SCOTUS Slaps Down Obama Recess Appointments

[nowisthetime]

You made Vette take you off ignore and got him to piss/shit his pants in aging impotent conservative male frustration again, Dys. Good stuff, good times.

http://i.imgur.com/Mg1zFRV.gif

And don't worry about the mess he made fouling the joint. The obsolete shitstain that posted directly after him will lick it up.

I tell you what, I've never seen so many whiny, old, petty, bitchy immature men in my life as I have seen on Literotica's general board.

How can you be over the age of 50 and still immature?

Bunnyslippers and Vette being the main ones.

Old, impotent and as petty as middle school girls.

That's scary.

I thought with age brings wisdom, that's not always the case.

 

[Que]

I tell you what, I've never seen so many whiny, old, petty, bitchy immature men in my life as I have seen on Literotica's general board.

How can you be over the age of 50 and still immature?

Bunnyslippers and Vette being the main ones.

Old, impotent and as petty as middle school girls.

That's scary.

I thought with age brings wisdom, that's not always the case.

It may benefit you to think of the GB as the Cafeteria in High School.

I used to jog home for lunch. I needed the road-work and the food was much better. Being modestly affluent we had some nice things in the kitchen. Dad had won this new-fangled device in a national sales contest. It was called a microwave.

 

[Boxlicker101]

As I see it, now Obama is not as much of a dictator as he thought he was.

And that's good news.

 

[Que]

As I see it, now Obama is not as much of a dictator as he thought he was.

And that's good news.

I kinda doubt it dissuaded him. The other SCOTUS losses seemd to give him no pause.

-------------------------------------

(paraphrasing)

"SCOTUS has ruled, now let's see them enforce it!" -Andrew Jackson

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

so he waited three days instead of ten when there's been no guidance as to what constitutes a recess.

boy, if that's not bad faith, i don't know what is.

that lower appeals court--the one that limited recess appointments to "remote periods and circumstances"--needs a refresher course in constitutional law.

the obvious answer is ten days.

not three days.

not remote periods and circumstances.

ten days.

hell, all they had to do was ask vette. i am sure he would have said, "ten days."

9-0

Obama cannot decide for Congress.

I see Frodo is on a hissy fit of anger at the court...

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

I kinda doubt it dissuaded him. The other SCOTUS losses seemd to give him no pause.

-------------------------------------

(paraphrasing)

"SCOTUS has ruled, now let's see them enforce it!" -Andrew Jackson

Mr. Marshall...

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

I tell you what, I've never seen so many whiny, old, petty, bitchy immature men in my life as I have seen on Literotica's general board.

How can you be over the age of 50 and still immature?

Bunnyslippers and Vette being the main ones.

Old, impotent and as petty as middle school girls.

That's scary.

I thought with age brings wisdom, that's not always the case.

Typical of the new-age Alinsky Liberal, isolate, denigrate and ridicule for then you do not have to engage in dialog or even thinking. You know what you feel, and what you feel is right, because everyone you agree with and like feels the same way and thus truthiness rules the day and facts can be discarded and ignored.

 

[Sean Renaud]

As I see it, now Obama is not as much of a dictator as he thought he was.

And that's good news.

Well since he never thought he was a dictator he probably thinks he's just another citizen. Might explain why he's not getting much done!

 

[jeninflorida]

Well since he never thought he was a dictator he probably thinks he's just another citizen. Might explain why he's not getting much done!

still trying hard to take stupidity to a new level. congratulations, you are the biggest idiot

 

[jeninflorida]

hopefully in our 50 years of life, you actually find a job ....

I tell you what, I've never seen so many whiny, old, petty, bitchy immature men in my life as I have seen on Literotica's general board.

How can you be over the age of 50 and still immature?

Bunnyslippers and Vette being the main ones.

Old, impotent and as petty as middle school girls.

That's scary.

I thought with age brings wisdom, that's not always the case.

 

[KingOrfeo]

From The Nation:

What the SCOTUS Decision Ending Obama’s Recess Appointment Power Means

George Zornick on June 26, 2014 - 1:11 PM ET

President Obama overstepped his power when he named three people to the National Labor Relations Board at the end of 2011, the Supreme Court decided unanimously on Thursday.

Here’s the background: since 2009, Senate Republicans undertook routine obstruction of President Obama’s appointments by wielding a filibuster that required sixty votes to break. They did this against all sorts of nominees, for offices big and small; in some cases, Republicans didn’t even bother to claim a substantive problem with the nominee. The only criteria for a filibuster, at times, seemed to be that Obama nominated that person.

One area where this was extremely problematic was the National Labor Relations Board—three members had their five-year terms expire in 2012, and Senate Republicans filibustered Obama’s replacements. With three empty seats, the NLRB would not have a quorum to function, and the practical effect would be that US labor law would no longer be enforced. (It’s not hard to see this as the GOP’s goal here).

The White House didn’t want this to happen, and Obama contemplated and ultimately made “recess appointments” to the three seats.

The law around presidential appointments during recess has historically been vague. Article II, section 2, clause three of the Constitution grants the president “power to fill up all vacancies that may happen during the recess of the Senate, by granting commissions which shall expire at the end of their next session.” That was a sensible clause for an era when it could take weeks for Congress to return to Washington via horse and buggy—if the war secretary died of tuberculosis, it would not be practical to wait that long to confirm a replacement.

In the modern era, how should that clause be interpreted? Presidents began making recess appointments when the Senate gaveled out of session, even for a few days, which was clearly within the letter of the law, though probably not the original spirit. That was legally fine—even three Supreme Court members were appointed in that fashion.

In the aughts, to prevent President Bush from placing un-confirmable nominees into office when the Senate broke for recess, Senator Harry Reid devised a strategy to hold “pro forma” sessions every three days. This consisted of a senator coming to the floor when everyone else was out of town, gaveling the Senate into session, and then right back out. As a technical matter, the Senate was always in session, and the president could not make recess appointments.

Republicans later adopted this strategy, but Obama—bolstered by a lower-court ruling that those pro forma sessions were not legitimate—decided in late 2011 to issue three recess appointments to the NLRB to keep it functioning in late 2011 in the midst of some pro-forma sessions. This is what is at issue in Thursday’s case, NLRB v. Canning.

The administration urged the justices to look at the practical matter here: the Senate was not really in session in any true sense, and the pro-forma sessions every three days were an obvious ploy by Republicans to prevent recess appointments.

The justices disagreed:

In our view, however, the pro forma sessions count as sessions, not as periods of recess. We hold that, for purposes of the Recess Appointments Clause, the Senate is in session when it says it is, provided that, under its own rules, it retains the capacity to transact Senate business. The Senate met that standard here.[…]

The Solicitor General asks us to engage in a more realistic appraisal of what the Senate actually did. He argues that, during the relevant pro forma sessions, business was not in fact conducted; messages from the President could not be received in any meaningful way because they could not be placed before the Senate; the Senate Chamber was, according to C-SPAN coverage, almost empty; and in practice attendance was not required.

We do not believe, however, that engaging in the kind of factual appraisal that the Solicitor General suggests is either legally or practically appropriate. From a legal perspective, this approach would run contrary to prece*dent instructing us to “respect…coequal and independent departments” by, for example, taking the Senate’s report of its official action at its word. From a practical perspective, judges cannot easily determine such matters as who is, and who is not, in fact present on the floor during a particular Senate session. Judicial efforts to engage in these kinds of inquiries would risk undue judicial interference with the functioning of the Legislative Branch.

In effect, this ends all recess appointments by the president, except in a rare scenario outlined by the Court in which the House and Senate disagree about the congressional calendar.

What does all this mean? In the short term, not much: Obama withdrew those now-illegal appointments, and the Senate confirmed three others to the NLRB earlier last year. Democrats then undertook rules reform this year that eliminated the filibuster on non-judicial appointments. That removed any real need for Obama to make recess appointments.

But, should things go poorly for Democrats in November, the Senate will become Republican. If history is a guide, they will block any further Obama appointments almost as a matter of reflex. And now recess appointments will be out of the question.

The long-term implications for organized labor here are also dire, as Ian Millhiser at the Center for American Progress has been relentlessly pointing out. The three seats in question here have terms that expire in 2018.

So: imagine a scenario in which Republicans hold the Senate in 2018, and refuse to confirm a Democratic president’s nominees to the NLRB, even if they are entirely noncontroversial. There will now be no recourse, and the NLRB will go dark.

 

[Que]

Well since he never thought he was a dictator he probably thinks he's just another citizen. Might explain why he's not getting much done!

I'm pretty sure he thinks of himself as a citizen with a pen and a phone....and unbridled power to use them to call upon the full force and power of every department of the Federal Government.

 

[KingOrfeo]

I'm pretty sure he thinks of himself as a citizen with a pen and a phone....and unbridled power to use them to call upon the full force and power of every department of the Federal Government.

Which is, you know, what every POTUS actually is.

 

[Sean Renaud]

I'm pretty sure he thinks of himself as a citizen with a pen and a phone....and unbridled power to use them to call upon the full force and power of every department of the Federal Government.

While that is actually what he is, he doesn't seem to function under that belief.

 

[Boxlicker101]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Boxlicker101 View Post

As I see it, now Obama is not as much of a dictator as he thought he was.

And that's good news.

Well since he never thought he was a dictator he probably thinks he's just another citizen. Might explain why he's not getting much done!

I have seen and heard him say he is going to pass laws without going through Congress. That would be the act of a dictator.

 

[Ulaven_Demorte]

I have seen and heard him say he is going to pass laws without going through Congress. That would be the act of a dictator.

No he didn't.

What he did say was this:

“Urging a “year of action,” he pitched what he called “concrete, practical proposals” to boost the middle class and build “new ladders of opportunity” for others to enter it.

“Some require congressional action, and I’m eager to work with all of you,” Obama said. "But America does not stand still – and neither will I. So wherever and whenever I can take steps without legislation to expand opportunity for more American families, that’s what I’m going to do.”

 

[Boxlicker101]

No he didn't.

What he did say was this:

“Urging a “year of action,” he pitched what he called “concrete, practical proposals” to boost the middle class and build “new ladders of opportunity” for others to enter it.

“Some require congressional action, and I’m eager to work with all of you,” Obama said. "But America does not stand still – and neither will I. So wherever and whenever I can take steps without legislation to expand opportunity for more American families, that’s what I’m going to do.”

He has also said this:

http://washington.cbslocal.com/2014...ve-actions-ive-got-a-pen-and-ive-got-a-phone/

And I have seen and heard him and I'm sure everybody here has also.

 

[unregistered]

 

[Liar]

He has also said this:

http://washington.cbslocal.com/2014...ve-actions-ive-got-a-pen-and-ive-got-a-phone/

And I have seen and heard him and I'm sure everybody here has also.

Yyyeah?

Do you disagree that Obama do have a pen and a phone? Or do you disagree that he can use them legally for anything?

 

[Liar]

Liar, shut up. He said this:


"... But if Congress won’t act soon to protect future generations, I will. I will direct my cabinet to come up with executive actions we can take, now and in the future, to reduce pollution, prepare our communities for the consequences of climate change, and speed the transition to more sustainable sources of energy.”

In other words:

if the American people and their Congress don't agree with me and my leftist advisers, that climate change is real, that we can do something to stop it, and that further controls on their liberty are needed, then I will act in the most undemocratic manner and unilaterally and unconstitutionally order the changes in law to make it happen.

"I will direct my cabinet to come up with executive actions we can take”

Not ”executive actions we can't take”. Such as unconstitutional ones.

This is really quite silly.

 

[IrezumiKiss]

No he didn't.

What he did say was this:

“Urging a “year of action,” he pitched what he called “concrete, practical proposals” to boost the middle class and build “new ladders of opportunity” for others to enter it.

“Some require congressional action, and I’m eager to work with all of you,” Obama said. "But America does not stand still – and neither will I. So wherever and whenever I can take steps without legislation to expand opportunity for more American families, that’s what I’m going to do.”

See, if a Reagan-ish right wing conservative Prezzydunt had said this, the RWCJers here would be swimming in basement pools of their own warm, milky ejaculate from all their baloney-bopping.

https://31.media.tumblr.com/2be83a339342528ed1abb8d7a42a3b14/tumblr_inline_n50gz5IEvc1qaht0c.gif

And as nasty as that is to visualize, it is the seminal (eeeccch) truth!

 

[Sean Renaud]

Liar, shut up. He said this:


"... But if Congress won’t act soon to protect future generations, I will. I will direct my cabinet to come up with executive actions we can take, now and in the future, to reduce pollution, prepare our communities for the consequences of climate change, and speed the transition to more sustainable sources of energy.”

In other words:

if the American people and their Congress don't agree with me and my leftist advisers, that climate change is real, that we can do something to stop it, and that further controls on their liberty are needed, then I will act in the most undemocratic manner and unilaterally and unconstitutionally order the changes in law to make it happen.

Sounds like he's willing to do his job to me.

 

[KingOrfeo]

In other words:

That phrase does not mean what you think it does.

 

[unregistered]

 

[miles]

Your Napoleon Complex is showing.

He has an amazing ability to read minds.