Obama Trolls Senate Republicans: Progressives Delighted

[Vilayet]

Exactly. It's only OK when Bush did it. Just not when the black guy does it.

and because someone else did it, that makes it perfectly ok for anyone else to do it.

What, exactly, is your objection to recess appointments?

[West Vandengaarde]

Exactly. It's only OK when Bush did it. Just not when the black guy does it.

and because someone else did it, that makes it perfectly ok for anyone else to do it.

Well, that's the doctrine the Democrats run on, yes.

[Nationstatelandsville]

Is there something against jokes now?

When they make false implications that amount to slander, sure.

Oh no! I have clearly damaged the reputation of the Republican party to such a degree that their lives are ruined.

Bullshit.

[West Vandengaarde]

and because someone else did it, that makes it perfectly ok for anyone else to do it.

What, exactly, is your objection to recess appointments?

Mine personally is that they undercut the ability of the congress to check the appointments of the president. In this case, while the congress was being a gaggle of idiots, it still should be able to use its powers to manipulate policy.

[Fnordgasm 5]

and because someone else did it, that makes it perfectly ok for anyone else to do it.

Well, that's the doctrine the politicians run on, yes.

Fixed.


Your welcome.

[West Vandengaarde]

When they make false implications that amount to slander, sure.

Oh no! I have clearly damaged the reputation of the Republican party to such a degree that their lives are ruined.

Bullshit.

Because that's what I totally said, not that you implied that the Republicans were racist and that this entire issue was based off the president's skin color quite wrongly or anything.

[Vilayet]

What, exactly, is your objection to recess appointments?

Mine personally is that they undercut the ability of the congress to check the appointments of the president. In this case, while the congress was being a gaggle of idiots, it still should be able to use its powers to manipulate policy.

No they don't. If the Senate rejects a recess appointment once they return to session, the position becomes vacant again. Recess appointments are still subject to congressional review.

[West Vandengaarde]

Well, that's the doctrine the politicians run on, yes.

Fixed.


Your welcome.

That's true enough I suppose.

[The Republic of Lanos]

What, exactly, is your objection to recess appointments?

Mine personally is that they undercut the ability of the congress to check the appointments of the president. In this case, while the congress was being a gaggle of idiots, it still should be able to use its powers to manipulate policy.

It was meant originally to have someone in the position when Congress would be out for weeks at a time before the days of transportation faster than a galloping horse. While it may have a legitimate usage, there are some times when it shouldn't be used. This was one of them.

[Nationstatelandsville]

Oh no! I have clearly damaged the reputation of the Republican party to such a degree that their lives are ruined.

Bullshit.

Because that's what I totally said, not that you implied that the Republicans were racist and that this entire issue was based off the president's skin color quite wrongly or anything.

Yes, I did, in a non-serious manner. What's your point?

Are you seriously taking a moral issue against sarcasm?

[West Vandengaarde]

Mine personally is that they undercut the ability of the congress to check the appointments of the president. In this case, while the congress was being a gaggle of idiots, it still should be able to use its powers to manipulate policy.

No they don't. If the Senate rejects a recess appointment once they return to session, the position becomes vacant again. Recess appointments are still subject to congressional review.

Ah, see, I didn't notice that. Thanks for correcting me. So why is this a huge issue again...?

[You-Gi-Owe]

WASHINGTON (CNNMoney) - In a move that has angered Republicans, President Obama is expected on Wednesday to make a recess appointment of Richard Cordray to be the first director of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, sidestepping the Senate confirmation process, a senior administration official tells CNN.

The president is expected to make the official announcement at a 1:15 p.m. ET speech in Ohio, where Cordray served as attorney general.

Last month, the Senate failed to muster enough votes to take up confirmation of Cordray to run the consumer bureau, with all but one Republican voting against the move. At the time, President Obama hinted that was considering such a recess appointment.

News of the impending recess appointment spurred a flurry of angry statements from GOP leaders who have been trying to block a recess appointment for more than seven months.

"President Obama, in an unprecedented move, has arrogantly circumvented the American people by 'recess' appointing Richard Cordray as director of the new CFPB," said Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell in a statement.

At stake are vast new powers the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau can't wield without a director. For example, the bureau can't regulate financial products from non-banks, including student loan providers, debt collectors, payday lenders and check cashers.

Without a chief, the bureau also can't regulate mortgage originators and servicers, which played a big role in the financial crisis by providing subprime mortgages to families who couldn't afford them.

The move has sharpened tension between the White House and Republicans, who have vowed since May to block confirmation of any director unless they get structural changes to the bureau, which was formed as part of the Wall Street reform law passed last year.

Republicans had been using a little-known procedure to keep the Senate in session - even as it wasn't really conducting any business - in order to stop the president from making recess appointments. Their basis for the move comes from a non-binding Department of Justice brief from 1993 that states Congress should be in recess for more than three days before the president makes an official recess appointment.

Until now, Obama has not tried to challenge the GOP's effort to block his recess appointments. However, legal experts have said they believed Obama had the authority to make such a recess appointment despite Congressional attempts to block him.

GOP leaders say they don't think Obama has the power to make a recess appointment, given their moves. Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell said Cordray's appointment is on "uncertain legal territory," in a statement.

And House Speaker John Boehner went a step further stating he expects "courts will find the appointment to be illegitimate," in a statement.

Republicans say their objection to Cordray's nomination has nothing to do with the nominee.

Instead, they want three big changes to how the bureau is overseen. They want to replace the director with a board; make the bureau ask Congress for money each year; and gain more power to overrule the bureau.

–CNN's Adam Aigner-Treworgy contributed to this report.

Source

Fuck yeah. Obama has apparently stolen someone's spine and he looks ready to beat the Republicans over the head with it. More info to follow.

What do you think of this developement?

The press seems much more sympathetic to recess appointments by Democratic Party Presidents than Republican Presidents.

However, I generally like it when a vacant and important position is filled by recess appointment, U.N. Ambassador, Appeals Court justice, or the like. This seems to me to be just another effing bureaucratic "czar".

[West Vandengaarde]

Because that's what I totally said, not that you implied that the Republicans were racist and that this entire issue was based off the president's skin color quite wrongly or anything.

Yes, I did, in a non-serious manner. What's your point?

Are you seriously taking a moral issue against sarcasm?

Humor can be used to make points, you know.

[New England and The Maritimes]

No they don't. If the Senate rejects a recess appointment once they return to session, the position becomes vacant again. Recess appointments are still subject to congressional review.

Ah, see, I didn't notice that. Thanks for correcting me. So why is this a huge issue again...?

The Republicans wanted to keep filibustering until everything fell apart. They're upset that Obama took advantage of them taking a break to put the guy in and force them to actually vote on it instead of reading numbers from the phone book into a microphone or whatever.

[The Black Forrest]

LOL@ "unprecedented". I'd suggest the one senator in that story to check out a copy of the US Constitution... recess appointments are quite precedented and, their boy "Dubya" made no less than 6 when he was in office.

But but but that's different.

[West Vandengaarde]

Ah, see, I didn't notice that. Thanks for correcting me. So why is this a huge issue again...?

The Republicans wanted to keep filibustering until everything fell apart. They're upset that Obama took advantage of them taking a break to put the guy in and force them to actually vote on it instead of reading numbers from the phone book into a microphone or whatever.

Meh. I'm against the filibuster power in the first place so whatever stops any of the parties from being douches is fine by me.

[Nationstatelandsville]

No they don't. If the Senate rejects a recess appointment once they return to session, the position becomes vacant again. Recess appointments are still subject to congressional review.

Ah, see, I didn't notice that. Thanks for correcting me. So why is this a huge issue again...?

It isn't. The news is that the Republicans flipped out.

Source

Fuck yeah. Obama has apparently stolen someone's spine and he looks ready to beat the Republicans over the head with it. More info to follow.

What do you think of this developement?

The press seems much more sympathetic to recess appointments by Democratic Party Presidents than Republican Presidents.

However, I generally like it when a vacant and important position is filled by recess appointment, U.N. Ambassador, Appeals Court justice, or the like. This seems to me to be just another effing bureaucratic "czar".

Mhm... what problem do you have with it You-Gi-Owe? Your logic makes no sense.

He's filling a position because Congress wouldn't. What's wrong with that?

[Nationstatelandsville]

Yes, I did, in a non-serious manner. What's your point?

Are you seriously taking a moral issue against sarcasm?

Humor can be used to make points, you know.

Get over it.

[West Vandengaarde]

The press seems much more sympathetic to recess appointments by Democratic Party Presidents than Republican Presidents.

However, I generally like it when a vacant and important position is filled by recess appointment, U.N. Ambassador, Appeals Court justice, or the like. This seems to me to be just another effing bureaucratic "czar".

Mhm... what problem do you have with it You-Gi-Owe? Your logic makes no sense.

He's filling a position because Congress wouldn't. What's wrong with that?

Because regulating student loans and other government business isn't important or something.

[Vilayet]

No they don't. If the Senate rejects a recess appointment once they return to session, the position becomes vacant again. Recess appointments are still subject to congressional review.

Ah, see, I didn't notice that. Thanks for correcting me. So why is this a huge issue again...?

Not a problem. To be honest, I didn't know that until I looked it up.

If you're asking why the position itself is so significant, it's because this appointment just filled the director position of a corporate watchdog, which should be good for... well, for people who support corporate watchdogs.

[Nekoland]

Is this the same Obama that's been in office for nearly three years now?

[West Vandengaarde]

Humor can be used to make points, you know.

Get over it.

Way to take a small argument and be a dick about it. Oh well.

[Flameswroth]

I am not a fan of Obama, and I know little to nothing about what this bureau's function is.

All I can tell is that the senators are keeping Congress in session (likely costing us money...I mean, isn't this like...Legislature Over-Time or somethin'?) to try and prevent Obama from appointing a person to a bureau they don't control strongly enough, thus preventing the bureau from actually functioning.

So we're spending money in order to prevent something from running properly because it doesn't run the way they'd like it to run? Seems pretty inefficient to me.

[Nationstatelandsville]

Is this the same Obama that's been in office for nearly three years now?

Maybe he's a robot. Robobama?

That would actually be kind of awesome. Can we do that?

[SaintB]

GOP leaders say they don't think Obama has the power to make a recess appointment, given their moves. Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell said Cordray's appointment is on "uncertain legal territory," in a statement.

And House Speaker John Boehner went a step further stating he expects "courts will find the appointment to be illegitimate," in a statement.

What the fuck? Of course the appointment is legitimate, the Constitution says so. Hell, George Washington himself even utilized recess appointments.

The Constitution is only legitimate when the GOP says it is. There is American law, and then the is American law the way the GOP wants it to be... guess which laws they follow?