Webmaster Forum

Go Back   Webmaster Forum > The Webmaster Forums > Forum Lobby > Controversial Social Issues

Controversial Social Issues Discussions concerning controversial social issues. Topics include politics, religion, culture, social and economic issues, etc. Respect required at all times.


Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Share |
  #41 (permalink)  
Old 01-30-2013, 09:30 AM
Breeze Wood's Avatar
Contributing Member
Latest Blog:
None

 
Join Date: 04-06-11
Location: USA
Posts: 958
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bob Barr View Post

B. These weren't vacancies that happened "during the Recess" (which wasn't a recess anyway). Those vacancies had existed for some number of months prior to the purported recess.

B. These weren't vacancies that happened "during the Recess"


Quote:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Recess_appointment

Examples and use

Presidents since George Washington have made recess appointments. Washington appointed South Carolina judge John Rutledge as Chief Justice of the United States during a congressional recess in 1795. Because of Rutledge's political views and occasional mental illness, however, the Senate rejected his nomination, and Rutledge subsequently attempted suicide and then resigned.

New Jersey judge William J. Brennan was appointed to the Supreme Court by President Dwight D. Eisenhower in 1956 through a recess appointment. This was done in part with an eye on the presidential campaign that year; Eisenhower was running for reelection, and his advisors thought it would be politically advantageous to place a northeastern Catholic on the court. Brennan was promptly confirmed when the Senate came back into session. President Eisenhower, in a recess appointment, designated Charles W. Yost as United States ambassador to Syria.[7] Eisenhower made two other recess appointments, Chief Justice Earl Warren and Potter Stewart.

George H. W. Bush appointed Lawrence Eagleburger Secretary of State during a recess in 1992; Eagleburger, as Deputy Secretary of State, had in effect filled that role after James Baker resigned.

According to the Congressional Research Service, President Ronald Reagan made 240 recess appointments, President George H. W. Bush made 77 recess appointments, President Bill Clinton made 139 recess appointments. President George W. Bush made 171 recess appointments, and as of January 5, 2012, President Barack Obama had made only 32 recess appointments.[8]

Quote:
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.

That's the point Bob - more so than whether the minority party may hold in "session" a branch of gov't that has adjourned.

and why this Administration should be held accountable when others have not.
__________________
.

All's Well that Ends Well

.
 
Reply With Quote

Advertisement

Advertisement

  #42 (permalink)  
Old 01-30-2013, 03:30 PM
robjones's Avatar
v7n Mentor
Latest Blog:
None

 
Join Date: 09-15-09
Location: Texas
Posts: 9,680
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Breeze - Aside from the fact that this has nothing to do with the topic whatsoever and i was a little surprised you bothered to raise it... I'm curious if you think anyone is gonna take your "legal opinion" instead of the one rendered by the court that just ruled on this, which said the presidents actions were unconstitutional.
__________________
-- CAUTION: Not Politically Correct --
 
Reply With Quote
  #43 (permalink)  
Old 01-30-2013, 04:06 PM
Bob Barr's Avatar
Moderator
Latest Blog:
None

 
Join Date: 05-17-08
Location: San Juan Bautista, California
Posts: 3,118
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Quote:
Originally Posted by Breeze Wood View Post
B. These weren't vacancies that happened "during the Recess"



That's the point Bob - more so than whether the minority party may hold in "session" a branch of gov't that has adjourned.

and why this Administration should be held accountable when others have not.
You talk as if the "minority party" is the Republican Party. In case you hadn't noticed, in the House of Representatives, the Democrats are the minority party, your imagination notwithstanding. And as for one house keeping the other in session, there's a specific provision in that pesky US Constitution (that you and Obama find so darned inconvenient) that makes that possible.

How many previous recess appointments were challenged in court? None

How many previous recess appointments have been found to be unconstitutional? None

Another precedent-setting moment for Obama - the first US president in over 200 years to have a recess appointment found unconstitutional. You (and he) must be so proud.
__________________
South SF Bay Area Carpet Cleaning Cleanway USA Inc.
 
Reply With Quote
  #44 (permalink)  
Old 01-30-2013, 06:15 PM
Breeze Wood's Avatar
Contributing Member
Latest Blog:
None

 
Join Date: 04-06-11
Location: USA
Posts: 958
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bob Barr View Post
You talk as if the "minority party" is the Republican Party. In case you hadn't noticed, in the House of Representatives, the Democrats are the minority party, your imagination notwithstanding. And as for one house keeping the other in session, there's a specific provision in that pesky US Constitution (that you and Obama find so darned inconvenient) that makes that possible.

How many previous recess appointments were challenged in court? None

How many previous recess appointments have been found to be unconstitutional? None

Another precedent-setting moment for Obama - the first US president in over 200 years to have a recess appointment found unconstitutional. You (and he) must be so proud.

what is your point Bob?

it has been in practice since George Washington 1795 - the Republicans are so clever to take it to court 200 years latter ? and the three Republican judges are the first to render an opinion ...
__________________
.

