• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

8 freshman reps block Obama from recess appointments

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
thraashman said:
Well seeing as the current minority Senate party has filibustered more nomination in less than 3 years under Obama than the minority Democratic party did in 6 years under Bush, I think we can see what's going on. Mitch McConnell said it himself, their primary goal is to prevent Obama getting a second term. And what better way to do that than to block his appointing of competent people who will fix this nation's problems. Thsi is just more proof that the Republicans want one thing and one thing only, to sacrifice the American people for their narrow-minded far right bordering on fascist ideals.
Click to expand...

Obama can't beat Bush in ANYTHING can he? :awe:
 
PokerGuy said:
So making sure the president doesn't do an end-run around congress is now an "obstructionist agenda"? He needs to appoint decent candidates, pure and simple.
Click to expand...

I mean the obstruction policy for both parties, which is, of course, what this is really about. There are no appropriate appointments Obama's opponents would approve of, much like there were essentially no "good" appointments dems approved of under Bush. Republicans are the worse offenders here, but dems are not innocent of it. At this point, the political voices sound, to me, like toddlers: "no!" "no!" no matter what you ask them.

I'm a republican, by the way.
 
spidey07 said:
Doing their constitutional duty is obstructionist how exactly?
Click to expand...

Well, again, this is a ruse. That's my beef with it. Just like you gleefully exclaimed at me "LOL U DONT GET TEH CONSTITUION STOOPD," (but entitled your thread in a fashion indicating the true intent here) you know darn well this isn't about representing their constituents, its simply a manipulation of the system to block appointments which will ultimately be circumvented.

I'd rather we get stuff done then take petty shots. The country sucked under Bush and is no better under Obama.
 
Axon said:
I mean the obstruction policy for both parties, which is, of course, what this is really about. There are no appropriate appointments Obama's opponents would approve of, much like there were essentially no "good" appointments dems approved of under Bush. Republicans are the worse offenders here, but dems are not innocent of it. At this point, the political voices sound, to me, like toddlers: "no!" "no!" no matter what you ask them.

I'm a republican, by the way.
Click to expand...

At least under Bush the Democrats made an agreement not to block any but the most extremely offensive nominations. The current Republicans will block anyone the second Obama nominates them because it was Obama nominating them. If Obama put forth a man that could prove that he'd be able to fix every major American economic problem in less than 1 year if appointed, the Republicans would block him. Whereas Huckabee thinks Donald Trump should be appointed somewhere and if a Republican president nominated him, the current Republicans would overwhelmingly vote for that incompetent nitwit.
 
Thump553 said:
No, I don't remember ANY of the COMMUNISTS Obama tried to appoint. Please enlighten me by naming even one-and for extra points submit some proof that person was ever a member of the Communist Party.


LOL, Republicans doing what they do best-obstructing government and then so clueless as to brag about it when the American people are begging for a government that functions.
Click to expand...
Van Jones, Obama's Green jobs Czar, was a self-described Communist, although I don't know that he ever felt the Democrat Party too constricting. Glenn Beck produced video of Jones describing himself as a Communist dedicated to overthrowing capitalism, which is why Jones had to step down. That's the only one I can recall, although admittedly I don't follow this stuff that much. Such accusations are usually politically motivated, and independently reaching a judgement would require time and resources I don't have. Frankly though I'd be amazed if Obama tried to appoint an actual Communist Party member to anything, as it would be politically quite damaging and would draw fire from both sides.

Republicans are doing exactly what Democrats do. Both sides strongly believe that their policies are right for America and the other side's policies are wrong. Our government has arguably become too big, too powerful, and too intrusive for both sides to compromise. That's why I think we need to concentrate on and follow rules, principles; even if the results are not to our liking, a few dozen judges on one side or the other isn't going to destroy America.

I do think though that there should be NO lifetime appointments. That is one thing that makes these appointments so politicized.
 
I am surprised that no one has recited the stat at the end of the Op's link.

During the Clinton Adm, Clinton made 139 recess appoints, GWB some 173 recess appointments, which makes Obama a serial abuser as he has only made 21 recess appointments so far?

As for Obama and the courts, for all practical purposes congress is now in recess, and what the GOP is pulling is only a gimmick.
 
Lemon law said:
I am surprised that no one has recited the stat at the end of the Op's link.

During the Clinton Adm, Clinton made 139 recess appoints, GWB some 173 recess appointments, which makes Obama a serial abuser as he has only made 21 recess appointments so far?

