Does this clown ever follow the Constitution?

Obama must love Ohio, he goes there enough.

This from the former Senator Obama, who of course roundly denounced the previous administration for doing the same thing. But at least then the nominee hadn’t been rejected by the senate already. Another power-grab and increase in government against the will of the people by the communist organizer.

This is a great move, POLITICALLY: it forces the Congressional GOP Caucusoids to either impeach or take out a legal challenge. Impeachment is doable at the House level, but there won’t be any conviction in the Senate, due to the Dems having control of the agenda there & having more votes, plus they’ll get a free couple of weeks to hammer away at the GOP for obstructing with votes to deny any up-or-down votes to Obama’s nominees or putting on serial holds – and that way, the Senate proceeding becomes a lengthy no-cost pro-Obama & Democratic party advertisement.

If the House GOP start a legal challenge, they have to start at the District Court level, followed by the Circuit Court of Appeals, maybe twice (if they don’t sit en banc the first time), then the SCOTUS. It’s difficult to see that getting even TO let along THRU the CCA before the electio, and after the year is out the question becomes “moot” (is academic) & can easily be abandoned by the next Congress – which, if Pelosi comes in again as Speaker, is exactly what would happen. 

Moreover, this has knock-on effects: the message is, If Obama gets away with this one, he’ll do it again, and that SHOULD force the Senate minority caucus to grant some chambers votes on the merits of some nominees.

On the other hand, this is a scary move CONSTITUTIONALLY, because if Obama gets away with it – which he will – then inevitably future presidents, including Obama himself, will have the precedent they need to do it as well.

He probably wants to have it secede from the Union so he can annex it.

republicans doing what dems did to W but then the liberal media were all fot it  O violates rules, preecedence and TC applauds him. 
imigine if W had done this TC would be calling for impeachment.

obamna is above the law — he is god to folks like TC

Actually, the previous administration did NOT do this; what they did, what BUSH did, was issue lots and lots of signing statements, which gave Obama the precedent to do the same now. You seem to be confusing the two procedures.

You also seem to be confused about “communism”. Maybe we here can help? Just give us your definition and we’ll take a stab at it.  

As to it being a “power grab”, yes, of course it is – but it’s a power grab in RESPONSE, since the Senate GOP caucus made & broke a commitment not to deny the administration’s nominees up-or-down votes. Remember that one? THAT was power grab.

And I’m sure that the 243 times Regan and >170 times George W did it you were outraged.  You guys are so predictable.  I know you guys are only interested in the constitution when it fits your mind set, but he is following the constitution with regards to a recess appointment.  Please try not to such a hack and realize that not everyone on this blog is in the teaparty and every lie spouted by a republican is not automatically taken as the gospel truth.

Funny how the Dems now back these when they were outraged when Bush did it…..I support Obama  but If I were in congress I would defund this Dept today.

I said recess appot were wrong when Bush did it….in fact I was very upset when he did Bolton at the UN so how could I support this action?

I voted for Obama in 2008…….and worked to help him win his Senate seat here in IL…..but hes doing everything he can to lose my vote in 2012.

I guess non of them other presidents have done this before?
LOL

Bush didn’t issue recess appointments?  Do you just make this stuff up as you go along?  Again, this is not a teaparty meeting and every lie is not automatically considered truth. 

Are you kidding me?
Any other president would have done the same thing in a heartbeat.
Congress (mostly the House) have done nothing but obstruct any nomination just for the sake of not getting anything done.
It’s a hell of a way to run a country.
Stupid Baggers!

I don’t think you want to begin talking about recess appointments, Colorado_Cretin. If you do, just remember, Kaptain Kangaroo, a/k/a John Bolton.

I don’t remember the House of Repersentives being controled by a bunch of freshman members. Who are holding the country hostage by doing nothing!

Conservative Victimization Syndrome.

I suppose it’s fine with you if a White president makes recess appointments.

party before country much?

I’m not a fan of recess appointments, but Cordray is a very good man, and he will head up an agency which will give a measure of protection to all Americans and American families.

remember when Obama cried when Bush did this? He made reference to “lacking credibility.” Hmmm.

