2012-01-04 02:45:49 PM
He declined to speak about the legal and constitutional challenge which may be ahead, but said White House lawyers were confident. "When pro forma sessions are simply used as an attempt to stop the president from making an appointment," then Mr. Obama was within his rights to move ahead.

Wait, so the senate never went on recess, the prez just decided that the proforma congress is not really congress and actually a recess time? Sorry but this is a violation of the separation of branches and deserving of chimpeachemnt. I have no problems with recess appointments but this stinks to high hell.
 
2012-01-04 02:46:10 PM
FTA: Senator Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, the Republican leader, objected strenuously, saying Mr. Obama was overstepping the bounds of his executive power and leaving the agency open to legal challenges.
...
"We're going to begin working to expand our program to non-banks, which is an area we haven't been able to touch before now," he said.

So, they are going to start prosecuting the investment houses that caused our economic collapse. All the while the Mitch McConnell/etc will be attempting to stop him. Man you couldn't get much better campaign fodder. If the Ds are smart they will use any such attempts to destroy the Republicans in this years elections.
 
2012-01-04 02:46:27 PM

Jurodan: I wasn't aware that congress went into recess. I had actually heard that they weren't going into recess because they wanted to block any and all appointments. How and when did they screw the pooch on their own plans? Someone else mentioned a momentary lapse of a few seconds between congresses. Did he sign orders during that point? The article doesn't give me the details, more the pity.


Actually, what the Senate is currently doing is having pro-forma sessions every four days. The idea is that if the Senate is in pro-forma session every four days, then technically, it is not an intrasession recess. However, as I have noted in my previous post, the 11th Circuit has determined, in a previous case of Evans v. Stephens (see my link for pertinent excerpt), that the Constitution does not differentiate between an intrasession recess and intersession recess and that the Constitution does not set minimum time periods on intrasession recesses within which the President is blocked from exercising a recess appointment power. (In the case of Evans v. Stephens, President Bush (43) made an appointment on the 7th day of a 10 day intrasession recess. Here, it's a 4 day intrasession recess.
 
2012-01-04 02:46:31 PM

I alone am best: Corvus: WHAT?!?! Obama doing something every other president has done!!!

Isn't it time for Republicans to start impeachment proceedings or something?

Could you name a president that has done a recess appointment while congress was in session? Not that it really matters the powers vested to this agency have to be approved by congress anyway. Good luck buddy, at least you will get a nice little office to sit in an twiddle your thumbs.


Congress is not in session


"Here are the facts: The Constitution gives the President the authority to make temporary recess appointments to fill vacant positions when the Senate is in recess, a power all recent Presidents have exercised. The Senate has effectively been in recess for weeks, and is expected to remain in recess for weeks. In an overt attempt to prevent the President from exercising his authority during this period, Republican Senators insisted on using a gimmick called 'pro forma' sessions, which are sessions during which no Senate business is conducted and instead one or two Senators simply gavel in and out of session in a matter of seconds. But gimmicks do not override the President's constitutional authority to make appointments to keep the government running. Legal experts agree. In fact, the lawyers who advised President Bush on recess appointments wrote that the Senate cannot use sham 'pro forma' sessions to prevent the President from exercising a constitutional power," Pfeiffer wrote on the White House Blog.

There is no quorum there, they do no business how can you consider it "in session". Also they only do it every few days. So by even their definition they are on recess for a couple of days.
 
2012-01-04 02:46:32 PM

Corvus: I alone am best: Corvus: WHAT?!?! Obama doing something every other president has done!!!

Isn't it time for Republicans to start impeachment proceedings or something?

Could you name a president that has done a recess appointment while congress was in session? Not that it really matters the powers vested to this agency have to be approved by congress anyway. Good luck buddy, at least you will get a nice little office to sit in an twiddle your thumbs.

WRONG. Congress is not in session. it is only going in session every three days.


Thats called a pro forma session (new window) and officially keeps congress in session.

Generally, a recess is a break in House or Senate proceedings. Neither chamber may take a break
of more than three days without the consent of the other.6 Such consent is usually provided
through a concurrent resolution.7 A recess within a session is referred to as an intrasession recess.
In recent decades, Congress has typically had 5-11 intrasession recesses of more than three days,
usually in conjunction with national holidays. The break between the end of one session and the
beginning of the next is referred to as an intersession recess. In recent decades, each Congress has
consisted of two 9-12 month sessions separated by an intersession recess. The period between the
second session of one Congress and the first session of the following Congress is also an
intersession recess.
 