As for Obama and the courts, for all practical purposes congress is now in recess, and what the GOP is pulling is only a gimmick.
Click to expand...

I think it would be more un if I could dig up the link on had on how many scumbags GWB pardoned on his way out now THAT would be a fun thread 😎
 
Thump553 said:
No, I don't remember ANY of the COMMUNISTS Obama tried to appoint. Please enlighten me by naming even one-and for extra points submit some proof that person was ever a member of the Communist Party.


LOL, Republicans doing what they do best-obstructing government and then so clueless as to brag about it when the American people are begging for a government that functions.
Click to expand...

Van Jones.

"In March 2009 Jones was appointed by President Barack Obama to the newly created position of Special Advisor for Green Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation at the White House Council on Environmental Quality...

...His position with the Obama Administration was described by columnist Chadwick Matlin as "switchboard operator for Obama's grand vision of the American economy"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Van_Jones

He was arrested in 1992 at a protest of the Rodney King verdicts. In 2007, he wrote in the Huffington Post "But the incident [arrest] deepened my disaffection with the system and accelerated my political radicalization."
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/van-jones/15-years-ago-rodney-king-_b_48361.html

In 2005, he was quoted as saying "But in jail, he said, "I met all these young radical people of color -- I mean really radical, communists and anarchists. And it was, like, 'This is what I need to be a part of.'" Although he already had a plane ticket, he decided to stay in San Francisco. "I spent the next ten years of my life working with a lot of those people I met in jail, trying to be a revolutionary." In the months that followed, he let go of any lingering thoughts that he might fit in with the status quo. "I was a rowdy nationalist on April 28th, and then the verdicts came down on April 29th," he said. "By August, I was a communist."
http://www.eastbayexpress.com/gyrob...ntalism/Content?oid=1079539&showFullText=true


"He [Van Jones] got involved with Standing Together to Organize a Revolutionary Movement (STORM), where Jones actively began protesting police brutality. STORM was a socialist group whose official Points of Unity "upheld revolutionary democracy, revolutionary feminism, revolutionary internationalism, the central role of the working class, urban Marxism, and Third World Communism," and which built connections with other organizations to organize protests, especially against wars and police violence."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Van_Jones



He shifted his goals toward environmental activism, but with his self-described communist past, one has to wonder how to interpret the statements he made to Uprising Radio in 2008"
"We [Progressives] don't understand the difference between minimum goals and maximum goals...''

"...Inside that minimum demand was a very radical kernel, that eventually meant from 1964 to 1968, that complete revolution was on the table for this country... and I think this green movement has to pursue those same steps and stages''

''...right now we are saying we want to move from suicidal grey capitalism to some kind of eco-capitalsim...''

''Will that be enough? No It [eco-capitalism] won't be enough! We want to go beyond systems of exploitations and oppression all together"

''So the green economy will start off as a small subset. And we are going to push it and push it and push it... until it becomes the engine for transforming the whole society''
http://jordy.gundy.org/eco-capitalism-and-marxist-revolution/



Given that the guy was a SELF ADMITTED COMMUNIST is it that out of left field to think that it might not be a good idea to let the guy transform our whole society? Might not be a good idea to let a SELF ADMITTED COMMUNIST be the "switchboard operator for Obama's grand vision of the American economy"...


I'm assuming that publicly ADMITTING THAT YOU'RE A COMMUNIST counts as "proof that person was ever a member of the Communist Party"?

What do I get with these...Bonus Points? Let's see....I'll take the dishwasher....the VHS camcorder....and.....I'll put the rest on a gift certificate.
 
On an interesting and perhaps related note, Republicans are tanking in the generic congressional ballot.

6a00d83451c45669e2015390a40dbf970b-550wi
 
loki8481 said:
it's their constitutional duty to routinely prevent any presidential nominee from receiving a vote in the Senate?
Click to expand...

How does ensuring that an appointee goes through the process of having a vote, instead of allowing the appointee to be appointed without a vote during a recess, "prevent the nominee from receiving a vote"? 🙄
 
QuantumPion said:
How does ensuring that an appointee goes through the process of having a vote, instead of allowing the appointee to be appointed without a vote during a recess, "prevent the nominee from receiving a vote"? 🙄
Click to expand...
because you and I and they all know that's not what they're doing.

it's not that Obama has nominees who are so polarizing and unqualified that they wouldn't reach 51 votes in the Senate, it's that the opposition party is blocking his nominees from ever receiving a vote in the first place.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top