When Bush made the recess appointment of John Bolton, he did it because democrats had threatened to filibuster that particular nominee.  Democrats never ever said that they would filibuster ANY AND EVERY nominee.  

Senate republiklans stated that they would filibuster ANY AND EVERY nominee to head the CFPB. 

This left Obama with little choice.

When W made a recess appointment of the depraved and despicable Kaptain Kangaroo, a/k/a John Bolton, what did we hear from you, Jeff Merrill? Crickets, I say “Crickets!”. Hypocrisy, thy name is Jeff Merrill.

Yes, I do, but you seem to have forgotten.

I can only hope Congress goes to court, Reid is a wuss and kneels before his King (who has bowed to our enemies and shunned our friends) but the House needs to stand up for the Constitution.  Obama/Reid have so far never passed a budget, Obama’s been ‘present’ on just about every issue, and has repeatedly gone around Congress when they don’t agree with him.  To his mind, its his way, period.  He has no interest in governing in partnership with Congress unless Congress agrees to bow down to him.  This has to stop, I pray Jan 2013 will come soon enough.

Please, put the pipe down and come back to the real world.  You are in some kind of alternate world where things just happen because you wish it. 

Why do Republicans only believe in up or down votes for nominees who have been nominated by Republican presidents?

Looking forward to 4 more years of Obama are you?  Because if you think any member of the current republican ass clown show in place now is going to beat him you live in the same dream world that Ms. Buchmann resides in.

What does the house have to do with this??? Its the Senate who makes appointments.

Why does it matter if they been there 1 year or ten? Good talking point but the House has NOTHING to do with this.

Recess app ARE wrong when anyone does them…..the fact that were are NOT in a recess make this VERY bad……anyone but a sheep can see that. If Bush did this I would be in favor of Impeachment…..I wouldnt go that far with Obama but he just broke the law.

Tollbooth Perry has flip-flopped and is staying in the race after all, and he has a real chance to ….

[Sorry, I couldn't finish it even as a joke.]

It’s good to see the President finally doing what it takes to carry out the will of the people and those conservative elites, with their born to rule mentality and their ideological insanity, can stew in it.

Do you do anything besides whine about how unfair the media is or how Obama is a god?  I would suggest that you tell us how the candidates in the rebublican field are going to fix things, but we can both agree they are not up to the job.  Rick Santorum just won the first round……. Rick ^%&*#&^ Santorum.  A guy so lacking in the skills necessary to lead the nation the teabaggers waited until they went through such giants as Cain, Bachmann and Perry.

Does the name John Bolton ring a bell?

Well stated.

First off, Washington made a recess appointment to the Supreme Court.  This isn’t new.  Second, recess appointments are constitutional.  It’s  Article II Clause III.

It’s just going to sting you that much more when Obama gets beat

Stop the race crap, you dolt.

I would say that you’re better than that.

But you aren’t.

Yea…read my 1st message…..if it was wrong then……why isnt it wrong now?

The Democrat Senate refused to allow an up or down vote for Bush’s nominee Miguel Estrada for the court of appeals because they knew he was on a path to the Supreme Court, and they wanted to be the first party to nominate an Hispanic. After 400 days of refusing a vote, Estrada removed his name from consideration. They also blocked 9 other nominees.

It will be good to have Reid out soon, so Congress can operate like grownups again.

DUHR CAWNSTI-TWOSHUN!

rofl

This is ridiculous.  Congress has blocked almost every nominee for any position that Obama has sent them.  Even Republican judges are complaining about it.

It is the Republican Congress that has no interest in “governing in partnership” with the president.

They block every nominee and they filibuster every bill.  Everybody knows that.

This is ridiculous.  Congress has blocked almost every nominee for any position that Obama has sent them.  Even Republican judges are complaining about it.

It is the Republican Congress that has no interest in “governing in partnership” with the president.

They block every nominee and they filibuster every bill.  Everybody knows that.

