Ah, but all of Bush's were CONSTITUTIONAL. You see, the president can only make recess appointment according to our Constitution, Article II, Section 2 of the U.S. Constitution.
In those questionable appointments made by Obumer Boy, Obama did not submit them to Congress at all as he knew the Senate would approve them as they were radicals. So he waited until he thought he could make a recess appointments but a few people in the Senate knew what Obama was up to so they made the minimum effort to keep Congress in session so he could not Constitutional do so.
Yep, Bush recess appointment were Constitutional but those Obummer Boy appoints were not!!! But using your Libarrdian Logic, you equate them as equal.
Rogue Scholar 05 wrote:
Poor Poopo. Can't rebut one of my points.
I agree, Obama has to appeal as this was just one lawsuit and now dozens of more corporations will be embolden to sue.
Now, IMHO, all presidential appoints should be given an up or down vote within 90 days after their appointments are received by the Senate. Unfortunately it does not take much to hold a vote with the current Senate procedures.
By the way, more appointments are held up by Democrats when the president is a Republican than the other way around.
You still have not said what you think I said was untrue! I do not agree with the Senate. Our Constitution says that the Senate must give advice and consent and how can they if there is no up or down vote? IHMO all political appointees should receive an simple majority up or down voted on within 90 days, period. And I also believe that the Senate should be able to remove any appointee with a 60% up or down vote. You should not have to go through an impeachment trial for appointees. Yes, I still believe in impeachment for politicians who are voted in but I would also like to see recall elections for Senators and Congressmen as all to often the vote opposite of the way they promised.<quoted text>
Politifact gives Obama a half flip on this one. LOL
We'll start with the 2005 Bolton appointment, and then compare it with what Obama did in 2010.
President George W. Bush appointed Bolton to be ambassador of the United Nations after senators held up the confirmation in two separate votes of 56-42 and 54-38. The nomination required 60 votes before formal approval.
Obama, a member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, told the Chicago Tribune, "To some degree, he's damaged goods," adding, "I think that means we'll have less credibility and, ironically, be less equipped to reform the United Nations in the way that it needs to be reformed."
But Obama also said that he thought Bush was within his rights in making the appointment. "The president is entitled to take that action, but I don't think it will serve American foreign policy well," Obama said in an interview.