Well for one thing Rogue I never accuse anyone of lying unless I think theyre intentionally lying. In this case one of us has misunderstood the scope of the decision. Its my understanding that the court ruled as well THAT RECESS APPOINTMENTS COULD ONLY BE USED FOR POSITIONS THAT BECOME VACANT WHILE THE SENATE IS IN RECESS.Rogue Scholar 05 wrote:
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.
And if thats the case and Bush actually made 179 recess appointments then the volume alone would suggest that at least some if not all of Bushs appointments would have been unconstitutional under this ruling as well.
My accusation of silly talk (not lying, your opinion) had to do with your usual libtard radical socialist BS in reference to Obamas nominees when in fact its every consumer protection agency that ruffles your Partys feathers. Obama keeps backing you idiots in a corner and you keep biting. Which position do you think the majority of the public will take? Think they just may want to be protected against the vulture capitalist your Party is so entrenched protecting?