President to use recess appointment for CFPB :-)

[candycorn]

candy why do you hate small business owners?

If you were worth talking to, I would explain it. Unlike you who can't explain why you are in favor of voter fraud.

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

Came for the USMB right wingnut brigade butthurt.

Leaving satisfied.

Yup, "The Great Divider" strikes again.

Campaigning is the only thing he can do right right short of letting the military snuff someone.

Makes one long for the days when Clinton was in power. At least he knew how to govern.

Clinton didn't have to deal with the kind of shit being dished out by this group, so you can shove that little comparison. These assholes aren't interested in letting this Prez govern.

Uhm, you know there is this whole checks and balances thing... not to mention the law specifically states that this position MUST be confirmed by the Senate.

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

Ask yourself...afterall you're mine.

PS: You're not working...you're posting on a message board while you blame President Obama for your failing business.

Obviously you are the cause of your own considerable, numerous, and abject failures.

I haven't mentioned my business in a while. Funny thing is my failing business was awarded the Super Service Award a couple weeks ago from Angieslist.

You, however continue to be a bitch daily.

So...how many sales calls COULD you be making instead of complaining about the poor business climate? I'm guessing several....too bad you don't care.

Don't worry, you can always blame someone else for your lot in life.

I currently have a 42k remodel I'm dealing with. I'm doing just fine at the moment but thanks for your concern. And by the way people in my business don't make cold calls. That's what telemarketers do. We advertise and wait for them to call us twit. You really have no idea how the construction industry functions do you.

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

candy why do you hate small business owners?

If you were worth talking to, I would explain it. Unlike you who can't explain why you are in favor of voter fraud.

TM would get a migraine trying to grasp the purpose of a mop handle.

 

[daveman]

Came for the USMB right wingnut brigade butthurt.

Leaving satisfied.

Yes, Art, we know: Obama can do no wrong. Good Obamabot.

 

[Mustang]

Let me see if I accurately understand conservatives' outrage.

Bush made 170 recess appoints.

This is Obama's 28th recess appointment.

And conservatives are outraged because Obama is circumventing the Congressional confirmation hearings process?

This reminds me of the moment in "Terminator 2" when the terminator (Ahnold) was introduced to John Connor's Mexican friend, Enrique, as 'Uncle Bob.' His reaction?

"Okay!?"
​

MY Outrage has to do with THERE IS NO RECESS, he has no authority to make an appointment.

This pro forma (sham) congressional non recess has an equivalent in the real world.

It would be like going to your place of employment, punching your time card, punching out three minutes later after doing no work, and then proclaiming that you worked that day.

 

[Liability]

Let me see if I accurately understand conservatives' outrage.

Bush made 170 recess appoints.

This is Obama's 28th recess appointment.

And conservatives are outraged because Obama is circumventing the Congressional confirmation hearings process?

This reminds me of the moment in "Terminator 2" when the terminator (Ahnold) was introduced to John Connor's Mexican friend, Enrique, as 'Uncle Bob.' His reaction?

"Okay!?"
​

MY Outrage has to do with THERE IS NO RECESS, he has no authority to make an appointment.

This pro forma (sham) congressional non recess has an equivalent in the real world.

It would be like going to your place of employment, punching your time card, punching out three minutes later after doing no work, and then proclaiming that you worked that day.

The SENATE declares when it is in recess, not the President, not me and not you.

The SENATE (run by a majority of DEMOCRATICS) said it was still in session.

http://dl.dropbox.com/u/3174287/CREC-2011-12-17-pt1-PgS8783-7.pdf

When the Senate passed a bill the President LIKED (the 2 month extension to the payroll tax cut), they did so while YOU say they had essentially punched the clock and left. But that was good enough for the President to sign the bill.

So, it LOOKS like the President will deign to recognize the Senate's authority when it suits him, but will not deign to honor that same Senate determination when it DOESN'T suit him.

See: Even Obama Agrees that the Senate Was Not in Recess

Obamabots LOVE to have it both ways, but this is beyond just transparently fraudulent. If the President cannot employ the tool of a recess appointment until the Senate is actually IN recess, then his putative appointment of Mr. Cordray is a nullity.

 

[Mustang]

MY Outrage has to do with THERE IS NO RECESS, he has no authority to make an appointment.

This pro forma (sham) congressional non recess has an equivalent in the real world.

