Justice Dept. memo justifies Obama's recess appointments

 

The Justice Department concluded in a Jan. 6 memo to the White House counsel that the Senate's "pro forma" sessions don't actually interrupt a congressional recess.

Because they don't, the president was entitled to exercise his constitutional power to make recess appointments, the department concluded.

President Obama used that authority last week to name Richard Cordray director of the newly formed Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. He also made additional recess appointments to the National Labor Relations Board.

"The Senate could remove the basis for the president's exercise of his recess appointment authority by remaining continuously in session and being available to receive and act on nominations, but it cannot do so by providing for pro forma sessions at which no business is to be conducted," says a memo from DOJ's Office of Legal Counsel.

The memo was released today in response to calls for a fuller explanation of the legal basis on which the White House acted.

The question, the Justice Department says, is a practical one: During these pro forma sessions, is the Senate actually able to provide advice and consent to nominations?  Obviously not, the memo says, which makes them a "recess" in name only, and not in substance.

Even so, it says, "the question is a novel one, and the substantial arguments on each side create some litigation risk for such appointments."

Discuss this post

Jump to discussion page: 1 2 3 4 5 6

Hey Joe in Albany...you are as complete a moron as can exist.

    Reply#78 - Thu Jan 12, 2012 5:00 PM EST

    This was the administration who was going to make transparency in Washington a top priority. No sleight of hand or back room deals. Bills posted on line and C-Span televising hearings. The act of going around congress goes against what Mr Obama said he would stand for as president. Expediency in the face of an election where he needs unions to pay him off and force membership to campaign on his behalf. Business as usual.

    • 4 votes
    Reply#79 - Thu Jan 12, 2012 5:00 PM EST

    THAT was assuming a level playing field. Why do Republicans hate the middle class? Why won't they protect the biggest earning field this country has?

    • 2 votes
    #79.1 - Thu Jan 12, 2012 5:05 PM EST

    That wont fly Kate as obama had a majority in both houses for the first two years.

    • 3 votes
    #79.2 - Thu Jan 12, 2012 5:12 PM EST

    obama had a majority for about 3 months.

    • 1 vote
    #79.3 - Thu Jan 12, 2012 5:27 PM EST

    Oops, wrong place!

      #79.4 - Thu Jan 12, 2012 5:35 PM EST

      3 months, damn you are uninformed, much like the rest of your fellow libs.

      • 2 votes
      #79.5 - Thu Jan 12, 2012 5:39 PM EST

      when kennedy left office the super majority was gone and the senate repubs have filibustered ever since. tell me im the one who is uninformed. you are the uninformed one or more likely you just dont know how our government works.

      • 2 votes
      #79.6 - Thu Jan 12, 2012 5:51 PM EST

      Super is the key word moron!

      How many times was the filibuster used, 10, 15, 20, 50? Take your best shot!

        #79.7 - Thu Jan 12, 2012 5:56 PM EST

        over 120 times. a record amount for any congress in history.

        • 2 votes
        #79.8 - Thu Jan 12, 2012 6:00 PM EST

        Zero bills were filibustered, zero.

          #79.9 - Thu Jan 12, 2012 6:09 PM EST

          Then we must insist you show stats and studies, otherwise, shut up. Words are easy to type, hard to prove.

          • 1 vote
          #79.10 - Thu Jan 12, 2012 6:30 PM EST

          If you are Republican, and middle class, please tell me: What is the allure of your party? Is it strictly one social issue? Just what is it? What would make you think Romney, or any of the others, for that matter, "gets" what you are going through and will act in your interest?

          • 1 vote
          #79.11 - Thu Jan 12, 2012 7:55 PM EST

          I have yet to see Livingbarefoot post anything factual. Guess who is going on my mute list Kate.

          • 1 vote
          #79.12 - Thu Jan 12, 2012 9:24 PM EST

          I am still a Republican Kate, a moderate center left 1860s Lincoln republican. If the R.I.N.O.'s in power are hell bent on going over a cliff I have no intention of following them. I am a Republican to honor Abraham Lincoln nor am I the only one. I have no use for today's GOP.

          • 2 votes
          #79.13 - Thu Jan 12, 2012 9:30 PM EST
          Reply

          Why do Republicans hate the middle class? Why? Why do Republicans not protect the middle class? Do Republicans want to see a country full of serfs and royalty? Why? Why?

          • 2 votes
          Reply#80 - Thu Jan 12, 2012 5:04 PM EST

          Kate, I think the left hurts the middle class the most by choosing not to enforce our immigration laws.

          • 1 vote
          #80.1 - Thu Jan 12, 2012 5:36 PM EST

          Why do liberals hate the middle class? Since Obama took over unemployment has increased. It's averaged 9% since he was elected. Household incomes fell farther during the recovery than they did during the recession, proving Obama's cure was worse than the disease.

