Recess appointment: epitome of Obama arrogance

by John in Oregon

Obama’s arrogance is just stunning when he makes recess appointments while the Senate is in session.

A little background:

The US Constitution – Article 1 Section 5 says that Each House may determine the Rules of its Proceedings.  Instead Obama decided he makes the rules.

Article 1 Section 5 also says, “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 house has NOT given permission to recess, but Obama decided he gets to decide when the Senate is in recess.

Article 2 – Section 2 says that “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.”

To put President Obama’s “recess” appointment in perspective, let’s take a look at the next conservative president using Obama’s precedent:

Walk this way said Professor Peabody as he opened what looked like a submarine pressure door.  “Unlike the way-back machine this one goes forward in time.  You, my friend, have been selected for the first projection in the way-forward machine.”  This first trip will be approximately 1 year into the future.  I shook Bullwinkle’s hoof and POOF

Bright lights.  It’s Saturday January 26, 2013 and I have stepped into the glaring lights of a major news conference.  President Michele Bachmann steps to the podium.  Let’s listen in….

Thank you all for coming today.  As you know this is a perilous time for our country.  One doubly so with the unexpected resignation of the FED Chairman and the tragic traffic accident taking the life of a Supreme Court Justice.

Over 5 days ago I placed my slate of agency and staff nominations before U.S. Senate and no action has been taken.  This inaction is an outrageous attack on middle class Americans who are reeling from the mess I inherited from my predecessor.  Delay is unacceptable.  We can’t wait. President Bachmann paused for a moment and then continued.

Last night after the Senate adjourned for the weekend Vice President Cain and I met with Speaker of the House Jason Chaffetz and Senate Majority Leader Jim DeMint.  Senator DeMint relayed a message from Minority Leader Reid.  Reid said that, with the aid of three Progressive Republicans, he would block all presidential nominations.  Reid declared it’s the Republicans that shut down the government by refusing to nominate from the progressive list.

Vice President Cain then suggested we contact a constitutional expert as my predecessors Justice Department and Solicitor General had rushed forward an opinion that only the Progressives were allowed to make administration nominations.

We contacted Professor Snidely Whiplash Chairman of the Constitutional Law department at Wossamotta U.  Professor Whiplash said the best way out of the constitutional crisis is to use recess appointment authority.  My predecessor’s use of recess appointments while the Senate is in session provides more than ample justification the Professor told us.  I then asked Majority Leader DeMint if the Senate was adjourned for the weekend.  Senator DeMint said yes, and Speaker of the House Chaffetz agreed.

Ladies and Gentleman, as president of the United States I am proud to announce that last night I made the following recess appointments.  The individuals have already been sworn in and the government is now operational.  I am pleased to introduce:

Rick Perry – EPA
Mitt Romney – Commerce
Rick Santorum – Treasury
Miguel Estrada – Justice
Newt Gingrich  – Congressional Liaison
John Bolton – Secretary of State
Mark Levin – Supreme Court
Ron Paul – Federal Reserve Chairman.

I saw reporters interviewing Minority Leader Reid.  Wandering over to listen in I heard Reid say: The Senate sets its rules, not the President.  It’s outrageous. The senate has the right to refuse to act.  Only Progressives are allowed to take extra-constitutional actions.  It’s a stunning power grab and I won’t stand for it.  Reid was furious.

I heard a hum, then a pop.  Suddenly I was back in January 2011.  As I stepped out of the way-forward machine I heard Majority Leader Reid in a TV news conference.  He was saying the President could decide when the Senate is in session.  A reporter asked, are you worried that a Republican President might take advantage of the precedent allowing recess appointments while the Senate is in session?  Reid responded I’m not worried at all.  A constitutional conservative would never do anything like that.

Then I knew that way-forward machine would never work.  It’s true. A constitutional conservative would never do anything like that.

Post to Twitter Post to Facebook Post to LinkedIn Post to Reddit

Posted by at 05:00 | Posted in President Obama | 35 Comments |Email This Post Email This Post |Print This Post Print This Post
  • Andycrossett

    You fail to admit that the Senate has defacto filibusters against hundreds of judicial and other appointments of the President. The Recess Appointment is his only recourse, if he wants a particular nominee. The Republicans just want Obama to be unable to get any of his nominees.