All's Well that Ends Well

.
 
Reply With Quote
  #45 (permalink)  
Old 01-30-2013, 07:42 PM
Bob Barr's Avatar
Moderator
Latest Blog:
None

 
Join Date: 05-17-08
Location: San Juan Bautista, California
Posts: 3,118
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Quote:
Originally Posted by Breeze Wood View Post
what is your point Bob?

it has been in practice since George Washington 1795 - the Republicans are so clever to take it to court 200 years latter ? and the three Republican judges are the first to render an opinion ...
My point is that Obama's ignoring/defying the constitution was not allowed to stand.

The Republican Party is living in your head -- rent-free. The Republicans didn't take this matter to court - Noel Canning did. While the three judges were, in fact, appointed by Republicans (Was that information in this morning's DNC talking-points email?), all three were easily confirmed by the senate. So much for their radical Republicanism.

Chief Judge Sentelle:
Quote:
On February 2, 1987, Reagan nominated Sentelle to a position on the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit to replace Antonin Scalia. Sentelle was confirmed by the United States Senate in an 87-0 vote on September 9, 1987.
Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_B._Sentelle

Judge Henderson:
Quote:
On May 8, 1990, President George H. W. Bush nominated Henderson to a seat on the D.C. Circuit that had been vacated by the resignation of Kenneth Starr to become Solicitor General of the United States. The United States Senate confirmed Henderson on June 28, 1990 by unanimous consent, and she received her commission on July 5, 1990.
Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karen_L._Henderson

Judge Griffith:
Quote:
On June 14, 2005, the Senate confirmed Griffith by a vote of 73-24.[7] Twenty Democrats joined fifty-three Republicans in voting for Griffith’s confirmation. (Two Republicans and one Independent did not vote.) Democrats voting for confirmation included Barack Obama, Joe Biden, Minority Leader Harry Reid, and Minority Whip Dick Durbin. Despite earlier criticisms of Griffith, the Washington Post endorsed his nomination, noting that he was “widely respected by people in both parties” as a “sober lawyer with an open mind.”[8]
Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_B._Griffith

Have you read the court's ruling? I have - it's 47 pages long with many citations of legal precedents that support the ruling. Here's a link to it:
http://www.cadc.uscourts.gov/interne...15-1417096.pdf
__________________
South SF Bay Area Carpet Cleaning Cleanway USA Inc.

Last edited by Bob Barr; 01-30-2013 at 07:43 PM. Reason: fixed typo
 
Reply With Quote
  #46 (permalink)  
Old 01-30-2013, 08:01 PM
Breeze Wood's Avatar
Contributing Member
Latest Blog:
None

 
Join Date: 04-06-11
Location: USA
Posts: 958
iTrader: 0 / 0%
that's all fine Bob, after 200 + years of precedent the three Republicans conclude with an astonishing ruling ... against the 44th Administration to use recess appointments.

the country has been saved - and of course the minority Republicans held the chamber in session (anyways) ...
__________________
.

All's Well that Ends Well

.
 
Reply With Quote
  #47 (permalink)  
Old 01-30-2013, 08:13 PM
Bob Barr's Avatar
Moderator
Latest Blog:
None

 
Join Date: 05-17-08
Location: San Juan Bautista, California
Posts: 3,118
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Quote:
Originally Posted by Breeze Wood View Post
that's all fine Bob, after 200 + years of precedent the three Republicans conclude with an astonishing ruling ... against the 44th Administration to use recess appointments.

the country has been saved - and of course the minority Republicans held the chamber in session (anyways) ...
If that's what it takes to make you feel better, you can just keep telling yourself that it's all the evil Republicans' fault. Didn't you ever learn that saying "But all the other kids did it too." wouldn't get you out of trouble?
__________________
South SF Bay Area Carpet Cleaning Cleanway USA Inc.
 
Reply With Quote
  #48 (permalink)  
Old 01-31-2013, 05:30 AM
Zap's Avatar
Zap Zap is offline
Super Moderator
Latest Blog:
None

 
Join Date: 01-15-06
Posts: 13,751
iTrader: 5 / 100%
Quote:
Originally Posted by Breeze Wood View Post
that's all fine Bob, after 200 + years of precedent the three Republicans conclude with an astonishing ruling ... against the 44th Administration to use recess appointments.

the country has been saved - and of course the minority Republicans held the chamber in session (anyways) ...
A ruling which upholds The Constitution shouldn't be considered "astonishing" by someone who cares about The Constitution.
 
Reply With Quote
  #49 (permalink)  
Old 01-31-2013, 09:35 AM
Contributing Member
 
Join Date: 03-17-06
Posts: 170
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Hmmnnn . . .

