Obama....'recess appointments'...and GOP tactics

[Antares]

Congress should have thirty days to approve or disapprove an appointment. After thirty days the appointment becomes official without Congress whether they are in session or not

.
Will you hold that same opinion when Ted Cruz is President?


This may seem like a trick question, but it is not.

.

Since it is purely fantasy as it regards to Cruz....Yes.....I think the President should be allowed to pick the people in his branch

You people changed everything when the name "Bork" became a verb.

That changed everything so the Left can go fuck themselves on this "the President should get his man" bullshit.

 

[Obiwan]

Nat

Look at it this way.....

If you're taking applications for a job and you see someone qualified , you give them an interview.

If you see a dud, you don't waste the time. You just throw it in the trash.

Tell Obama to send them someone qualified instead of trying to spend taxpayers money on wasting time.

 

[nat4900]

nSTEWED doesn't bother reading previous posts (reading must be such a chore for semi-literates)....and I'll let the rest of you right wing clowns just stew in your own hatred......I have a happy life to lead,

 

[nat4900]

Nat

Look at it this way.....

If you're taking applications for a job and you see someone qualified , you give them an interview.

If you see a dud, you don't waste the time. You just throw it in the trash.

Tell Obama to send them someone qualified instead of trying to spend taxpayers money on wasting time.

You mean like Loretta Lynch???? hardly a dud...

 

[Antares]

Translation: "I hate you Righties because you I am so damned brilliant you should all just bow down and suckle at my breast"

Sorry kid Lefty's like you are a dime a dozen......and you are all the same, shocked when we don't just marvel at your presence.

 

[thereisnospoon]

On another thread, some of our "sweethearts" of the right wing mindset reminded us that Obama has been "slapped down" 12 or 13 times by the Supreme Court for overstepping his executive authority and had basically "broken: the law.......

However, one particular rejection caught my eye.....the one about RECESS APPOINTMENTS........That one was interesting because I had read that Obama was particularly angered by this related SC decision and that the Court had actually gone along with the Republican senate shameless practices and tactics.

The current guidelines state that a president can make an appointment during congressional recess periods IF congress is in recess for MORE than 3 days...and, Obama DID follow the "letter" of that guideline........However, read what the "clever" republicans did to thwart his efforts.....

Since May 2011, Republicans have been relying on a little-known procedure to keep the Senate in session, even when it was not really conducting any business, in order to stop the President from making those recess appointments. The legal basis comes from a 1993 Department of Justice brief saying the president should act only if the Senate is in official recess more than three days.

So, party leaders have arranged for a single Republican lawmaker to show up every three days and gavel the Senate to order, wait around for about 30 seconds, gavel it to a close, then leave.


YOU JUDGE the ethics of the republican senate......

Tit for tat....

 

[rightwinger]

Congress should have thirty days to approve or disapprove an appointment. After thirty days the appointment becomes official without Congress whether they are in session or not

Perfect and sound idea....surely 30 days should be enough for those camera whores to strut their approval or dissent.

Congress should not have the authority to shut down the executive branch or the judicial branch through inaction

If the want the right to approve or disapprove appointments, they should use it

Right! When Harry Reid wouldn't bring a budget up for a vote, you were all good with that though, weren't you?

Sho

Congress should have thirty days to approve or disapprove an appointment. After thirty days the appointment becomes official without Congress whether they are in session or not

.
Will you hold that same opinion when Ted Cruz is President?


This may seem like a trick question, but it is not.

.

Since it is purely fantasy as it regards to Cruz....Yes.....I think the President should be allowed to pick the people in his branch

You people changed everything when the name "Bork" became a verb.

That changed everything so the Left can go fuck themselves on this "the President should get his man" bullshit.

Bork was bizarre

 

[natstew]

Congress should have thirty days to approve or disapprove an appointment. After thirty days the appointment becomes official without Congress whether they are in session or not

You mean Republicans should have 30 days, you were silent when the Dems blocked Bush's nominations:

"When Senate Minority Whip Dick Durbin played the race card Wednesday against Republicans blocking Loretta Lynch’s attorney general nomination, he must have forgotten all of the times he opposed Republican minority nominees.

In one of those instances of obstinance, Durbin’s Senate staff submitted a memo in 2001 asserting that George W. Bush U.S. Appeals Court’s nominee Miguel Estrada was an “especially dangerous” prospect because “he is Latino.

Here's the whole article:
Durbin Sought To Block Bush s Latino Court Nominee The Daily Caller

Here's more:

Miguel Estrada - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

 

[natstew]

Congress should have thirty days to approve or disapprove an appointment. After thirty days the appointment becomes official without Congress whether they are in session or not

Perfect and sound idea....surely 30 days should be enough for those camera whores to strut their approval or dissent.

Congress should not have the authority to shut down the executive branch or the judicial branch through inaction

If the want the right to approve or disapprove appointments, they should use it

Right! When Harry Reid wouldn't bring a budget up for a vote, you were all good with that though, weren't you?

Sho

Congress should have thirty days to approve or disapprove an appointment. After thirty days the appointment becomes official without Congress whether they are in session or not

.
Will you hold that same opinion when Ted Cruz is President?


This may seem like a trick question, but it is not.

.

Since it is purely fantasy as it regards to Cruz....Yes.....I think the President should be allowed to pick the people in his branch

You people changed everything when the name "Bork" became a verb.

That changed everything so the Left can go fuck themselves on this "the President should get his man" bullshit.

