Page 5 of 18 FirstFirst ... 3456715 ... LastLast
Results 41 to 50 of 178

Thread: Justices skeptical of Obama’s recess appointment claim[W:88]

  1. #41
    Sage
    Perotista's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Georgia
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:03 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    17,926
    Blog Entries
    24

    Re: Justices skeptical of Obama’s recess appointment claim

    Quote Originally Posted by polgara View Post
    I always thought that was more of a matter between he and his wife, personally. I think it was more his lying about it, but most people think politicians lie anyway, so what else is new? :
    I may have looked at it differently if I hadn't learned about JFK and LBJ womanizing, but JFK had class. Marilyn Monroe vs. Lewinski. I actually thought it was quite funny, I mean having a BJ in the Oval Office. But I had a wild life myself when I was young. But the difference was once I married I was true blue. But then again, I had a nice Thai wife and not Hillary.

    I would love nothing better than to have a few beers with Bill and reminisce, let's say about our conquests.
    This Reform Party member thinks it is high past time that we start electing Americans to congress and the presidency who put America first and their political party further down the line. But for way too long we have been electing Republicans and Democrats who happen to be Americans instead of Americans who happen to be Republicans and Democrats.

  2. #42
    Sage


    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    IL
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:56 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    36,762

    Re: Justices skeptical of Obama’s recess appointment claim

    Trans-Pacific is something I'll bring to your blog, as it affects the Congressional races, IMO.
    Some would call it NAFTA on steroids.
    For instance, just the mention of Vietnam being included with it's average pay of $0.75/hr will spur debate.
    Quote Originally Posted by Perotista View Post
    I haven't head of Trans acific Participation, is that some kind of get out the vote issue or something like that. The NSA spying really doesn't bother me much. Not like some anyway. Let me know what I am missing.
    NSA spying is a hot patato, since the GOP really put it on super-steroids last decade, not impeachable by itself.
    This SCOTUS year will be historic, for the quantity and high-level of issues, another 2014 election "peripheral influence", a Linc original .
    Physics is Phun

  3. #43
    Sage
    Perotista's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Georgia
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:03 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    17,926
    Blog Entries
    24

    Re: Justices skeptical of Obama’s recess appointment claim

    Quote Originally Posted by NIMBY View Post
    Trans-Pacific is something I'll bring to your blog, as it affects the Congressional races, IMO.
    Some would call it NAFTA on steroids.
    For instance, just the mention of Vietnam being included with it's average pay of $0.75/hr will spur debate.

    NSA spying is a hot patato, since the GOP really put it on super-steroids last decade, not impeachable by itself.
    This SCOTUS year will be historic, for the quantity and high-level of issues, another 2014 election "peripheral influence", a Linc original .
    You're talking about another free trade agreement, alright. I may have heard something on it, but I have had other things on my mind. I think about the only two things that got under my skin is the ACA and Reid's nuclear option. Most everything thing else I can live with and that includes NSA and the Patriot Act. Although if both were cut back that is fine too. As for the SCOTUS, the religious issue with the nuns piqued my interest more than the recess appointments. Although personally I think they may have been unconstitutional. But what may decide this issue is this question" Is a pro forma senate session a real senate session? I think not. But with the nuclear option in play, the whole thing is moot anyway. Also there is no need for any pro forma anything. By the way, I would come down on the side of the Nuns.
    This Reform Party member thinks it is high past time that we start electing Americans to congress and the presidency who put America first and their political party further down the line. But for way too long we have been electing Republicans and Democrats who happen to be Americans instead of Americans who happen to be Republicans and Democrats.

