8 freshman reps block Obama from recess appointments

[Macamus Prime]

Democrats obstructing the wishes of a Republican President? As well they should. It is the system.

You see, it's like an egg man who was placed on top of a wall. You aren't quite sure how he got up there. Or, even who put him up there to begin with. But at some point he will have a great fall. And all the king's men just can't seem to put him together again.

 

[Jhhnn]

Nice hit piece on Jones, kinev. You obviously didn't compile it yourself, so what's the source?

The attribution by Matlin, who has no idea what he's talking about, is truly touching, btw...

 

[Jhhnn]

On an interesting and perhaps related note, Republicans are tanking in the generic congressional ballot.

Probably because they caved on the debt deal.

How lame. It's probably because they started the whole fracas, threatened to discredit the Government of the People if they couldn't have their own way...

They've jumped the shark, and are too wrapped up in their own rhetoric to realize it.

 

[Thump553]

Van Jones off the top of my head. The guy for health and human services as well.

So you contend Van Jones is or was at any time a Communist? What is your proof? There is no mention at all of any alleged Communist affliation in his wkikpedia bio (link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Van_Jones)-the closest is that he doesn't like Republicans. Guess a lot of Americans are Communist under that standard.

Typical Spidey argument, making up lies and then claiming they are facts.

 

[PokerGuy]

So you contend Van Jones is or was at any time a Communist? What is your proof?

He said so himself. That's plenty of proof. That, and he admitted to becoming a radical nutcase... and that's the kind of person you want to appoint to a critical position in the US economy. That's why we need patriots to make sure no recess appointments are made at this point. Once a more qualified person comes into office they can re-evaluate the need for it.

 

[spidey07]

He said so himself. That's plenty of proof. That, and he admitted to becoming a radical nutcase... and that's the kind of person you want to appoint to a critical position in the US economy. That's why we need patriots to make sure no recess appointments are made at this point. Once a more qualified person comes into office they can re-evaluate the need for it.

Tea Party Patriots, taking it back!
Stopping Obama's tyranny in it's tracks!

 

[Moonbeam]

It's so sad. The Poor poor American People. So many have been put so deeply asleep they don't even know their being fucked in the ass by the party of the rich. There's nothing you can do to save people who fuck themselves thinking it's good. There's nothing you can do but feel pity. The blind are blind and that's the way it is.

 

[crownjules]

Tea Party Patriots, taking it back!
Stopping Obama's tyranny in it's tracks!

You do not know the meaning of that word. It's rhetoric like that which is causing this country to become so divisive and incapable of reaching useful compromise that would get us on track.

 

[Jhhnn]

Tea Party Patriots, taking it back!
Stopping Obama's tyranny in it's tracks!

Like this, huh?

http://politicalhumor.about.com/od/politicalcartoons/ig/Political-Cartoons/Take-America-Back.htm

 

[fskimospy]

Probably because they caved on the debt deal.

No, probably not.

 

[Jhhnn]

He said so himself. That's plenty of proof. That, and he admitted to becoming a radical nutcase... and that's the kind of person you want to appoint to a critical position in the US economy. That's why we need patriots to make sure no recess appointments are made at this point. Once a more qualified person comes into office they can re-evaluate the need for it.

Radical nutcase? You ought to know.

For a second there, I thought you might have been talking about GWB's DoJ, staffed by Fundie fringe lawyers from fourth rate schools-

http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/fundies_rise_quickly_bushs_justice_department/

 

[WelshBloke]

Tea Party Patriots, taking it back!
Stopping Obama's tyranny in it's tracks!

At some point you're going to stop, start blinking, look around you and go "oh shit, maybe being spiteful argumentative arseholes might not have been the best idea".

But hey, what do I care, I dont have to live in the once great country you seem happy to trash out of spite.

 

[PokerGuy]

Radical nutcase?

He termed himself a radical, socialist, revolutionary -- those aren't my terms, they are his own.

For a second there, I thought you might have been talking about GWB's DoJ, staffed by Fundie fringe lawyers from fourth rate schools

Oooh, the old "but but but but but Booooosh" defense. Brilliant, you must be the first to come up with that idea. Comparing one fool to another fool doesn't make him any less foolish.

 

[PokerGuy]

But hey, what do I care, I dont have to live in the once great country you seem happy to trash out of spite.

Speaking of trashing, shouldn't you be rioting somewhere right about now?

 

[WelshBloke]

Speaking of trashing, shouldn't you be rioting somewhere right about now?

Nah, everything decent has been nicked already. Its not worth the effort now.

 

[kinev]

Nice hit piece on Jones, kinev. You obviously didn't compile it yourself, so what's the source?

The attribution by Matlin, who has no idea what he's talking about, is truly touching, btw...

Awwww....thank you. I'm flattered that you think my "hit piece" was so good that I "obviously didn't compile it" myself! Couple of things:

1. I did write it myself; at least the parts that aren't quoted. I got all of the info mainly from his Wikipedia article that I cited or the from the wiki citations themselves. It took a while to compile it (that's why others beat me to the punch coming up with Van Jones as an example) and to format/cite/bold it.

2. It's not a hit piece. It's his own words! Go ahead...check the links. I did that intentionally so nobody could claim that whatever pundit I was quoting was biased. If you don't like the fact that I quote him directly, well....tough.

3. I'm not sure who Chadwick Matlin is, so that might be a valid critique. His quote is on the Wiki (but the original source article is missing; Big Money became Slate and their archive isn't being friendly). Ok, here's a link to the article from Matlin from (get this....WarIsACrime.org ). http://warisacrime.org/node/41867 It's a very complimentary piece on Van Jones and President Obama. This isn't a quote from Glen, Rush, or Sean...it's a quote from the left. But, it's not in Jones' own words, so I'll grant that it isn't as convincing. It just stood out to me on the Wiki.