Bork was bizarre

Ans you are a proven liar

 

[Hutch Starskey]

"In the history of the United States,168 presidential nominees have been filibustered, 82 blocked under President Obama, 86blocked under all the other presidents."

Harry Reid says 82 presidential nominees have been blocked under President Barack Obama 86 blocked under all other presidents PolitiFact

I would say that is unprecidented obstruction.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

Advise, consent and confirm Loretta Lynch

Advise consent and confirm Loretta Lynch TheHill

 

[natstew]

Congress should have thirty days to approve or disapprove an appointment. After thirty days the appointment becomes official without Congress whether they are in session or not

Perfect and sound idea....surely 30 days should be enough for those camera whores to strut their approval or dissent.

Congress should not have the authority to shut down the executive branch or the judicial branch through inaction

If the want the right to approve or disapprove appointments, they should use it

I'll bet you think Congress should just take orders from Obama and do whatever he tells it to do.

I think Congress should do its job

Where was your voice when "Dirty" Harry Reid was Speaker of the House??

 

[bripat9643]

I'll bet you think Congress should just take orders from Obama and do whatever he tells it to do.

Only an idiot would state that.....and YOU rose to the "challenge."

What "challenge" is that?

 

[Ernie S.]

this entire debate could be over IF the republican senate members would simply decide to YES........we will vote down ANY appointment request made by the Obama administration....

Instead they either "table" the request and do NOTHING, or rely on their cronies on the corrupt SC to back them up on their UNWILLINGNESS to do their jobs.

Again, a tactic used hundreds of times by Harry Reid.

 

[Ernie S.]

Keep talking instead of reading, you're just proving how ignorant you really are. Your dear leaders recess appointments of union cronies to the NLRB was done because they would have never gotten senate confirmation.

You don't like the nominations???? Then have the balls to VOTE THEM DOWN......Instead, senate republicans HIDE behind their cronies at the SC.

Look, idjut! The GOP has a majority in the Senate. What's the point of bringing obumbler's nominees up for a vote? They will not be confirmed.
Hell! if the Asshat in Chief doesn't learn to play ball with an opposition Congress, he won't be able to pass gas, let alone any meaningful legislation or appointments.

 

[rightwinger]

Congress should have thirty days to approve or disapprove an appointment. After thirty days the appointment becomes official without Congress whether they are in session or not

You mean Republicans should have 30 days, you were silent when the Dems blocked Bush's nominations:

"When Senate Minority Whip Dick Durbin played the race card Wednesday against Republicans blocking Loretta Lynch’s attorney general nomination, he must have forgotten all of the times he opposed Republican minority nominees.

In one of those instances of obstinance, Durbin’s Senate staff submitted a memo in 2001 asserting that George W. Bush U.S. Appeals Court’s nominee Miguel Estrada was an “especially dangerous” prospect because “he is Latino.

Here's the whole article:
Durbin Sought To Block Bush s Latino Court Nominee The Daily Caller

Here's more:

Miguel Estrada - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

I don't give a shit which party

President makes an appointment....you have 30 days yes or no

 

[Ernie S.]

That's not required by the Constitution. That sucks for you and Obama, doesn't it?

Senate republicans are NOT required to do their jobs????
Yeah, in your sick, hate-filled world, that sounds just about right.

Their "job" is to do what they were elected to do, namely stop obama from further damaging the nation. Sucks to be you, doesn't it?

 

[rightwinger]

Keep talking instead of reading, you're just proving how ignorant you really are. Your dear leaders recess appointments of union cronies to the NLRB was done because they would have never gotten senate confirmation.

You don't like the nominations???? Then have the balls to VOTE THEM DOWN......Instead, senate republicans HIDE behind their cronies at the SC.

Look, idjut! The GOP has a majority in the Senate. What's the point of bringing obumbler's nominees up for a vote? They will not be confirmed.
Hell! if the Asshat in Chief doesn't learn to play ball with an opposition Congress, he won't be able to pass gas, let alone any meaningful legislation or appointments.

Do it Senate

Don't like it ..vote no

 

[Ernie S.]

Congress should have thirty days to approve or disapprove an appointment. After thirty days the appointment becomes official without Congress whether they are in session or not

You mean Republicans should have 30 days, you were silent when the Dems blocked Bush's nominations:

"When Senate Minority Whip Dick Durbin played the race card Wednesday against Republicans blocking Loretta Lynch’s attorney general nomination, he must have forgotten all of the times he opposed Republican minority nominees.

In one of those instances of obstinance, Durbin’s Senate staff submitted a memo in 2001 asserting that George W. Bush U.S. Appeals Court’s nominee Miguel Estrada was an “especially dangerous” prospect because “he is Latino.

Here's the whole article:
Durbin Sought To Block Bush s Latino Court Nominee The Daily Caller

Here's more:

Miguel Estrada - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

I don't give a shit which party

President makes an appointment....you have 30 days yes or no

Can you show me that requirement in the COTUS?

 

[rightwinger]

That's not required by the Constitution. That sucks for you and Obama, doesn't it?

Senate republicans are NOT required to do their jobs????
Yeah, in your sick, hate-filled world, that sounds just about right.

Their "job" is to do what they were elected to do, namely stop obama from further damaging the nation. Sucks to be you, doesn't it?

That's it?

Republicans don't expect the Congress they elected to do anything to help Republicans.........just stop Obama?