non-starter

Saint Paul, MN

#72 Jan 27, 2013
Amused Slew wrote:
REWRITING REALITY, again !!???
non-starter wrote: I found it, you just won't publish that you got it off Yahoo or Wiki answers ....
THEN the lies began, LMAOROTFU~!
non-starter wrote: No, I guessed, because you weren't forthcoming with your source
OR MY NEW FAVORITE-
non-starter wrote: I found similar postings on Yahoo answers and Wiki answers
You posted to the urban dictionary to support your position...It's called tampering and you're clearly a duplicitous/dishonest POS... Have a nice lie... Oh sorry, I surely meant life.
Those "nonsense" words are from your trusted source, slewsie. Quit being such a slewche.

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php ...
1. Slewche

Someone who is being extremly slow or dumb.

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php ...
1. slewsie

An idiot, dolt, someone who talks incessantly about things they are completely wrong about.

But hey, it is your valuable source after all.
non-starter

Saint Paul, MN

#73 Jan 27, 2013
Amused Slew wrote:
REWRITING REALITY, again !!???
non-starter wrote: I found it, you just won't publish that you got it off Yahoo or Wiki answers ....
THEN the lies began, LMAOROTFU~!
non-starter wrote: No, I guessed, because you weren't forthcoming with your source
OR MY NEW FAVORITE-
non-starter wrote: I found similar postings on Yahoo answers and Wiki answers
You posted to the urban dictionary to support your position...It's called tampering and you're clearly a duplicitous/dishonest POS... Have a nice lie... Oh sorry, I surely meant life.
Obama and the Democrats have no one but themselves to blame for this embarrassing political turn of events. It was the Democrats who created the sham pro forma parliamentary procedure to keep the Senate "in session" to prevent former President Bush from making recess appointments. Bush honored the administrative procedure; however Obama charged ahead and ignored the tactic created by his own party.

http://www.policymic.com/articles/24233/obama ...
non-starter

Saint Paul, MN

#74 Jan 27, 2013
Amused Slew wrote:
The court not only said that recess is strictly defined by the Constitution, but recess appointments are limited to those that "arise" during that period. Presidents have made appointments during recess sessions for years. The practice goes back to at least 1867. In recent years, President Clinton made 139 recess appointments and President Bush made 171. Obama has made 32 recess appointments. President Reagan holds the record with 243 recess appointments. This ruling in essence says that some, if not all of those appointments were unconstitutional unless they happened between sessions of Congress and the openings occurred during that period. The Huffington Post reported, "under the court's decision, 285 recess appointments made by presidents between 1867 and 2004 would be invalid."
Obama and the Democrats have no one but themselves to blame for this embarrassing political turn of events. It was the Democrats who created the sham pro forma parliamentary procedure to keep the Senate "in session" to prevent former President Bush from making recess appointments. Bush honored the administrative procedure; however Obama charged ahead and ignored the tactic created by his own party.

Asked and answered, slewsie. Next.

http://www.policymic.com/articles/24233/obama ...
Amused Slew

Minneapolis, MN

#75 Jan 27, 2013
Amused Slew wrote:
Poor cheap sandy, you like do-nothing senators, huh ??? Of course, teabaggers are all do-nothing, right ???
Here is the Democrat hero of my gay husband Slewsie. This is certainly NOT a do-nothing Senator. This guy did a lot, din't he Slewsie?

On Friday it was revealed that the FBI is investigating Sen. Robert Menendez (D-N.J.) for allegedly sleeping with underage prostitutes in the Dominican Republic.
Time

Minneapolis, MN

#77 Jan 27, 2013
Obama is invalidated by the court.

His lame duck term is off to a wonderful start.
Amused Slew

Seattle, WA

#78 Jan 28, 2013
It's being appealed, but it's funny EVERY PRESIDENT HAS DONE THE SAME, right ?
non-starter

Saint Paul, MN

#79 Jan 28, 2013
Amused Slew wrote:
It's being appealed, but it's funny EVERY PRESIDENT HAS DONE THE SAME, right ?
Not true, but then reading comprehension was never your strong point.