    • Bob Clark

      I accidentally hit the like button.  The Senate defacto filibusters are constitutional whereas this recent move by Obama is highly questionable as to its constitutionality.  We shall see how the court rules on Obama’s move to ignore the congress in this instance.  AG Eric Holder and his department’s running of the Fast and Furious debacle; and subsequent cover up tells a lot about the attitude of disrespect Obama and his cohorts hold toward the constitution (the very one which he swore to uphold). 

      • None

        Wait a minute. 7 years ago, Republicans were saying it was unconstitutional to filibuster appointees.

        For the G.O.P., where they stand depends on where they sit.

    • Steven Howatt

      You greatly over-simplify by saying “the Republicans just…” (do you understand the larger issue, that the Consumer Protection agency needs to have oversite?), but apart from that, so what?  Do you not get that this is how the system functions?  It is called politics, and is a system of checks and balances.  Republicans have had to deal with the same roadblocks from dems.

      • None


        Can you name any instance where Democrats stated that they would block any and all appointees to head a governmental agency?

      • 3H

        LOL.. but.. if Obama does it, it’s more wrong.  Yes?  It is really wrong when he does it…  and only a little wrong when Republicans do it.  

  • Unionboss

    I am proud of this man for standing up to the do-nothing congress led by dirty republicans.

    • Steven Howatt

      You give unions a bad name with your non-thinking comment and namecalling (“dirty”).  Do you not realize that the Dems controlled BOTH houses of congress for the first 2 years of this administration, and still control the upper house (Senate), while a Dem President is in office?  What makes you think it is not the dems that are “leading congress”?  Do you realize that it is the Dems that have not been able to bring a budget forward for approval in what, more than 1,000 days?  What is their problem, and who is do-nothing?

      • David formerly from Eugene

        Currently neither party controls the Senate. To control the Senate a party needs to have at least 61 seats held by individuals who actively support the parties goals, RINOs and DINOs don’t count. The Democratic Party through having a majority of Senate Seats held by members of the Democratic caucus currently hold Senate leadership positions.

  • Rupert in Springfield

    There has been little argument by anyone that this has been the most arrogant and secretive presidency in recent times. With this move they also become the most inconsistent. The Obama administration itself has argued before the supreme court, that this very procedure is unconstitutional. Now, when it suits them, they argue its perfectly OK.

    The left will let this slide, as they do most things Obama. The article is right however. At some point there will be a Republican president. That president will now be able to appoint whomever they want, whenever they want, and it will all be thanks to Obama.

    To put it all into perspective, can we remember back to a quaint time when the left was crazed about the outrage of tapping overseas phone calls without a warrant, or picking up combatants on the battle field without reading them their rights?

    Well, now the president can detain anyone he wants for any length of time and its all okie dokie thanks to Obamas efforts. There was a little murmuring on the left about this, but not a lot. Certainly none of the shrill concerns about peoples rights and posters with the presidents likeness calling him a war criminal.

    Yet here we are. And as stated at the beginning of this presidency, by me and plenty of others, the left is concerned about one thing and one thing only, accumulation of power for the government.

    Obamas assertion of this new found power to appoint whoever he wants whenever he wants, constitution be dammed, accomplished this accumulation of power. Therefore this is why we see the left strangely quiescent. No shrill tones at all about the abuse of power.

    The thing the left forgets is that, like it or not, they will not be in power forever. When such time comes as there is a Republican president, that president will now be able to install anyone he likes based upon the Obama president.

    For perspective, consider that had Reagan taken this same tactic we very likely would be looking at Robert Bork as chief justice of the supreme court right now.

    Oh wont the shrill trumpets sound from the halls of left wing bastions then? It will be hilarious to see the conniption fits from the new found interest in the constitution the left will have on such occasion. Pass the popcorn!

    • valley person

      “There has been little argument by anyone that this has been the most arrogant and secretive presidency in recent times.”

      Does recent times include the Bush-Cheney Administration? If so, I would argue they were more arrogant and certainly more secretive than Obama-Biden have been.

      The left” will let this slide, I agree. Why? For one, the whole issue is a tempest in a teapot. Congress is obviously (to everyone) not “in session” because it isn’t even in town. The Republican minority in the Senate have refused to consider ANY person for the position unless or until they get an effective repeal of legislation they don’t like that already passed both houses and was signed into law. So Obama did an end run. possibly an “unconstitutional” end run. But only to make an appointment, not to start a war or torture anybody or read your emails or any other nefarious activity. He made a recess appointment supported by a majority of Senators. BFD.

      By the way Rupert, “the left” never made an issue out of picking up combatants on the field and not reading them their rights. The issue was over torture, indefinite detention, and misuse of military tribunals.

