• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Obama Defies Congress With ‘Recess’ Picks. Could Provoke Constitutional Fight.

Cole said:
Silly response. This is an issue. And eventually the courts will make a decision. One way or the other....
Click to expand...

Has anyone filed a lawsuit? Or announced an intention to file a lawsuit?
 
hazlnut said:
Did Fox cover it back then and give their trusty viewers the talking points to regurgitate around the water cooler... Was W. making a "power grab" back then?

Or was it just Reid looking foolish trying to end run around the constitution?
Click to expand...

W. was engaging in recess appointments, which was a legitimate expression of his power as the President. So, the Senate stayed in session to block him, which was a legitimate expression of theirs. You may recall from 11th Grade that our Constitution features "Checks and Balances"?
 
cpwill said:
the question becomes one of standing.
Click to expand...


Absolutely. It may not be the RNC that files the suit. But, because of the language of the law, the first decision that the CFPB makes under Cordray, it will be immediately challenged in court.

j-mac
 
cpwill said:
the question becomes one of standing.
Click to expand...

Since the claim is a breach of separation of powers, I should think that standing would be no problem. It shouldn't be a bar if a Senator or group of Senators wants to challenge it.
 
AdamT said:
Since the claim is a breach of separation of powers, I should think that standing would be no problem. It shouldn't be a bar if a Senator or group of Senators wants to challenge it.
Click to expand...


Politicians tend to think in terms of gain for their political careers, while businessmen will absolutely file suit the minute some dictate from this board threatens their business.

j-mac
 
j-mac said:
Absolutely. That is correct. However, too bad for you that Article 1 Section 5 comes first....The Senate was not in recess.

j-mac
Click to expand...

Oh yes how could i forget about efficiency of a government? I mean look at the number the repubs left 74 nominees pending consideration on the Senate floor and an additional 107 bottled up in committees.
That pro forma Senate session was not legitimate and you know it. It was nothing more than just smoke and mirrors to stop Obama...
 
TheDemSocialist said:
Oh yes how could i forget about efficiency of a government? I mean look at the number the repubs left 74 nominees pending consideration on the Senate floor and an additional 107 bottled up in committees.
That pro forma Senate session was not legitimate and you know it. It was nothing more than just smoke and mirrors to stop Obama...
Click to expand...

Believe those "smoke and mirrors" were created a few years ago by Reid.

And pretty sure he didn't do it to stop Obama.....
 
Cole said:
Believe those "smoke and mirrors" were created a few years ago by Reid.

And pretty sure he didn't do it to stop Obama.....
Click to expand...

And i tell you what i disagree with Reid on that move in 07.
 
TheDemSocialist said:
And i tell you what i disagree with Reid on that move in 07.
Click to expand...


So what. No way to prove that in the slightest, and your word on the matter is questionable. However, you don't get to just ignore the rules when it is convenient for you. If Obama wanted to change that aspect then Reid, whom I assume is still a demo, should have changed them to clear that path. But the fact of the matter is that Obama is willing to provoke a Constitutional Crisis in order to benefit his campaign...And demo's, libs, and socialist progressives cheer him on.

pathetic.

j-mac
 
j-mac said:
So what.
Click to expand...
Then why did you bring it up?

No way to prove that in the slightest, and your word on the matter is questionable.
Click to expand...
Ok.....

However, you don't get to just ignore the rules when it is convenient for you.
Click to expand...
Ok.
What other point was the senate using a pro forma Senate?
74 nominees pending consideration on the Senate floor!
Whats the point?

Oh yea the republicans #1 job is to make Obama suffer and not let our government work...


If Obama wanted to change that aspect then Reid, whom I assume is still a demo, should have changed them to clear that path.
Click to expand...
What does Reid have anything to do with this?

But the fact of the matter is that Obama is willing to provoke a Constitutional Crisis in order to benefit his campaign..
Click to expand...
A constitutional crisis? Really?
I think Jon Stewart brings this on the best: Commission: Impossible - The Daily Show with Jon Stewart - 01/05/12 - Video Clip | Comedy Central

.And demo's, libs, and socialist progressives cheer him on.

pathetic.

j-mac
Click to expand...
Ahh yes we are in cahoots!
 
TheDemSocialist said:
Ok.
What other point was the senate using a pro forma Senate?
74 nominees pending consideration on the Senate floor!
Whats the point?
Click to expand...


I don't know, ask Harry Reid.

Oh yea the republicans #1 job is to make Obama suffer and not let our government work...
Click to expand...

Oh Boo freakin' Hoo...Cry me a river...Like you progressive hacks made anything easy on republicans.

What does Reid have anything to do with this?
Click to expand...

Majority Leader sets the agenda...Good Grief, you lefties all of the sudden forget how things work?

A constitutional crisis? Really?
I think Jon Stewart brings this on the best
Click to expand...

Liebowitz is a satirist, funny at times, but a liberal hack, so why should I care what he says.

Ahh yes we are in cahoots!
Click to expand...

No, just useful idiots.

j-mac
 
TheDemSocialist said:
Oh yes how could i forget about efficiency of a government? I mean look at the number the repubs left 74 nominees pending consideration on the Senate floor and an additional 107 bottled up in committees.
That pro forma Senate session was not legitimate and you know it. It was nothing more than just smoke and mirrors to stop Obama...
Click to expand...

*cough* Dems control the Senate.
 
j-mac said:
So what. No way to prove that in the slightest, and your word on the matter is questionable. However, you don't get to just ignore the rules when it is convenient for you. If Obama wanted to change that aspect then Reid, whom I assume is still a demo, should have changed them to clear that path. But the fact of the matter is that Obama is willing to provoke a Constitutional Crisis in order to benefit his campaign...And demo's, libs, and socialist progressives cheer him on.

pathetic.

j-mac
Click to expand...

And I'll repeat the same the conservatives said to the Dems when the Dems said Bush got us into an illegal war in Iraq. If you all think it was illegal, impeach him. Oh wait, that's because it ISN'T illegal.

While I don't agree with Obama doing this, the way the GOP was handling it was truly pathetic.

Face it, what Obama did was not unconsitutional and it wasn't illegal.
 
TheNextEra said:
And I'll repeat the same the conservatives said to the Dems when the Dems said Bush got us into an illegal war in Iraq. If you all think it was illegal, impeach him. Oh wait, that's because it ISN'T illegal.

While I don't agree with Obama doing this, the way the GOP was handling it was truly pathetic.

Face it, what Obama did was not unconsitutional and it wasn't illegal.
Click to expand...

I'd love to see it. Damned straight! Impeach him. You don't agree with the way Obama did this? Well, Reid did the same damned thing, and Bush respected it. What you have here is a Chicago wanna be thug running the WH and ****ting all over this country...I'll be soooo glad when he's tossed out on his ear.

Oh BTW, all you demo's...The WaPo editorial page had this nugget for you all to gasp at...

President Obama’s attempt to unilaterally appoint three people to seats on the National Labor Relations Board and Richard Cordray to head the new Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (after the Senate blocked action on his nomination) is more than an unconstitutional attempt to circumvent the Senate’s advise-and-consent role. It is a breathtaking violation of the separation of powers and the duty of comity that the executive owes to Congress.

Yes, some prior recess appointments have been politically unpopular, and a few have even raised legal questions. But never before has a president purported to make a “recess” appointment when the Senate is demonstrably not in recess. That is a constitutional abuse of a high order.

As a former U.S. attorney general and a former Office of Legal Counsel lawyer who provided advice to presidents on recess appointment issues, we have defended and will continue to defend the lawful use of the recess appointment power. Although originally conceived by the Framers for a time when communicating with and summoning senators back to the Capitol might take weeks, it is still valid in a modern age — but only as long as the Senate is in recess. Not only was the Senate not in recess when these purported appointments were made, it constitutionally could not have been.

Article I, Section 5, of the Constitution states that neither house of Congress may adjourn for more than three days without the consent of the other house. The House of Representatives did not consent to a Senate recess of more than three days at the end of last year, and so the Senate, consistent with the requirements of the Constitution, must have some sort of session every few days.


http://www.washingtonpost.com/opini...nstitutional/2012/01/05/gIQAnWRfdP_story.html
Click to expand...


j-mac
 
Last edited:
j-mac said:
I'd love to see it. Damned straight! Impeach him. You don't agree with the way Obama did this? Well, Reid did the same damned thing, and Bush respected it. What you have here is a Chicago wanna be thug running the WH and ****ting all over this country...I'll be soooo glad when he's tossed out on his ear.


j-mac
Click to expand...

Funny not one of the GOP has the gonads to try and get him impeached, wonder why?

As I said before, yes, it was a respect thing that was broken (something I think Obama shouldn't have done), but then I don't agree that the GOP was being respectful either.

Two wrongs don't make it a right. Obama ended this childishness and called the GOP on the BS.

However, with that being said, noone is going to try to impeach him because it WASN'T ILLEGAL. Just because you don't like it, doesn't make it illegal. And thanks to your clown GOP candidates, as much as I don't like it, Obama will be re-elected for 4 more years and all you will have to blame for that is the GOP for putting up clowns.
 
TheNextEra said:
Funny not one of the GOP has the gonads to try and get him impeached, wonder why?