2012-01-04 02:47:48 PM

Garet Garrett: And, by the way, wtf excuse does he have for not waiting for an actual recess? Just curious if you have an answer to that.


Because they are doing Pro Forma sessions to specifically avoid a recess just for this reason. They are obstructing the process either by not holding a vote or by not going into recess. President Obama juked them and left them standing there at the 30 yard line looking stupid while he's in the end zone doing the Ickey Shuffle.
 
2012-01-04 02:47:57 PM

I alone am best: Corvus: WHAT?!?! Obama doing something every other president has done!!!

Isn't it time for Republicans to start impeachment proceedings or something?

Could you name a president that has done a recess appointment while congress was in session? Not that it really matters the powers vested to this agency have to be approved by congress anyway. Good luck buddy, at least you will get a nice little office to sit in an twiddle your thumbs.


I believe it was already addressed earlier in the thread that President George W. Bush did just that.
 
2012-01-04 02:48:07 PM

Ninepoundhammer: And your failure to address republican obstructionism and it's role in his decision to go this route makes it difficult to take you seriously.


So you'll take me seriously if I address the GOP's obstructionism? Ok, how's this: The GOP isn't the first party to engage in any sort of obstructionism. Yet Obama is the first to redefine "recess" to mean "not recess" in order to respond to it. So, two things come to mind: first, why is the GOP's particular flavor of obstructionism unique? I don't believe it is, and thus I see no reason why non-unique problems would force unique responses. Second, is there a "they weren't playing nice" exception to constitutional process? Is that what you favor? Is constitutionality a sliding scale, dependent upon the amount of cooperation you're getting from other (co-equal, remember) branches of government?

God help us if the Supreme Court finds the individual mandate unconstitutional. What will you believe Obama to be justified in doing, then?
 
2012-01-04 02:48:14 PM

Garet Garrett: HotWingConspiracy: LOL

Preventing a democratic government from functioning properly is good for democracy, eh teabagger?

Republicans don't want to work, so Obama will. Americans like people that get the job done.

I love it that your idea of constitutional theory is reduced to "suck it, lol!" I hate to rain on your parade, but Obama is not "a democratic government." Conflating the two is dangerous.

And, by the way, wtf excuse does he have for not waiting for an actual recess? Just curious if you have an answer to that.


Because Republicans are deliberately not going into recess SPECIFICALLY to prevent Obama from making a recess appointment. They, like they have been since at least January '09, are abusing loopholes purely to spite Obama. They're petulant, whiny children, and it's about goddamn time Obama realized this.
 
2012-01-04 02:49:03 PM

RexTalionis: Jurodan: I wasn't aware that congress went into recess. I had actually heard that they weren't going into recess because they wanted to block any and all appointments. How and when did they screw the pooch on their own plans? Someone else mentioned a momentary lapse of a few seconds between congresses. Did he sign orders during that point? The article doesn't give me the details, more the pity.

Actually, what the Senate is currently doing is having pro-forma sessions every four days. The idea is that if the Senate is in pro-forma session every four days, then technically, it is not an intrasession recess. However, as I have noted in my previous post, the 11th Circuit has determined, in a previous case of Evans v. Stephens (see my link for pertinent excerpt), that the Constitution does not differentiate between an intrasession recess and intersession recess and that the Constitution does not set minimum time periods on intrasession recesses within which the President is blocked from exercising a recess appointment power. (In the case of Evans v. Stephens, President Bush (43) made an appointment on the 7th day of a 10 day intrasession recess. Here, it's a 4 day intrasession recess.


Thank you for clarifying that to everyone. Now, we get to see who is just being a whiny little biatch about it, and who will acknowledge that Obama has the right to do it.
 
2012-01-04 02:50:03 PM
This is why Obama chose to do this today, as opposed to yesterday. Gets Cordray a full year.

--

By definition, a recess appointment expires at the end of the next full session of the Senate. If a nominee is recess appointed in the middle of a Senate session, he or she serves through the rest of that year, and through the next session.

