Once again we encounter MSM political maneuvering intended to distract us from what has become the ‘norm’. After more than a solid year of ‘inaction’, the president has decided to start exercising some of that power Mr. Bush left for him. (Which is to point out that the newly elected president has done absolutely nothing to ‘roll back’ the power grabs made by his predecessor, adding them to the pile being slowly built up by many past administrations.)
Hard to say what is more disturbing, this sudden flurry of activity or the fact that the Executive office once again finds itself beleaguered and besieged by a Congress so influenced by lobbyists that it can’t break free from the constant state of deadlock?
The ‘critics’ of Democracy point to precisely this type of ‘procedural wrangling’ as the ‘downside’ of democratic forms of government. They say these ‘deadlocks’ hinder swift action when the nation needs to be ‘nimble’…although the only time governance requires ‘agility’ is when the interests of the public are being undermined.
Worse, those who freely ‘criticize’ democracy usually do so while wrapping themselves in the banner of liberty…while advocating either monarchy or fascism in democracy’s place!
I am no fan of ‘representative’ democracy because ‘proxies’ can (and have) been bought. If I can’t take the time to educate myself and decide directly on the issues I certainly don’t want to be forced to live with the decisions of someone who sold my vote to the highest bidder.
But it is a choice YOU don’t get to make. In fact, the system, as it currently exists, bars you from making any decisions save the choice of who will make decisions in your name without ever consulting you!
Yeah baby, that’s what they call ‘freedom’ (although no one in their right mind would call it that!)
So what is the ‘quality of freedom’ when the situation leads to this outcome ?
Obama Bypasses Senate Process, Filling 15 Posts
By SHERYL GAY STOLBERG
Published: March 27, 2010
WASHINGTON — President Obama, making a muscular show of his executive authority just one day after Congress left for spring recess, said Saturday that he would bypass the Senate and install 15 appointees, including a union lawyer whose nomination to the National Labor Relations Board was blocked last monthwith the help of two Democrats. [Well, how could president Obama appoint ‘scum’ like a lawyer for a labor union to ah, um, what post did he appoint that guy to? Which begs a different question good citizen…the question of what happened to the Democratic ‘party apparatus’ that it hands its endorsement to people who OPPOSE union leaders? How the FUCK did those people get into the party? Or, more succinctly, how, er, ‘accurate’ is anyone’s ‘party designation’ if these basic values are, er, ‘for sale’?]
Coming on the heels of Mr. Obama’s big victory on health care legislation, Saturday’s move suggests a newly emboldened president who is unafraid to provoke a confrontation with the minority party. [Most of us would hope this newfound courage would result in some desperately needed criminal prosecutions of people who were actually responsible for destroying the US economy…oh wait, that would mean prosecuting politicians! That ain’t gonna happen…yet.]
Just two days ago, all 41 Senate Republicans sent Mr. Obama a letter urging him not to appoint the union lawyer, Craig Becker, during the recess. Mr. Obama’s action, in defiance of the Republicans, was hailed by union leaders, but it also seemed certain to intensify the partisan rancor that has enveloped Washington. [How much more ‘intense’ could it possibly get? The next step is bloodshed and we’re all very curious to see how that is handled…or not.]
“The United States Senate has the responsibility to approve or disprove of my nominees,” Mr. Obama said in a statement. “But if, in the interest of scoring political points, Republicans in the Senate refuse to exercise that responsibility, I must act in the interest of the American people and exercise my authority to fill these positions on an interim basis.” [Just as President Bush appointed UN hater John Bolton as US envoy to the United Nations during a congressional ‘recess’. For some bizarre reason the Bush White House didn’t share the Obama administration’s ‘sense of urgency’ when it came to staffing government offices.]
It was the first time the president has used his constitutional authority to fill vacant federal positions by making recess appointments, thus avoiding the requirement for the advice and consent of the Senate. Mr. Obama, who currently has 217 nominees pending and 77 awaiting action on the Senate floor, said Republicans had given him little choice.
“At a time of economic emergency, two top appointees to the Department of Treasury have been held up for nearly six months,” Mr. Obama said. “I simply cannot allow partisan politics to stand in the way of the basic functioning of government.” [You can’t fault the president, he’s given ‘the party of no’ plenty of slack…What excuse do the Republican’s have for not acting upon 217 appointments? Can you imagine their outrage (and the media’s) if the shoe were on the other foot?]
With lawmakers back in their home states and Mr. Obama spending a quiet family weekend at Camp David, the White House issued the statement announcing the president’s intent to appoint Mr. Becker, and 14 others, mostly to fill positions on his economic and homeland security teams. [Um, you’d think the ‘specific’ positions filled would be of great interest to the public but apparently the press doesn’t think so…]
The White House said the 15 nominees had been waiting, on average, seven months to be confirmed. They are expected to begin work over the next week; the president’s action will enable them to serve without Senate confirmation until the chamber adjourns at the end of 2011.[So why didn’t bobo just seat all 217 positions? In for a penny, in for a pound!]
Republicans, who have cast Mr. Becker as a pro-labor radical, issued a flurry of angry statements. [now there’s a shock, isn’t it?] They wasted little time in reminding reporters that when George W. Bush was president, then-Senator Obama had railed against the recess appointment of John R. Bolton as ambassador to the United Nations, saying that Mr. Bolton would be “damaged goods” and lacked credibility without Senate confirmation. [Honestly good citizen, is there anyone out there (who isn’t a rabid Republican) that doesn’t have serious reservations about Mr. Bolton’s, er, mental stability?]
Senator Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, the Republican leader, called the president’s move “yet another episode of choosing a partisan path despite bipartisan opposition.” [Um, if that doesn’t redefine the term ‘chutzpah’ I don’t know what does! (Given the ‘bipartisan-ship’ displayed by the Republicans to date!)]
Another Republican, Senator Tom Coburn of Oklahoma, said in an interview that he could understand Mr. Obama’s frustration; he said that most of the other nominees were noncontroversial and that his concern was centered primarily on Mr. Becker. “He has a precedent,” Mr. Coburn said of the president, “Others have done it, so I’m not critical of him doing it. But I am critical of the Becker appointment because he doesn’t have the votes.” [Examine that statement and contrast it with the rest of the facts as they are laid out here…217 appointees pending and there’s nothing ‘controversial’ about them EXCEPT that the Republicans in congress have the power to block their appointments…because they can. Now how many of you will have your heads explode when the MSM announces a major Republican victory this coming November? Worse, you had best start preparing yourself mentally for the defacto ‘election by the media’ of local Republican candidates, much like what happened here with Scott Brown.]
Recess appointments are a common tool for presidents frustrated by the confirmation process. Mr. Obama’s action puts him on a par with Mr. Bush, who had made 15 recess appointments by this point in his presidency. Mr. Bush had an especially intense tussle with Democrats over judicial appointees; during the course of his two terms in office, he made a total of 171 recess appointments, although 72 were to part-time positions, according to the Congressional Research Service. President Clinton made 139 recess appointments. [So, why is this suddenly ‘more common than anyone realized’ tool being touted as the unexpected surge in presidential authority? More importantly it points directly to the increasing non-functionality of the government…something the people are NOT being asked to address. Well, should WE fix this good citizen or should we just let the same people who allowed things to get to this point to handle it? Do you smell gasoline? I smell it too!]
With the exception of Mr. Becker, the White House said most of the 15 nominees being installed by Mr. Obama have bipartisan support. Indeed, in a sign that Mr. Obama did not want to go too far in inflaming partisan passions, he resisted using his executive powers to install one of his most contentious candidates, Dawn Johnsen, an Indiana University law professor, to lead the Office of Legal Counsel at the Justice Department. Ms. Johnsen has drawn the ire of Republicans for her work as a lawyer for NARAL Pro-Choice America as well as her outspoken opposition to the Bush administration’s counterterrorism policies. [Do the Republican’s fear the indictments they so richly deserve? How ‘brave’ does the president look now?]