          Middle class pipeline jobs? NO! Middle class gulf jobs? NO! Middle class Boeing jobs? NO!

            #80.2 - Thu Jan 12, 2012 5:36 PM EST

            p111, nothing you said is true. nmoone of it.

            • 1 vote
            #80.3 - Thu Jan 12, 2012 5:37 PM EST

            Wow and I guess the Broncos did not beat the Steelers either?

              #80.4 - Thu Jan 12, 2012 5:40 PM EST

              foot, no we lost. but none of what that guy said is true. the jobs package obama put forth was totally shot down by house repubs. learn how our government works. the president isnt all powerful. hes not like the CEO of a company. he has some powers but those mainly deal with national defense and being the CIC. the constistution was drawn up with checks and balances.

              • 1 vote
              #80.5 - Thu Jan 12, 2012 5:55 PM EST

              A leader knows how to work with others. You don't tell people to go to the back of the bus and then expect cooperation.

              The man was an inexperienced crook who does not believe in the United States of America.

              • 2 votes
              #80.6 - Thu Jan 12, 2012 5:59 PM EST

              hes statement was, if they wont get on bored with us then they can go to the back of the bus. he tried over and over and over to work with them they didnt want to. the reason being if he fixed the economy right away it would have destroyed their party. it was and always will be about power and money to the right.

              • 1 vote
              #80.7 - Thu Jan 12, 2012 6:02 PM EST

              Why did the Republicans not back Obama's jobs bill that would have rebuilt our crumbling infrastructure...you know, those bridges that are falling down and roadways that are crumbling? This would have put people to work. But you Republicans have one objective in mind, no matter the cost to the American people. You want to defeat Obama. Well, instead, you are defeating Middle Class America. We pay your paychecks! (Ooooops....what? oh, we don't pay their paychecks? No? The corporations pay their paychecks? But...but, but, but...oh.... I see. Corporations are people, too! Oh, Okay. )

              • 3 votes
              #80.8 - Thu Jan 12, 2012 7:29 PM EST

              I just KNEW that would stop the thread. Jeesh. Anytime you introduce a bit of common sense, all the posters dry up!

              • 1 vote
              #80.9 - Thu Jan 12, 2012 10:32 PM EST
              Reply

              7.62x- I went back and looked at the video, 2 guys maybe they are black panthers, one with a stick, not a club. They weren't harassing anyone. To me not scary, but Since you like the KKK and skinheads, I can see why you were afraid! LOL How about all the T/baggers showing up armed to protest's to me that is scary!

              • 1 vote
              Reply#81 - Thu Jan 12, 2012 5:04 PM EST

              That's your opinion, however; it was enough for the police to press charges untill holder steped in. Intimidation at polling stations is illegal in the USA no matter how you try to justify it.

              • 3 votes
              #81.1 - Thu Jan 12, 2012 5:16 PM EST

              KKK was a liberal democrat organization. Google Robert Byrd, a card carrying member. Google George Wallace for more liberal democrat racism, it was quite blatant in the 50's-60's.

                #81.2 - Thu Jan 12, 2012 5:38 PM EST

                And they hated that evil Republican MLk also.

                  #81.3 - Thu Jan 12, 2012 5:41 PM EST

                  p111 barefoot, those were conservative southern democrats who left and joined the repubs in the 60s. dont try to connect them with us fighting this fight with the same people nowadays. learn history before you spout off some beck bs.

                  • 2 votes
                  #81.4 - Thu Jan 12, 2012 5:47 PM EST

                  Different GOP, different Dem's, then than now living barefoot. Just as the parties were different during the civil war.

                  • 1 vote
                  #81.5 - Thu Jan 12, 2012 5:48 PM EST

                  That is an old lie. The left keeps repeating it until people believe it. I guess it works.

                  I am arguing with a person who has no knowledge of current events, let alone history. You really need to educate yourself, it is embarrassing.

                    #81.6 - Thu Jan 12, 2012 5:49 PM EST

                    hey foot i think you are the one uninformed or just ignorant of history.

                    • 1 vote
                    #81.7 - Thu Jan 12, 2012 5:53 PM EST

                    Never seen one bit of proof to your claims, just the claims repeated and repeated. Some try and offer some proof, but it is easily debunked.

                    It is such a immature childish stance to think that people who are conservative are any more likely to be racist than others. It is a tactic used to get the mental midgets to follow you, I guess it works.

                      #81.8 - Thu Jan 12, 2012 5:53 PM EST

                      There is only an argument with yourself. I only pointed out a fact.

                      • 1 vote
                      #81.9 - Thu Jan 12, 2012 5:54 PM EST

                      Facts. What was the vote record of the Civil Rights Act?

                      Also, after the Civil war, Republicans became racist and that persuaded MLK to join them?