  4. #44
    Guru

    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    Columbus, OH
    Last Seen
    Today @ 03:49 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    4,482

    Re: Justices skeptical of Obama’s recess appointment claim

    Quote Originally Posted by Perotista View Post
    You're talking about another free trade agreement, alright. I may have heard something on it, but I have had other things on my mind. I think about the only two things that got under my skin is the ACA and Reid's nuclear option. Most everything thing else I can live with and that includes NSA and the Patriot Act. Although if both were cut back that is fine too. As for the SCOTUS, the religious issue with the nuns piqued my interest more than the recess appointments. Although personally I think they may have been unconstitutional. But what may decide this issue is this question" Is a pro forma senate session a real senate session? I think not. But with the nuclear option in play, the whole thing is moot anyway. Also there is no need for any pro forma anything. By the way, I would come down on the side of the Nuns.
    Its a tough one to call really. As you indicated, the questions the Justices have to answer don't just center around what the extent of the Executive power, to make recess appointments, is but also how the founders intended for the Senate to function. Either way the chips fall, its time to settle this issue so the wailing on both sides stops whenever a President makes recess appointments.

  5. #45
    Sage


    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    IL
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:56 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    36,762

    Re: Justices skeptical of Obama’s recess appointment claim

    When you mention the Nuns, that would be the new triangle in the SCOTUS, with Catholic-raised Sotomayor joining with Roberts and Kennedy.
    She will bring along some or all of the three "lefties".

    I expect a "split-decision" on this Senate issue, 6-3 leaning right.
    Not that there isn't case law, but I expect the SCOTUS to keep the waters muddied here.
    Legislative matters of this type like ACA and VRA have been split-decisions leaning right recently.

    We have other issues than ACA and Harry sir, and you'll be super pissed when you get briefed on TPP .
    Quote Originally Posted by Perotista View Post
    You're talking about another free trade agreement, alright. I may have heard something on it, but I have had other things on my mind. I think about the only two things that got under my skin is the ACA and Reid's nuclear option. Most everything thing else I can live with and that includes NSA and the Patriot Act. Although if both were cut back that is fine too. As for the SCOTUS, the religious issue with the nuns piqued my interest more than the recess appointments. Although personally I think they may have been unconstitutional. But what may decide this issue is this question" Is a pro forma senate session a real senate session? I think not. But with the nuclear option in play, the whole thing is moot anyway. Also there is no need for any pro forma anything. By the way, I would come down on the side of the Nuns.
    Last edited by NIMBY; 01-14-14 at 12:57 AM.
    Physics is Phun

  6. #46
    Sage
    Perotista's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Georgia
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:03 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    17,926
    Blog Entries
    24

    Re: Justices skeptical of Obama’s recess appointment claim

    Quote Originally Posted by Napoleon View Post
    Its a tough one to call really. As you indicated, the questions the Justices have to answer don't just center around what the extent of the Executive power, to make recess appointments, is but also how the founders intended for the Senate to function. Either way the chips fall, its time to settle this issue so the wailing on both sides stops whenever a President makes recess appointments.
    Oh I agree. Presidents have been making recess appointments since George Washington. But back then congress only met for a few months out of the year and it took perhaps a month travel time to get to the capital depending where one left from. But if I read the constitution right, recess appointments are temporary. I have never fully understood how an recess appointment becomes a permanent thing. The Constitution says:

    The President shall have the Power to fill up all vacancies that may happen during the recess of the Senate by granting commissions which shall expire at the end of their next session.

    At least that what I think expire means, temporary. Then what about the phase "may happen during the recess of the Senate?" Does this mean the vacancies must happen while the senate is in recess. It seems to. It seems not to be referring to previous vacancies, but only to ones that happen while the senate is in recess. But that is plain English and way too many times what I think the constitution says in plain English, the SCOTUS lets me know it means entirely something else.

    But it will be interesting.
    This Reform Party member thinks it is high past time that we start electing Americans to congress and the presidency who put America first and their political party further down the line. But for way too long we have been electing Republicans and Democrats who happen to be Americans instead of Americans who happen to be Republicans and Democrats.

  7. #47
    Sage
    Perotista's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Georgia
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:03 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    17,926
    Blog Entries
    24

    Re: Justices skeptical of Obama’s recess appointment claim

    Quote Originally Posted by NIMBY View Post
    When you mention the Nuns, that would be the new triangle in the SCOTUS, with Catholic-raised Sotomayor joining with Roberts and Kennedy.
    She will bring along some or all of the three "lefties".