Yesterday, it turns out, the Senate made the switch from the first to the second session of the 112th Congress. Some advocates hoped Obama would use the brief seconds between those two sessions to make the appointment. Because previous Presidents had seized that opening to make numerous recess appointments, Obama could have avoided a procedural or legal fight with the GOP. The rub, though, is that Cordray's appointment would have expired at the end of the year. The "next full session," after all, would have began mere seconds after his appointment was official.

By acting today, with session two of this Congress technically under way, Obama has given Cordray the rest of this session and the full next session of the Senate to run the bureau. Cordray could potentially serve through the end of 2013.

Link (new window)
 
2012-01-04 02:50:03 PM

Jackson Herring: what_now: Scotty2Hotty

Let's not lose sight of the things that really matter in life. No matter what happens in 2012, he still has a sweet pickup truck pair of daughters whom he's probably trying to coax into getting breast augmentation surgery and then go out on the campaign trail with him.


FTFM.
 
2012-01-04 02:50:28 PM

I alone am best: Corvus: I alone am best: Corvus: WHAT?!?! Obama doing something every other president has done!!!

Isn't it time for Republicans to start impeachment proceedings or something?

Could you name a president that has done a recess appointment while congress was in session? Not that it really matters the powers vested to this agency have to be approved by congress anyway. Good luck buddy, at least you will get a nice little office to sit in an twiddle your thumbs.

WRONG. Congress is not in session. it is only going in session every three days.

Thats called a pro forma session (new window) and officially keeps congress in session.

Generally, a recess is a break in House or Senate proceedings. Neither chamber may take a break
of more than three days without the consent of the other.6 Such consent is usually provided
through a concurrent resolution.7 A recess within a session is referred to as an intrasession recess.
In recent decades, Congress has typically had 5-11 intrasession recesses of more than three days,
usually in conjunction with national holidays. The break between the end of one session and the
beginning of the next is referred to as an intersession recess. In recent decades, each Congress has
consisted of two 9-12 month sessions separated by an intersession recess. The period between the
second session of one Congress and the first session of the following Congress is also an
intersession recess.


So you are saying the 2 days they are not there doing nothing is "in session"? They even said congress when closed when someone tried to speak. It's a joke.
 
2012-01-04 02:51:06 PM

Garet Garrett: And, by the way, wtf excuse does he have for not waiting for an actual recess? Just curious if you have an answer to that.


because they republicans are holding sham sessions to pretend that congress is still in session, even though they aren't, specifically to keep him from ever making any appointments.

of course, this isn't illegal because the republicans screwed up the sham sessions and therefore went into defacto vacation, allowing the white house to sneak one in.

this is just republicans playing political semantic games and screwing it up, then crying that they can't count right
 
2012-01-04 02:51:40 PM

I alone am best: Thats called a pro forma session (new window) and officially keeps congress in session.


There's no business being conducted. It's a shameless display of partisan obstructionism by the Republican party. They're being incredibly lazy about it, too... they could have stayed in Washington to do some BS business of some kind, but they wanted to go on vacation and use the "pro forma" gimmick.
 
2012-01-04 02:51:48 PM
Ok, so we're arguing about the technicality of senate recesses and all, and we agree that this PARTICULAR man isn't the problem, and we're ignoring the fact that the GOP wants to kill an agency designed to help consumers.

Someone explain to me why the GOP hates consumers?
Someone explain to me why the GOP doesn't thinks banks should be regulated?
 
2012-01-04 02:52:08 PM
Why does this have a hero tag? And why are people joyous about this. Government regulations on how you shop. YEAY. I LIKE GOVERNMENT IN EVERYTHING. WTF? Looks around--I am in America right?
 
2012-01-04 02:52:13 PM

Soup4Bonnie: Garet Garrett: And, by the way, wtf excuse does he have for not waiting for an actual recess? Just curious if you have an answer to that.

Because they are doing Pro Forma sessions to specifically avoid a recess just for this reason. They are obstructing the process either by not holding a vote or by not going into recess. President Obama juked them and left them standing there at the 30 yard line looking stupid while he's in the end zone doing the Ickey Shuffle.


You know that pro forma sessions have been held in the past, right? Such as, in 2007? So Bush would've been justified in saying to Congress "well hold on there, that's not a REAL session you're having there. I think you're REALLY in recess."

