Dear Leader's assault on Constitution continues

I don't know which is more "interesting": linking to the Washington Times or calling the President "treasonous".

It is clear that the Wash Times is the perfect paper for the op.
 
So because the Washington Times printed it, it didn't happen?

Good God.

And I can think of a lot worse adjectives to describe the Gangster in Chief than 'treasonous'.
 
It is possible that Obama haters may be even more shrill than the Bush hating lefties, which I did not think was possible.

Definitely cut from the same cloth.

I'm sure someone else can point out all of the recess appointments made by Bush, Clinton, etc.

Note that requiring a 60 vote majority for almost any legislative action in the Senate is also "unprecedented" so welcome to the new era of politics.
 
One can attack a source all one likes but the real issue is
IS the information correct?
Did bo make a recess appointment when in fact the senate is not in recess?


I know dems when they were in control of the senate stayed is session in this same way to prevent Bush from making recess appointments.
 
The op can do little more than regurgitate what he has read.

What I read is that the Senate says they are in sesson; or they think they are in sesson ... for the purposes of blocking recess appointments.

We're not going to get anything of quality from the op or from the paper he's linked.
 
The more I read about this the more idiotic the original post becomes.And there's no shortage of people out there lapping it up.

The Constitution gives a president the power to make appointments when the U.S. Senate is in recess. To keep Obama from appointing officials after Congress started a holiday break last month, congressional Republicans refused to adopt a resolution to formally adjourn and senators have appeared every three days for a brief pro forma session.

Senate Recess

The Congressional Research Service, in a 2001 memo, said congressional practice and Justice Department opinions have backed the position that the Senate should be out of session for more than three days before the president can make a recess appointment.

Pfeiffer, in a post on the White House website, accused Senate Republicans of making an “overt attempt” to block the president from using his constitutional authority to make recess appointments by insisting the chamber remain in pro forma session.

“Gimmicks do not override the president’s constitutional authority to make appointments to keep the government running,” Pfeiffer wrote. Lawyers who advised President George W. Bush on recess appointments wrote that the Senate “cannot use sham ‘pro forma’ sessions to prevent the president from exercising a constitutional power,” he wrote.

Obama’s press secretary, Jay Carney, cited a legal opinion by the White House counsel’s office that determined the Senate was in recess and not conducting any business.


*********************

The Senate is scheduled to stay symbolically open for business until lawmakers resume work on Jan. 23.

Let's get this Washington Times crap out of here. What's next, you're going to tell us that Hitler and JFK are still alive in South America?
 
Just what is it that you are trying to show with the LA Times link, left?

I'm beginning to think that you are even more addled and confused that I originally thought. Do you think that I contest the fact that a recess appointment has been made? Is that it?

Why don't you explicitly tell us how the LA Times link helps your case.
 
How about an oped in WaPO that starts out
"Breaking: Obama also set to make recess appointments to the NLRB.
It isn’t just Richard Cordray. Obama is also set to use recess appointments to install his picks to the National Labor Relations Board, according to White House officials and others familiar with ongoing discussions."The Link


so when Dems did it to Bush that was ok but now it isn't?
 
Tweedledee and Tweedledum need to confab and get their acts together.

Anybody who can't see the difference b/t the WaPo link and the idiotic WashTimes link just isn't trying very hard. Or maybe they are, which is why they read the Wash Times....

left, you still are confused and clueless about the facts. I'll give you a hint: "treasonous" and "in sesson".

so when Dems did it to Bush that was ok but now it isn't?

Please clarify, if you are able, just exactly what "it" is.

There still seems to be a gross lack of fact awareness here.

But this is when the posts get the most fun: people don't know their facts, make outlandish statements (treasonous), get lost in their own argument, try to defend it, etc. It's like an abnormal psych lab.
 
Answer my previous post, Perham. Calling me clueless and bringing up the "treasonous" thing again isn't going to cut it.

And for the record, I considered this charlatan treasonous a long time ago. This latest stunt is just another pebble to be thrown on the mountain.
 
Read the article. This is NOT a recess appointment. The Senate is in session.

Lol. Read the article!

Yet later you speak of recess appointments. So, which is it, left?

This has been fun but unless this dynamic duo can marshal some reinforcements it's not worth continuing.

Read the article! The Senate is still in session! These are not recess appointments! Obama is treasonous!
 
Answer my previous post, Perham.

What was the question?

left, you're so out to lunch you don't even know it.

What this country needs is fewer people criticizing the O-man in an idiotic fashion. Not saying not to criticize him, but don't be so lame about it.
 
You are clearly an idiot.

Lol. Says the guy linking to the Wash Times, screaming to "read the article! the Senate is in session!", then linking to the LA Times and then saying it's a recess appt.

There are so many things wrong with your posts, left, that it takes a supreme act of organization just to list them and respond. Frankly, it's not worth it.

Just read the Washington Times - classic.

You got called out for bad post and your feelings got hurt. Nut up and deal with it.
 
So let's keep track of this and see how far this whole "unconstitutional" thing goes, shall we?

Let's see how serious Boehner (sp) et al are.

Be sure to link us to the Washington Times there, buddy, when the news breaks.
smile.gif
 
Just ignore Perham, he is just so superior to everyone else.

He is wrong on every thread but he acts like he is some all mighty know everything and his opinion should be worshipped by all, sounds like an Obama Cultist to me!!!
 
Per
why have you hung up on the use of the phrase recess appontment versus the fact that the senate is NOT in recess?
I suspect it is because that is all you got .

So then answer this, Under what circumstances did BO appoint Cordray?

and you really reveal how ignorant you are with this:
"Let's see how serious Boehner (sp) et al are."


I'd suggest you quit digging but you antics are entertaining so carry on
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

NEW: Pro Sports Forums

Cowboys, Texans, Rangers, Astros, Mavs, Rockets, etc. Pro Longhorns. The Chiefs and that Swift gal. This is the place.

Pro Sports Forums

Recent Threads

Back
Top