Because the president had no other option.  Senate republiklans have said that they would filibuster ANY nominee. 

http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2011/06/10/242195/mcconnell-confirms-any-cfpb-nominee-blocked/

“A spokesman for Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) confirmed yesterday that Republicans intend to block anyone President Obama names
to head the new Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. “It’s any nominee,” said McConnell spokesman Donald Stewart.”

http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/gops-mitch-mcconnell-senate-minority-leader-stands-by-vow-to-block-cfpb-nominees/2011/06/09/AG3LcjNH_story.html

Obama had no choice but to make a recess appointment.

Wow. You are one stupid dude. “No interest in governing in partnership with Congress”?

So its OK to break the law if the other party wont give you something you want?

My how things change when your party is in charge…….other than its just wrong (obama agreed when Bush was in the WH) if Obama loses he just gave a Republican a gift they could NEVER have gotten on their own.

This have been a VERY bad week if Obama wanted my vote again. In the end it may not matter….unless the GOP is asleep….they will defund this Dept………which will be  ashame but Obama has left them little choice….right?

The only reason Obama studied the Constitution was to probe for ways to exploit it and crap all over it.

Because of Obama’s extremely thin resume, poor and incomplete failed legislative record and lack of
executive experience, he doesn’t know how to lead and govern…he’s a
failure. He’s the first President to actually fail in office and call
being a failure an election year tactic.

This is the first time in American history that a sitting President has thrown up his hands and actually quit governing according to America’s Constitutional laws.

This is the first time in American history that a sitting President has actually failed at doing the job he was elected to do and failed to uphold his oath of office.

This is the predictable end result of what you get when you elect someone who was a complete failure at being an Illinois state Congressman; failed state Senator with no record of achievement he could call his own, and a US Senator who never did anything in that position except promote himself and run for President.

This is what you get when you elect the most grossly unqualified President in American history. You get a complete failure in the Oval Office who doesn’t have a single clue about being a leader.

First of all, please stop pretending you voted for Obama.  This is clearly a falsehood.

If Republiklans wish to challenge this appointment, then can of course sue.  They can’t defund the agency without passing a bill through both houses of congress and then getting the president to sign it into law.

He knows without Ohio, he has no chance. Time for the Republicans to make him toxic in Ohio with maximum negative ads, which shouldn’t be hard to do.

Are you new here? I voted for Obama in 2008 and worked for his election in IL for the Senate. Im a Democrat.  Obama could be the greatest president of my lifetime.

Unless Obama does something very bad I will again back him. I cant understand how anyone could have ever backed mcCain.

Do I allways agree with him……well since Im no sheep (unlike you) No I dont but IMHO hes doing a good job and DESERVES to be reelected as of today.

This was a wrong move and the 2008 Obama agrees with me. I look forward to the next 4 years with Obama but hes starting to act allot like Bush…….Im still pissed about the Defence Bill he signed last week.

Just like signing statements I hated them then I hate them now…….anything other makes you a hypocrite!

Tommy, was it intentional that you neglected to  point out Barry’s utter hypocrisy on the issue of recess appointments or were you hoping that we are all as stupid as your liberal buddies?

It turns out that the action not only contradicts long-standing practice, but also the view of the administration itself. In 2010, Deputy Solicitor General Neal Katyal explained to the Supreme Court the Obama administration’s view that recess appointments are only permissible when Congress is in recess for more than three days

Before: Harry Reid Begins Holding Pro Forma Sessions To Block Bush Appointments — Now: Harry Reid Says He Supports Obama’s Decision To Ignore Pro Forma Sessions To Make An Appointment

And this is what America gets when they allow Teabaggers to control their thoughts: a “conservative” scum bag with no earthly idea what leadership entails. This is the first time in American history that “conservative” scum bag ideology will be dragged out into the sunlight to wither and die as it should have when St. Ronnie Alzheimers let it fall from his disease ridden lips. There, fixed it for you shitbird. You’re welcome!

W made 171 recess appointments. 

Okay, keep your pants on.  I don’t know who you are and I don’t particularly care.

I’d rather discuss this issue than discuss who you are.