Obama and the Democrats have no one but themselves to blame for this embarrassing political turn of events. It was the Democrats who created the sham pro forma parliamentary procedure to keep the Senate "in session" to prevent former President Bush from making recess appointments. Bush honored the administrative procedure; however Obama charged ahead and ignored the tactic created by his own party.

http://www.policymic.com/articles/24233/obama ...
Amused Slew

Seattle, WA

#80 Jan 28, 2013
The court not only said that recess is strictly defined by the Constitution, but recess appointments are limited to those that "arise" during that period. Presidents have made appointments during recess sessions for years. The practice goes back to at least 1867. In recent years, President Clinton made 139 recess appointments and President Bush made 171. Obama has made 32 recess appointments. President Reagan holds the record with 243 recess appointments. This ruling in essence says that some, if not all of those appointments were unconstitutional unless they happened between sessions of Congress and the openings occurred during that period. The Huffington Post reported, "under the court's decision, 285 recess appointments made by presidents between 1867 and 2004 would be invalid."

“The one and only Smart Liberal”

Since: Aug 12

Former MN Tax Payer

#81 Jan 28, 2013
non-starter wrote:
<quoted text>Not true, but then reading comprehension was never your strong point.
Obama and the Democrats have no one but themselves to blame for this embarrassing political turn of events. It was the Democrats who created the sham pro forma parliamentary procedure to keep the Senate "in session" to prevent former President Bush from making recess appointments. Bush honored the administrative procedure; however Obama charged ahead and ignored the tactic created by his own party.
http://www.policymic.com/articles/24233/obama ...
It is very plain to see if one takes the time and effort to study the topic.

But, I am not a Democrat who thinks laws are merely an inconvenience on my way to a predetermined result.
non-starter

Saint Paul, MN

#82 Jan 28, 2013
Amused Slew wrote:
The court not only said that recess is strictly defined by the Constitution, but recess appointments are limited to those that "arise" during that period. Presidents have made appointments during recess sessions for years. The practice goes back to at least 1867. In recent years, President Clinton made 139 recess appointments and President Bush made 171. Obama has made 32 recess appointments. President Reagan holds the record with 243 recess appointments. This ruling in essence says that some, if not all of those appointments were unconstitutional unless they happened between sessions of Congress and the openings occurred during that period. The Huffington Post reported, "under the court's decision, 285 recess appointments made by presidents between 1867 and 2004 would be invalid."
Obama and the Democrats have no one but themselves to blame for this embarrassing political turn of events. It was the Democrats who created the sham pro forma parliamentary procedure to keep the Senate "in session" to prevent former President Bush from making recess appointments. Bush honored the administrative procedure; however Obama charged ahead and ignored the tactic created by his own party.

http://www.policymic.com/articles/24233/obama ...

Those appointments were recess appointments, Obama's were not. Too bad your reading comprehension is so poor.
Amused Slew

Seattle, WA

#83 Jan 28, 2013
It is very plain to see(comma) if one has a brain and isn't such a dumb, partisan putz, it HERTZ ~!

The court not only said that recess is strictly defined by the Constitution, but recess appointments are limited to those that "arise" during that period. Presidents have made appointments during recess sessions for years. The practice goes back to at least 1867. In recent years, President Clinton made 139 recess appointments and President Bush made 171. Obama has made 32 recess appointments. President Reagan holds the record with 243 recess appointments. This ruling in essence says that some, if not all of those appointments were unconstitutional unless they happened between sessions of Congress and the openings occurred during that period. The Huffington Post reported, "under the court's decision, 285 recess appointments made by presidents between 1867 and 2004 would be invalid."
Amused Slew

Seattle, WA

#84 Jan 28, 2013
Funny, shrub did the same....

http://www.senate.gov/reference/resources/pdf...
non-starter

Saint Paul, MN

#85 Jan 28, 2013
Amused Slew wrote:
Funny, shrub did the same....
http://www.senate.gov/reference/resources/pdf...
You should really read your own sources putz....from your link:

On at least three occasions, the Senate has used
procedural tools to prevent the occurrence of a recess of more than three days for the
stated purpose of preventing such appointments: the 2007 Thanksgiving holiday period,10
the period between the first and second sessions of the 110th Congress,11 and the 2008
Presidents Day holiday period.12 In each of these cases, the Senate met in pro forma
sessions (during which no business was to be conducted) every three or four days over the
course of what otherwise would have been a longer Senate recess. The President made
no recess appointments during these periods.

Obama made appointments during the same "pro-forma" periods, Bush did not.

