Breaking: National Journal reports Obama to use recess appointment for Cordray

posted at 10:36 am on January 4, 2012 by Ed Morrissey

Exactly one week ago, I warned that Barack Obama would not feel himself constrained from making recess appointments by the pro forma sessions in the Senate, especially on Richard Cordray.  National Journal reports that Obama will announce a recess appointment for Cordray to the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau — and escalate the division between the Senate and the White House, and Democrats and Republicans:

President Obama will announce today that he will appoint Richard Cordray as head of the controversial Consumer Financial Protection Bureau during the Senate’s recess, the White House said.

The appointment comes to the dismay of Senate Republicans, who blocked Cordray’s nomination in order to weaken the bureau. …

Obama is scheduled to make his first public appearance of 2012 on Wednesday at 1:15 p.m. in the suburbs of Cleveland — Cordray’s home state.

Of all the controversial appointments that the Senate GOP has managed to bottle up, this one had the weakest argument.  The objections of Republicans to Cordray rested mainly on the CFPB itself, not Cordray.  They had already forced Obama to withdraw his first nominee, Elizabeth Warren, who proved inartful at Congressional relations anyway.  The CFPB itself was a battle Republicans lost over a year ago.  Congress passed it into law, and Obama should be able to get a nominee to run it confirmed.  Republicans can win the next election and make the changes they wish in the next session, but it’s unreasonable to simply block the agency from operating with its chosen leadership.

Don’t be surprised if Obama turns to the NLRB next.  The board can’t operate without a quorum, which it now lacks, and the GOP won’t budge after the activism of the NLRB under the influence of his previous recess appointment, Craig Becker.   Cordray won’t cost him much political damage, but Obama will come under fire regardless of which way he goes on this.  Business leaders will erupt in outrage if he forces more activists onto the NLRB, and unions will be just as outraged if he doesn’t.  Obama needs the former for funding and the latter for organization in the coming election, but setting this precedent will make it almost impossible for Obama to resist more recess appointments.

Update: As an aside, the timing on this is rather interesting, too.  Maybe Obama hoped to get this under the radar with all of the attention on Iowa the morning after the caucuses — or maybe steal some of the thunder from the Republicans.  Either works.

However, the lasting impact of this recess appointment will be (a) Republicans blocking even more Obama appointments, and (b) a Republican President ignoring a Democratic block on appointments regardless of the time that the Senate has been out of the chamber.  Expect the GOP to press a charge of Obama as an imperial President in the fall, too.

Update II: Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-UT) released a statement saying he is “outraged” by the recess appointment of Cordray:

“This is a very grave decision by this heavy-handed, autocratic White House.  Circumventing the Senate and tossing out decades of precedent to appoint an unaccountable czar to appease its liberal base is beneath the Office of the President.  The legislative branch exists as a check and a balance on the Executive.  By opening this door, the White House is saying it can appoint any person at any time to any position it chooses without the advice and consent of the Senate.  This is not how our Republic was designed to function. The American people deserve to be treated with more respect than this White House is affording them with this blatant power grab.  Senators of both parties should be deeply troubled the President’s actions today – actions which will come back to haunt them. ”

Other than making statements, there is little anyone can do to stop Obama from making these appointments, as I wrote last week.  The only action that can be taken is to make sure that Obama pays a political price for them.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4

No more confirmations. Period.

neoavatara on January 4, 2012 at 10:37 AM

BOOM. Screwed again.

they lie on January 4, 2012 at 10:37 AM

I’ll be the first to say it on this thread: IMPEACH NOW!

annoyinglittletwerp on January 4, 2012 at 10:38 AM

Good news.

Bishop on January 4, 2012 at 10:38 AM

Pandoras box

And the dems will be OUTRAGED once a gop pres is in office along with the lsm

Lsm giddy now

cmsinaz on January 4, 2012 at 10:39 AM

Elections have consequences. So lets keep giving the deems ammunition to use agains our eventual nominee.

ctmom on January 4, 2012 at 10:40 AM

Jives with the item in the HA headlines:
“When Congress Won’t Cooperate, Obama Will Take ‘Small, Medium and Large’ Executive Actions”

whatcat on January 4, 2012 at 10:40 AM

“Do you know who I am??? I am the Pharaoh!”

-Pharaoh Barry Obamseys II

portlandon on January 4, 2012 at 10:41 AM

Much more it this and Obama will give politics a bad name.

Electrongod on January 4, 2012 at 10:41 AM

The senate’s not recessed.

Akzed on January 4, 2012 at 10:41 AM

Some days I wish I could make changes to a post.

Electrongod on January 4, 2012 at 10:42 AM

Wait a minute. These organizations set up with little or no GOP support, should receive little or no GOP going forward. This “he won” stuff is defeatist and we all know how hard it is to put an end to a government program.

I’m not sure why Ed thinks the GOP shouldn’t dig in their heels over a president who has shown, and continues to show he’ll do anything to enact his agenda, even it that agenda is nothing but election talking points.

BKeyser on January 4, 2012 at 10:42 AM

Will the Rnc or superpac air the video of dear leading bashing w on this issue?

Please!

cmsinaz on January 4, 2012 at 10:42 AM

What’s it going to take to get rid of Dodd-Frank? The thing is like a very bad case of cancer.

Lourdes on January 4, 2012 at 10:42 AM

Here ya go…

Michelle Obama: “I Kind Of Like” Being Called “Your Excellency”

idesign on January 4, 2012 at 10:42 AM

Elections have consequences. So lets keep giving the deems ammunition to use agains our eventual nominee.
ctmom on January 4, 2012 at 10:40 AM

But there’s no difference between Obama and (place Republican candidate here).

….I hope no one needs a “sarc tag” on that.

whatcat on January 4, 2012 at 10:42 AM

Uhm you know, please dont use the picture of a nuclear explosion with the red lettered word “breaking”. I get old, for a minute I really thought … whew …

Valkyriepundit on January 4, 2012 at 10:42 AM

That will teach us.

Blanket holds, blocks, obstructions for 3 years gives Obama the cover to do this and much more over the next year.

Read the polls. Obama isn’t seen as the guy standing in the way of progress. Despite what we read here daily about his policies failing.

freshface on January 4, 2012 at 10:43 AM

This is blatantly illegal.

Unabashedly illegal.

Up next: NLRB appointments. He will fill it with cronies. Anyone think that the recent slight economic turnaround won’t collapse AGAIN with such arbitrary rule of not law by our Dictator?

This is so far across the line it’s time for direct action. REAL civil disobedience. Ads explaining the illegality of these appointments. And what would happen if the 150 million of us who actually DO pay taxes refused to pay them?

Oh, I forgot, Hussein signed into law another illegal act that allows him to imprison anyone he chooses.

Wake up people… It is NOT certain that there will be an election this November. It also isn’t certain that Hussein will RESPECT the outcome if it isn’t what he wants.

wildcat72 on January 4, 2012 at 10:43 AM

The Imperial Presidency continues apace…laws, traditions and that silly old “Constitution” thing are obsolete!

Justrand on January 4, 2012 at 10:43 AM

Obama is just as busy as can be not-working on the nation’s business but working on ruining the nation.

Lourdes on January 4, 2012 at 10:44 AM

Desperate President and weak Republicans.

Sparky5253 on January 4, 2012 at 10:44 AM

Who didn’t expect this?

TheClearRiver on January 4, 2012 at 10:44 AM

If he tries a recess appointment to the NLRB, they should attempt to have it thrown-out there is no need for recess appointments. Congress is almost always in session.

SC.Charlie on January 4, 2012 at 10:44 AM

The CFPB itself was a battle Republicans lost over a year ago. Congress passed it into law, and Obama should be able to get a nominee to run it confirmed. Republicans can win the next election and make the changes they wish in the next session, but it’s unreasonable to simply block the agency from operating with its chosen leadership.

As Justice Scalia said, “Embrace the gridlock.”

I don’t have a problem with the Senate blocking appointments as a political tactic. Besides the fact that this is a tactic that will never go away, it provides another layer between us and the government. Thank God we don’t have a parliamentary system.

NotCoach on January 4, 2012 at 10:44 AM

“Recess appointments are bad. I will never do this.”

-Candidate Obama, 2008.

portlandon on January 4, 2012 at 10:44 AM

This is just more of Obama trying to pick a fight with Congress, like with the payroll tax cut holiday.

RedRedRice on January 4, 2012 at 10:44 AM

He must be stopped.

The future of our country and our freedom depends on it.

gophergirl on January 4, 2012 at 10:45 AM

Obama should be able to get a nominee to run it confirmed.

Not no, hell no. Stop enabling him by trying to play nice.

18-1 on January 4, 2012 at 10:45 AM

If Boehner’s political IQ was even half of Maxine Waters’, he would defund all of the Obama’s Marxist/Communist recess appointed agencies. That would be the end of the O’s recess appointments. But, alas, Boehenr is only good at crying and golfing.

they lie on January 4, 2012 at 10:45 AM

So what recourse does the congress have against the president short of impeachment? Funding doesn’t seem to work.

Kaffa on January 4, 2012 at 10:45 AM

What’s it going to take to get rid of Dodd-Frank? The thing is like a very bad case of cancer.

Lourdes on January 4, 2012 at 10:42 AM

Unfortunately the effects of this legislation will be with us long after the two knuckleheads whose names are attached to it are a distant bad memory.

UltimateBob on January 4, 2012 at 10:46 AM

Oh bad news: CONSUMER PROTECTION

residentblue on January 4, 2012 at 10:46 AM

Breaking news: Barack Obama is like most modern Presidents. America is doomed or something…

libfreeordie on January 4, 2012 at 10:46 AM

I warned about this also couldn’t justa few Senators staying behind keep the senate open enough to stop this. Our repunks have not the will nor the cajones to fight the marxist usurpers they must be gone also.

ConcealedKerry on January 4, 2012 at 10:46 AM

The Republicans drive me crazy, they should have never adjourned. They aren’t enough to be in charge.

Cindy Munford on January 4, 2012 at 10:46 AM

OT: Bachmann cancels SC trip.

BacaDog on January 4, 2012 at 10:46 AM

Of all the controversial appointments that the Senate GOP has managed to bottle up, this one had the weakest argument

.

Thats right Ed, we don’t need no stinkin principles! You really are going to vote for Obama aren’t you?

dmann on January 4, 2012 at 10:46 AM

Some days I wish I could make changes to a post.

Electrongod on January 4, 2012 at 10:42 AM

Then how would we pass judgment on you?

red villain on January 4, 2012 at 10:47 AM

Elections have consequences. So lets keep giving the deems ammunition to use agains our eventual nominee.
ctmom on January 4, 2012 at 10:40 AM

The PROBLEM is with the agency. Anyone Obama nominates will, as expected, be Marxist-Narcissist-Collectivist-whathaveyou as he is, but the issue is with how this agency is structured, and it’s not structured in a way that benefits our nation.

The GOP shouldn’t back down on these objections. This is one agency that, if left to run it’s course — Obama’s fan/s as director/s — will result in a growing kudzu-weed infestation of regulations.

The GOP shouldn’t allow Obama to appoint anyone to head this agency. Stick to the principle of opposing the structure and let Obama go fly in the wind.

Lourdes on January 4, 2012 at 10:47 AM

But remember Republicans. Don’t criticize our Dear Leader. You might lose all our new “Republicans” that signed up in Iowa and turned out for Ron Paul.

Such as this guy.

MNHawk on January 4, 2012 at 10:48 AM

Gaaaaaahhhh! He just becomes more loathsome every day…

OmahaConservative on January 4, 2012 at 10:48 AM

meh, this is typical of this commie White House. People will shriek loud enough and it’ll be shoved through the senate.

Flapjackmaka on January 4, 2012 at 10:48 AM

Here ya go…

Michelle Obama: “I Kind Of Like” Being Called “Your Excellency”

idesign on January 4, 2012 at 10:42 AM

I prefer to call her “Moochelle the hypocritical bubble-butt”.

Back when we had free speech that is.

Our Founders gave us three boxes to use in the defense of the Republic, use in this order:

1. Soap (1st Amendment)
2. Ballot (Constitutional Representative Republic)
3. Bullet (2nd Amendment)

With the President actually engaging in behavior in which he recognizes NO law, and NO restraint on his power, what recourse do we have? Throw him out of office? What if he refuses to allow the elections, and even if he does, what if he refuses to accept a result he doesn’t like?

wildcat72 on January 4, 2012 at 10:48 AM

Obama is scheduled to make his first public appearance of 2012 on Wednesday at 1:15 p.m. in the suburbs of Cleveland — Cordray’s home state.

Cleveland is a state?

backwoods conservative on January 4, 2012 at 10:48 AM

OT: Steve Brown said MB is definitely suspending her campaign at the presser…

OmahaConservative on January 4, 2012 at 10:49 AM

man it would seem like a certain congressman from California could begin distracting this guy with a few indictments doesn’t it?

DanMan on January 4, 2012 at 10:50 AM

So what recourse does the congress have against the president short of impeachment? Funding doesn’t seem to work.

Kaffa on January 4, 2012 at 10:45 AM

The Republicans will do nothing to stop it, just like they have basically done nothing to stop any other item in the Obama agenda since they returned to power in 2010.

Doomberg on January 4, 2012 at 10:50 AM

I wonder if Cordray, like Elizabeth Warren, claims to be one of the people who invented OWS?

UltimateBob on January 4, 2012 at 10:50 AM

If I’m not mistaken, there legally has to be at least a brief adjournment between the sessions of Congress. I don’t think the Republicans had a choice but to adjourn at least briefly, thus their “strongly worded letter” to Obama last week.

Shump on January 4, 2012 at 10:50 AM

Defund the NLRB. Put it out of business.

oldernwiser on January 4, 2012 at 10:50 AM

I’m sure the Hot Air boards were up in arms when John Bolton was recess appointed by the Bush Administration. The hypocrisy stinks to high heaven. This is what modern presidents do now. The next Republican president will do it and folks around here will cheer lead. Sheesh.

libfreeordie on January 4, 2012 at 10:51 AM

Atlas Shrugged is coming to life before our very eyes.

search4truth on January 4, 2012 at 10:51 AM

Exactly one week ago, I warned that Barack Obama would not feel himself constrained from making recess appointments by the pro forma sessions in the Senate…

This is the real issue even though it won’t be covered by the media in general. Obama should be constrained from making such an appointment as long as the Senate is in session. And if they refuse to end the session, then Obama gets no recess appointments. Instead of complaining about Republicans refusing to lie down in the road and be run over like good little losers, argue forcefully for why this President is exercising unprecedented executive authority and how dangerous that is.

NotCoach on January 4, 2012 at 10:52 AM

So what recourse does the congress have against the president short of impeachment? Funding doesn’t seem to work.

Kaffa on January 4, 2012 at 10:45 AM

Indict him for violating state laws. If Obama violates laws that protect you as a citizen of a state, he is just as liable as anyone else.

He’s a president, not an emperor. And presidents are not immune to charges when they break the law.

wildcat72 on January 4, 2012 at 10:52 AM

IMPEACH BUSH!

Good Lt on January 4, 2012 at 10:52 AM

Then how would we pass judgment on you?

red villain on January 4, 2012 at 10:47 AM

:)

Electrongod on January 4, 2012 at 10:52 AM

Atlas Shrugged is coming to life before our very eyes.

search4truth on January 4, 2012 at 10:51 AM

We’ve been living it since January 2009…

CorporatePiggy on January 4, 2012 at 10:53 AM

I’m sure the Hot Air boards were up in arms when John Bolton was recess appointed by the Bush Administration. The hypocrisy stinks to high heaven. This is what modern presidents do now. The next Republican president will do it and folks around here will cheer lead. Sheesh.

libfreeordie on January 4, 2012 at 10:51 AM

You don’t understand the difference and know how Bush respected the rules, do you?

NotCoach on January 4, 2012 at 10:53 AM

I’m sure the Hot Air boards were up in arms when John Bolton was recess appointed by the Bush Administration. The hypocrisy stinks to high heaven.

Not sure, but I am pretty sure that Democrats were.. Guess your definition of hypocrisy depends on who you support doesn’t it?

melle1228 on January 4, 2012 at 10:53 AM

Shump on January 4, 2012 at 10:50 AM

Did they adjourn?

NotCoach on January 4, 2012 at 10:54 AM

I’m sure the Hot Air boards were up in arms when John Bolton was recess appointed by the Bush Administration. The hypocrisy stinks to high heaven. This is what modern presidents do now. The next Republican president will do it and folks around here will cheer lead. Sheesh.

libfreeordie on January 4, 2012 at 10:51 AM

The Senate was NOT in session when this happened. Indeed, the Bolton appointment was why the democrats started HAVING pro forma sessions to avoid recess.

wildcat72 on January 4, 2012 at 10:54 AM

I’m sure the Hot Air boards were up in arms when John Bolton was recess appointed by the Bush Administration. The hypocrisy stinks to high heaven. This is what modern presidents do now. The next Republican president will do it and folks around here will cheer lead. Sheesh.

libfreeordie on January 4, 2012 at 10:51 AM

…so you’re obviously outraged about this, aren’t you?

I mean, you said it was wrong, so it stands to reason that it’s wrong when Obama does it, too.

Good Lt on January 4, 2012 at 10:55 AM

I guess it doesn’t matter who gets the nomination. obama is going to rule by fiat and ignore congress. he will decide that for good of the nation to suspend the general election until the problems are resolved.

And he can now do all this by signing the defense auth. bill that allows him to detan ANY AMERICAN INDEFINITELY FOR NO REASON OTHER THAN SAYING THEY ARE A DANGER TO THE NATION

ConservativePartyNow on January 4, 2012 at 10:56 AM

Oh bad news: CONSUMER PROTECTION

residentblue on January 4, 2012 at 10:46 AM

The sad, sad state of affairs as to those in the U.S. with the vote is that there are just enough people who are counted in that who THINK that someone saying “I’m here to help you” actually means they are.

Along those lines, the concept of “consumer protection” ACTUALLY means, in the World of the Left, reduction in employment (no jobs, less jobs, more unemployment and from that, more government, more socialism, bigger bailouts, on and on and on…downward economy).

Remember Elizabeth Warren? (Obama’s first nominee to “rule” this agency was Warren). Remember her enthusiasm and pride about Occupy dingbattery? All her thrills about the very idea of deconstructing Capitalism and the U.S. economy under guise of “social justice”?

Well…that’s what this agency is all about if left in the hands of one President and his one underling to do his “ruling” over our nation as to commerce, buying, selling, loans, financials, STUDENT loans, etc.

Obama is appealing to his grovelling lowest common denominator and it’s at the very huge expense (no pun intended but it’s appropriate here) of our nation and our overall population.

Lourdes on January 4, 2012 at 10:56 AM

Not sure, but I am pretty sure that Democrats were.. Guess your definition of hypocrisy depends on who you support doesn’t it?

melle1228 on January 4, 2012 at 10:53 AM

No actually, hypocrisy is a word whose definition does not change. Democrats supporting recess appointments now are also hypocrites (as I’ve said a few times, I’m an independent). I, for one, don’t have a strong opinion about the Senate’s advise and consent powers. Or rather, I guess I feel since the Senate is a useless body, with too much power that the President should be able to appoint people he/she thinks would be best in a given situation. Presidential appointments are one of the few areas where I think the executive should have a bit more power.

libfreeordie on January 4, 2012 at 10:57 AM

Oh bad news: CONSUMER PROTECTION

residentblue on January 4, 2012 at 10:46 AM

Breaking news: Barack Obama is like most modern Presidents. America is doomed or something…

libfreeordie on January 4, 2012 at 10:46 AM

And the Day Shift roll out of bed…did you two also defend the Recess Appointments the previous President made? John Bolton comes to mind…

Del Dolemonte on January 4, 2012 at 10:57 AM

I actually find it quite pleasing that Obama is setting this precedent, because Democrats in the senate will be completely unreasonable after he is defeated in November and they lose the majority. They can scream and cry all they want as we run roughshod over them.

Mord on January 4, 2012 at 10:58 AM

Democrats supporting recess appointments now are also hypocrites (as I’ve said a few times, I’m an independent).

So…you’re outraged at Obama over this, right?

Presidential appointments are one of the few areas where I think the executive should have a bit more power.

So Bush wasn’t totaly out of bounds appointing Bolton to a useless UN Ambassador position, right?

Good Lt on January 4, 2012 at 10:58 AM

Breaking news: Barack Obama is like most modern Presidents.

libfreeordie on January 4, 2012 at 10:46 AM

But…. but…. what happened to all that Hope and Change that he promised, and idiots like you fell for?

Seems that “Hope and Change” turned out to mean “business as usual.” The only real difference between 0bama and any other president is the level of corruption from this administration. 0bama is like Nixon on steroids.

And you’ll probably vote for him again in 2012. The definition of insanity.

UltimateBob on January 4, 2012 at 10:58 AM

Why do we refer to them as “Congress”?
We should refer to them as “Crickets”!

Why do we refer to John Bonehead as “Mr. Speaker”!
We should refer to him as “Mr. Speechless”!

KOOLAID2 on January 4, 2012 at 10:58 AM

This is my surprised face. See how surprised it is?

The shocker here is…….well there is none. It was obvious he was going to do this. Hes just following in previous Presidents footsteps in appointing people that Congress refused to allow through.

I really couldn’t care about this appointment. The coming NLRB appointments on the other hand, that’s something to get angry about. This was nothing more than laying the groundwork for the coming appointments.

The NLRB has been out of control for(at least) 2 years now. Just imagine what will happen when The One appoints more activists to the NLRB.

Whats even worse is that people seem to be to stupid or disconnected to realize what this means. Mainly that Job Creators will refuse to make any new jobs as long as the threat of another Boeing-gate looms.

Blu3Yeti on January 4, 2012 at 10:59 AM

I cannot wait until a Republican is in the White House so that he can give the finger to the Democrat pro forma Senate sessions for recess appointments. And when the Dems cry foul (they will), I will laugh hard enough to rupture my spleen, right before I fart into their collective faces.

Physics Geek on January 4, 2012 at 11:00 AM

To you Leftwingers here:

It’s not about outrage as to Obama making his failed “recess appointment” as in some game where someone else gets the ball and runs with it or doesn’t.

The ISSUE is this agency and how it’s structured. It’s structured badly, wrongly, anti-American-y, destructively to our economy.

Obama is attempting to enforce that bad structure with his refusal to address the bad structure of the agency and instead insisting on some one individual to “rule” the thing.

Lourdes on January 4, 2012 at 11:00 AM

Oh bad news: CONSUMER PROTECTION

residentblue on January 4, 2012 at 10:46 AM

Oh bad news: Orwellian Doublespeak.

John the Libertarian on January 4, 2012 at 11:00 AM

This is what modern presidents do now.

libfreeordie on January 4, 2012 at 10:51 AM

So you’re saying O’bama is no better than Bush? How Democrat of you.

Del Dolemonte on January 4, 2012 at 11:01 AM

So…you’re outraged at Obama over this, right?

I’m stunned. STUNNED! That you could ask this question when later in that post you indicated you read my whole comment where I explicitly endorsed recess appointments as not so bad. Stunning.

libfreeordie on January 4, 2012 at 11:03 AM

Here’s some bad news for Obama: The Liberty Legal Foundation has brought lawsuits to keep Obama off the 2012 ballot because “the Supreme Court has defined ‘natural-born-citizen’ as a person with two U.S. citizen parents, and Obama admits that his father was never a U.S. citizen.”

Yesterday, a GA court upheld LLF which could be disastrous news for Der Fuehrer. My favorite scenario involves a ruling removing him from the ballot and the decision comes this summer so that the Dims have no time to react. If GA removes him from the ballot we can be sure that many other states will follow suit.

http://libertylegalfoundation.org/1477/georgia-court-ruled-against-obama/

Samantha on January 4, 2012 at 11:03 AM

If you dismantle the institutions then presidents can’t make recess appointments to them.

kagai on January 4, 2012 at 11:03 AM

“Recess appointments are bad. I will never do this.”

-Candidate Obama, 2008. – portlandon on January 4, 2012 at 10:44 AM

Another broken promise, what’s new?

SC.Charlie on January 4, 2012 at 11:04 AM

I’m sure the Hot Air boards were up in arms when John Bolton was recess appointed by the Bush Administration. The hypocrisy stinks to high heaven. This is what modern presidents do now. The next Republican president will do it and folks around here will cheer lead. Sheesh.

libfreeordie on January 4, 2012 at 10:51 AM

When all else, including logic or any kind factual backup fails…..Apples and Beach Balls, Sport.

ManWithNoParty on January 4, 2012 at 11:04 AM

Del Dolemonte on January 4, 2012 at 11:01 AM

Oh honey, I first said that around the Thanksgiving table in 2008 when he appointed Timmy Geithner. The “I told you so” from Democrats and otherwise intelligent leftists have been gratifying in a way. But not worth it for Bush III. I’d give you an A, but the assignment is late.

C–

libfreeordie on January 4, 2012 at 11:04 AM

This is what modern presidents do now.

libfreeordie on January 4, 2012 at 10:51 AM

So you’re saying O’bama is no better than Bush? How Democrat of you.

Del Dolemonte on January 4, 2012 at 11:01 AM

2008: HOPE AND CHANGE!!!!11!11!!!!111!

2012: Ah, well, this is what Presidents do.

UltimateBob on January 4, 2012 at 11:04 AM

Its not so much Cordray the Republicans were holding up as the monsterous department he would head.

October 18, 2011
Tort Lawyers’ Dream, Economy’s Scourge: Richard Cordray and the CFPB
By Michael I. Krauss

You see, Dodd-Frank allows the CFPB to repress any and all “unfair,” “deceptive,” “abusive,” and “discriminatory” practices, but the law fails to define those terms at all — so the CFPB’s actions will suspiciously resemble legislation. Indeed, CFPB is vested with the sole discretion to decide what those terms mean and how they are applied to consumer financial products and services.

Speakup on January 4, 2012 at 11:05 AM

Elections have consequences.

ctmom on January 4, 2012 at 10:40 AM

…including the one where Republicans took control of the House.

dominigan on January 4, 2012 at 11:05 AM

He’s officially a lame duck now. Anything he does now expires in November.

FireBlogger on January 4, 2012 at 11:06 AM

The senate’s not recessed.