As I said before, yes, it was a respect thing that was broken (something I think Obama shouldn't have done), but then I don't agree that the GOP was being respectful either.

Two wrongs don't make it a right. Obama ended this childishness and called the GOP on the BS.

However, with that being said, noone is going to try to impeach him because it WASN'T ILLEGAL. Just because you don't like it, doesn't make it illegal. And thanks to your clown GOP candidates, as much as I don't like it, Obama will be re-elected for 4 more years and all you will have to blame for that is the GOP for putting up clowns.
Click to expand...

Well, you are probably right in that the repubs don't have the balls to begin impeachment hearings, which they absolutely should on this criminal, doesn't mean that it was legal, or constitutional.

We'll most likely have to wait til November when Obama and his gangster group are booted out by we the people. How sad, I hope he doesn't screw us up too bad on the way out....Being the pathetic failure he is.

j-mac
 
j-mac said:
Well, you are probably right in that the repubs don't have the balls to begin impeachment hearings, which they absolutely should on this criminal, doesn't mean that it was legal, or constitutional.
Click to expand...

Again, your OPINION on it being illegal doesn't make it so. That's why noone is calling for impeachment. But please continue your foaming at the mouth rant. It's quite humurous.

j-mac said:
We'll most likely have to wait til November when Obama and his gangster group are booted out by we the people. How sad, I hope he doesn't screw us up too bad on the way out....Being the pathetic failure he is.

j-mac
Click to expand...

Care to put your money where your mouth is on Obama getting the boot?
 
j-mac said:
Well, see it is among the favorite tricks of the libs.
Click to expand...

Like making false claims and then moving on to new false claims when they are disproven, like you do?

Enough already.
 
j-mac said:
I don't know, ask Harry Reid.
Click to expand...
So you admit with me Harry Reid has nothing to do with this?



Oh Boo freakin' Hoo...Cry me a river...Like you progressive hacks made anything easy on republicans.
Click to expand...
Irrelevant.




Majority Leader sets the agenda...Good Grief, you lefties all of the sudden forget how things work?
Click to expand...
As AdamT already said its called a senate hold (secret hold)..
.



Liebowitz is a satirist, funny at times, but a liberal hack, so why should I care what he says.
Click to expand...
Close mind.




No, just useful idiots.

j-mac
Click to expand...

Fantastic response..
Really made progress here!
:lamo
 
j-mac said:
I'd love to see it. Damned straight! Impeach him. You don't agree with the way Obama did this? Well, Reid did the same damned thing, and Bush respected it. What you have here is a Chicago wanna be thug running the WH and ****ting all over this country...I'll be soooo glad when he's tossed out on his ear.

Oh BTW, all you demo's...The WaPo editorial page had this nugget for you all to gasp at...


j-mac
Click to expand...

Here's what YOU aren't grasping: realistically speaking, the Senate was in recess. Obama is picking this fight because the courts need to actually make a decision on what "in session" is going to mean regarding executive appointments. We can't have important positions just sit empty because congress feels like exploiting bull**** loopholes for the sole purpose of being obstructionist.

Also, nice work with the dog whistle "wanna be thug."
 
Redress said:
You expected differently? Some of our posters can take this long explaining why Obama is a socialist.
Click to expand...
It is impossible to explain why anyone would choose to be a socialist. The one term Marxist president Barack Hussein Obama has Communists, Socialists, Marxists and radicals all over his background. I believe he has been a thug in waiting for a very long time. I am sure he is tough just as I am sure his core beliefs are rooted in the peculiar form of tyranny labeled Marxism.
 
Misterveritis said:
It is impossible to explain why anyone would choose to be a socialist. The one term Marxist president Barack Hussein Obama has Communists, Socialists, Marxists and radicals all over his background. I believe he has been a thug in waiting for a very long time. I am sure he is tough just as I am sure his core beliefs are rooted in the peculiar form of tyranny labeled Marxism.
Click to expand...

Hey, dude, take the tinfoil off your scalp. You could read the news about how all three automakers are profitable now, that should cheer you up. Good thing Obama didn't let the auto companies just die, huh?
 
Deuce said:
Here's what YOU aren't grasping: realistically speaking, the Senate was in recess. Obama is picking this fight because the courts need to actually make a decision on what "in session" is going to mean regarding executive appointments. We can't have important positions just sit empty because congress feels like exploiting bull**** loopholes for the sole purpose of being obstructionist.

Also, nice work with the dog whistle "wanna be thug."
Click to expand...

Actually, they were in session. If they weren't then as I have asked repeatedly, with no response, simply show us the where they gaveled to recess. You can't, because they never did.

J-mac

Sent from my PC36100 using Tapatalk
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom