SCOTUS Strikes Down Three "Recess" Appointments by President Obama

[RedLeg505]

Originally Posted by i'va biggen

WTF are you babbling about now? Time for your monthly?

Wow.. I thought that if I quoted YOUR comment, you'd understand what I was referring to. Since you don't seem to have the intelligence to think, let me lay it out for you.

1. YOU SAID :You clowns realize it (the SCOTUS decision) will apply to all presidents not just Obama

2. I REPLIED: The SCOTUS decision which said the Senate was in session when the SENATE said it was, applied to Bush when Harry Reid used the tactic, but.. BUSH knew it was legal and didn't violate it. Unlike Obama who tried to claim that the Senate wasn't "really" in session.. i.e. He tried to say when the Senate was in session and the SCOTUS slapped him down for it.

So.. Did you grasp the fact that the SCOTUS decision simply UPHELD what was already known and followed by Bush? Funny how Bush the "idiot" you guys claim he was, knew this before the so-called "Constitutional Scholar" did.

There. did that clarify it for you? Or were there too many words with more than one syllable for you?

[CuteOldGuy]

Originally Posted by i'va biggen

Poor choice of words on my part, should have been appoint.

The question remains. What does this have to do with whether the president can hire and fire his own appoint [sic]?

[i'va biggen]

Originally Posted by RedLeg505

Wow.. I thought that if I quoted YOUR comment, you'd understand what I was referring to. Since you don't seem to have the intelligence to think, let me lay it out for you.

1. YOU SAID :You clowns realize it (the SCOTUS decision) will apply to all presidents not just Obama

2. I REPLIED: The SCOTUS decision which said the Senate was in session when the SENATE said it was, applied to Bush when Harry Reid used the tactic, but.. BUSH knew it was legal and didn't violate it. Unlike Obama who tried to claim that the Senate wasn't "really" in session.. i.e. He tried to say when the Senate was in session and the SCOTUS slapped him down for it.

So.. Did you grasp the fact that the SCOTUS decision simply UPHELD what was already known and followed by Bush? Funny how Bush the "idiot" you guys claim he was, knew this before the so-called "Constitutional Scholar" did.

There. did that clarify it for you? Or were there too many words with more than one syllable for you?

Check the appointments your Bush made while the senate was on recess.

Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

The question remains. What does this have to do with whether the president can hire and fire his own appoint [sic]?

Now you know why I call you dull knife.

[Unique_Carpenter]

Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

The question remains. What does this have to do with whether the president can hire and fire his own appoint [sic]?

Because certain appointed folks, by law, actually have to be approved by the Senate. This is one of the "built in" checks and balances of the system. ie:
Federal Judges, very high ranking military, all senior cabinet positions, and more.

Here's the entire list from Fall 2013 from the Congressional Research Service:
http://fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/RL30959.pdf

It's our government, we should understand how it works.

[CuteOldGuy]

Originally Posted by Unique_Carpenter

Because certain appointed folks, by law, actually have to be approved by the Senate. This is one of the "built in" checks and balances of the system. ie:
Federal Judges, very high ranking military, all senior cabinet positions, and more.

Here's the entire list from Fall 2013 from the Congressional Research Service:
http://fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/RL30959.pdf

It's our government, we should understand how it works.

The President still does the hiring, and he fire them without Senate approval. You are simply adding to LittleEva's ignorance. Which no one thought could get any greater.

[Yssup Rider]

You're a real pip, Whiny.

What have you done to make America better?

[i'va biggen]

Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

The President still does the hiring, and he fire them without Senate approval. You are simply adding to LittleEva's ignorance. Which no one thought could get any greater.

LMFAO Poor dull knife his dementia is worsening. Those Obabaton's will defend him at all costs.

[CuteOldGuy]

When LittleEva is drowning in his own stupidity, you can always count on WK AssupRidee, DEM, DOTY 2013-2014 to ride in for his defense.

[i'va biggen]

Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

When LittleEva is drowning in his own stupidity, you can always count on WK AssupRidee, DEM, DOTY 2013-2014 to ride in for his defense.

:

Seems funny for a decision by the SCOTUS on how long the senate has to be out before it is determined to be in recess, has caused the right wingers to become all a flutter. However you clowns are entertaining. Deep thinkers LOL

[JD Barleycorn]

If you read the majority decision (there was no minority decision) it is frequently mentioned that this single instance is in question. That is read to mean that future administrations can make their own case for what is and is not recess. In this case, the Senate was not in recess. The appointments are vacated (there were four total) but it does not remedy the situation by calling into question all business and decisions made by the NLRB when they did not have a quorum.

http://constitution.i2i.org/files/20...el-Canning.pdf

[CuteOldGuy]

Originally Posted by i'va biggen

Seems funny for a decision by the SCOTUS on how long the senate has to be out before it is determined to be in recess, has caused the right wingers to become all a flutter. However you clowns are entertaining. Deep thinkers LOL

You really haven't got a clue, Eva the "Independent".

[i'va biggen]

Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

You really haven't got a clue, Eva the "Independent".

:

LMFAO like you think you have dull knife. Hell you are unable to understand simple sentences. Clueless dull knife the tea party clown. I see why you left the law for you new job restocking nights at Walmart.

[I B Hankering]

Originally Posted by i'va biggen

I am surprised that you have shown this much clarity chimp shit. I repeat again for the slow...This opinion applies to ALL presidents just not Obama...Get it?

According to the Constitution, it always did, Ekim the Inbred Chimp. The Supreme Court merely affirmed what was already in the Constitution -- evidently unbeknownst to your dumb-ass constitutional scholar: Odumbo!

Originally Posted by RedLeg505

Wow.. I thought that if I quoted YOUR comment, you'd understand what I was referring to. Since you don't seem to have the intelligence to think, let me lay it out for you.

1. YOU SAID :You clowns realize it (the SCOTUS decision) will apply to all presidents not just Obama

2. I REPLIED: The SCOTUS decision which said the Senate was in session when the SENATE said it was, applied to Bush when Harry Reid used the tactic, but.. BUSH knew it was legal and didn't violate it. Unlike Obama who tried to claim that the Senate wasn't "really" in session.. i.e. He tried to say when the Senate was in session and the SCOTUS slapped him down for it.

So.. Did you grasp the fact that the SCOTUS decision simply UPHELD what was already known and followed by Bush? Funny how Bush the "idiot" you guys claim he was, knew this before the so-called "Constitutional Scholar" did.

There. did that clarify it for you? Or were there too many words with more than one syllable for you?

+1

Originally Posted by i'va biggen

Check the appointments your Bush made while the senate was on recess.

There's a keyword there that you obviously do not understand, Ekim the Inbred Chimp.

Originally Posted by Yssup Rider

Anybody willing to bet that IBIdiot has memorized the entire libretto to at least a dozen Broadway Musicals?

This is one seriously confused motherfucker.

Were you inspired by "Silence of the Lambs?" IBIdiot? Because you fit the profile of the asshole who kept the fat girl in the pit...

The South Shall Rise Again? or.... Can you squeal like a pig, IBIDiot?