Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
You fit right in with him. No one ever said he'd hold any kind of "competiton" or anything like that. Nice try to deflect from his promises to be the most open administration and totally change Washington. Has he fulfilled any of the promises you list? NO! What happened to his promise of posting everything in the internet so the American people could see just what he and his administration were doing? Lie, after lie, after lie after broken promise yet you still support him. Nov. 2012 can't come soon enough to get rid of this abomination.
I agree as you do. If those fools who voted for him the first time around, bought all the crap he had to say, then it is only fitting that they will still believe in him. Thank Goodness for people as us who knew better from the start, he was not fooling me at all, never bought into the media hype about him. Lie Lie and more Lies, broken promises, a bully at that, spend spend and spend, by-partisian my --- health-care bill, worse housing situation ever, unemployment still up, businesses still shutting down, yeah, this is some great Change isn't it. Could not get a more corrupt Administration if this were a movie, only thing, no script, we are stuck with the real deal.
What's the big deal? Recess appointments are common practices used by both repub and dem presidents. In two terms, Bush made 171 recess appointments - one was a judge filibustered by the dems.
It's the topic the lies about being transparent
Don't you care?
Only fools believe that the reason this appointment couldn't be accepted by the Senate. When you have that many people in your majority and all it takes here is a majority, it seems to me that he couldn't get enough Dems to go along with this appointment.
Hey that was a great job of trying to deflect the conversation to Cheney and Reagan. I don't think it worked, though.
The repubs were threatening to filibuster. They've been doing this all year long particularly in respect to blocking debates on President Obama's nominees. Additionally, they've been placing holds on the nominees. What goes around, comes around. The repubs don't like this nomination, dems didn't like John Bolton (I want to dissolve the United Nations) recess appointed as ambassador to the U.N.
As far as argument deflection, I used the Cheney incident as a "true" example of a back room deal. President Obama has been very open about his reasons for the appointment. If you have a cite that indicates Obama held secret meetings about the appointment, please post.
Clip:
Until a few weeks ago, 120 Obama nominations were pending in the Senate, in most cases because Republicans had placed anonymous “holds” on them--that is, blocking debate on the nominations by threatening to filibuster them. ... But half still remain unconfirmed. And while Democrats were known to use anonymous holds during the Bush Administration, investigative reports from National Public Radio suggests the Democrats never took the practice to these extremes.*
The holds are in keeping with the rules of the Senate, as currently written; Republicans are technically within their rights to use them. But having poisoned the nomination process, are they really surprised--and can they really blame--the Democrats for responding in kind? “If you’re going to push the rules as far as they can go,” my colleague Jonathan Chait notes, “you can hardly complain when the other party does the same thing.” Poisoning The Nomination Process | The New Republic
Why is this considered a back room deal? A back room deal is when we don't know the detail of why a decision has been made. President Obama made it very clear the repubs are holding up approving the nominee for political reasons. An example of a back room deal was Cheney's secret meetings with the oil and gas companies.
BTW - Saint Ronnie is the king of recess appointments with 273.
And, of course, you believe Obama's explanation no questions asked. The real facts are these. The necessary paperwork for moving his nomination to the appropriate committee had not been completed yet. So any hold up to this point was on the part of the administration for not doing the necessary preliminaries to get the nominee to a committee hearing. And so the Dems had not (could not) schedule hearings until that paper work was completed. So there was nothing for the Republicans to hold up. So more lies, spin and smoke and mirrors from Obama. But apparently that works on people like yourself.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
the lies about being transparent