So you contend Van Jones is or was at any time a Communist? What is your proof? There is no mention at all of any alleged Communist affliation in his wkikpedia bio (link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Van_Jones)-the closest is that he doesn't like Republicans. Guess a lot of Americans are Communist under that standard.

Typical Spidey argument, making up lies and then claiming they are facts.

Quoted for hilarity! Pssssst....look up a few posts. I'll help you out even more because your reading comprehension skills might not be up to par given that you "read" his Wiki bio. Look at post #46.

Still waiting on my "extra points"....

Radical nutcase? You ought to know.

For a second there, I thought you might have been talking about GWB's DoJ, staffed by Fundie fringe lawyers from fourth rate schools-

http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/fundies_rise_quickly_bushs_justice_department/

But....but.....but......BOOOOOOOOOOOSH.......... :'(

 

[werepossum]

Awwww....thank you. I'm flattered that you think my "hit piece" was so good that I "obviously didn't compile it" myself! Couple of things:

1. I did write it myself; at least the parts that aren't quoted. I got all of the info mainly from his Wikipedia article that I cited or the from the wiki citations themselves. It took a while to compile it (that's why others beat me to the punch coming up with Van Jones as an example) and to format/cite/bold it.

2. It's not a hit piece. It's his own words! Go ahead...check the links. I did that intentionally so nobody could claim that whatever pundit I was quoting was biased. If you don't like the fact that I quote him directly, well....tough.

3. I'm not sure who Chadwick Matlin is, so that might be a valid critique. His quote is on the Wiki (but the original source article is missing; Big Money became Slate and their archive isn't being friendly). Ok, here's a link to the article from Matlin from (get this....WarIsACrime.org ). http://warisacrime.org/node/41867 It's a very complimentary piece on Van Jones and President Obama. This isn't a quote from Glen, Rush, or Sean...it's a quote from the left. But, it's not in Jones' own words, so I'll grant that it isn't as convincing. It just stood out to me on the Wiki.






Quoted for hilarity! Pssssst....look up a few posts. I'll help you out even more because your reading comprehension skills might not be up to par given that you "read" his Wiki bio. Look at post #46.

Still waiting on my "extra points"....






But....but.....but......BOOOOOOOOOOOSH.......... :'(

Funny how so many people who feel "War is a crime" also feel that looting and cop-killing are merely social justice.

I think everyone familiar with Van Jones agrees he is a communist. Beck actually had video of Jones describing himself as a communist. I don't know though that you can reasonably apply that tag to any of Obama's other appointments. Liberal/progressive, certainly. European socialist democrat, arguably. Marxist, maybe, in the very broadest sense of the term. But communist, probably not.

 

[ConstipatedVigilante]

It's so sad. The Poor poor American People. So many have been put so deeply asleep they don't even know their being fucked in the ass by the party of the rich. There's nothing you can do to save people who fuck themselves thinking it's good. There's nothing you can do but feel pity. The blind are blind and that's the way it is.

I know a lot of rich democrats...

 

[zinfamous]

Van Jones off the top of my head. The guy for health and human services as well.

lolno.

 

[zinfamous]

we're still reeling from Reagan's philosophical rape of the federal judiciary system through his appointments.

what the repubs are doing here, is completely unprecedented. there is absolutely zero vetting going on of any candidates. If Obama touches them, they don't want him. It basically overrides one of the few presidential decisions that a sitting POTUS ever gets to make, and not a single party, or congress, has ever had the petty schoolyard mentality to take their balls home and cry like the delusioned teabaggers have.

if there were ever any challenges to these candidates, if there was ever any vetting going on, that would be one thing. But no--just little babies with a "Me First!" mentality while the country crumbles around them. Yeah--true patriots, spidey. But the attitude is pretty much similar to how you present yourself around here; so I'm not too surprised.

 

[Craig234]

yes?

Republicans filibustering Obama appointments in the Senate lead to him having to make recess appointments while Congress is not in session.

the exact same situation that George Bush was in when Democrats were filibustering all of his appointments, while Republicans at large decried the minority party denying his appointments a fair up-or-down vote in the then-Republican-controlled Senate.

Um, when did Democrats ever 'filibuster all of Bush's appointments'? They might prevent say the worst 4 out of 100 largely bad appointments, and then he'd recess appoint.

 

[Craig234]

I don't believe the executive should make any appointments without congressional review/approval.

cue "but bush" in 3, 2, 1...

Bush hugely used recess appointments routinely to get around votes. Please link one post from you during the Bush administration objecting. PS you oppose the constitution.

 

[Craig234]

I think all Presidential appointments should have an up or down vote, should require a two-thirds or even three-fifths approval for lifetime positions or a simple majority vote for Cabinet positions, and should not be subject to a filibuster as this is a Constitutionally required Senate function.

Unlike voting on legislation, which is not a Constitutionally required Senate function; it's those radical liberals abusing their power legislating from the legislature.

 

[Lithium381]

good to see the freshman in there, going in with gusto and really doing what's right for their consituents. They haven't been corrupted by the status quo of bureaucratic BS games

 

[Craig234]

Apparently there are some people left in the house that take the wishes of their constituents seriously. Good work by these guys. Don't leave the window open for getting idiots appointed without review.

Uh, the issue isn't getting "these idiots" - your well informed statement - appointed without review. It's about the government getting appointments filled around filibusters.

It's the REPUBLICANS who are preventing getting "these idiots" - your well informed statement - reviewed and voted on, simply blocking as obstructionists.

Why didn't my ignore list block your post?