Saturday’s announcement is certain to cheer some of Mr. Obama’s strongest supporters, who have been arguing that the president should take on Republicans in a more forceful way. Gay rights advocates were elated to see Chai R. Feldblum, a Georgetown University Law professor who advocates on gay issues, claim a spot on the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission as a result of Mr. Obama’s action. [Okay…so they gave us one specific appointment along with one official denial…which tells us what?]
But perhaps no group will be as heartened as union leaders.
For months they had complained that Mr. Obama was too timid in responding to Republican opposition to Mr. Becker, a former associate general counsel for the A.F.L.-C.I.O. and the Service Employees International Union. Labor leaders were also unhappy that the labor relations board has been largely paralyzed since January 2008 because only two of its five seats have been filled since then. Mr. Obama also appointed Mark Pearce, a New York labor lawyer, on Saturday to fill a fourth seat on the board. [Is this where the ‘contentious’ appoint was made? The ‘roll over and play dead’ labor board?]
Last month, the Democrats fell eight votes short of the 60 needed to overcome a threatened Republican filibuster of a vote for Mr. Becker. Two Democrats, Blanche Lincoln of Arkansas and Ben Nelson of Nebraska, joined Republicans in the 52-to-33 vote. [That’s a whole bunch of ‘abstains’ there! If you ask me this whole fiasco is foolishness in the extreme, we shouldn’t ‘elect’ anyone to public office. It’s high time we put the laws beyond the reach of those who would manipulate them for their personal advantage!]
In their letter to the president, Republicans wrote that Mr. Becker, a former law professor at U.C.L.A. and the University of Chicago, “could not be viewed as impartial, unbiased or objective” in labor board cases. A law review article he wrote, saying that employers should not have a voice in unionization elections, angered many businesses and Republicans. But in Congressional testimony, Mr. Becker said that those were his personal views and as a labor board member, he would follow the letter of the law.
Two other candidates who are getting recess appointments, Jeffrey Goldstein, the nominee for a high-level job at the Department of Treasury as under secretary for domestic finance, and Alan D. Bersin, the nominee for commissioner of the Customs and Border Protection division of the Department of Homeland Security, were still being vetted by the Senate Finance Committee.[?] Mr. Obama’s decision to bypass the vetting drew criticism Saturday from the senior Republican on the panel, Senator Charles E. Grassley of Iowa. [Mr. ‘Obstruction’ himself!]
Mr. Grassley said Mr. Goldstein was still answering the panel’s questions about his work for a private equity firm, and Mr. Bersin was answering questions about “what appeared to be conflicting information about his documentation and disclosure” of household employees — questions that, the senator said, were “directly relevant” to the positions they will hold.
Um, don’t tell me, we have yet another political appointee who A.) hasn’t paid taxes in decades and B.) hired an illegal alien (totally unaware, of course!)
Oh and in keeping with the great spirit of ‘bipartisanship’ they’re both fucking Republicans! [Don’t know that but just saying, ya know?]
Um, the term ‘hell in a bucket’ comes to mind when pondering the rapid descent into the abyss this nation is taking, thanks to the ‘over-abundance’ of predators we failed to exterminate.
Which leads us to the central question good citizen, just how responsible ARE WE, the average Joe and Jane who don’t and have never had a voice in ‘the process’?
Is this ‘our fault’, could we have asserted our will and nipped this crisis in the bud?
For all of the ‘woulda, coulda, shoulda,’ Monday morning quarterbacking going on, we can say with a high degree of confidence that there isn’t (nor was there ever) a friggin thing we could have (legally) done to alter the course of the nation.
The tools aren’t there (and anyone who tells you otherwise is full of it!)
Yup, good citizen, we have no ‘legal avenue’ open to us capable of altering the trajectory of our society…which has been altered by the self-interested, for their own benefit, without our input (save the rubber stamp we handed to our ‘bought and paid for’ elected representatives.)
If you’re genuinely interested in Liberty and freedom, we have to resort to some ‘less than legal’ activities. I belabor the obvious when I point out that WE are unlikely to prevail in THEIR courts.
Tends to be an ‘insurmountable obstacle’.
Thanks for letting me inside your head,
Gegner
No comments:
Post a Comment