                        #81.10 - Thu Jan 12, 2012 6:02 PM EST

                        either way foot, that has no bearing on today. the dems have a black president. the repubs will never even consider one. herman cain wasnt going anywhere. im sorry you are blind but its hard to argue with someone who is trying to tell me obama is bad because dems in the 1800s were racist. or that MLK was a republican. you sound crazy.

                        • 1 vote
                        #81.11 - Thu Jan 12, 2012 6:05 PM EST

                        Never consider one and cain was a front runner. You make zero sense.

                        The D's keep their feet on the heads of minorities and get rich doing it. Hell, Obama let a felon screw poor people for a deal onb a bigger yard!

                        I am a huge MLK fan and he wanted everyone to enjoy the fruits of capitalism, not just a select old white few. Your party has no belief in the beauty and sanctity of capitalism, that is why I have no use for them.

                        It is the greatest equalizer in the world and when it is screwed with, things go bad.

                        Every financial problem in this country is due to the lack of true capitalism!

                          #81.12 - Thu Jan 12, 2012 6:15 PM EST

                          Sorry people, my point was that the black panthers, kkk, and the skinheads are nothing but parties of hate, and shouldn't be hanging out at ANY polling station on election days.

                          • 1 vote
                          #81.13 - Thu Jan 12, 2012 6:23 PM EST
                          Reply

                          Go Obama! He's made fewer recess appointments than his predecessors, so I think he needs to do more. He should do all of them. There are dozens of appointments which cannot get an up or down vote.

                          The Senate's role is to say whether or nor the person nominated for the job is competent enough to have it.

                          It is not to push an agenda of hampering the work of the govt. Congress has the purse strings for that purpose.

                          So, unless the GOP is willing to forego future recess appointments, they should take a chill pill.

                          • 1 vote
                          Reply#82 - Thu Jan 12, 2012 5:11 PM EST

                          Hey hummbird

                          Merriam-Webster defines socialism as:

                          1. Any of various economic and political theories advocating collective or governmental ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods

                          2. A: A system of society or group living in which there is no private property
                          B: A system or condition of society in which the means of production are owned and controlled by the state

                          3. A stage of society in Marxist theory transitional between capitalism and communism and distinguished by unequal distribution of goods and pay according to work done

                          • 1 vote
                          Reply#83 - Thu Jan 12, 2012 5:12 PM EST

                          Sonmanub- Your point? LOL Did someone take your property? Call the police! My advise to you, quit listening to Beck, Lush and faux noise, because you are losing touch with reality!

                          • 1 vote
                          #83.1 - Thu Jan 12, 2012 5:34 PM EST

                          Taking over GM, and giving a big chunk to the UAW and the government. That is the taking of property. Declaring wetlands without compensation is also taking of property.

                          "3. A stage of society in Marxist theory transitional between capitalism and communism and distinguished by unequal distribution of goods and pay according to work done"

                          Anyone dare that isn't going on right now?

                          • 1 vote
                          #83.2 - Thu Jan 12, 2012 5:45 PM EST

                          P111, you just made that crap up. Right out of thin air.

                          Taking over GM. Right. Good one. Also known as nonsense.

                          Giving a big chunk to the UAW. Right. Another good one. Also known as nonsense.

                          Wow. I know, I'll just listen to Faux News, Fat boy Rush, Glenn the Idiot and Sean "I'll say anything for dollars" Hannity and then I'll be well equipped to go on NewsVine and show those damn Liberals a thing or two, you bet.

                          Freaking laughable.

                          Obama in 2012, if only because folks like P111 beleive almost everything they hear.

                          • 1 vote
                          #83.3 - Thu Jan 12, 2012 6:12 PM EST

                          Buck, he circumvented our bankruptcy laws and put the union in front of the rightful creditors.

                          Do you wilfully choose to remain ignorant? Or does it just fit your agenda?

                          I bet you even believe they paid back the loan because Obama said they did, don't you?

                          • 2 votes
                          #83.4 - Thu Jan 12, 2012 6:18 PM EST

                          You're spouting propaganda, pure and simple.

                          The idea that the UAW got a "chunk" of GM is laughable.

                          I'll tell you, what, let's make a deal. You deal with real facts and I'll do my best to do the same.

                          Propaganda ain't a fact, it's propaganda.

                          • 1 vote
                          #83.5 - Thu Jan 12, 2012 6:44 PM EST
                          Reply

                          does it really matter. obama is doing what he has to do. this is the most obstructed administration in history. no respect is given to him. he is trying and getting blamed for the obstructionism of the republicans. they wont let him do anything. ever since kennedy died early the first yr they have blocked everything. its ashame. the right also has fooled so many people into believing he has failed. he has failed. he has been blocked.

                          • 3 votes
                          Reply#84 - Thu Jan 12, 2012 5:32 PM EST

                          Obama is doing what he has to do to destroy this country. Respect is earned not demanded.