      • Rupert in Springfield

        > I would argue they were more arrogant and certainly more secretive than Obama-Biden have been.

        You would be one of the few, but yes, we knew that Dean.

        >By the way Rupert, “the left” never made an issue out of picking up combatants on the field and not reading them their rights.

        Wrong, it was quite an issue.

        >The issue was over torture, indefinite detention, and misuse of military tribunals.

        Wrong. The left had zero concern with those issues, they simply wanted their guy in charge of them.

        This is why when Obama continued and enhanced some of those very same policies you now defend that which you once railed against. Something I said you would do once Obama got in office by the way.

        • None

          “You would be one of the few, but yes, we knew that Dean.”

          You really need to read something other than right-wing blogs, watch something other than Fox “News”, and listen to something other than right-wing radio.

          Unless, of course, you’re perfectly happy continuing to make foolish statements.

        • valley person

          Well, its hard to argue reality with you, you’ve proven that much.

    • 3H

      . There was a little murmuring on the left about this, but not a lot.

      Even more sadly, more “murmuring” was done on the left than there was done on the right.  In fact, this was initiated in the  Republican House.  Of course, you hold Obama responsible (rightly) and don’t mention how it was initiated by conservatives.   More than a little hypocritical don’t you think?  Seems to me you’re kind of contorting the argument.  Maybe now you understand.

      So, why hasn’t the right taken on the new powers granted to the President?  Why did they insist on giving that power to the President.  Let’s hold Obama responsible for signing it, but lets also ask ourselves why conservatives hate the Constitution and Due Process so much that they would even conceive of this?

      • Rupert in Springfield

        > Of course, you hold Obama responsible (rightly) and don’t mention how it was initiated by conservatives.

        I dont really care who initiated it. The fact is this is wrong and the fact is the Obama administration demanded this provision be in the bill.

        The fact that you are trying to turn this into some argument against conservatives in order to defend Obama is totally absurd.

        What the hell is wrong with you guys? You can never just flat out say when something is wrong.

        You have this attitude that is a conservative has done an action before, or if any Republican did it, and you argued against it then, your guy doing it now is right.

        Seriously, you are exactly the sort who was crying his heart out in Pyongyang when Dear Leader died. Your unflinching obedience is really scary.

        Admit when your guy is wrong and call it good. Dear Leader is fallible.

        • 3H

          If you had read more closely Rupert, you would have seen that I said that you rightly criticized him for signing the bill.  I have criticized him on other occasions in this very blog.

          However, you weren’t just criticizing Obama, but Liberals as well.  Perhaps you don’t recall that part of your own post?  

          I know you don’t care who initiated it.  I find it hypocritical in the extreme that you not only criticize Obama, but Liberals as well and allow Conservatives to get a pass on their role – their essential role in initiating a patently offensive and scary piece of legislation.

          What is wrong with you Rupert?  What makes you so partisan and blind that you can’t admit that conservatives played an even larger part?  Your apparently single minded devotion to bashing almost all things Obama and Liberal makes you come across as a hysterical shill.

          LOL, hysterical enough to compare me to North Korean loyalists?  Is there a hyperbole out there too extreme for you?   

    • David Appell

      Republicans are now consumed with so much hatred that they are taking down the country. It’s not just the liberals they hate, and the gays and blacks and anyone who doesn’t look, act, and think like they do, but themselves as well, as demonstrated in the debates (especially this morning’s in NH), which resembles nothing so much as a pit of snakes. 

      This country has become too large to function as a democracy, and consequently it’s now some government-corporate amalgam that functions only for the sake of monied interests. No one is happy, and we should probably let it topple and start over.

      • Steven Howatt

        It never have been a “democracy” – it is a constitutional republic, and it would be good to know the difference.

        Where do folks get the idea that principled difference has anything to do with hatred?  The hyperbole and rhetoric that some spread around like this seems quite counterproductive.

        • David Appell

          It is a democratic republic — representatives are elected democratically. This kind of nitpicking merely avoids the issue.

          • Rupert in Springfield

            David, you are trying to be a writer, and a science writer at that. Whenever your lack of scientific rigor is pointed out to you, you claim it is nitpicking. Now, on a political blog, you claim getting the political terminology right is also nitpicking.

            The issue has been confronted and put on the table.

            Obama is acting unconstitutionally as his own people have argued in front of the Supreme Court.

