The Other McCain

"One should either write ruthlessly what one believes to be the truth, or else shut up." — Arthur Koestler

Open Letter To Senators Warner & Webb

Posted on | January 5, 2012 | 22 Comments

by Smitty

Gentlemen,

The news of the President appointing Richard Cordray and three NLRB names without hearings should dismay anyone who has sworn an oath to defend the U.S. Constitution. The Cordray appointment opens the door to large scale mortgage re-financing. This sounds far-fetched, but we are in an election year, and look at the disinterest in legality, form, and tradition expressed by these appointments themselves.

In these appointments, as in recent adventurism in Libya, the President has revealed that the separation of powers, a crucial component of the exceptional form of government we have enjoyed in the U.S., is crumbling. Should he win re-election, one might not unreasonably expect the 22nd Amendment to join the 10th in the trash bin. And the reason for the impunity is that the Democrats control the Senate, guarding his rear, and rendering the Republicans in the house toothless to do the correct thing, which would be to impeach President Obama.

Coming to the point, then, one wonders if there are a dozen or so Senators who are Democrats and who retain sufficient conscience and honor to quit the Democrats and caucus with the Republicans. The knowledge that the Worst Majority Leader in History, Senator Reid, is running interference for him allows for the President to run amok. Gather the various independent, retiring, and American Senators, leave the Democrat caucus, and restore a semblance of separation of powers.

Maybe with the Republicans in the majority, we could also get a budget.

Thank you for your consideration,

C. Smith

Alexandria, VA

Update: linked by Fausta and Daily Pundit, for whose demise as a result of my blogging I absolve myself of culpability. It was your browser, man. You may have named the Blogosphere, but I wrote OediPOTUS Wrecks. Mwahahaha.

Bookmark and Share

Comments

  • http://twitter.com/richard_mcenroe richard mcenroe

    Scott Brown supported Obama’s action

  • Pingback: Come On, Smitty, You’re Killing Me! | Daily Pundit

  • http://thecampofthesaints.org Bob Belvedere

    Over at Volokh, John Elwood makes a convincing case that Obama’s appointments in this case are Constitutional.

    http://volokh.com/2012/01/04/recess-appointment-of-richard-cordray-despite-pro-forma-sessions/

    Such a controversial appointment of Cordray, however, is certainly a shameful move.  But, hey, BHO has no damn shame.

    PS: Damn Scott Brown all to Hell.

  • http://twitter.com/ilovegrover Thane_Eichenauer

    “do the correct thing, which would be to impeach President Obama”

    So rather that present an impeachment in the House of Represenatives that presumably would be defeated in the Senate the best alternative is to do nothing at all until November. To me that sounds like a little tune called defeatism.

    http://soundcloud.com/mike-details-detelj/defeatism-prod-by-tictax

  • Pathfinder’s wife

    Let’s be honest with ourselves: most of the Republicans want the same end results as the Democrats.  We have no representation for the people anymore; there are no Democrats and only a few Republicans who even pay lip service to their oaths today.

  • http://thepagantemple.blogspot.com/ ThePaganTemple

    Do nothing until November, and then in a couple of months, if he does somehow manage to win re-election, then impeach his ass when it hopefully won’t be defeated in the Senate. Think of how much fun that would be.

  • Anonymous

    Interesting move by Obama. Instead of doing what most Democratic presidents do — whine about “Republican obstructionism” of their appointments — he’s taking the fight to them. Hey, it may work in his favor.

    The technical issue, of course, is whether or not the Senate is actually in recess.  Apparently they’ve taken up the custom in recent years (before Obama, at least back into the Bush administration) of leaving a couple of unlucky Senators in DC over breaks to bang the gavel every three days for the express purpose of blocking “recess appointments.” If there’s a suit, SCOTUS will have to decide if that’s sufficient to constitute being in real session, or if it’s an unconstitutional fraud.

    There’s every chance that Obama would lose on that question. But I’m not sure that the next Republican president (if there ever is one again) will like the precedent.

  • http://twitter.com/ilovegrover Thane_Eichenauer

    Do nothing?

    Have you heard the line “All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing.”

  • Finrod Felagund

    Yet another case where Democrats fail to comprehend the old saying ‘good for the goose, good for the gander’.

    They started filibustering court nominees regularly, not understanding that it could be used against them.  They started filibustering bills regularly, not understanding it could be used against them.  They started keeping the Senate in session to keep out recess appointments, not understanding that it could be used against them.  And if this precedent is allowed to stand, it’ll get used against them by the next Republican President.

  • http://thepagantemple.blogspot.com/ ThePaganTemple

    All right, calm down. What good do you think it would do to try that now? You said yourself it wouldn’t pass in the Senate. Those kinds of things take a lot of time, and cost a lot of money. All we’d do is piss people off who would think we’re just doing it because we’re afraid we can’t beat him in the election. Besides, what are we going to impeach him for? It takes time to gather that kind of evidence. By the time we got the evidence together we need, it would probably be past the election anyway.

    Take a deep breath or a few of them, and chill.

  • Physics Geek

    “The technical issue, of course, is whether or not the Senate is actually in recess.”

    Umm, Doesn’t Article V, Section 1 state that one house of Congress must consent for the other house to be in extended recess for more than 3 days? I’m fairly certain that the GOP leadership in the House did NOT consent, which means that the Senate is NOT in recess, technically or otherwise.

  • Ccoffer

    ” Instead of doing what most Democratic presidents do — whine about
    “Republican obstructionism” of their appointments — he’s taking the
    fight to them.”

    My, how stupid.
     Republicans don’t control the Senate. They can’t stop anything from happening there. Brakabama is wiping his bony little ass with the Constitution and you’re applauding him. At least we know how little you think of your country.

  • Anonymous

    Chuck,

    There’s no need to go out of your way to look like a dumbass. I don’t support the existence of the agency in question, or Obama’s particular appointee to head that agency, or his decision to pull this stunt, as you well know. It has nothing to do with “how little I think of my country” (I think a hell of a lot more of it than you do).

    But I understand the purpose behind the stunt. As a political tactic, “fuck the Republicans, I’m doing this” is a stronger play than “poor me, those mean old Republicans won’t let me do this.” He’s going on the strategic offensive.

    As you also know quite well, Senate minorities are quite capable of tying presidential appointments up indefinitely.

  • http://thecampofthesaints.org Bob Belvedere

    Huh?

  • Anonymous

    Yes, you’re correct, the Senate is not technically in recess (it’s in ACTUAL recess — it’s taking an extended break in which no business is being done; the gavel is being smacked on the podium every third day, which is the “technical” part).

    Which is why I said that Obama will quite likely lose if this goes to court.

  • Pingback: R.S. McCain on the Cordray recess appointment: Open Letter To Senators Warner & Webb « The Rhetorican

  • http://thepagantemple.blogspot.com/ ThePaganTemple

    Don’t mind Chuckie, he probably just woke up on the wrong side of the bed this morning from hearing Democrat feminists little aborted  fetuses wailing through the night from somewhere under it.

  • Pingback: Thursday Roundup 1/5/12 Obama Coronation Edition | Katy Pundit

  • http://profiles.google.com/icebergwtq William Quick

    They started filibustering court nominees regularly, not understanding
    that it could be used against them.  They started filibustering bills
    regularly, not understanding it could be used against them.  They
    started keeping the Senate in session to keep out recess appointments,
    not understanding that it could be used against them.  And if this
    precedent is allowed to stand, it’ll get used against them by the next
    Republican President.

    They know what they’re doing.  They count on the MSM to cover up their hypocrisy, and to excoriate the GOP whenever it tries to do the same things the Dems are doing.  So far, the strategy seems to be pretty effective.

  • Pingback: Fausta's Blog » Blog Archive » Recess appointments while Congress is not in recess

  • http://profiles.yahoo.com/u/EU5DQWQTTHTPO4A4ZYSL3AAV2U Adjoran

    The statute specifically says the director takes over after confirmation by the Senate.  Hard to find a recess appointment legal in there.

  • Pingback: Recess appointments while Congress is not in recess | FavStocks