                          The obstructionist lie was exposed the moment Obamacare was shoved down our throats, if they could pass that they could pass anything.

                          He failed his first two years so bad he was handed the worst defeat in 70 years. The economy has only started to recover since republicans blocked his insane agenda.

                          • 1 vote
                          #84.1 - Thu Jan 12, 2012 5:48 PM EST

                          nothing obama has done has hurt this country. nothing. you can say it has because you dont like it but the economy is improving. housing is going up. jobs have increased for almost 2 yrs straight. the lies being told are lies. you can have your opinion. you cant have your own facts.

                          • 2 votes
                          #84.2 - Thu Jan 12, 2012 6:07 PM EST

                          Sorry P111, Obamacare was passed by both houses of congress, just like our forefathers wanted.

                          You're bitching cuz you lost.

                          As for his worst defeat in 70 years, P111 is refering to the late great election of 2010. Well, that was then and this is now. Now, P111's TeaBagger Party enjoys about an 11% approval rating across the country.

                          Today P111's TeaBaggers couldn't get elected to shine the President's shoes.

                          Freaking laughable.

                          Obama in 2012, if only because P111 is so mad he just starts making sh*t up. Good for you, P111, after all, you live in the greatest country in the world...despite what your TeaBagger Party is trying to do to it.

                          • 1 vote
                          #84.3 - Thu Jan 12, 2012 6:17 PM EST
                          Reply

                          I think the big question unanswered is what constitutes a recess? It sounded like if the Senate left town it was a recess but is that all of them or a majority or just a few? 3 days was the time limit but still what is a recess?

                          Yes I mostly consider myself a republican but I am a conservative. I did not agree with holding up an appointment that everyone seemed to have no problems with just so another point can be made. If he was good for the position then get it done already. I don't like the actions of either side of this.

                          I do want to ask the question of why so many people think it is the government’s responsibility to "create" jobs. Really? When did their responsibility change from upholding our rights turn into providing us stuff?

                          It is not jobs that will fix our problems. It is people getting control of their own life and providing for themselves.

                          Our expectations are WAY too high and it has us in an unrecoverable position.

                          The Haitians are currently living out of tents and if we don't pull our own pants up and take care of our own needs we will be living in less than that.

                          If our government (that’s both the GOP and the Dems) don't get a control on what they SHOULD be doing we are all going to pay for it.

                          We don't need to tax the rich. We need to pull the loopholes away if they do not contribute. A corporation wants a subsidy? Great fix its payroll ratio and they have it. No need to tax more. In fact providing all these paths for fewer taxes all based on favorable actions will work great.

                          If you want government help? Great follow the rules. Otherwise do it on your own. Want the government out of your life? Great but don't ask for help. It can be this way if our inept I can't believe we were dumb enough to elect them congress and executive would do their job.

                          Stop complaining please and find a way to do the right thing. (I don't think they heard me)

                            Reply#85 - Thu Jan 12, 2012 5:35 PM EST

                            Yawn!

                              #85.1 - Thu Jan 12, 2012 8:38 PM EST
                              Reply

                              To tell you the truth, it is not clear whether the appointments were legal or not. But professor obama, constitutional scholar is probably right. Mr grover, the gop, & the rushbo were intentionally impeding & twisting the wheels of law & justice once again. Anybody can see it.

                              • 2 votes
                              Reply#86 - Thu Jan 12, 2012 5:38 PM EST

                              And that is a one party only tactic? Grow up!

                              The man wants to transform our country, he needs to be obstructed!

                              We have the best foundation in the world and things go bad when they mess with it.

                              • 3 votes
                              #86.1 - Thu Jan 12, 2012 5:44 PM EST

                              maybe if you wore shoes you would see things different.

                              • 1 vote
                              #86.2 - Thu Jan 12, 2012 5:51 PM EST

                              He needs to be obstructed? And what do you think the GOP/TP have been doing for the last three years? No matter what the proposal was they obstructed to the point of wanting to close the government down, like they did with Clinton. Do I see a pattern here? I do of course, but you don't, well, you do but look the other way.

                              That's the constructive Repugnican way.

                              • 2 votes
                              #86.3 - Thu Jan 12, 2012 5:55 PM EST

                              The difference is we did shut it down during Clinton and we left with a surplus. Does that bother you?

                              Our government living within its means is a problem to you?

                              Best things in life are done barefoot!

                              • 1 vote
                              #86.4 - Thu Jan 12, 2012 6:05 PM EST

                              cow manure between your toes?

                                #86.5 - Thu Jan 12, 2012 6:17 PM EST

                                Maybe, but much better than you having it between your ears!

                                • 2 votes
                                #86.6 - Thu Jan 12, 2012 6:20 PM EST

                                Not legal? What a joke.

                                Presidents from both parties have been doing this for over a hundred years. Clue in.

                                It's funny that Republicans start to bitch about it when it's Obama doing the appointing. It's as if Republicans don't have a freaking memory. Georgie Boy recessed appointed far, far more folks than Barry Boy, but now it's somehow against the law.

                                Freaking laughable.

                                Obama in 2012, if only because SouthernTeaBaggers won't vote for a Mormon. Ha.

                                • 2 votes
                                #86.7 - Thu Jan 12, 2012 6:25 PM EST

                                I like you livingbarefoot, you inspire me to ensure that the GOP never holds the presidency again.

                                • 2 votes
                                #86.8 - Thu Jan 12, 2012 6:29 PM EST
                                Reply

                                Obama's justice department sees nothing wrong with Obama's actions, gee what a surprise.

                                • 1 vote
                                Reply#87 - Thu Jan 12, 2012 5:50 PM EST

                                Yes, just like the right wing Supreme Court saw nothing wrong in "appointing" Bush to the presidency. Obama appointed just a man to do a job, Bush wanted war at any cost, even before being prez, and he got it.

                                • 2 votes
                                #87.1 - Thu Jan 12, 2012 5:58 PM EST

                                Bush wanted war even before becoming prez? Where do you fools get this stuff?

                                • 1 vote
                                #87.2 - Thu Jan 12, 2012 6:11 PM EST

                                Bush did the same. As did his Dad and Clinton

                                  #87.3 - Thu Jan 12, 2012 8:35 PM EST

                                  I got it from Bushes actions scottyusa. Bush, I am convinced saw the war as a chance to destroy the Democratic party once and for all. I hate GWB so much I never want to be within 500 miles of the man. He is a WAR criminal that should have been tried for his crimes. I am convinced he had a hand in staging 9-11. The man is a swaggering idiot who never should have been president.

                                  • 1 vote
                                  #87.4 - Fri Jan 13, 2012 12:09 AM EST

                                  Wade:

                                  Go somewhere and take your ignorant azz to sleep. No one is trying to hear all of that BS. All you are doing is pimping your stupidity.

                                    #87.5 - Fri Jan 13, 2012 1:13 PM EST
                                    Reply

                                    Of course Holder and Co. will back Obama. This is a joke of course just like this whole administration has been a poor joke for the last 3 years.

                                    • 1 vote
                                    Reply#88 - Thu Jan 12, 2012 6:09 PM EST

                                    On the contrary, considering who Obama replaced, we all must confess that the president is doing a stellar job. He brought this country back from the abyss, right where George Bush left us, and now we are on the road to recovery.

                                    Folks like Scottyusa hate that the president is doing well. They hate that unemployment is dropping.

                                    Freaking laugable.

                                    Obama in 2012, if only because the real joke around these parts is that at one time the Right looked to Rick Perry has theiry savior. Ha. Oh my.

                                    • 3 votes
                                    #88.1 - Thu Jan 12, 2012 6:29 PM EST
                                    Reply

                                    Unemployment... still dropping. What're you people going to do when it's down around 7.2 by the end of Summer and still falling? When the President has passed legislation that ends tax breaks for outsourcers to talk about and his "insourcing" initiative, and all Romney has is his experience at Bain Capital as a "job creator." (Awesome job-creation record, Mitt... in China!)

                                    Is this the best y'all have got? Noone's listening to your "Where are the jobs" 2010 slogan... we're out finding jobs! This country is coming back, despite the GOP's best efforts to cut off the economy's nose to spite its President. Keep hoping against all hope that the American recovery stalls, GOP... keep digging your own political graves.

                                    Government's not the problem, Republicans are.

                                    • 2 votes
                                    Reply#89 - Thu Jan 12, 2012 6:21 PM EST

                                    People collecting unemployment benefits, or unemployment.

                                    Both sides have been lying to us for years. Peoples benefits expiring makes the rate go lower, that does not mean they are employed.

                                    Also, the left likes to claim that the R's are only for the 1% and the D's are for the worker. Let's say that's true.

                                    Which party is failing at their job?

                                    • 1 vote
                                    #89.1 - Thu Jan 12, 2012 6:28 PM EST

                                    That's misleading.

                                    Though someone's employment benefit expires, they remain registered and therefor counted as "unemployed." These numbers are not soley based on who's collecting benefits and who is not.

                                    So...basically your assertion is wrong. Cheers.

                                    • 1 vote
                                    #89.2 - Thu Jan 12, 2012 6:32 PM EST
                                    Reply

                                    Stop the Presses! Stop the Presses!

                                    Prez O's employees, the appointees that are directly under his supervision in the

                                    Executive Branch of Government, agree with their ultimate superviser--Prez O!

                                    • 1 vote
                                    Reply#90 - Thu Jan 12, 2012 6:26 PM EST

                                    Well of course the Justice Dept scum (lawyers) support Obama. He appointed them to their cushy jobs.

                                    • 1 vote
                                    Reply#91 - Thu Jan 12, 2012 6:31 PM EST

                                    Loopholes for appointments. I like it. I'm pretty sure that the republicans will have a field day. But the republicans can't really talk @!$%# anyways. After all, most of the people that wrote this loophole are still serving in congress for the past 50 years. So they can not say that they didn't know about it.

                                    And they also can't say nothing about the use of this power, because if one of them is ever elected president, they too want that option to make appointments without the harrasment of congress.

                                    Kinda stupid if you ask me.

                                    • 1 vote
                                    Reply#92 - Thu Jan 12, 2012 6:36 PM EST

                                    livingbarefoot, what state contributed to your education?

                                      Reply#93 - Thu Jan 12, 2012 6:39 PM EST

                                      Welcome to the Big Lie of the day:

                                      p111

                                      KKK was a liberal democrat organization. Google Robert Byrd, a card carrying member. Google George Wallace for more liberal democrat racism, it was quite blatant in the 50's-60's.

                                      Freaking laughable. The KKK was certainly not a liberal democrat organiztion. That's like saying the Nazis were a liberal democrat organization. And Robert Byrd joined the KKK in the 1920's, when our country sustained a far different political and racial landscape than it does today.

                                      And to assert that George Wallace was a liberal because he was a democrat is ignorant at best, and at worst downright dishonest.

                                      Wow. Folks post stuff here assuming no one has an education, no one knows their country's history, no one believes anything unless they heard it from Glenn Beck.

                                      Oh my. Laughable.

                                      Obama in 2012, if only because we as a country are, in the end, better than the great Big Lie.

                                      • 2 votes
                                      Reply#94 - Thu Jan 12, 2012 6:40 PM EST

                                      Buck

                                      Maybe you need to do some research.

                                      Founded in 1866, the Ku Klux Klan (KKK) extended into almost every southern state by 1870 and became a vehicle for white southern resistance to the Republican Party's Reconstruction-era policies aimed at establishing political and economic equality for blacks. Its members waged an underground campaign of intimidation and violence directed at white and black Republican leaders. Though Congress passed legislation designed to curb Klan terrorism, the organization saw its primary goal–the reestablishment of white supremacy–fulfilled through Democratic victories in state legislatures across the South in the 1870s. After a period of decline, white Protestant nativist groups revived the Klan in the early 20th century, burning crosses and staging rallies, parades and marches denouncing immigrants, Catholics, Jews, blacks and organized labor. The civil rights movement of the 1960s also saw a surge of Ku Klux Klan activity, including bombings of black schools and churches and violence against black and white activists in the South.

                                      http://www.history.com/topics/ku-klux-klan

                                      Then there is this if you don't like those facts.

                                      The Democratic Party’s war against African-Americans continued after the Civil War (which many Democrats in fact opposed, often working actively to undercut the Union war effort). Democrats, both north and south fought the attempt to implement the equality for African-Americans gained at such a high cost. This opposition was often violent. Indeed, the Ku Klux Klan operated as the de facto terrorist arm of the national Democratic Party during Reconstruction.

                                      Democrats defeated Reconstruction in the end and on its ruins created Jim Crow. Democratic liberalism did not extend to issue of race. Woodrow Wilson was the quintessential "liberal racist," a species of Democrat that later included the likes of William Fulbright of Arkansas, Sam Ervin of North Carolina, and Albert Gore, father of Al, of Tennessee.

                                      http://www.ashbrook.org/publicat/oped/owens/02/racism.html

                                      I you need more just Google KKK and Democrats or History of KKK

                                        #94.1 - Thu Jan 12, 2012 7:07 PM EST

                                        Guess who was a Southern Democrat before before he became a Republican Slodon, don't want to guess? Strom Thurmond. I will not deny that the KKK was born in fertile grounds left by the Southern Democrats after the civil war. It is a matter of public record. But you are leaving out important points. In 1860 the Southern Democrats behaved the same way the GOP is behaving now.

                                        Nor is that a coinsidence. The Republicans of the time were liberal, or moderate, none more so than Abraham Lincoln. The southern Democrats controlled the south during the Civil War. Afterwards the KKK formed to force free black men and women into a kind of social slave status. 95 years later many Southern Democrats left the Democratic Party to join the GOP and they took their conservative attitudes with them. What happened in effect was a hostile take over of the GOP by southern conservatives in the the 1970s.

                                        Let me be perfectly clear here.

                                        1860's Republican Party, moderate to liberal. Southern Democrats, very conservative, proslavery, very much states rights, extremely fertile ground for the formation of the KKK.

                                        2012's Republican Party, those in power are conservative and trying to strip everyone who disagrees with them of the right to vote, and their personal liberty favoring the very rich.

                                        The Democratic party has flipped on it axis too. It stands for everything the GOP stood for under Lincoln.

                                        If the Republicans of 1860 had the same mind set that the GOP in power has today, the civil war would NEVER have been fought. I could still go down town in Tampa and buy a slave to do my housework etc. I recommend watching the movie C.S.A. I am glad to be an old guard Republican with an 1860s mindset.

                                        Consider me to be a R.I.N.O? If you are goosestepping with todays GOP I consider you to be a R.I.N.O. too. Ponder this while you are at it. I am not the only Republican who feels as I do. How many of us do you think will be voting Straight Democratic tickets like I will be? For the record I do not like abortion, I do not feel it should be the primary birth control method, but I will not stand in the way of a woman getting an abortion. I expect to have the company of prochoice GOP women who do not want to go back to the days of coat hanger abortions that killed so many women. I expect to have the company of independents like myself who see what the GOP has planned for our country as a step back in time to a brutal era.

                                        I expect to be slammed for this post. However if you feel as I do and you are a center left moderate to liberal I ask that you stand with me now whether you are a Democrat, or like myself an independent Republican.

                                        • 1 vote
                                        #94.2 - Thu Jan 12, 2012 11:53 PM EST

                                        Slodon, I hope this finds you well.

                                        You're a smart guy so I'll get to the point. I know my history, as do you.

                                        With that said, my main point, in fact my only point, was that the KKK was most certainly not a liberal organization. It matters not that they were Democrats, they weren't liberals. George Wallace was certainly not a liberal. A Democrat yes, but he was no liberal.

                                        Slodon, the poster equates Democrat with Liberal. Perhaps that argument can be made today, depends on the context. It most certainly cannot be made about Democrats of 100 plus years ago. That's not me talking, that's history.

                                        C'mon, George Wallace a liberal?

                                        • 1 vote
                                        #94.3 - Fri Jan 13, 2012 1:42 AM EST
                                        Reply

                                        Key

                                        Maybe you need an education. This is NOT a LOOPHOLE as you state but an Article of the Constitution.

                                        Specifically Article 1 Section 2 Clause 3.

                                        The President shall have 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.

                                        The argument is if the Senate was in Secession or not. And according to Article 1 Section 5 Clause 4 they were NOT in Recess.

                                        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.

                                        Now since the House didn't give it's consent for the Senate to adjourn for more than 3 days the Senate is still in Session.

                                        Let the Legal Arguments Begin!!

                                          Reply#95 - Thu Jan 12, 2012 6:52 PM EST

                                          Slodon, I'm sure you were protesting just as strongly when George W. Bush made recessed appointments.

                                          Ronald Reagan practically made recessed appointments an art form.

                                          Obama in 2012, if only because the Right is turning to Mitt Romney, a man who consistently enjoys a whopping 25% approval rating.

                                          • 1 vote
                                          #95.1 - Fri Jan 13, 2012 1:48 AM EST
                                          Reply

                                          Of course they will agree with the idiot in charge-he's bought & paid for them 1000 times over. Doesn't matter if they are right or wrong by the definitions of the people. It's only what he wants when he wants it that is right. Another spoiled brat, Obama is.

                                            Reply#96 - Thu Jan 12, 2012 7:07 PM EST

                                            The fun part is that Harry Reid pioneered this stunt to prevent George W. Bush from making recess appointments, but Reid says this is different. Now it's Republicans trying to block a Democrat.

                                            http://thehill.com/blogs/on-the-money/banking-financial-institutions/202335-reids-backs-obama-for-ignoring-pro-forma-sessions-he-once-pushed

                                            • 1 vote
                                            Reply#97 - Thu Jan 12, 2012 7:14 PM EST

                                            That's not the position Obama supported when Bush was president and he was a senator. I guess the "change" was just BS!

                                            • 1 vote
                                            Reply#98 - Thu Jan 12, 2012 7:29 PM EST

                                            Facts just the facts. First the President is not doing anything new or not done by Republicans in the past. Oh and this is the truth about the number of filibusters by the party of NO.

                                            http://newsjunkiepost.com/2010/03/02/republican-obstruction-at-work-record-number-of-filibusters/

                                            Republican Obstruction at Work: Record Number of Filibusters

                                            When the Democrats regained tenuous control of the 110th Congress in 2007, filibusters by the new Republican minority skyrocketed. Following the landslide victory of Barack Obama and progressive Democrats in 2008, there was a clear mandate for change in reform in America, yet the 111th should set a new record for filibusters as part of a clear pattern of obstruction from those who do not want change or reform.

                                            The filibuster – tool of obstruction in the U.S. Senate – is alternately blamed and praised for wilting President Barack Obama’s ambitious agenda. Some even say it’s made the nation ungovernable. More certain, however: Opposition Republicans are using the delaying tactic at a record-setting pace.

                                            Clear Pattern of Obstruction

                                            This is all part of the Republican plan to deliberately stop government from working, as part of a playbook to retake Congress and hamstring the change voted for in 2008, and one that is eerily similar to the one they used in 1994.

                                            This playbook consists of 5 distinct steps:
                                            Step 1: Avoid Responsibility for GOP Failures
                                            Step 2: Increase Negativity
                                            Step 3: “Throw the Bums Out!”
                                            Step 4: The New Contract on America
                                            Step 5: Retake Congress

                                            Where the filibuster should have a legitimate role in a functional democracy to protect minority rights, it is a procedure that is highly susceptible to abuse. In the past, this was always kept in check by the morality of individual senators, but in the 111th Congress, the sheer number of times it has been used indicate a clear pattern and dangerous precedent.

                                            • 2 votes
                                            Reply#99 - Thu Jan 12, 2012 8:00 PM EST

                                            luvenia

                                            Your 'Facts just facts' ring hollow when you use a source like newsjunkiepost.com

                                            I think you would be better served if you widened your horizons and sources.

                                              #99.1 - Thu Jan 12, 2012 8:11 PM EST

                                              Easily solved! Vote for Obama

                                              • 1 vote
                                              #99.2 - Thu Jan 12, 2012 8:34 PM EST
                                              Reply

                                              So Obama's lackey at the justice department backs him up, say it ain't so and I knew nothing about the fast and furious and its ok to lie. To bad its not Constitutional, back yard rules do not circumvent any appointments.

                                              This is a blatant disregard for the Constitution and now the Administration is turning into the largest disgrace America has ever had.

                                              Democrats do as I say not as I do, ok to do it to Bush but not ok to do it to us. Screw both sides the corruption is so large that nothing gets accomplished.

                                                Reply#100 - Thu Jan 12, 2012 8:13 PM EST

                                                If the Republicans can justify Romney as a defender of the working class and not just a multi millionaire and a corporate raider, I would like to hear how they can do it. So far, Romney has had nothing to offer the country. He has been well financed by the ultra rich who stand to gain but he is not pushing any kind of policy that is intended to benefit anyone but the few who back him. All this commie socialist bull that the right is spewing against the Obama and the Dems is just that, bull. What are the Republicans offering the country that will actually benefit the country? Going back to Bush Cheney policies is not a good idea because those failed policies are what got us in the mess in the first place. All you fools who are not millionaires but support those whose policies will not even benefit you, what in the hell are you doing? I think that the real class envy comes from middle class and upper middle class Republicans who will never be in Mitt Romney's status but live on the hope and dream of gaining a piece of it. It never happens that way when the scheme is a pyramid scheme and is skewed to benefit the few at the top as it is now with corporate owning the Congress and buying the leadership in the country. You are fools.

                                                • 1 vote
                                                #100.1 - Thu Jan 12, 2012 8:39 PM EST
                                                Reply

                                                Every President has done this. So what is the Big Deal. The Republicans want gymics to stop what has happened before. My God don't you republicans just want to go hide. Such a poor excuse for running the Country!

                                                • 2 votes
                                                Reply#101 - Thu Jan 12, 2012 8:32 PM EST

                                                The other thing you people miss is that the Country needs Consumer Protection!

                                                • 2 votes
                                                Reply#102 - Thu Jan 12, 2012 8:37 PM EST

                                                We need protection from the greed and corruption that is backing Mitt Romney and his policies. We need protection from the bought Congress who is not doing the bidding of the voters who voted them into office. We need to be protected from the very real corruption that will drain even more from the country as Wall Street did under Bush Cheney.

                                                • 1 vote
                                                #102.1 - Thu Jan 12, 2012 8:45 PM EST

                                                Why don't the Republicans, who want to accuse Obama of this and that, ask Romney to show his tax returns? Maybe they would finally realize that what their party is about is a double standard. Middle class pays somewhere around 28% and Mittens pays what? 15% or less? Same thing with the recess appointments. The Republicans abuse the system and block appointments all day long and appoint more while Congress is in recess then anyone but squeal like stuck pigs when a Dems beats them at their own game. Why do the Republicans not push for getting the work of the people done while their Representatives are in session? Why are the Republicans not demanding to know what tax rate those who so want to protect the wealthy are paying as compared to the tax rates that the majority of us out here are paying? Are you hypocrites?

                                                • 1 vote
                                                #102.2 - Thu Jan 12, 2012 9:00 PM EST
                                                Reply
                                                Jump to discussion page: 1 2 3 4 5 6
                                                You're in Easy Mode. If you prefer, you can use XHTML Mode instead.
                                                As a new user, you may notice a few temporary content restrictions. Click here for more info.