Obama appointments are unconstitutional

FredHayek wrote:

Dumblonde wrote:

frogger wrote: Back to Bob's place

The left really gets their panties bunched up when unbridled power hits a set back.

Unbridled power! :rofllol Yup, that's why we have single payer health care, comprehensive climate change legislation, Guantanamo shut down, assault weapons banned, liberal judges seated and a talking filibuster!

Maybe because you have an incompetent president? LBJ got the GOP to sign onto the Great Society and couldn't even get Dems to vote for his planned budget last year.

Yeah, and Bush tried to get his own party to go along with Social Security "private investment accounts", and couldn't even get his own party to walk off that cliff...

Your point is?

Shall we do the usual "Fred-deflection" and go back through FDR, Hoover, and Ulysses S. Grant / Lincoln to find some "They did it too" b.s. ?

...Oh...And the obligatory

But "W" did get Hilary and Biden to sign off on both Iraq & Afghanistan!

:Snooze

Yeah, I guess if you lie about it with cooked-intelligence, and cover up the facts, you can get almost anybody to agree to anything...

Now that we KNOW it was all lies, I fail to see the relevance.

The way I read it, this should be unconstitutional due to the reference of "the recess" vs. "a recess". So it seems it should only be legal during the an "official" recess where one congress leaves and the new one starts, as is happening now.

But this has been going on for years, and Bush did it too as well as others before him from both parties.

Why did it take so long to get a court ruling on it?

pineinthegrass wrote: Why did it take so long to get a court ruling on it?

Squeaky wheels getting the lube and all that?
JMTCW

pineinthegrass wrote: The way I read it, this should be unconstitutional due to the reference of "the recess" vs. "a recess". So it seems it should only be legal during the an "official" recess where one congress leaves and the new one starts, as is happening now.

But this has been going on for years, and Bush did it too as well as others before him from both parties.

Why did it take so long to get a court ruling on it?

Apparently they weren't in "official" recess. they were still banging the gavel.

Dumblonde wrote: If this stands, the Republicans have effectively strayed democracy in America. If the opposing party holds just one chamber of Congress they can prevent the other party from doing anything at all. Ever. Now that the Republicans have a party platform of no compromise, it's their way or the highway. Even when the majority of Americans disagree with their policies. Way to run a coup, boys. Got any banana plantations?

Works both way's... doesn't it? Let's hear you pipe when sometime in the future the Democrats hold on chamber.

Sen. McConnel spoke on this today. Congress should decide when they are in session not the President. Makes sense to me. I would like the Supremest to take this up soon since Team Obama plans to ignore the ruling today.

Yes, we forget that the obstructionista's idea of "being in session" is trotting out the goon-of-the-day to bang the gavel once, declare it in-session, bang the gavel again, declare it adjourned for the day, and use that to keep any recess appointments from being made... Bad, bad Obama...

But at least they accomplished their PRIMARY GOAL!!! "To make Obama a one-term president!"...(Ooops... How'd that work out for ya?) For some reason I thought it was JOBS-JOBS-JOBS!... But, hey, we got a few post-offices renamed; passed a few abortion bills; took care of spending money on appealing DOMA and anything else the right-wing didn't like.... And basically closed out with a a 7% approval rating... (About 2 notches below a root-canal, and anthrax...)

:rofllol

Jus' keep doin' what yer doin'....

Insert standard irrelevant "they did it too" comment here: ________________________________

...Oh...And the obligatory

OK, if you want this dangerous precedent set up.