Of course, that's a hypothetical, because the President whom Fark taught us to believe had absolutely zero respect for the Constitution actually abided by the Constitution. It took the election of a would-be Constitutional Law professor for us to witness a President who was willing to deem the Executive Branch the judge of the Legislative Branch's procedures.

I can't believe I have to write this shiat. This is elementary stuff. But The One did it, leaving you all credulous lemmings.
 
2012-01-04 02:52:17 PM

tlchwi02: this is just republicans playing political semantic games and screwing it up, then crying that they can't count right


...yet they want the keys to the economy.
 
2012-01-04 02:53:04 PM

I alone am best: HotWingConspiracy: I alone am best: Jurodan: I wasn't aware that congress went into recess. I had actually heard that they weren't going into recess because they wanted to block any and all appointments. How and when did they screw the pooch on their own plans? Someone else mentioned a momentary lapse of a few seconds between congresses. Did he sign orders during that point? The article doesn't give me the details, more the pity.

They didnt, Obama just decided he can do what he likes.

Oh I'm sure the GOP will get their lawyers right on that.

Hahahahahaha

They might, and would be right to do so. Im not keeping my hopes up for it.


Well hopefully it won't be the Bush lawyers that wrote that "the Senate cannot use sham "pro forma" sessions to prevent the president from exercising a constitutional power".

HAHAHAHAHA
 
2012-01-04 02:53:50 PM

Cup_O_Jo: Government regulations on how you shop


Like my bank no longer being allowed to send me my credit card bill the day before its due and then slapping a hefty fine when I don't pay it on time?

DAMN YOU FARTBAMA!!!
 
2012-01-04 02:53:51 PM

Cup_O_Jo: Looks around--I am in America right?


Yes, but Venezuela is, too. Perhaps not coincidental, in this case?
 
2012-01-04 02:53:57 PM

Funk Brothers: Jake Havechek: Funk Brothers: Jake Havechek: Funk Brothers: I don't think Obama would enjoy getting impeached in an election year.

This is ridiculous and in violation of the Constitution. He goes ahead appointing a person without approval from Congress.

On August 1, 2005, Bush officially made a recess appointment of [John] Bolton, installing him as Permanent US Representative to the UN. A recess appointment lasts until the next session of Congress ends or until the individual is renominated and confirmed by the Senate.

Well at least Bush didn't have a tend with a Democratic majority during that time. Still this does not matter. This is illegal.

Oh please. Save your righteous indignation for something that is actually a big deal.

THIS IS A BIG DEAL.

Especially when this is an election year. Congress ties Obama down with articles of impeachment and then the birthers win in court removing Barack 'Hussein' Obama from the election ballot from state to state because he can't prove he is a natural born citizen.


Oh, you're one of them.


3/10
 
2012-01-04 02:53:59 PM

Cup_O_Jo: Why does this have a hero tag? And why are people joyous about this. Government regulations on how you shop. YEAY. I LIKE GOVERNMENT IN EVERYTHING. WTF? Looks around--I am in America right?


Run along and get your free government provided health care and medicine now.
 
2012-01-04 02:54:20 PM
Please Republicans biatch about this!! Please argue that it's your right to do nothing and block everything as a congress!! Oh please please please!
 
2012-01-04 02:54:26 PM

Saiga410: He declined to speak about the legal and constitutional challenge which may be ahead, but said White House lawyers were confident. "When pro forma sessions are simply used as an attempt to stop the president from making an appointment," then Mr. Obama was within his rights to move ahead.

Wait, so the senate never went on recess, the prez just decided that the proforma congress is not really congress and actually a recess time? Sorry but this is a violation of the separation of branches and deserving of chimpeachemnt. I have no problems with recess appointments but this stinks to high hell.


?????????
 
2012-01-04 02:54:34 PM

what_now: Ok, so we're arguing about the technicality of senate recesses and all, and we agree that this PARTICULAR man isn't the problem, and we're ignoring the fact that the GOP wants to kill an agency designed to help consumers.

Someone explain to me why the GOP hates consumers?
Someone explain to me why the GOP doesn't thinks banks should be regulated?


REGULATION BAD!
 
2012-01-04 02:54:50 PM

Garet Garrett: HotWingConspiracy: LOL

Preventing a democratic government from functioning properly is good for democracy, eh teabagger?

Republicans don't want to work, so Obama will. Americans like people that get the job done.

I love it that your idea of constitutional theory is reduced to "suck it, lol!" I hate to rain on your parade, but Obama is not "a democratic government." Conflating the two is dangerous.

And, by the way, wtf excuse does he have for not waiting for an actual recess? Just curious if you have an answer to that.


If you actually knew what was happening, you wouldn't ask such a dumb question.
 
2012-01-04 02:54:59 PM

Garet Garrett: You know that pro forma sessions have been held in the past, right? Such as, in 2007? So Bush would've been justified in saying to Congress "well hold on there, that's not a REAL session you're having there. I think you're REALLY in recess."


thinkprogress.org
 
2012-01-04 02:55:28 PM

Garet Garrett: Ninepoundhammer: And your failure to address republican obstructionism and it's role in his decision to go this route makes it difficult to take you seriously.

So you'll take me seriously if I address the GOP's obstructionism? Ok, how's this: The GOP isn't the first party to engage in any sort of obstructionism. Yet Obama is the first to redefine "recess" to mean "not recess" in order to respond to it. So, two things come to mind: first, why is the GOP's particular flavor of obstructionism unique? I don't believe it is, and thus I see no reason why non-unique problems would force unique responses. Second, is there a "they weren't playing nice" exception to constitutional process? Is that what you favor? Is constitutionality a sliding scale, dependent upon the amount of cooperation you're getting from other (co-equal, remember) branches of government?

God help us if the Supreme Court finds the individual mandate unconstitutional. What will you believe Obama to be justified in doing, then?


Please cite one instance of Democratic obstructionism in the last 10 years.
 
2012-01-04 02:55:32 PM

Garet Garrett: Soup4Bonnie: Garet Garrett: And, by the way, wtf excuse does he have for not waiting for an actual recess? Just curious if you have an answer to that.

Because they are doing Pro Forma sessions to specifically avoid a recess just for this reason. They are obstructing the process either by not holding a vote or by not going into recess. President Obama juked them and left them standing there at the 30 yard line looking stupid while he's in the end zone doing the Ickey Shuffle.

You know that pro forma sessions have been held in the past, right? Such as, in 2007? So Bush would've been justified in saying to Congress "well hold on there, that's not a REAL session you're having there. I think you're REALLY in recess."


Um, yeah, actually, Bush did say just that, you farking dumbass. It's already been covered several previous times in the thread that a court has found this method constitutional.
 
2012-01-04 02:55:45 PM

what_now: Cup_O_Jo: Government regulations on how you shop

Like my bank no longer being allowed to send me my credit card bill the day before its due and then slapping a hefty fine when I don't pay it on time?

DAMN YOU FARTBAMA!!!


Like you qualify for a credit card.
 
2012-01-04 02:56:13 PM
Ronald Reagan's Use of the Recess Power

According to G. Calvin Mackenzie, a professor at Colby College, "The principal current use of recess appointments is for the strategic purpose of circumventing the confirmation process. President Ronald Reagan used recess appointment powers as part of his effort to undermine the Legal Services Corporation (LSCV), a government agency that provides legal assistance in civil cases for the poor. Reagan made no appointments to the board of directors of the LSC for most of his first year in office. Then, to prevent holdovers who were Jimmy Carter's appointees from determining the 1982 grants of the LSC, Reagan made seven recess appointments on the last day of 1981. Over the next few years, Reagan made several regular nominations to the LSC board, then withdrew them before a Senate confirmation decision. At the same time, he continued to fill vacancies with recess appointments. Reagan appointees were thus able to control the LSC between 1981 and 1984, even though not a single one was confirmed by the Senate."

Link (new window)

And yet Reagan is still a god among the GOP. WEIRD
 
2012-01-04 02:56:22 PM

Eshman: Please cite one instance of Democratic obstructionism in the last 10 years.


The keep running for office and WINNING, and sometimes they're even BLACK!

This is clearly an obstruction of the rule of Republican Jesus.
 
2012-01-04 02:56:28 PM

Garet Garrett: You know that pro forma sessions have been held in the past, right? Such as, in 2007? So Bush would've been justified in saying to Congress "well hold on there, that's not a REAL session you're having there. I think you're REALLY in recess."


His lawyers advised him the Senate can't carry on these sham sessions and he was free to by pass them if they did. Yes, GOP lawyers advising the GOP president.
 
Displayed 50 of 516 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report