Archive | January, 2013

Appeals Court Rules Obama’s Recess Appointments Unconstitutional

25 Jan

Hallelujah and thank goodness for a panel of judges who knows what the Constitution allows and doesn’t allow and said so for a change. I don’t care if Obama mouthpiece Smarmy Carney says the White House disagrees or not. If Obama and Company persist in ignoring what the appeals court ruled, the judges should hit them with an injunction to enforce their ruling, pending appeal, thereby suspending any further actions by the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) and, upon confirmation by the Supreme Court, nullifying all NLRB rulings since Obama thought he could bypass the Senate and just arbitrarily appoint whoever he liked.

By the way, it’s an interesting factoid that it was Democratic Senate Majority Leader High Horse Harry Reid, that great legislative innovator and trickster, who “invented” the exact same tactic of gaveling in and gaveling out used by the Republicans during the Obama appointments in question so as not be in recess. The Democrats used it many times to block George W. Bush from making recess appointments, which, unlike Obama, Bush always honored. Plus, although most senators were away, those who were present did move some legislation along despite not being able to make big votes on major legislation — another sign they were not in recess.

And for those on the Left who like to point out how many recess appointments past Republican presidents have made, none of them were made during times of even the type of non-recess that Obama tried to get away with.

I guess it’s another of those examples of Democratic duplicity and double standards that they can invent a procedure and use it but when somebody else uses it, it’s all wrong, and Obama thought he could define when the Senate is in recess or not and just do as he pleased, when the Constitution clearly says that each chamber of the Congress sets its own rules of procedure, not the president.


Obama 3.0? — Hardly

16 Jan

I just read a (-nother) sycophantic ABC online article about Obama 3.0 and there being a “new president in town” — (a) progressive, (b) resolute, (c) challenging “the Congress” (which is politi-speak for the Republican controlled House), (d) leading and not just leaving it to Congress to pass major legislation, as even the lapdog media admit he did with ObamaCare (which was, uh, the Democratically controlled Congress, both houses at the time, who drafted it behind closed doors and in secret, plus voted to approve it without even reading it, if I remember correctly), and (e) unwilling to any longer meet in private to negotiate compromises (which actually is welcomed, because it makes it harder for him to move the goal posts at the last moment as he has done before and blame a lack of progress on the other guy). Of course House Speaker Boehner already beat Obama to that marker, saying he would no longer try negotiating in private with Obama but would instead “let the House work its will,” I suspect finally realizing the truth of the axiom “fool me once…, fool me twice…”

My response to the ABC article and Obama’s so-called gun violence press conference today:

No, there’s not a new president in town. Same liberal progressive we’ve had since 2009, using more Kabuki theater and kids to sell his policies with emotion rather than logic, capitalizing on the national tragedy of Sandy Hook to push more gun control (don’t let a good disaster go to waste), with little of substance to address the real problem of preventing deranged people, who are the ones misusing guns to commit the mass killings, from having access to guns.

One example of how much Obama’s presser today was about appearances rather than real, comprehensive and much-needed mental health care reform or revision of Hollywood’s standards for guns and guts movies, the video game industry’s obsession with ever more realistic games to “kill” people, or gangsta rap’s advocacy of violence, especially toward women, was the fact that one of the 23 EOs he’s so slavishly touted by the Left as signing reminded him to appoint a new ATF chief, something it’s already his responsibility to do. That’s a perfect metaphor for doing anything to run up the numbers and make activity appear to be action.

Only fools take an unserious man seriously.


%d bloggers like this: