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

misterman · Jan 8, 2012

Ummm...if the Senate has not adjourned, they're still in session. They cannot be on recess while still in session. Cut and dry.[/QUOTE]

Hmmm. Then why do they have to come back every three days and prove they are in session? If they don't adjourn, then that should be enough.

AdamT · Jan 8, 2012

misterman said:
Ummm...if the Senate has not adjourned, they're still in session. They cannot be on recess while still in session. Cut and dry.

Hmmm. Then why do they have to come back every three days and prove they are in session? If they don't adjourn, then that should be enough.[/QUOTE]

And of course "they" don't actually come back at all. One guy comes back to put on the charade that they are conducting business, which in fact they are not. Because ... you know ... only one guy is there playing make believe.

j-mac · Jan 9, 2012

misterman said:
Cite it please. Which rule?

No it's not.

Pro forma session prevents adjournment, but not necessarily a recess.

U.S. Senate: Reference Home > Glossary > pro forma session

[/QUOTE]

Ahem!....Let's take a look at your own posting from the Glossary of the Senate:

pro forma session - A brief meeting (sometimes only several seconds) of the Senate in which no business is conducted. It is held usually to satisfy the constitutional obligation that neither chamber can adjourn for more than three days without the consent of the other.

Adjourn, hmmm...Interesting word right? What does that word mean?

Definition of ADJOURN
transitive verb
: to suspend indefinitely or until a later stated time
intransitive verb
1
: to suspend a session indefinitely or to another time or place
2
: to move to another place

Adjourn - Definition and More from the Free Merriam-Webster Dictionary

Now let's take a look at the definition of 'recess'

: a suspension of business or procedure often for rest or relaxation

Now come on libs, there was no suspension of the Senate, therefore they were NOT in session. Now, weather or not there will be anything done about this other than rhetoric, and soundbytes is another question. But, that will be a showing of weather or not the republicans have the fortitude to press this, or let Obama get away with wadding up our constitution for his own political purposes. Either way we lose.

j-mac

SypherAL · Jan 9, 2012

The senate WAS in recess, meeting for 60 seconds just to get around that does not count, and that shal be proven in the court of law. Im willing to bet the GOP wont even sue because they KNOW they will lose. Im willing to bet my life earnings that Obama was well within his means as president to do this.

j-mac · Jan 9, 2012

SypherAL said:
The senate WAS in recess, meeting for 60 seconds just to get around that does not count, and that shal be proven in the court of law. Im willing to bet the GOP wont even sue because they KNOW they will lose. Im willing to bet my life earnings that Obama was well within his means as president to do this.

If you are so sure that they were in recess, then you should be able to answer the question that I keep posting in here, and everyone arguing this ignores...

Show me where Boehner gave consent for the Senate to recess. it should be a matter of public record...If you're so sure that is...

Simply saying it isn't fair that the Senate uses pro forma sessions to block recess appointments isn't an argument, it is an excuse to circumvent the constitution. And that should alarm libs, as well as conservatives.

j-mac

misterman · Jan 9, 2012

j-mac said:
Now let's take a look at the definition of 'recess'

Yeah, let's:

: a suspension of business or procedure often for rest or relaxation

Yep, like when they all go home for Christmas.

Now come on libs

Stop throwing ideology into this, especially since you don't know mine.

Now come on libs, there was no suspension of the Senate, therefore they were NOT in session. Now, weather or not there will be anything done about this other than rhetoric, and soundbytes is another question. But, that will be a showing of weather or not the republicans have the fortitude to press this, or let Obama get away with wadding up our constitution for his own political purposes. Either way we lose.

j-mac[/QUOTE]

misterman · Jan 9, 2012

IF you're right, and the Senate isn't in recess and cannot be, then your outrage should be aimed at the Senators who aren't showing up for work every day.

j-mac · Jan 9, 2012

misterman said:
Stop throwing ideology into this, especially since you don't know mine.

Sure I do, everyone does. You're not that clever.

j-mac

Pointy · Jan 9, 2012

Eighty Deuce said:
The Senate has followed the proper protocols. Protocols that Obama's own Justice Department argued for. These protocols compel a President to act with the advice and consent of Congress. Such advice and consent Obama has shunned. Now Obama has taken a further unprecedented step to take power from the Legislative. The community organizer needs to be shown the door.

From what I can see as to the reaction to Obama's action, I would surmise that once again he has got away with extending his middle finger to America.

teamosil · Jan 9, 2012

Pointy said:
From what I can see as to the reaction to Obama's action, I would surmise that once again he has got away with extending his middle finger to America.

Hmm I think of it more like he is extending his middle finger to the Republicanbaggers on behalf of the American people.

AdamT · Jan 9, 2012

teamosil said:
Hmm I think of it more like he is extending his middle finger to the Republicanbaggers on behalf of the American people.

Yes indeed, I think that the roughly 80% of Americans who support the CFPB are joining the President in his one finger salute to Republicans who are fighting to protect too-big-to-fail banks.

VanceMack · Jan 9, 2012

SypherAL said:
Obama didn't break any laws, the GOP can take full responsibility for this. This man is the president of the United States, give him his staff, he has every right to have whomever he wishes. This pathetic childs play by the GOP to deny our commander and chief an opportunity to appoint who he feels necessary just sickens me. I can promise you that Obama has a whole team of lawyers and advisers. If they have ANY doubt this would be a constitutional violation, there is just no way he would pull this 1 year out from elections. Case closed. Still no scandal GOP, sorry, keep trying.

Were you equally sickened when democrats did it to Bush? where you disgusted with...say...Senator Obama's comments on recess appointments?

Henrin · Jan 9, 2012

AdamT said:
Yes indeed, I think that the roughly 80% of Americans who support the CFPB are joining the President in his one finger salute to Republicans who are fighting to protect too-big-to-fail banks.

Because being against the CFPB is being for banks? You want to try that again?

bicycleman · Jan 9, 2012

Redress said:
Bush makes recess appointments, no problem. Obama makes recess appointments, it's a constitutional crisis. For gods sake people, whether something is right or wrong is not determined by who did it.

No, I happen to remember that when Bush made the appointments, there was much weeping and gnashing of teeth coming from the Democrat circles. Recess appointments are wrong no matter, who does it. Both parties are equally as guilty.

AdamT · Jan 9, 2012

Henrin said:
Because being against the CFPB is being for banks? You want to try that again?

Given that the CFPB is tasked with protecting the rights of consumers in financial transactions generally involving banks ... yeah -- pretty much. Who do you think it was that spent tens of millions of dollars lobbying against the CFPB? Hint: it wasn't consumers.

j-mac · Jan 9, 2012

teamosil said:
Hmm I think of it more like he is extending his middle finger to the Republicanbaggers on behalf of the American people.

Oh, so you think only libs, and progressives are "the American People"?

What happened to 'the President is supposed to represent ALL the people"?

And all the calls that Bush was a criminal for recess appointments...

Man, you far lefties couldn't be anymore hypocritical could you?

j-mac

AdamT · Jan 9, 2012

j-mac said:
Oh, so you think only libs, and progressives are "the American People"?

What happened to 'the President is supposed to represent ALL the people"?

And all the calls that Bush was a criminal for recess appointments...

Man, you far lefties couldn't be anymore hypocritical could you?

j-mac

A huge majority of Americans -- including a majority of REPUBLICANS -- supported the CFPB. Kinda makes you wonder who the Republicans in Congress were representing there, doesn't it?

Henrin · Jan 9, 2012

AdamT said:
Given that the CFPB is tasked with protecting the rights of consumers in financial transactions generally involving banks ... yeah -- pretty much.

The rights of people? Please, that is dishonest right from the start. Its regulates banks and puts in place their solutions trumping their rights and the responsibly of people. All it does is allow the fed the power to control more of the economy while trumping rights of people.

Who do you think it was that spent tens of millions of dollars lobbying against the CFPB? Hint: it wasn't consumers.

This has nothing to do with everyone that opposes the CFPB. Your argument is like saying because someone opposes the EPA they are for everyone dieing because of chemicals. You don't see how dishonest that is, do you?

Henrin · Jan 9, 2012

AdamT said:
A huge majority of Americans -- including a majority of REPUBLICANS -- supported the CFPB. Kinda makes you wonder who the Republicans in Congress were representing there, doesn't it?

The twenty percent? Oh right, the minority, **** them.

teamosil · Jan 9, 2012

j-mac said:
Oh, so you think only libs, and progressives are "the American People"?

No sir. Almost 4/5 Americans support the CFPB. Only 1/5 supports the Republican's attempts to block it. The people, as a whole, have spoken on this issue.

TheDemSocialist · Jan 9, 2012

Isnt this totally constitutional?

AdamT · Jan 9, 2012

Henrin said:
The twenty percent? Oh right, the minority, **** them.

You're arguing that 20% of the people should get their way over the other 80%? WTF do you think this is, a dictatorship?

TheDemSocialist · Jan 9, 2012

Obama used his constitutional legal powers to make this appointment...

Henrin · Jan 9, 2012

AdamT said:
You're arguing that 20% of the people should get their way over the other 80%? WTF do you think this is, a dictatorship?

A republic protects the rights of all. You are asking that a group of people give up rights for your calls and pays for those calls to boot.

haymarket · Jan 9, 2012

Henrin said:
A republic protects the rights of all.

And that is exactly what our government is doing.

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

misterman

AdamT

j-mac

SypherAL

j-mac

misterman

misterman

j-mac

Pointy

teamosil

AdamT

VanceMack

Less like the tiger...more like the lion.

Henrin

bicycleman

AdamT

j-mac

AdamT

Henrin

Henrin

teamosil

TheDemSocialist

Gradualist

AdamT

TheDemSocialist

Gradualist

Henrin

haymarket