There is a dangerous precedent on the other side here.  We can’t really have a situation where the Senate simply refuses to vote on any appointments by a particular president because he is in a different party.

Do we really want to move toward a system in which we don’t have Secretaries of State and Treasury (for example) because the Senate simply refuses to do its constitutional duty?

George W. Bush made 171 recess appointments;  

George H.W. Bush made 77 recess appointments;

and Ronald Reagan made 243 recess appointments.. 

OBAMA  MADE 27 RECESS APPOINTMENTS….are you baggers suffering from DEMENTIA?

Number of recess appointments according to Congressional Research Service-
Ronald Reagan-240
George H W Bush-77
Bill Clinton-140
George W Bush- 171
Barack Obama-28

So please stop with the moron comments about Obama disregarding the constitution of being a dictator. Try dealing with facts people and quit with the knee jerk reactionary crap.

Let the suicide watch begin!

Obama could be the greatest president of my lifetime.HAHA, good one!

This is not about recess appointments.

THE SENATE WAS NOT IN RECESS.

Obama broke the law.

Don’t be silly! As far as Obama is concerned, the laws don’t apply to him. He’s “special,” don’t you know?

The media are so “Obama-whipped” that they’ll never call him on it, nor will any of the other supposed “watchdogs” of the Left.

Congress is NOT in RECESS- that’s the point. They are conducting pro forma sessions in order to avoid this very thing and Obama doesn’t give a flip- the rules don’t apply to him!

I don’t think he ever studied it- he was only an adjunct professor in Con Law- not a scholar in the subject.

Racist Republicans telling others stop being racist is the new racist.

Not all republicans are racist but all racists are republican.

Be careful GATXER. Even though you identify yourself as an Obama supporter, these left wing loons will not except you holding a contrary position and allow you to comment against Obama. And if you decide that you won’t be silenced with your criticism of Obama, then you WILL be branded a racist.

That would be Senator Reid.

In other words they aren’t actually doing anything, but are pretending to be in session just to play political games.

So rather than use leadership and politics to solve your suggested problem, your solution paves the way for the possible total removal of the ‘advice and consent’ function.

It’s reelection strategy, and a dangerous path to pursue

No, they don’t filibuster every bill – look to all the bills which have been sent over from the house and Senator Reid has ‘shelved’ and failed to introduce to the Senate.

What explanation is there for his failure to introduce those ?  Why not introduce some of them and vote them down if they wish to do so.  But to just ignore them ?  Do these folks really wish to end the legislative process as we have known it ?

The fact that Harry Reid used this SAME ploy to block Miguel Estrada’s appointment to the court of appeals seems to be irrelevant to you. Hypocrisy, much?

What does the Consumer Financial Production Agency really do and why would anyone be against it?

Here’s a good overview of what’s really going on.

Al Sharpton is Republican?

I have always appreciate to the Obama Speech for Announcement a Lots of Great step for the benefit of american citizen.
http://www.usfarmtalk.com/forum/member.php?467524-Bailbee 

Obama is naming a Republican to the position here and the Republican Senate is filibustering. Bush named an arch-conservative John Bolten to be ambassador to the UN during one of his much, much more common recess appointments. Obama is dead last among recent Presidents’ use of the recess appointment, and he holds this position while battling the most uncooperative Senate.

You Republicans accuse Obama of not leading, yet you’re the ones stopping him with the filibusters. If Obama were to lead more, in the traditional way, you Republicans would find that even more distasteful. You people just don’t know what you want. In my opinion,

Obama should be doing a LOT more of this.

No they haven’t. This is the first time. The Senate is NOT in recess. Why is that so hard for you to understand?

The Constitution is simply too inconvenient for Obama and he proves it over and over again.

The GOP campaign adds just keep writing themselves…

The Senate is NOT in recess. Why is that so hard for you to understand?

Why do liberals hate the Constitution?

The Senate would ACTUALLY have to be in recess though. You’re not too bright are you?

Yea, screw the Constitution!

Well, that’s the issue, isn’t?  Not everyone can agree on the current status of this Congressional session.  There are some that think since the Senate and House are holding pro forma sessions every three days that the Body is still in active session.  This position is based on a legal brief from 1993. 

Others believe that the Congress is indeed in recess because they are not actually meeting in a formal session.  This is based on the fact that nothing is being discussed and no formal legislating is occurring during these pro forma sessions. 

According to Obama’s own Justice Department, the president is in the wrong. During a 2010 Supreme Court hearing, Chief Justice John Roberts and Deputy Solicitor General Neal Katyal had this exchange, in which the latter admitted that recess appointments may not be made within three days of adjournment:

CHIEF JUSTICE ROBERTS: And the recess appointment power doesn’t work why?

MR. KATYAL: The — the recess appointment power can work in — in a recess. I think our office has opined the recess has to be longer than 3 days. And — and so, it is potentially available to avert the future crisis that — that could — that could take place with respect to the board. If there are no other questions –

CHIEF JUSTICE ROBERTS: Thank you, counsel.

It does not matter that most Members of Congress are not in town
voting on legislation, because ending a session of Congress requires the
passage of a formal resolution, which never occurred.

Fair enough.  I was unaware of that.  Do you have a link to the transcript?  I’d like to see it in context.

It’s nice to see that you can make an argument without having to resort to childish name-calling, so why do it in the first place when you can clearly articulate yourself?

I got a little riled up because so many people are missing the clear illegality of this. I usually don’t go there, but occasionally I do. I usually regret it though.  :/

Anyway, here’s where I got the text from. It’s not the full text though.:

http://blog.heritage.org/2012/01/04/obama-doj-undercuts-presidents-recess-appointment-stunt/

I’m sure the full text is available somewhere, but I didn’t find it by a quick search. Probably need to dig a little.

It’s cool.  I understand the frustration.  Thanks for the link.  If this is really the case, I’d like to say that while I do like the nominee, I would have rather the appointment occurred under more traditional channels.  That isn’t to say, however, that I don’t think Republicans are engaging in pro forma sessions with the explicit purpose of preventing recess appointments. 

If your link ends up being accurate then both sides are in the wrong here.

It is about time Obama appointed Cordray. The real clowns are the Republicans who are making a sham of the political process. This BS of appearing everyday to gavel in the Senate for the purpose of denying a vote to confirm Cordray is ridiculous. What kind of a**holes try to block the confirmation of an individual to head up an agency, the CFPB, dedicated to protecting Americans rights against predatory lending practices, scams and fraud?

Oh, btw GW was never to keen on following the Constitution, and we lived through that, barely.

So to wrest this Constitutional Power inherent in the Executive Branch, Congress has decided to never adjourn?  If congress, or anyone in government acts in a way which effectively nullifies part of the constitution – wouldn’t that be of some concern?

We need that campus security cop from the University of California to go Washington and mace all these idiots.

Just how hypocritical is this jerk? Apparently, hypocrisy is his strong point.

What was unconstitutional?

Yeah, real clear.  There have been 285 “intra” session appointments since 1867.  The senate has never presented a  legal challenge.  Let’s see what happens here Mr. “clear illegality of this”

The senate wasn’t in recess. Recess requires a formal resolution, which hasn’t happened.

Man, I’m getting tired of doing everyone’s research for them.

The reason the President did this is because he did not accept the Senates disapproval of one of his appointees. If you can just trick an appointee into office because you don’t like the Senates failure to agree on him then what is the point.

Further even if this guy could be legally considered a valid recess appointee he still by this new Agencies own rules does not have full authority to pen policy UNTIL he receives the approval from the Senate. So this appointment has two strikes against it.

First it is a Presidential over-reach since the Senate was legally in session. The fact that a downvote would have been considered obstructing what Obama wants to do is irrelevant.

Secondly, it is clear from both general law and the new Agencies own policies and regulations that the new appointed head may have “leadership” but no legal authority to pen policy or law without Senate Approval, so all of this is moot.

That wasn’t research. You just picked out which part of the show you say is unconsitutional. Other legal scholars advise Bush that the pro forma sessions of Congress were not binding on his ability to make recess appointments, though I don’t think he did.