    I expect a "split-decision" on this Senate issue, 6-3 leaning right.
    Not that there isn't case law, but I expect the SCOTUS to keep the waters muddied here.
    Legislative matters of this type like ACA and VRA have been split-decisions leaning right recently.

    We have other issues than ACA and Harry sir, and you'll be super pissed when you get briefed on TPP .
    I may be my friend, but right now it is bed time as the wife is going for the baseball bat. I never liked all these free trade agreements, all they help are the trans global corporations and screws companies and workers here in the states.
    This Reform Party member thinks it is high past time that we start electing Americans to congress and the presidency who put America first and their political party further down the line. But for way too long we have been electing Republicans and Democrats who happen to be Americans instead of Americans who happen to be Republicans and Democrats.

  8. #48
    Guru

    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    Columbus, OH
    Last Seen
    Today @ 03:49 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    4,482

    Re: Justices skeptical of Obama’s recess appointment claim

    Quote Originally Posted by Perotista View Post
    Oh I agree. Presidents have been making recess appointments since George Washington. But back then congress only met for a few months out of the year and it took perhaps a month travel time to get to the capital depending where one left from. But if I read the constitution right, recess appointments are temporary. I have never fully understood how an recess appointment becomes a permanent thing. The Constitution says:

    The President shall have the Power to fill up all vacancies that may happen during the recess of the Senate by granting commissions which shall expire at the end of their next session.

    At least that what I think expire means, temporary. Then what about the phase "may happen during the recess of the Senate?" Does this mean the vacancies must happen while the senate is in recess. It seems to. It seems not to be referring to previous vacancies, but only to ones that happen while the senate is in recess. But that is plain English and way too many times what I think the constitution says in plain English, the SCOTUS lets me know it means entirely something else.

    But it will be interesting.
    The Constitution says what it says and I think where they are going to struggle is in justifying allowing the Senate to effectively strip the President of his power to make recess appointments by sending some bozo in to mill around on the Senate floor and declaring that the recess doesn't count. Obviously the founders intended for the Senate to have recesses, but can the Senate basically just decide not to anymore if it has the (intended) effect of eliminating, by fiat, an explicitly named power of the Executive Branch? There are so many Constitutional questions here that it almost boggles the mind, but I do not believe that the founders intended for the Senate to use parliamentary smoke and mirrors, when they don't like a power granted to another branch of government, to circumvent the Constitutional amendment process.
    Last edited by Napoleon; 01-14-14 at 01:50 AM.

  9. #49
    Canadian Conservative
    CanadaJohn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Toronto, Ontario, Canada
    Last Seen
    Today @ 03:07 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    27,186

    Re: Justices skeptical of Obama’s recess appointment claim

    Quote Originally Posted by NIMBY View Post
    I would agree CJ.
    Could it be due to those who are bringing up all of these "firvilous faux" outrages to the SCOTUS?
    It could be, if you consider the constitution as simply a "document" rather than the law of the land. More likely, it represents a failure on the part of the sitting President to negotiate and legislate and instead dictate. In your form of government, when one branch ignores the others and attempts to run wild, usually the other two sit up and take notice and do whatever they can to rein the renegade in.

    Let's also remember it's well known government watchdogs like the ACLU who are taking the President and his administration to court, so hardly a concerted effort on the part of those who oppose Obama simply because he's Obama.

    Like I said, not since Nixon has a President so ignored and abused the laws of the land and so court challenges should be expected.
    "Liberals claim to want to give a hearing to other views, but then are shocked and offended to discover that there are other views." William F. Buckley Jr.

  10. #50
    Sage
    AliHajiSheik's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Last Seen
    Today @ 03:58 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    6,369

    Re: Justices skeptical of Obama’s recess appointment claim

    Quote Originally Posted by Perotista View Post
    Yep, and I do not think that really phased him. It was basically a witch hunt. If the American people cared so much about a BJ in the White House they wouldn't have had him at a 56% approval rating when the House took up impeachment. Or at 63% when the trial in the senate ended. If nothing else, this whole process made him more popular at the time.
    It's sad when people are OK with perjury. I hope no one ever lies under oath on a case your are involved with.

Page 5 of 18 FirstFirst ... 3456715 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •