Pelosi: I’m darned proud of Obama for making these illegal recess appointments

posted at 3:57 pm on January 5, 2012 by Allahpundit

Some said she’d never top her infamous reply when asked to explain the constitutional basis for ObamaCare’s mandate, but you know Nancy — always striving to improve. Notice here that she doesn’t try to defend Obama’s move on legal grounds. She could have, as that’s what the follow-up question is looking for, but all she’s willing to do when pressed is mumble something about “public debate.” For good reason: Even if there’s a constitutional argument to be made in Obama’s defense, that argument isn’t available to Democrats. They used pro forma sessions, successfully, to block Bush; the only way to square that circle is to argue that the GOP is being more obstructionist than they were, to the point where other branches are now free to ignore separation-of-powers provisions in the Constitution in order to break the impasse. It’s as if Obama, frustrated at seeing Democratic bills stalled in the House and Senate, had suddenly decreed that some of those bills will be treated as valid law. That’d show that “do-nothing Congress” a thing or two, eh? It’s nutty, and insanely shortsighted given that a Republican president will end up clubbing them over the head with this precedent, but it might help Obama’s reelection bid marginally, so hey.

Exit quotation: “It was the latest milestone in Obama’s journey from bipartisan conciliator to partisan agitator, perhaps the starkest break to date from his campaign promises to change the tone in Washington.” Click the image to watch.


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

Folks, its happening. We’re witnessing our government abandon the US Constitution in favor of something else, right before our eyes. And they are proud of it.

Its time to wake up and realize that this is real.

BobMbx on January 5, 2012 at 4:04 PM

So tell us, what’s the constitutional basis for requiring a super majority vote to pass a low-level appointee, as mandated by a recent act of Congress?

Some people are living in their own little world of make-believe victimization.

bayam on January 5, 2012 at 5:17 PM

Obama’s pronouncement is as close to an actual declaration of a dictatorship as one can get without actually saying those words.

He can kill anyone at will
He can detain anyone indefinitely without charges
He picks and chooses which laws he supports (today)
He makes up laws as he goes along
His administration is the biggest grouping of academic idiots in the world.
He no longer needs Congress, since they get in his way
He can rule the country by Executive Orders

America is in deep doo-doo!

ANY congress critter with a drop of honor should be speaking out against this while his/her staff is furiously drafting the first (of many) Articles of Impeachment. They should speak out for the sake of America, not for mere talking points and re-election. The time for talk is past…Obama has declared war on America…maybe it is time for America to reciprocate.

http://www.rongoulden.com/Literary.htm

xmanvietnam on January 5, 2012 at 5:19 PM

Ann on January 5, 2012 at 5:12 PM

Peace. Keep posting too. I think its safe to assume whatever the original intent of the founding fathers were they are going to be challenged at every turn by the guy who thinks the entire Constitution is a document of “negative rights”.

DanMan on January 5, 2012 at 5:19 PM

President Obama signaled Congress this week that he is prepared to share U.S. missile defense secrets with Russia.

In the president’s signing statement issued Saturday in passing into law the fiscal 2012 defense authorization bill, Mr. Obama said restrictions aimed at protecting top-secret technical data on U.S. Standard Missile-3 velocity burnout parameters might impinge on his constitutional foreign policy authority.

J_Crater on January 5, 2012 at 5:19 PM

I can’t see this helping Obama’s re-election bid. He has now gone into full mode unconstitutional tyrant territory. That has to lose him some intelligent votes.

WannabeAnglican on January 5, 2012 at 5:21 PM

So tell us, what’s the constitutional basis for requiring a super majority vote to pass a low-level appointee, as mandated by a recent act of Congress?

Some people are living in their own little world of make-believe victimization.

bayam on January 5, 2012 at 5:17 PM

Article I, Section 5, Paragraph 2

Each House may determine the Rules of its Proceedings, punish its Members for disorderly Behaviour, and, with the Concurrence of two thirds, expel a Member.

The filibuster exists entirely as a rule created by the Senate. They can change the rule any time they want. Anymore stupid questions?

NotCoach on January 5, 2012 at 5:22 PM

I couldn’t resist linking this here…keep in mind that this cartoon was made in 1948. (Yeah, I know RAAAAACCCISSST). Very timely. Gotta watch out for those “Isms!.” Hope you read and pass it on. It’s also going on my FB Profile.

Chewy the Lab on January 5, 2012 at 5:22 PM

So tell us, what’s the constitutional basis for requiring a super majority vote to pass a low-level appointee, as mandated by a recent act of Congress?

Some people are living in their own little world of make-believe victimization.

bayam on January 5, 2012 at 5:17 PM

Really? Which act, bigot?

And also, since you’re screaming and pissing yourself that requiring a supermajority vote automatically makes a law unconstitutional, then I guess you totally screwed yourself on Obamacare.

Now, come on, bigot. You and your pissing, screaming Obama insisted before that requiring supermajority votes was constitutional. Why did you flip flop now, bigot? Is it because you’re an unprincipled lying bigot?

Answer the question, bayam. You shrieked that laws requiring a supermajority vote for anything are unconstitutional. Obamacare does. Either admit that Obamacare is unconstitutional or scream and piss yourself.

northdallasthirty on January 5, 2012 at 5:22 PM

Chewy the Lab on January 5, 2012 at 5:23 PM

I hope that the Republicans stay home for the next State of the Union. That discourtesy would be well deserved.

Special Forces Grunt on January 5, 2012 at 5:24 PM

I can’t see this helping Obama’s re-election bid. He has now gone into full mode unconstitutional tyrant territory. That has to lose him some intelligent votes.

WannabeAnglican on January 5, 2012 at 5:21 PM

This presumes he had intelligent votes to begin with and I am not sure that he did.

Lily on January 5, 2012 at 5:25 PM

the only way to square that circle is to argue that the GOP is being more obstructionist than they were

You think? Can you name one recent Senate vote of significance that didn’t require a supermajority to pass? The GOP is turning a procedure intended for special circumstances into a platform for exercising more power than the founding fathers ever envisioned for the Senate- and far beyond the number of seats awarded to the party by voters.

Let’s keep in mind that the Gang of 14 compromise to restrict filibusters in the Senate ended as soon as Bush left office. In other words, the behavior that Republicans vilified as unconstitutional and unethical during the Bush Presidency suddenly became their modus operandi for governing during the Obama era.

bayam on January 5, 2012 at 5:25 PM

Chewy the Lab on January 5, 2012 at 5:25 PM

I can’t see this helping Obama’s re-election bid. He has now gone into full mode unconstitutional tyrant territory. That has to lose him some intelligent votes.

WannabeAnglican on January 5, 2012 at 5:21 PM

It has little to do with intelligence. It has a lot to do with wisdom.

Two very different things.

visions on January 5, 2012 at 5:25 PM

So tell us, what’s the constitutional basis for requiring a super majority vote to pass a low-level appointee, as mandated by a recent act of Congress?

Some people are living in their own little world of make-believe victimization.

bayam on January 5, 2012 at 5:17 PM

Take a deep breath before reading this:

The Senate’s power to establish rules derives from Article One, Section 5 of the United States Constitution: “Each House may determine the rules of its proceedings…”

BobMbx on January 5, 2012 at 5:26 PM

I give up! Haven’t ever had a problem posting a link! Sorry!

Chewy the Lab on January 5, 2012 at 5:26 PM

bayam on January 5, 2012 at 5:17 PM

Oh, and bayam, since you’re blathering about constitutionality, how about your Obama Party and your Barack Obama previously shrieking that recess appointments were always unconstitutional?

THEN-SEN. BARACK OBAMA (D-IL): Recess appointments ‘the wrong thing to do.’ “‘It’s the wrong thing to do. John Bolton is the wrong person for the job,’ said Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., a member of Foreign Relations Committee.” (“Officials: White House To Bypass Congress For Bolton Nomination,” The Associated Press, 7/30/05)

· OBAMA: A recess appointee is ‘damaged goods… we will have less credibility.’ “To some degree, he’s damaged goods… somebody who couldn’t get through a nomination in the Senate. And I think that that means that we will have less credibility…” (“Bush Sends Bolton To U.N.” The State Journal-Register [Springfield, IL], 8/2/05)

SEN. HARRY REID (D-NV): ‘An end run around the Senate and the Constitution.’ “I will keep the Senate in pro forma session to block the President from doing an end run around the Senate and the Constitution with his controversial nominations.” (Sen. Reid, Congressional Record, S.15980, 12/19/07)

· REID: ‘They are mischievous.’ “Also, understand this: We have had a difficult problem with the President now for some time. We don’t let him have recess appointments because they are mischievous, and unless we have an agreement before the recess, there will be no recess. We will meet every third day pro forma, as we have done during the last series of breaks.” (Sen. Reid, Congressional Record, S.7558, 7/28/08)

· REID: Recess appointments an ‘abuse of power.’ “Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) denounced the appointment as ‘the latest abuse of power by the Bush administration,’ adding that Bolton would arrive at the UN ‘with a cloud hanging over his head’ because he could not win confirmation.” (“Bush Puts Bolton In UN Post,” Chicago Tribune, 8/2/05)

· REID: A recess appointee will have ‘a cloud hanging over his head.’ “Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) denounced the appointment as ‘the latest abuse of power by the Bush administration,’ adding that Bolton would arrive at the UN ‘with a cloud hanging over his head’ because he could not win confirmation.” (“Bush Puts Bolton In UN Post,” Chicago Tribune, 8/2/05)