Obama hasn't paid much attention to the constitution so far; why change now?
His level of comfort with too much government is waaayy too high, and it doesn't sit well with many people.

Maybe those petitions--from all 50 states--to secede have got Obama worried, and he is preparing for a possible suppression.
 
Reply With Quote
  #50 (permalink)  
Old 01-31-2013, 02:01 PM
robjones's Avatar
v7n Mentor
Latest Blog:
None

 
Join Date: 09-15-09
Location: Texas
Posts: 9,680
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Meanwhile, on the original topic... here's a good youtube clip of the local news on this "multi-agency drill". This has taken place in a number of major metro areas now, and if I'm a betting man, will continue. Not sure if this is meant as intimidation or if there's actual intent to use this and they need the practice... but it's a martial law drill.

[YT]RgJSuGPob_w[/YT]
__________________
-- CAUTION: Not Politically Correct --
 
Reply With Quote
  #51 (permalink)  
Old 01-31-2013, 07:08 PM
TechWizard's Avatar
v7n Mentor
 
Join Date: 07-26-07
Location: Georgia
Posts: 6,156
iTrader: 2 / 100%
The Posse Comitatus Act does alow for military action in the case of an Act of Congress. I am not completely familiar with the power set under a declaration of Marshal Law. Does that not give the Commander and Chief a great deal more power and the ability to over ride certain things like the Act that prevents military policing in the Home Land, pretty much cancels States Rights?

Conspiracy Theorist have been saying for some time that the use of Marshal Law is a way that the sitting President could prevent the two term rule, or to set into motion things that otherwise would be impossible by-passing the House and as long as the person has military support is actually a way for them to assume fairly unfettered power at least for a short time?
__________________
Get A PC Helper
Virus Malware Removal | Remote Computer Repair
And More...
www.pchelper123.com


 
Reply With Quote
  #52 (permalink)  
Old 02-01-2013, 07:05 AM
TechWizard's Avatar
v7n Mentor
 
Join Date: 07-26-07
Location: Georgia
Posts: 6,156
iTrader: 2 / 100%
Wife and I were just talking as we listen to the burping of machine gun fire coming from strafing run practices at Moody Air Force base by the Warthogs they fly. There has been an extra ordinarily high volume of this going on for the last week. We cannot usually hear it from our house here and it is now very noticeable. Not sure if this just happens to be a week when a lot of maneuvers are going on military wide or what, if didn't know any better I would tend to think something was up.
__________________
Get A PC Helper
Virus Malware Removal | Remote Computer Repair
And More...
www.pchelper123.com


 
Reply With Quote
  #53 (permalink)  
Old 02-24-2013, 05:35 PM
ScriptMan's Avatar
Super Moderator
 
Join Date: 02-10-07
Location: Central Kentucky
Posts: 13,127
iTrader: 4 / 100%
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bob Barr View Post
They're not similar in the slightest. The use of military forces against US citizens would be in total violation of the Posse Commitatus Act. (Not that I'd put it past Obama to do that.)

Just a unverified snigglet that I just saw on the Discovery Channel. Eisenhower used the 101st Airborne to ensure domestic tranquility and see the it that the "Little Rock Nine" were enrolled in the university. I think that was 1957. The Arkansas Guard stood down and allowed it to happen.

Now admittedly there was no hostile action but the potential was there for it to happen. I doubt their guns were loaded with blanks.
__________________
I do not put ads or pop-ups in my posts and I have no control of what shows there. I do not endorse any product displayed in my post.
Scriptman's Playhouse || Ramblings from an old man
 
Reply With Quote
  #54 (permalink)  
Old 02-24-2013, 08:10 PM
robjones's Avatar
v7n Mentor
Latest Blog:
None

 
Join Date: 09-15-09
Location: Texas
Posts: 9,680
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Quote:
Originally Posted by ScriptMan View Post
Just a unverified snigglet that I just saw on the Discovery Channel. Eisenhower used the 101st Airborne to ensure domestic tranquility and see the it that the "Little Rock Nine" were enrolled in the university. I think that was 1957. The Arkansas Guard stood down and allowed it to happen.

Now admittedly there was no hostile action but the potential was there for it to happen. I doubt their guns were loaded with blanks.
No idea if he did or didnt, but to put that in perspective, I ran a stop sign without getting a ticket for it, but the fact that I got away with it doesn't mean stop signs are no longer unenforceable.

We are not talking about virginity... the constitution doesn't just cease to exist once violated.
__________________
-- CAUTION: Not Politically Correct --
 
Reply With Quote
  #55 (permalink)  
Old 02-25-2013, 04:57 AM
ScriptMan's Avatar
Super Moderator
 
Join Date: 02-10-07
Location: Central Kentucky
Posts: 13,127
iTrader: 4 / 100%
Rob, I fully agree with that. I am also fairly sure that neither of us are Obamanites.

I just want the record to reflect the facts without distortion so as not to undermine the credibility of those who express negative views. Or said another way break the other fellas stick before he can use it.
__________________
I do not put ads or pop-ups in my posts and I have no control of what shows there. I do not endorse any product displayed in my post.
Scriptman's Playhouse || Ramblings from an old man
 
Reply With Quote
  #56 (permalink)  
Old 02-25-2013, 08:59 PM
robjones's Avatar
v7n Mentor
Latest Blog:
None

 
Join Date: 09-15-09
Location: Texas
Posts: 9,680
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Didnt mean to sound like I was arguing... that clarification was for the peanut gallery.
__________________
-- CAUTION: Not Politically Correct --
 
Reply With Quote
  #57 (permalink)  
Old 02-26-2013, 08:46 AM
Breeze Wood's Avatar
Contributing Member
Latest Blog:
None

 
Join Date: 04-06-11
Location: USA
Posts: 958
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Quote:
Originally Posted by ScriptMan View Post
Just a unverified snigglet that I just saw on the Discovery Channel. Eisenhower used the 101st Airborne to ensure domestic tranquility and see the it that the "Little Rock Nine" were enrolled in the university. I think that was 1957. The Arkansas Guard stood down and allowed it to happen.

Now admittedly there was no hostile action but the potential was there for it to happen. I doubt their guns were loaded with blanks.

The Arkansas Guard stood down and allowed it to happen.


Quote:
Article. II. Section. 2.

The President shall be Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the Militia of the several States, when called into the actual Service of the United States; he may require the Opinion, in writing, of the principal Officer in each of the executive Departments, upon any Subject relating to the Duties of their respective Offices, and he shall have Power to grant Reprieves and Pardons for Offences against the United States, except in Cases of Impeachment.

not sure why there might be an issue in regards to State's militia and their chain of command ? - for the US Constitution.

- we are aware, the Articles of Confederation were abolished ?
__________________
.

All's Well that Ends Well

.
 
Reply With Quote
  #58 (permalink)  
Old 03-02-2013, 07:23 PM
robjones's Avatar
v7n Mentor
Latest Blog:
None

 
Join Date: 09-15-09
Location: Texas
Posts: 9,680
iTrader: 0 / 0%
The articles of confederation did not establish the Posse Comitatus Act. The US Congress did. It is still the law, even if not on Obama's favorites list, and he is still subject to it.
__________________
-- CAUTION: Not Politically Correct --
 
Reply With Quote
  #59 (permalink)  
Old 03-03-2013, 05:19 PM
Breeze Wood's Avatar
Contributing Member
Latest Blog:
None

 
Join Date: 04-06-11
Location: USA
Posts: 958
iTrader: 0 / 0%
as previously noted the Administration has upheld both the Constitution and all applicable laws ...

....


Perhaps in the same vein against gov't encroachment is the case of U.S. Army private Bradly Manning.


Quote:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-21610811

"I felt I accomplished something that would allow me to have a clear conscience," said Manning, who spoke under oath for more than an hour.
............

"The most alarming aspect of the video to me was the seemingly delightful bloodlust the aerial weapons team happened to have," he said, comparing the troops to children "torturing ants with a magnifying glass".

likewise believing in civil disobedience when warranted -
__________________
.

All's Well that Ends Well

.
 
Reply With Quote
  #60 (permalink)  
Old 03-03-2013, 05:34 PM
Zap's Avatar
Zap Zap is offline
Super Moderator
Latest Blog:
None

 
Join Date: 01-15-06
Posts: 13,751
iTrader: 5 / 100%
Quote:
Originally Posted by Breeze Wood View Post
as previously noted the Administration has upheld both the Constitution and all applicable laws.
That is a blatant lie.
The administration contravened the Constitution when the NDAA was signed.
The NDAA very clearly violates the 4th, 5th and 6th amendments.

While you are entitled to your own opinion, you are not entitled to your own facts.
 
Reply With Quote
Go Back   Webmaster Forum > The Webmaster Forums > Forum Lobby > Controversial Social Issues

Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Flying options WildRose Forum Lobby 5 04-18-2011 01:22 PM
what's the term for helicopters/chopper's port? turf Forum Lobby 2 05-31-2010 12:14 PM
At Least 8 Shot In Downtown High-Rise Franc Tireur Controversial Social Issues 0 11-06-2009 09:45 AM


V7N Network
Get exposure! V7N I Love Photography V7N SEO Blog V7N Directory


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 06:45 PM.
Powered by vBulletin
Copyright 2000-2014 Jelsoft Enterprises Limited.
Copyright © 2003 - 2014 Escalate Media




Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.6.0 RC 2 ©2011, Crawlability, Inc.