Akzed on January 4, 2012 at 10:41 AM

Obama doesn’t care. He will beging taking extra-legal actions. The courts will take forever to forbid them, if they do. Impeachment is the only alternative.

theCork on January 4, 2012 at 11:06 AM

This is what modern presidents do now.

libfreeordie on January 4, 2012 at 10:51 AM
So you’re saying O’bama is no better than Bush? How Democrat of you.

Del Dolemonte on January 4, 2012 at 11:01 AM

But…butt Del Dolemonte….he’s a Libertarian donchaknow?
wink…wink!

KOOLAID2 on January 4, 2012 at 11:07 AM

Impeach (her excellency too)

screwauger on January 4, 2012 at 11:07 AM

beging => begin

theCork on January 4, 2012 at 11:07 AM

http://libertylegalfoundation.org/1477/georgia-court-ruled-against-obama/

Samantha on January 4, 2012 at 11:03 AM

From your link:

The hearing is set for 9AM on January 26th in Atlanta, Georgia.

That means that we should all expect some sort of disaster to befall Georgia from the hand of Eric Holder sometime before January 26.

Lourdes on January 4, 2012 at 11:07 AM

Sur-prise, sur-prise, sur-PRISE ! – Jim Nabors Gomer Pyle, USMC

ExpressoBold on January 4, 2012 at 11:08 AM

I’m glad some folks are admitting that its not about “an unprecedented Obama overreach of executive power that will tip the U.S. toward fascisms, aieeeee!” and that this is all about opposition to the consumer protections board. Which is fine. For my money, Warren and the consumer protections board is one of the few genuinely leftist things to come out of this Administration. And its protection, along with the Court, are enough for me to pull a level for Obama rather than 3rd party. But seriously, this is about partisanship, not some genuine fear about executive over reach. Which folks could just be honest.

libfreeordie on January 4, 2012 at 11:08 AM

I’m stunned. STUNNED! That you could ask this question when later in that post you indicated you read my whole comment where I explicitly endorsed recess appointments as not so bad. Stunning.

libfreeordie on January 4, 2012 at 11:03 AM

I didn’t ask if you were surprised.

I asked if you were angry.

Good Lt on January 4, 2012 at 11:09 AM

He’s officially a lame duck now. Anything he does now expires in November.

FireBlogger on January 4, 2012 at 11:06 AM

He’s been a lame duck since November of 2008!

KOOLAID2 on January 4, 2012 at 11:10 AM

He’s officially a lame duck now. Anything he does now expires in November.

FireBlogger on January 4, 2012 at 11:06 AM

We should not, none of us, underestimate the desperation that will ensue with what potential damages before November.

Lourdes on January 4, 2012 at 11:10 AM

And its protection, along with the Court, are enough for me to pull a level for Obama rather than 3rd party.

LOL

So you support the one genuinely leftist thing to come out of the administration, and it’s enough for you to pull the lever for Obama rather than (some candidate you weren’t ever going to vote for).

Yeah.

You’re “independent.”

Good Lt on January 4, 2012 at 11:10 AM

Well this didn’t take long.

ctmom on January 4, 2012 at 11:11 AM

I actually find it quite pleasing that Obama is setting this precedent, because Democrats in the senate will be completely unreasonable after he is defeated in November and they lose the majority. They can scream and cry all they want as we run roughshod over them.

Mord on January 4, 2012 at 10:58 AM

Republicans run “roughshod” over the Dems? Thanks for the morning laugh. That’s part of the problem. The Repubs won’t battle the Dems using Dem rules. The Repubs have absolutely no idea on how to combat the school yard bully.

climbnjump on January 4, 2012 at 11:11 AM

Impeach (her excellency too)

screwauger on January 4, 2012 at 11:07 AM

That reminds me of a bumper sticker I saw during the Clinton administration.

“Impeach the president! And her husband too!”

backwoods conservative on January 4, 2012 at 11:11 AM

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4