            David Appell is acting like an idiot for implying racism and homophobia in anyone who questions the president. Apparently the president has a lot of racists and homophobes int he Solicitor Generals office.

            Why homophobia enters the picture is unclear, the president is not gay to the best of my knowledge.

            I think you just slapped in homophobia in there because you are an intellectually lazy person.

            This fact is buttressed by the fact that you are lazy with your writing, and when called on it you always complain it is nitpicking.

            A suprising response for someone who wants to be a science writer yet apparently has the verbal precision of a drunken bar conversation.

        • valley person

          I think it is the “principled difference” question Steven. It appears to have morphed into if not hate, certainly fear. And those 2 emotions are not far apart.

        • Rupert in Springfield

          >Where do folks get the idea that principled difference has anything to do with hatred?

          Because these are the people who follow with blind obedience. They are unquestioning of their leadership.

          Did you vote for Bush? If so, can you admit Bush made mistakes? I voted for Bush and I can admit where Bush was wrong.

          Did you vote for Clinton? If so can you admit where he was wrong?

          Plenty of people who voted for either one of these questioned them. Plenty of that questioning was done on this very blog. There has been no shortage of people who voted for Bush who were openly critical of him during his presidency.

          That’s the difference here. People like David Appell can never admit where their leaders are wrong. Not in a forthright manner.

          That is not how most people act. Most would like to think they have judgement, a mind, a mental capacity to say when even those they support politically are acting in a manner that is wrong. David Appell prefers to act otherwise. In thrall, obedient, unquestioning and rabid towards all opposition.

          In that sense David Appell is a very good thing indeed.

          His recitation of the mantra – “racist, homophobe, don’t you question our leaders” serves not to convince anyone his is any attitude to emulate, but rather serves as a warning flag “oh my God, do I really want to be that vacuous?”

      • Rupert in Springfield

        Pointing out that Obama is using a procedure his own people have argued is unconstitutional before the supreme court is hatred?

        How inane David.

        You might not like it, but someone using a tactic they have previously said was unconstitutional does not constitute hatred on my part, is constitutes arrogance and inconsistency on their part.

        How small does someone have to be to not be able to even admit to this wrong by the president?

        You intellectual vacuity is astonishing David. Every president makes mistake, and this president is clearly wrong here. The fact that you cannot admit that, but instead have to flee to the intellectual light weight corner of implying any opposition is based on racism is so intellectually meager it is appalling.

        Seriously, its been three years. This is the best you can do? Any opposition is racist?

        File David Appell in the “Napoleon is always right” camp of unquestioning followers, incapable of questioning their leaders.

    • 3H

      the left is concerned about one thing and one thing only, accumulation of power for the government.”

      And then you say things like this.  Why should anyone take you seriously when you make egregious lies like this?  Even you know it’s not true, you just can’t help yourself.   What is wrong with you Rupert?  What makes you such a partisan that you feel the need to make such patently silly comments? 

      Or, do you really believe that?  

  • Independent Vet

    The pendulum swings; the further Obama pushes it to the left, the further it will swing back to the right. There is going to be hell to pay when the constitution finally falls (2nd Amendment in my book). So, go ahead, keep chipping away at it you fools, your protective umbrella is folding with it.

    • None

      Wow. If you think that Obama is “far left”, you are totally clueless. Just totally clueless.

      On many issues, Obama, and his Presidency, are to the right of Nixon and Eisenhower. He wants to raise taxes just a little bit on the wealthy, sure, but at rates far lower than they paid in the ’50s, ’60s, or ’70s.

  • Manchild

    I need the help of this agency. Otherwise greedy companies will rip me off.
    I want government to look out for me like a good parent would. Anything less is simply not the American way.

    • None

      I realize that you think you’re being cleverly sarcastic.

      Tell me, are you glad that the air is cleaner than it was 40 years ago?

      Are you glad that cars are safer than they were 40 years ago?

      Are you glad that if your employer fires you because you happen to be Christian/Catholic/Baptist/Atheist/Muslim/Jewish/Hindu/Zoroastrian/Rastafarian/Buddhist, that you have legal recourse, and perhaps a government agency that will assist you?

  • guest

    ABO, das antiChrist has to go – Lo, preferably to the theological place of eternal punishment where he bongs.

Stay Tuned...

Stay up to date with the latest political news and commentary from Oregon Catalyst through daily email updates:

Prefer another subscription option? Subscribe to our RSS Feed, become a fan on Facebook, or follow us on Twitter.

Twitter Facebook

No Thanks (close this box)