It would be like going to your place of employment, punching your time card, punching out three minutes later after doing no work, and then proclaiming that you worked that day.

The SENATE declares when it is in recess, not the President, not me and not you.

The SENATE (run by a majority of DEMOCRATICS) said it was still in session.

http://dl.dropbox.com/u/3174287/CREC-2011-12-17-pt1-PgS8783-7.pdf

When the Senate passed a bill the President LIKED (the 2 month extension to the payroll tax cut), they did so while YOU say they had essentially punched the clock and left. But that was good enough for the President to sign the bill.

So, it LOOKS like the President will deign to recognize the Senate's authority when it suits him, but will not deign to honor that same Senate determination when it DOESN'T suit him.

See: Even Obama Agrees that the Senate Was Not in Recess

Obamabots LOVE to have it both ways, but this is beyond just transparently fraudulent. If the President cannot employ the tool of a recess appointment until the Senate is actually IN recess, then his putative appointment of Mr. Cordray is a nullity.

In encourage Republicans to take this matter to court.

 

[g5000]

A Bush recess appointment was challenged in 2004.

Evans vs. Stephens:

The Constitution, on its face, does not establish a minimum time that an
authorized break in the Senate must last to give legal force to the President’s
appointment power under the Recess Appointments Clause. And we do not set the
limit today. Although a President has not before appointed a judge to an Article
III court during an intrasession recess as short as the one in this case,
appointments to other offices -- offices ordinarily requiring Senate confirmation --
have been made during intrasession recesses of about this length or shorter.8
Furthermore, several times in the past, fairly short intrasession recesses have given
rise to presidential appointments of judges to Article III courts.9
Twelve Presidents have made more than 285 intrasession recess
appointments of persons to offices that ordinarily require consent of the Senate.
So, given the words of the Constitution and the history, we are unpersuaded by the
argument that the recess appointment power may only be used in an intersession recess, but not an intrasession recess. Furthermore, what we understand to be the
main purpose of the Recess Appointments Clause -- to enable the President to fill
vacancies to assure the proper functioning of our government -- supports reading
both intrasession recesses and intersession recesses as within the correct scope of
the Clause.

Obama's appointment was entirely constitutional.

Class dismissed!

 

[mudwhistle]

This pro forma (sham) congressional non recess has an equivalent in the real world.

It would be like going to your place of employment, punching your time card, punching out three minutes later after doing no work, and then proclaiming that you worked that day.

The SENATE declares when it is in recess, not the President, not me and not you.

The SENATE (run by a majority of DEMOCRATICS) said it was still in session.

http://dl.dropbox.com/u/3174287/CREC-2011-12-17-pt1-PgS8783-7.pdf

When the Senate passed a bill the President LIKED (the 2 month extension to the payroll tax cut), they did so while YOU say they had essentially punched the clock and left. But that was good enough for the President to sign the bill.

So, it LOOKS like the President will deign to recognize the Senate's authority when it suits him, but will not deign to honor that same Senate determination when it DOESN'T suit him.

See: Even Obama Agrees that the Senate Was Not in Recess

Obamabots LOVE to have it both ways, but this is beyond just transparently fraudulent. If the President cannot employ the tool of a recess appointment until the Senate is actually IN recess, then his putative appointment of Mr. Cordray is a nullity.

In encourage Republicans to take this matter to court.

I would refuse to fund this new agency.

Two can play this game.

 

[Liability]

A Bush recess appointment was challenged in 2004.

Evans vs. Stephens:

The Constitution, on its face, does not establish a minimum time that an
authorized break in the Senate must last to give legal force to the President’s
appointment power under the Recess Appointments Clause. And we do not set the
limit today. Although a President has not before appointed a judge to an Article
III court during an intrasession recess as short as the one in this case,
appointments to other offices -- offices ordinarily requiring Senate confirmation --
have been made during intrasession recesses of about this length or shorter.8
Furthermore, several times in the past, fairly short intrasession recesses have given
rise to presidential appointments of judges to Article III courts.9
Twelve Presidents have made more than 285 intrasession recess
appointments of persons to offices that ordinarily require consent of the Senate.
So, given the words of the Constitution and the history, we are unpersuaded by the
argument that the recess appointment power may only be used in an intersession recess, but not an intrasession recess. Furthermore, what we understand to be the
main purpose of the Recess Appointments Clause -- to enable the President to fill
vacancies to assure the proper functioning of our government -- supports reading
both intrasession recesses and intersession recesses as within the correct scope of
the Clause.

