Stuff they didn't teach on "Schoolhouse Rock"
It's been quite a year: first we found out that the President can pick and choose which laws he wants to enforce. Then we discovered that minority rights in the Senate can be suspended when votes reach the threshold of "potentially embarrassing." And today it came to our attention that all those pro forma sessions in the Senate were a waste of time since a President can appoint whoever he wants, whenever he wants.
All this new information is going to come in super-handy around this time next year.
Extra - Candidate Obama: "We are not going to use signing statements as a way of doing an end run around Congress."
More - Fleeing the State House to prevent a vote = democracy.
9 comments:
Teddy Roosevelt filled 160 recess appointments during a break of a few minutes in 1903. Harry Truman made a similar appointment in 1949.
More recently Ted Kennedy's challenge to the William Pryor judicial appointment failed, and the Republicans will lose this one.
What happened to "all we want is an up-or-down vote"? Ah, fond memories...
Clinton: 139 recess appointments
GWBush: 171 recess appointments
Obama: 29 recess appointments
OUTRAGE!
Yes, and Nero fiddled while Rome burned.
You really are this site's version of SNL's Mr. Peepers. Lick away.
Another awesome comedic comeback from Unfrozen-on-January-20-2009 Conservative.
"I'm just a conservative. Awareness of history confuses and frightens me. Who puts facts and context into my Google, tiny little demons?"
Who's outraged? Not me!
I think it's great that whoever our new president will be in 2012 can appoint whomever he wants.
Senate's in session? No it's not.
Problem solved.
The fact that there's been a bigger, angrier reaction from conservatives about Obama appointing a consumer watchdog without Mitch McConnell's say-so than there has been about Obama authorizing indefinite detention without trial for American citizens tells us how deeply screwed up the political right's priorities are at the current time.
The fact that there's been virtually no reaction from liberals about Obama authorizing indefinite detention without trial for American citizens tells us how deeply screwed up the political left's priorities are at the current time.
Or did I miss that NYT editorial?
Now you've done it, Eric. Mr. Peepers will post countless historical examples of so-called liberals ignoring genocide, tyranny, atrocities, etc in their countries. Somehow that will be intended to excuse Obama and his supporters in this instance, or ANY instance, for that matter.
Or did I miss that NYT editorial?
Hard to say. Which one?
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/12/16/opinion/politics-over-principle.html
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/12/13/opinion/guantanamo-forever.html?_r=3
With too few exceptions, the left's response has been shameful, also. But your reflexive we're rubber/you're glue response doesn't obscure the fact that compared to this foul law, Obama's organized opposition is far more invested in Kenya, teleprompters, Solyndra, "Happy holidays," and Michelle Obama telling us to eat vegetables even though she doesn't exactly have a small ass.
"But your reflexive we're rubber/you're glue response"
Oh, that's rich.
Post a Comment