W Flips off Congress Again

[mburbank]

It's only the friggin abassador to Belgium, but Withdrew this nomination because the guy didn't have the votes. Even more so than Bolton, who might agruably have gotten the votes on the floor if not in committee, this seems like an effort to say 'fuck you' to congress. This is why I hate it when he talks about Bipartisanship. I mean, he an do what he wants (and he does) but why does he insist on calling 'doing everything my way' cooperation? The word he's looking for is capitulation.

WASHINGTON (AP) -- President Bush named Republican fundraiser Sam Fox as U.S. ambassador to Belgium on Wednesday, using a maneuver that allowed him to bypass Congress where Democrats had derailed Fox's nomination.
Democrats had denounced Fox for his 2004 donation to the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth. The group's TV ads, which claimed that Sen. John Kerry exaggerated his military record in Vietnam, were viewed as a major factor in the Massachusetts Democrat's losing the election.
Recognizing Fox did not have the votes to obtain Senate confirmation, Bush withdrew the nomination last month. On Wednesday, with Congress out of town for a spring break, the president used his power to make recess appointments to put Fox in the job without Senate confirmation.
This means Fox can remain ambassador until the end of the next session of Congress, effectively through the end of the Bush presidency.

[Preechr]

So one's right to free speech is suspended if it's expressed in a way that pisses John Kerry off? This is another purely political appointment that is being criticized for it's political nature, yet the only reason for Kerry's blocking of his appointment is petty political score-settling. According to the logic of your template, Kerry should resign as your Senator.

[KevinTheOmnivore]

It's a political appointment, yes, but it was done so under the radar to deliberately snub Congress.

I agree with Max. I hated the Bolton appointment (although I've soured on the UN, so maybe I was wrong), and I think this stinks. It's not that the President can't do it, but it just plays out like a bribe pay off and an fu to The Hill.

p.s.-- it clearly didn't just piss off John Kerry, but what bugs me is that Lieberman enabled this appointment, cuz Fox is a buddy.

[Preechr]

Reagan had almost 300 recess appointments to his name, and every other president back to JFK had over a hundred...

[mburbank]

And almost every one of them is an abuse of authority. A smaller portion are deliberate insults.

Fox's right to free speech AND Kerry's right to be pissed off are not in question. Nor is the 'right' of the President to appoint a guy who he had to withdraw as a nominee because he was never going to get the job on votes, of which Kerry has, at last count, one.

W (and all preidents) have the legal authority to do all sorts of things. Which of those things they choose to do, how often they do them, how baldly and how ridiculously they lie before during and after define them.

I've yet to live through a president I liked. Some of them I like a whole lot less than others. And then there's W. I believe my extreme dislike of W and his Posse is reasonable, arrived at after thought and an opinion shared by many distinuished scholars as well as bloviats like myself. Presidencies, like Autism, are a spectrum disorder. On one end You got your Presidents that have a little trouble making eye contact and like baseball statistics too much, and and on the other you got your yowling, biting, drooling, plate spinning, moaning, beeping presidents. Guess where I think W. is on that spetrum?

[Preechr]

I'm guessing the side that is the devil?

[Preechr]

Is there any room in there, btw, for checks and balances the president might have on the power of Congress, or do you figure it only goes one way?

[mburbank]

The side of the really autistic devil.

And his side of the balance is making the appointment. He can make appointment after apointment he knows won't go through and take the gamble that the constant rejection of his appointments makes the congress look worse than it makes him look.

OR he can appoint people he honestly thinks might be qualified and challenge congress to defy him.

He can also make recess apointments. He can do it to fill a position that desperately needs filling and as executive he feels filling the position is more important than confressional oversite. That's a hard case to make when you're appointing the ambassador to Belgium.

Or, legally, he can abuse his authority and make a recess appointement as a way of saying 'fuck you'. He is totally allowed to do that under current law. But when the opposition party or congress points out this this is the action of an asshole who cares more about saying fuck you than acknowledging the oversight role of congress, the President has no choice but to eat it, or make a convincing case. W has a big problem of wanting to say fuck you and have everybody treat it like he kissed a baby. Legally he can, and does, go right to the wall (and argubaly over and under it as well) with his authority to say "I'm the decider, that's why." But I would say his loss of congress and his lousy approval numbers that people are tired of it. It doesn't look as if he cares. Sounds like the Pres has a lot of power in the checks and balances game.

Oh, and Vetos. He has those. Not on appointment rejections, but on all the stuff congress decides. He checks their decisions, congress checks his. I swear to the sweet baby Jesus, the only part of my public school educumation that was any good was the basic civics portion of social studies, and they seem to have replaced it with Kwanza Appreciattion and Health ed classes taugfht by gym teachers.

[Preechr]

So was it also abuse of the checks and balances system when the Dems were threatening to filibuster almost every single appointment suggested by Bush for four years?

[mburbank]

Yes.

It was also an abuse of power to threaten to do away with the fillibuster entirely.

These are abusive folks. They should be called on it every time, loudly and with trumped up outrage.

[Preechr]

Alright, NOW we're on the same page... :D

[kahljorn]

http://www.netscape.com/viewstory/2007/04/10/impeachments-back-in-the-news/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.populistamerica.com%2Fimpeac hments_back_in_the_news&frame=true

that's a very poorly written story in my opinion but it's the first time ive ever heard mention of president bush being impeached in the news

[Courage the Cowardly Dog]

I'd like Alan Keyes to take it if he doesn't try to run for Republican Pres. nominee again he HAS had diplomatic experience and I always liked his MSNBC show.