Obama's appointment was entirely constitutional.

Class dismissed!

The "teacher" ^ fails.

You missed the major premise, genius.

In order for the putative Obama recess appointment to be valid, the Senate would have had to have been IN recess.

It wasn't.

You best pray that you have tenure, otherwise you dopey ass is gettin' fired, schmuck.

 

[Mustang]

The SENATE declares when it is in recess, not the President, not me and not you.

The SENATE (run by a majority of DEMOCRATICS) said it was still in session.

http://dl.dropbox.com/u/3174287/CREC-2011-12-17-pt1-PgS8783-7.pdf

When the Senate passed a bill the President LIKED (the 2 month extension to the payroll tax cut), they did so while YOU say they had essentially punched the clock and left. But that was good enough for the President to sign the bill.

So, it LOOKS like the President will deign to recognize the Senate's authority when it suits him, but will not deign to honor that same Senate determination when it DOESN'T suit him.

See: Even Obama Agrees that the Senate Was Not in Recess

Obamabots LOVE to have it both ways, but this is beyond just transparently fraudulent. If the President cannot employ the tool of a recess appointment until the Senate is actually IN recess, then his putative appointment of Mr. Cordray is a nullity.

In encourage Republicans to take this matter to court.

I would refuse to fund this new agency.

Two can play this game.

Too bad you don't know what you're talking about, then, because the bureau is not subject to being funded (or having their funding cut, for that matter) by Congress since it's funded by the Federal Reserve, an independent agency not subject to the whims of Congress. That's why the Republican Congress wants to change it. They want control it so they can gut it.

 

[Liability]

This pro forma (sham) congressional non recess has an equivalent in the real world.

It would be like going to your place of employment, punching your time card, punching out three minutes later after doing no work, and then proclaiming that you worked that day.

The SENATE declares when it is in recess, not the President, not me and not you.

The SENATE (run by a majority of DEMOCRATICS) said it was still in session.

http://dl.dropbox.com/u/3174287/CREC-2011-12-17-pt1-PgS8783-7.pdf

When the Senate passed a bill the President LIKED (the 2 month extension to the payroll tax cut), they did so while YOU say they had essentially punched the clock and left. But that was good enough for the President to sign the bill.

So, it LOOKS like the President will deign to recognize the Senate's authority when it suits him, but will not deign to honor that same Senate determination when it DOESN'T suit him.

See: Even Obama Agrees that the Senate Was Not in Recess

Obamabots LOVE to have it both ways, but this is beyond just transparently fraudulent. If the President cannot employ the tool of a recess appointment until the Senate is actually IN recess, then his putative appointment of Mr. Cordray is a nullity.

In encourage Republicans to take this matter to court.

Translating whateverthefuck it was you were apparently trying to say into English -- it LOOKS like you think it would be funny if someone filed a suit over this invalid recess appointment.

Funny isn't the way I'd view it. But I will join with you to this extent. I hope someone challenges that bullshit effort in Court.

It would be GREAT to confirm that the position is STILL vacant.

 

[Mustang]

A Bush recess appointment was challenged in 2004.

Evans vs. Stephens:

The Constitution, on its face, does not establish a minimum time that an
authorized break in the Senate must last to give legal force to the President’s
appointment power under the Recess Appointments Clause. And we do not set the
limit today. Although a President has not before appointed a judge to an Article
III court during an intrasession recess as short as the one in this case,
appointments to other offices -- offices ordinarily requiring Senate confirmation --
have been made during intrasession recesses of about this length or shorter.8
Furthermore, several times in the past, fairly short intrasession recesses have given
rise to presidential appointments of judges to Article III courts.9
Twelve Presidents have made more than 285 intrasession recess
appointments of persons to offices that ordinarily require consent of the Senate.
So, given the words of the Constitution and the history, we are unpersuaded by the
argument that the recess appointment power may only be used in an intersession recess, but not an intrasession recess. Furthermore, what we understand to be the
main purpose of the Recess Appointments Clause -- to enable the President to fill
vacancies to assure the proper functioning of our government -- supports reading
both intrasession recesses and intersession recesses as within the correct scope of
the Clause.

Obama's appointment was entirely constitutional.

Class dismissed!

The decision could go either way.