I really do believe it is too late for your reading comprehension, maybe you can start funding a program to help other liberals to overcome their comprehension problems, it is clearly too late for you.
Amused Slew

Seattle, WA

#86 Jan 28, 2013
This whole ruling was made because the appointments “took place when the Senate was in an “intrasession” recess, rather than an “intersession” recess.” Good grief. This was a charade by the Republicans.
redeemer

Saint Paul, MN

#87 Jan 28, 2013
Amused Slew wrote:
This whole ruling was made because the appointments “took place when the Senate was in an “intrasession” recess, rather than an “intersession” recess.” Good grief. This was a charade by the Republicans.
We will win this Champ! you're be witnessing another Roadrunner and Coyote moment......Beep-Beep....BOOM!
Amused Slew

Seattle, WA

#88 Jan 28, 2013
non-starter wrote:
<quoted text>You should really read your own sources putz....from your link:
On at least three occasions, the Senate has used
procedural tools to prevent the occurrence of a recess of more than three days for the
stated purpose of preventing such appointments: the 2007 Thanksgiving holiday period,10
the period between the first and second sessions of the 110th Congress,11 and the 2008
Presidents Day holiday period.12 In each of these cases, the Senate met in pro forma
sessions (during which no business was to be conducted) every three or four days over the
course of what otherwise would have been a longer Senate recess. The President made
no recess appointments during these periods.
Obama made appointments during the same "pro-forma" periods, Bush did not.
it is too late for your reading comprehension, maybe you can start funding a program to help other liberals to overcome their comprehension problems, it is clearly too late for you.
I really do believe(comma)...

Yeah, a sand fearing moron gives great advice ??? Tell me again, how much you'd like to wager on the appeal ???
non-starter

Saint Paul, MN

#89 Jan 30, 2013
Amused Slew wrote:
<quoted text>I really do believe(comma)...
Yeah, a sand fearing moron gives great advice ??? Tell me again, how much you'd like to wager on the appeal ???
On at least three occasions, the Senate has used
procedural tools to prevent the occurrence of a recess of more than three days for the
stated purpose of preventing such appointments: the 2007 Thanksgiving holiday period,10
the period between the first and second sessions of the 110th Congress,11 and the 2008
Presidents Day holiday period.12 In each of these cases, the Senate met in pro forma
sessions (during which no business was to be conducted) every three or four days over the
course of what otherwise would have been a longer Senate recess. The President made
no recess appointments during these periods.

Obama made appointments during the same "pro-forma" periods, Bush did not.

Make sure you comment on punctuation again, instead of the substance.
Amused Slew

Seattle, WA

#90 Jan 30, 2013
It's being appealed, but it's funny EVERY PRESIDENT HAS DONE THE SAME, right ?

Since: Oct 08

Location hidden

#91 Jan 30, 2013
Even Liberal judges think Obama is too liberal!
Amused Slew

Seattle, WA

#92 Jan 30, 2013
From the "guy", who misspelled her moniker ?? Gotta be "right" !! LMAOROTU~!

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Minneapolis Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
2 cops dead THANKS LIBERALS! 3 hr Space ace 5
Dirty chat male to female 18 plus 11 hr Space ace 4
Global warming 'undeniable,' scientists say (Jul '10) 12 hr Sunshine 33,476
St. Anthony, Minnesota to Pay $200,000 to Settl... 15 hr Sunshine 2
Mall of America Protest 15 hr cowboy chris 17
Veteran Freed From MSP VA Dental Dept Phone Abu... 18 hr American_Sons 14
Walker Wins Unions Lose (May '12) Fri LIbEralS 29
Minneapolis Dating
Find my Match
More from around the web

Minneapolis People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

Minneapolis News, Events & Info

Click for news, events and info in Minneapolis

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]

NFL Latest News

Updated 6:01 pm PST

Bleacher Report 6:01PM
Source: Rodgers' Calf Strain Is 'Mild'
Bleacher Report 7:07 PM
Who Will Come out on Top of NFC North?
NBC Sports 7:55 PM
Packers favored by at least seven points
NBC Sports 8:51 PM
Steelers, Packers, Cowboys, Seahawks win, move into playoffs - NBC Sports
NBC Sports11:42 PM
Raiders knock Bills out of playoffs with 26-24 win - NBC Sports