SEN. DICK DURBIN (D-IL): ‘Troubling.’ “When you have an appointment that is this critical and this sensitive, and the president basically says he’s going to ignore the will of the senate and push someone through, it really is troubling.” (“Bush Sends Bolton To U.N.” The State Journal-Register [Springfield, IL], 8/2/05)

· DURBIN: ‘Could easily be unconstitutional.’ “I agree with Senator Kennedy that Mr. Pryor’s recess appointment, which occurred during a brief recess of Congress, could easily be unconstitutional. It was certainly confrontational. Recess appointments lack the permanence and independence contemplated by the Framers of the Constitution.” (Sen. Durbin, Congressional Record, S.6253, 6/9/05)

SEN. JOHN KERRY (D-MA): Recess appointments an ‘abuse [of] the power of the presidency.’ “‘It’s sad but not surprising that this White House would abuse the power of the presidency to reward a donor over the objections of the Senate,’ Kerry said in a statement …” (“Recess Appointments Granted to ‘Swift Boat’ Donor, 2 Other Nominees,” The Washington Post, 4/5/07)

SEN. FRANK LAUTENBERG (D-NJ): “…bends the rules and circumvents the will of Congress.” (“President Sends Bolton to U.N.; Bypasses Senate,” The New York Times, 8/2/05)

SEN. MAX BAUCUS (D-MT): “Senate confirmation of presidential appointees is an essential process prescribed by the Constitution that serves as a check on executive power and protects Montanans and all Americans by ensuring that crucial questions are asked of the nominee — and answered…” (“Dem Baucus Joins GOP In Blasting Obama CMS Recess Appointment,” The Hill, 7/7/10)

What’s the matter, Obama bigot? You being exposed as a bigot, given how you and your stinking party are endorsing and supporting activity that you previously said was unconstitutional?

Hilarious. Troll bigot boys like yourself are being humiliated every time you open your mouth. You’re so helplessly ignorant and unable to do anything other than shill for Barack Obama that you’re demonstrating what a complete and total irrational bigot you are.

northdallasthirty on January 5, 2012 at 5:27 PM

NotCoach on January 5, 2012 at 5:22 PM

Beat me to it.

Talk about T-ball. Hell, I damn near didn’t even look that up.

BobMbx on January 5, 2012 at 5:27 PM

The filibuster exists entirely as a rule created by the Senate. They can change the rule any time they want.

Correct, it’s a Senate rule and NOT a constitutional mandate.

bayam on January 5, 2012 at 5:27 PM

This woman is about as believable as Baghdad Bob. Is it possible that she really is as astonishingly stupid as some of her statements would imply?

mr.blacksheep on January 5, 2012 at 5:27 PM

BTW, I always believed that AnninCA was not a single person, but most likely a high school or college civics or government class that would trade the Ann persona from student to student. Some sort of class assignment. I say this because we haven’t heard from Ann since May/June of 2011, unless I missed her somewhere since.

“her” comments seemed too broad, and quite frankly she flip-flopped more than Romney. “Her” writing style changed alot, too.

BobMbx on January 5, 2012 at 5:05 PM

Hmmmm, I see your point. I always thought they were just having trouble dialing in her meds.

Lily on January 5, 2012 at 5:29 PM

Some people are living in their own little world of make-believe victimization.

bayam on January 5, 2012 at 5:17 PM

Do you have any concept of what this new cabinet position is about? It is the chairmanship for the Consumer Finance Protection Board. What makes you think a party that won’t produce a budget but spends at a clip of $1.2 trillion in deficits/year is going to protect your finances? dayum bayam

DanMan on January 5, 2012 at 5:29 PM

Let’s keep in mind that the Gang of 14 compromise to restrict filibusters in the Senate ended as soon as Bush left office. In other words, the behavior that Republicans vilified as unconstitutional and unethical during the Bush Presidency suddenly became their modus operandi for governing during the Obama era.

bayam on January 5, 2012 at 5:25 PM

You just invent nonsense from whole cloth, don’t you? Please link to a single Senator ever declaring the filibuster rule unconstitutional. And again, a rule that can be changed tomorrow because the Constitution explicitly states that each chamber shall make its own rules.

NotCoach on January 5, 2012 at 5:30 PM

northdallasthirty on January 5, 2012 at 5:27 PM

You have the manners and class of little child. HotAir used to make a point of censoring hateful talk but fortunately for you the sheer number of comments makes it harder these days.

bayam on January 5, 2012 at 5:31 PM

Beat me to it.

Talk about T-ball. Hell, I damn near didn’t even look that up.

BobMbx on January 5, 2012 at 5:27 PM

Lol.

NotCoach on January 5, 2012 at 5:31 PM

I think its safe to assume whatever the original intent of the founding fathers were they are going to be challenged at every turn by the guy who thinks the entire Constitution is a document of “negative rights”.

DanMan on January 5, 2012 at 5:19 PM

I think Madison or Hamilton would have already challenged The One to a duel.

BobMbx on January 5, 2012 at 5:31 PM

Correct, it’s a Senate rule and NOT a constitutional mandate.

bayam on January 5, 2012 at 5:27 PM

So what the h3ll is your problem?

NotCoach on January 5, 2012 at 5:32 PM

bayam on January 5, 2012 at 5:25 PM

The constitution gave the Senate a different formulation than the House for a reason; that is, to prevent mob rule from overtaking common sense, and to ensure that even the smallest and least populated states have at least some counterbalance to populist bullshit that seems so right at the time but turns out to be completely bad policy in the long term.

When did you ever give a flip about what the founders envisioned, by the way? When it became convenient to do so?

That’s what I thought.

Cripes, the termites are crawling out of the woodwork again.

hillbillyjim on January 5, 2012 at 5:32 PM

Loving the troll smackdown.

Joffen on January 5, 2012 at 5:35 PM

You think? Can you name one recent Senate vote of significance that didn’t require a supermajority to pass? The GOP is turning a procedure intended for special circumstances into a platform for exercising more power than the founding fathers ever envisioned for the Senate- and far beyond the number of seats awarded to the party by voters.

bayam on January 5, 2012 at 5:25 PM

Sorry, but Obama and the Obama Party insisted that the filibuster is an absolute right, completely democratic, not at all against the rules, and necessary to protect minority rights, even insisting that abolishing the filibuster would be racist.

So again, filthy bigot, you expose yourself. You and your Obama Party just can’t stop lying — and now your lies are unraveling as you agitate against that which you defended and now insist something is constitutional when mere years ago you were screaming that it wasn’t.

You’re a liar, bayam. You’re a bigot. You are like your Obama, nothing but lying bigoted filth who will say and do anything to stay in power.

And thankfully, your Obama is making that obvious, humiliating the fools like yourself who just months ago were praising the filibuster and insisting that it was always the right thing to do.

northdallasthirty on January 5, 2012 at 5:35 PM

You have the manners and class of little child. HotAir used to make a point of censoring hateful talk but fortunately for you the sheer number of comments makes it harder these days.

bayam on January 5, 2012 at 5:31 PM

Nope. I have the manners and class of an adult, which is why I can provide links and facts and you can’t.

You’re just bleating and screaming and crying because your lies and bigotry are being shoved in your face. Like your emotional child Obama, you just aren’t used to having to take responsibility for what you said and are throwing a tantrum.

Slam your fists on the floor some more, brat. We all know what Obama Party members like you really are — nothing but lazy, worthless brats who sit around in diapers all day and demand others pay their bills for them.

northdallasthirty on January 5, 2012 at 5:38 PM

Something ironic about appointing someone illegally whose job it is to work against those that is to work against people who break the law.

CW on January 5, 2012 at 5:40 PM

Can we seriously consider impeachment?

Joffen on January 5, 2012 at 5:41 PM

Del Dolemonte on January 5, 2012 at 5:03 PM

He was hit with suborning perjury, too. He plotted with witnesses to perjure themselves, which was even worse than his own personal perjury.

ThePrimordialOrderedPair on January 5, 2012 at 5:16 PM

During the Impeachment hearings the Republicans called as a witness the female V.A. Doctor who Clinton’s Justice Department had successfully prosecuted a few years earlier. The Democrats basically ignored her.

She had been prosecuted for lying under oath about sex too.

Del Dolemonte on January 5, 2012 at 5:44 PM

Can you name one recent Senate vote of significance that didn’t require a supermajority to pass? The GOP is turning a procedure intended for special circumstances …

bayam on January 5, 2012 at 5:25 PM

Serious question: Where you born in 2009?

strictnein on January 5, 2012 at 5:44 PM

Some people are living in their own little world of make-believe victimization.

bayam on January 5, 2012 at 5:17 PM

Translated: “I supported Bush’s Recess Appointments too”.

F-

Del Dolemonte on January 5, 2012 at 5:44 PM

I hope im wrong about this… game plan for change

1. get control of the media
2. control the school system
3. challenge the status quo at every turn.
4. build the entitlement sector as large as possible
5. pull the rug out from under entitlement sector
6. institute marshall law to stem the violence ( luckily we have new rules in place as of new years)
7. no longer need those pesky elections

naw.. im just paranoid right?

MrMoe on January 5, 2012 at 5:48 PM

Can we seriously consider impeachment?

Joffen on January 5, 2012 at 5:41 PM

why waste the time. and we’ll need the precedent to overcome the minority dems hanging on after 2012 in the senate, all 45 or them or so. to brush them out fo the way of progress. nah, this is very helpful in the long run. relax. these are the death throes of a dying party. its fun to watch. enjoy.

t8stlikchkn on January 5, 2012 at 5:48 PM

. . . That has to lose him some intelligent votes.

WannabeAnglican on January 5, 2012 at 5:21 PM

Well, it would be nice if he lost some Democrat votes, too . . .

BigAlSouth on January 5, 2012 at 5:48 PM

I can’t see this helping Obama’s re-election bid. He has now gone into full mode unconstitutional tyrant territory. That has to lose him some intelligent votes.

WannabeAnglican on January 5, 2012 at 5:21 PM

This presumes he had intelligent votes to begin with and I am not sure that he did.

Lily on January 5, 2012 at 5:25 PM

According to MSNBC Exit Polling in 2008, he got 70% of the high school dropout vote, a new high. The previous high was 61% by Algore in 2000.

But since some of us kept reminding folks of those MSNBC exit polls, they magically vanished them from their web presence. Dr. Goebbels would be proud of them.

Two other exit polls, by CNN and ABC, had him tied with Gore for the record, with 61% of the HS dropout vote.

Del Dolemonte on January 5, 2012 at 5:50 PM

why waste the time. and we’ll need the precedent to overcome the minority dems hanging on after 2012 in the senate, all 45 or them or so. to brush them out fo the way of progress. nah, this is very helpful in the long run. relax. these are the death throes of a dying party. its fun to watch. enjoy.

Enjoy Obama crapping all over the Constitution? No way. Clinton lied under oath, but I’d argue it did not harm the country. Glad he was impeached, it was right and necessary. However, this is different. The time for political games is over. The time for watching the other side lose, while fun, is over. Obama has seriously betrayed one of the very bedrocks of our entire country. I won’t sit idly by and snark while he gets away with this.

Joffen on January 5, 2012 at 5:55 PM

Clinton lied under oath, but I’d argue it did not harm the country.

Joffen on January 5, 2012 at 5:55 PM

And I could argue that it did hurt the country-because it set a precedent. See my 5:44 PM post. Clinton’s defenders ignored that his own Justice Department had already prosecuted a female Federal employee for doing the same thing, and basically said she wasn’t above the law and yet he was. Clinton also redefined the words “sex” and “is”, something no one else had ever done in the history of the English Language, in order to excuse his criminal behavior.

In addition, Clinton basically ignored everything else to keep from being impeached, which allowed al Qaeda to grow. During the time of the Impeachment hearing and later Trial, he passed on several bona fide chances to get bin Laden.

After the 9/11 Attacks, bin Laden stated that one of the motivations was his fury at Clinton for committing adultery. He also said that he wanted those attacks to happen while Clinton was still in office.

Del Dolemonte on January 5, 2012 at 6:07 PM

You have the manners and class of little child. HotAir used to make a point of censoring hateful talk but fortunately for you the sheer number of comments makes it harder these days.

bayam on January 5, 2012 at 5:31 PM

I guess it is harder these days. Hot Air certainly missed yours.

Walter L. Newton on January 5, 2012 at 6:11 PM

After the 9/11 Attacks, bin Laden stated that one of the motivations was his fury at Clinton for committing adultery. He also said that he wanted those attacks to happen while Clinton was still in office.

Del Dolemonte on January 5, 2012 at 6:07 PM

So Clinton lied and people died? Man they took projection to a whole new level with that meme didn’t they?

DanMan on January 5, 2012 at 6:11 PM

Can you name one recent Senate vote of significance that didn’t require a supermajority to pass? The GOP is turning a procedure intended for special circumstances …

bayam on January 5, 2012 at 5:25 PM

Um, Yeah… One in particular comes to mind

HR 4872 – The Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act of 2010

Speaking of turning a procedure only meant for special circumstances into…. oh, nevermind you wouldn’t understand the irony.

Green_Bay_Packers on January 5, 2012 at 6:12 PM

Oh, and bayam, since you’re blathering about constitutionality, how about your Obama Party and your Barack Obama previously shrieking that recess appointments were always unconstitutional?

northdallasthirty on January 5, 2012 at 5:27 PM

Awesome article you linked. Thanks!

SailorMark on January 5, 2012 at 6:18 PM

Del Dolemonte on January 5, 2012 at 6:07 PM

So Clinton lied and people died? Man they took projection to a whole new level with that meme didn’t they?

DanMan on January 5, 2012 at 6:11 PM

bin Laden said it, not the opponents of Clinton.

Del Dolemonte on January 5, 2012 at 6:18 PM

I don’t have a lot of faith that the Republicans will do much of anything to educate the public to the fact that the President has just seriously overstepped his bounds. The media has already put out the message that Obama has done something “bold” and are in awe. Republicans may whine a little but nothing of substance will come of this. What is happening is surreal. Watching your country circle the drain is very unsettling.

JannyMc on January 5, 2012 at 6:24 PM

At this point I would be willing to vote for anyone that doesn’t have a D after their name or a Little moustache and Jack boots!!!!!! And northdallasthirty YOU ARE AWESOME!!!!!

lisa fox on January 5, 2012 at 6:26 PM

I wonder when the ex-speaker will have the surgery to remove her lips from Mr. Obama’s @ss.

LizardLips on January 5, 2012 at 6:27 PM

Now do you understand what the Leftists mean when they say our Constitution should be a living breathing document to keep up with the times. One problem, the times seem to be all the laws the leftists can break.

aposematic on January 5, 2012 at 6:28 PM

My God, if the Republicans have so totally lost sight of the rule of law that they can’t stand straight up to 0bama and tell him in no uncertain terms that he either withdraws these appointments by Monday or be impeached, then we have lost our Constitutional government.

As far as obeying her oath to protect and defend the COnstitution, Pelosi is no better than an SS guard handing a Jew a bar of soap and wishing him a good shower.

cane_loader on January 5, 2012 at 6:29 PM

Now do you understand what the Leftists mean when they say our Constitution should be a living breathing document to keep up with the times. One problem, the times seem to be all the laws the leftists can break.

aposematic on January 5, 2012 at 6:28 PM

A poster at Puffington Host on the Montana Supreme Court decision said this:

Seems that for the majority of commenters at this site, their fidelity to the Constituti­on is determined solely by whether the ruling jibes with their left wing politics.

Del Dolemonte on January 5, 2012 at 6:33 PM

0bama:

These bombs are actually FLOWERS.

The Senate is in RECESS.

These trains full of Jews Americans are going to CLUB MED.

Slippery slope…. a very smooth one.

cane_loader on January 5, 2012 at 6:34 PM

J_Crater on January 5, 2012 at 5:19 PM

F*****G WHAT??? ARE YOU SERIOUS??? TELL ME YOU ARE NOT SERIOUS!!!

MooCowBang on January 5, 2012 at 6:38 PM

northdallasthirty on January 5, 2012 at 5:27 PM

PERFECT…wish the gop would use this to pound the talking heads with as well…

cmsinaz on January 5, 2012 at 6:45 PM

Would McCain call her a liar? ….

Shain1611 on January 5, 2012 at 4:49 PM

No, McDisaster only calls Republicans liars and trolls.

Resist We Much on January 5, 2012 at 6:48 PM

Can we seriously consider impeachment?

Joffen

Obama is all-but daring the Republicans in the House to bring up Articles of Impeachment. I think he wants that exact thing to happen. Nothing would drive the Democrats base more nuts than House Republicans drafting and passing Articles of Impeachment. I hate to say it, but he knows he’s putting the Republicans in a catch-22. Not to act on it potentially demoralizes the GOP grassroots.

Jurisprudence on January 5, 2012 at 6:49 PM

Correct, it’s a Senate rule and NOT a constitutional mandate.

bayam on January 5, 2012 at 5:27 PM

Article I, Section 5 is NOT a Senate rule.

Article One, section Five of the Constitution — the Adjournments Clause — states:

“Neither House, during the Session of Congress, shall, without the Consent of the other, adjourn for more than three days, nor to any other Place than that in which the two Houses shall be sitting.”

The Constitution says the Senate cannot recess for more than 3 days without the House’s permission. The House has not granted permission, and as a result both houses have been holding pro forma sessions out of constitutional necessity.

Resist We Much on January 5, 2012 at 6:50 PM

No, McDisaster only calls Republicans liars and trolls.

Resist We Much on January 5, 2012 at 6:48 PM

ding ding ding

cool name by the way :)

cmsinaz on January 5, 2012 at 6:51 PM

cmsinaz on January 5, 2012 at 6:51 PM

Thanks. I am part of the vast “white wing” conspiracy discovered by that champion of equal protection for all races and the Queen’s English, Al Sharpton.

“But resist, we much… we must… and we will much… about… that… be committed.”

– Al Sharpton, 9 August 2011

:-)

Resist We Much on January 5, 2012 at 6:54 PM

msinaz on January 5, 2012 at 6:51 PM

Thanks. I am part of the vast “white wing” conspiracy discovered by that champion of equal protection for all races and the Queen’s English, Al Sharpton.

“But resist, we much… we must… and we will much… about… that… be committed.”

– Al Sharpton, 9 August 2011

:-)

Resist We Much on January 5, 2012 at 6:56 PM

Do i invest in torches and pitchforks yet?

royzer on January 5, 2012 at 7:03 PM

Resist We Much on January 5, 2012 at 6:56 PM

lolol

:)

cmsinaz on January 5, 2012 at 7:03 PM

Pelosi: I’m darned proud of Obama for making these illegal recess appointments

What does she care? She has her millions socked away like so many others in Washington, and they know they can lie and spew all manner of hypocrisy they want-there are no repercussions. They don’t believe in Hell. If they don’t get re-elected, it just hurts their egos. They aren’t going to jail for being lying dickweeds. They write their own rules and set their own moral standards (such as they are) for their little coven.

Down the road, they’ll want for nothing, and if things really do go South big time, they’ll hop on a plane and stick it out in some Caribbean retreat.

Dr. ZhivBlago on January 5, 2012 at 7:19 PM

Let’s see if I can flush out some more faux conservatives from the brush.
Obama did do a good thing here lately.
He brought horse slaughter back.
GO!

Badger40 on January 5, 2012 at 7:26 PM

I can’t wait to hear her and Reid scream when a Republican president does this to them.

DRayRaven on January 5, 2012 at 4:03 PM

I just saw this 1st part.
I thought it was some wierd sex thing at 1st.
*SHUDDDER*

Badger40 on January 5, 2012 at 7:28 PM

I will take your word that’s what she said, I just can’t listen to her ravings.

oregano on January 5, 2012 at 7:33 PM

Badger40 on January 5, 2012 at 7:26 PM

Heh, stop that.

rightoption on January 5, 2012 at 7:35 PM

Badger40 on January 5, 2012 at 7:26 PM

Didn’t the law that prevented horse slaughter just simply expire?

NotCoach on January 5, 2012 at 7:40 PM

Listen folks, it’s only going to get worse during the run-up to the general election.

WordsMatter on January 5, 2012 at 7:40 PM

Didn’t the law that prevented horse slaughter just simply expire?

NotCoach on January 5, 2012 at 7:40 PM

I don’t think the slaughter was banned, but facilities weren’t able to stay open, I think, bcs govt inspectors were defunded.

Badger40 on January 5, 2012 at 7:45 PM

NotCoach on January 5, 2012 at 7:40 PM

This Times article explains it some.

Badger40 on January 5, 2012 at 7:46 PM

I’m sitting here kind of laughing to myself as I watch this unfold. Obama’s doing his recess appointments, and then he’s announcing his “teen summer jobs” program, and then the gutting the military press conference, and he is just so proud of his little self. You can see him wearing his big boy pants and he thinks he’s just got everyone over a barrel. He’s tossin’ in 3 pointers all day. He’s the man, baby. You can’t touch this! And I am honestly just chuckling because it is so clear that the brilliant and well-educated president has never read any Greek tragedy. I don’t suppose that was on any of the reading lists in those ethnic studies classes he took in college. Hubris will bring this man down. He is saddled with many so tragic flaws – envy, vanity, but most of all, arrogance. He mistakes hubris for leadership, vanity for skill, envy for opportunity. And all are on display now. He is out of control. No one can save him from himself any longer. Nancy Pelosi isn’t proud; she’s scared. Her president is going to destroy himself, and take her party down with him. And she knows it.

Rational Thought on January 5, 2012 at 8:40 PM

I see no republicans making a stink about this, we are screwed.

mnkatie on January 5, 2012 at 9:05 PM

I wonder when the ex-speaker will have the surgery to remove her lips from Mr. Obama’s @ss.

LizardLips on January 5, 2012 at 6:27 PM

Funny, I’ve always thought that her lips and his @ss were one in the same.

climbnjump on January 5, 2012 at 9:11 PM

The 60 vote rule was first used extensively by Tom Daschle, Senate Majority Leader right after George W. was elected. With the Senate being 50D, 49R, and one lying weasel, he used this tactic to prevent VP Cheney from casting any deciding votes. What was desirable then is obstructionism now.

FirelandsO3 on January 5, 2012 at 9:39 PM

I wonder when the ex-speaker will have the surgery to remove her lips from Mr. Obama’s @ss.

LizardLips on January 5, 2012 at 6:27 PM

Funny, I’ve always thought that her lips and his @ss were one in the same.

climbnjump on January 5, 2012 at 9:11 PM

Please, you’re making us sick.

/

What was desirable then is obstructionism now.

FirelandsO3 on January 5, 2012 at 9:39 PM

It’s called “Turning On A Dime”.

Get used to it.

Del Dolemonte on January 5, 2012 at 10:21 PM

He is saddled with many so tragic flaws – envy, vanity, but most of all, arrogance. He mistakes hubris for leadership, vanity for skill, envy for opportunity. And all are on display now. He is out of control. No one can save him from himself any longer. Nancy Pelosi isn’t proud; she’s scared. Her president is going to destroy himself, and take her party down with him. And she knows it.

Rational Thought on January 5, 2012 at 8:40 PM

That was very well said; thank you.

Flotsam Jetsome on January 5, 2012 at 11:09 PM

I guess the next Republican President can just go for broke with all his recess appointments during pro forma and NO libs will sqawk about it!

Oh yeah, the Repubics ain’t gonna do nothing about it, he is the first half black president after all!

Africanus on January 6, 2012 at 1:15 AM

Can we seriously consider impeachment?

Even if our UTTERLY SPINELESS, FECKLESS, and GUTLESS house of representatives were to impeach, the Senate would not do it’s part in the matter under Dingy Reid. Obama is untouchable right now, and the tyrant knows it.

Hell the RePubics in congress are probably scared they will be declared terrorists and end up getting “predatored” without a trial.

Can we ad that as a new verb?

SilverDeth on January 6, 2012 at 1:46 AM

Pelosi trashes the Constitution while the little dictator makes the congress irrelevant. How in the world can this once great Republic be saved?

rplat on January 6, 2012 at 6:30 AM

We are in deep trouble, folks.

dogsoldier on January 6, 2012 at 6:44 AM

Exit quotation: “It was the latest milestone in Obama’s journey from bipartisan conciliator to partisan agitator, perhaps the starkest break to date from his campaign promises to change the tone in Washington.”

Oh, he’s changed the tone, alright. From partisan but manageable, to nasty, bitter, ugly, and downright poisonous.

Mission Accomplished!

Good job, Champ!

nukemhill on January 6, 2012 at 6:59 AM

Damn. No bites.

Badger40 on January 6, 2012 at 7:35 AM

Nancy Pelosi isn’t proud; she’s scared. Her president is going to destroy himself, and take her party down with him. And she knows it.

Rational Thought on January 5, 2012 at 8:40 PM

If that were true, she would abandon ship, not go down with it. It appears rather she is attempting to cement her place in the court of Zero the 1st.

dogsoldier on January 6, 2012 at 9:33 AM

And she still thinks that she will be Majority leader again? The woman is delirious.

I couldn’t even begin to imagine the lefts reaction right now had a Republican president pushed through his appointments while the senate was not in recess.

Big-Dave on January 6, 2012 at 10:49 AM

This entire government is a farce, operating under the facade of a Constitution. The little dictator will simply ignore it all and impose his will on the mindless masses.

rplat on January 6, 2012 at 11:08 AM

. . . That has to lose him some intelligent votes.

WannabeAnglican on January 5, 2012 at 5:21 PM

Well, it would be nice if he lost some Democrat votes, too . . .

BigAlSouth on January 5, 2012 at 5:48 PM

Do you have any idea how tough it is to clean pepsi max out of a keyboard???

runawayyyy on January 6, 2012 at 11:30 AM

Nancy Pelosi isn’t proud; she’s scared. Her president is going to destroy himself, and take her party down with him. And she knows it.

Rational Thought on January 5, 2012 at 8:40 PM

If that were true, she would abandon ship, not go down with it. It appears rather she is attempting to cement her place in the court of Zero the 1st.

dogsoldier on January 6, 2012 at 9:33 AM

She has nothing to fear and she knows it.

The press will simply turn around and call it unconstitutional next time a republican president tries to do exactly the same thing they’re calling obama bold for now. They’ll keep repeating this ad nauseum until the majority of the country demands the republican stop it. And the republican will stop it (if he has the stones to try it in the first place, knowing what’s coming).

This is what they do every time because it works every time. Name a single exception in history, not just American history but world history. Once a party controls the press as completely as democrats in America do right now, there is no longer anything to stop them from doing whatever they want whenever they want to whomever they want. Do you really think pelosi doesn’t know this? More importantly, do you people really not know this by now?

runawayyyy on January 6, 2012 at 11:35 AM

northdallasthirty Thanks for the reminder of Obama and Reid statements and reaction to recess appointments under Bush.

More of the elitist attitude of “Rules do not apply to me, I am the President” He has declared Laws not enforceable because he does not like or agree with them, He reversed Bankruptcy Law when he gave Unions Stock and Stock Holders got NOTHING. He has allowed loans to the Banking industry and Fanny Mae/Mac that are set up so investors get their money first and the Tax Payers are last, Law says we are first, but as I said, this does not apply to Obama. Obama went to Libya without even calling and talking to Congress about it, a violation of the Constitution. It just goes on and on doesn’t it? Well I am interested in what, if anything, the Congress does about these appointments, not only did he bypass Congress he also appointed them with no background check, a clear violation of National Security. I expect to have him make an appearance wearing a crown as will the First Lady. If there are election in November I will be surprised, he just got the Bill passed allowing the Military to operate inside the United States, to arrest and hod citizens with no charges, trial, and for as long as they please. I don’t know about you folks, but I do not want any President to have that power. This act is the door unlocked to declare Marshall Law, and he will not request Congressional Approval first either. He could suspend the election, the Legislature and Supreme Court. He has always envied the Chinese Premier because he does not have to deal with opposition, it just disappears in the night. Obama King and Pelosi Queen, WOW I just made myself sick.

old war horse on January 6, 2012 at 9:06 PM

Can’t wait for “Queen Nancy” to retire when Obama is tossed from his dictator perch soon. She is evil and needs to return to her sanctuary in California, whence she came.

Amazingoly on January 7, 2012 at 8:01 AM

cane_loader on January 5, 2012 at 6:29 PM

GO TIGERS!

hillbillyjim on January 7, 2012 at 4:28 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3