 

[Liability]

A Bush recess appointment was challenged in 2004.

Evans vs. Stephens:

The Constitution, on its face, does not establish a minimum time that an
authorized break in the Senate must last to give legal force to the President’s
appointment power under the Recess Appointments Clause. And we do not set the
limit today. Although a President has not before appointed a judge to an Article
III court during an intrasession recess as short as the one in this case,
appointments to other offices -- offices ordinarily requiring Senate confirmation --
have been made during intrasession recesses of about this length or shorter.8
Furthermore, several times in the past, fairly short intrasession recesses have given
rise to presidential appointments of judges to Article III courts.9
Twelve Presidents have made more than 285 intrasession recess
appointments of persons to offices that ordinarily require consent of the Senate.
So, given the words of the Constitution and the history, we are unpersuaded by the
argument that the recess appointment power may only be used in an intersession recess, but not an intrasession recess. Furthermore, what we understand to be the
main purpose of the Recess Appointments Clause -- to enable the President to fill
vacancies to assure the proper functioning of our government -- supports reading
both intrasession recesses and intersession recesses as within the correct scope of
the Clause.

Obama's appointment was entirely constitutional.

Class dismissed!

The decision could go either way.

9-0 or 8-1.

 

[g5000]

A Bush recess appointment was challenged in 2004.

Evans vs. Stephens:

The Constitution, on its face, does not establish a minimum time that an
authorized break in the Senate must last to give legal force to the President’s
appointment power under the Recess Appointments Clause. And we do not set the
limit today. Although a President has not before appointed a judge to an Article
III court during an intrasession recess as short as the one in this case,
appointments to other offices -- offices ordinarily requiring Senate confirmation --
have been made during intrasession recesses of about this length or shorter.8
Furthermore, several times in the past, fairly short intrasession recesses have given
rise to presidential appointments of judges to Article III courts.9
Twelve Presidents have made more than 285 intrasession recess
appointments of persons to offices that ordinarily require consent of the Senate.
So, given the words of the Constitution and the history, we are unpersuaded by the
argument that the recess appointment power may only be used in an intersession recess, but not an intrasession recess. Furthermore, what we understand to be the
main purpose of the Recess Appointments Clause -- to enable the President to fill
vacancies to assure the proper functioning of our government -- supports reading
both intrasession recesses and intersession recesses as within the correct scope of
the Clause.

Obama's appointment was entirely constitutional.

Class dismissed!

The decision could go either way.

I provided the link. Read it!

We conclude that the President’s appointment was not beyond his constitutional power.

We are not persuaded that the President acted beyond his authority in this
case: both the words of the Constitution and the history of the nation support the
President’s authority.

Clear now?

 

[Liability]

A Bush recess appointment was challenged in 2004.

Evans vs. Stephens:

Obama's appointment was entirely constitutional.

Class dismissed!

The decision could go either way.

I provided the link. Read it!

We conclude that the President’s appointment was not beyond his constitutional power.

We are not persuaded that the President acted beyond his authority in this
case: both the words of the Constitution and the history of the nation support the
President’s authority.

Clear now?

It is CRYSTAL clear that you have no capacity for comprehension.

It is (despite your drooling imbecility) STILL the case that in order for a so-called recess appointment to be valid, the Senate would have to be IN recess.

 

[g5000]

Someone somewhere decided that as long as the Senate met every three days, then the Senate is not in recess.

However, Evans clearly states that the length of time the Senate is out of session is not set. They also stated there is precedence for this type of appointment when they said, "offices ordinarily requiring Senate confirmation -- have been made during intrasession recesses of about this length or shorter".

So while "time out" and "time in" might work on the playground, it does not work in the courts.

The Senate was in recess. The appointment is legal.

 

[g5000]

I would spend a little time thinking about the stance some of you are taking today. It will come back to bite you in the ass when a Republican is in office.

Don't be a crybaby butt-hurt hypocrite trying to diminish the power of the executive when it suits you and then conveniently suffer amnesia when it doesn't.

Think!

 

[JakeStarkey]

Presidents have a constitutional right to the folks they want, and the Senate has the right advise and consent. Not obstruct. Bush wanted Bolton (whom I abhor and would never let near any government office from city to national), but Bush had the right to appoint Bolton and the Senate had the obligation, which it failed, to advise and consent.

Obama did what he had to in this situation, and the GOP has not a leg to stand on.