Publicado: 01-04-2012 08:04 PM
The origin of this three day period is Article I, Section 5 of the Constitution, which states: “Neither House, during the Session of Congress, shall, without the Consent of the other, adjourn for more than three days.”
In other words, the president can only recess appoint when the Senate has adjourned for more than three days, and the Senate cannot adjourn for more than three days without the consent of the House. Speaker John Boehner has properly withheld that consent to prevent Obama from installing radical appointees into key positions.
There is recent precedent for this action and for its legitimacy. In fact, then-Obama Solicitor General Elena Kagan wrote to the Supreme Court on April 26, 2010: “Although a President may fill such vacancies through the use of his recess appointment power … the Senate may act to foreclose this option by declining to recess for more than two or three days at a time over a lengthy period. For example, the Senate did not recess intrasession for more than three days at a time for over a year beginning in late 2007.”
Obama’s attempt to “recess appoint” Richard Cordray while the Senate is in pro forma session is especially galling in light of the history of the new Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) and the broad powers that Cordray – if Obama’s sleight of hand is permitted by the courts – will wield over the United States economy.
The CFPB has the power to interfere with every consumer financial transaction in the economy. It is housed in the Federal Reserve and funded out of Fed operations, not congressional appropriations, avoiding effective congressional oversight.
All power is vested in one individual – now, presumably Cordray – with no board or commission. None of this was part of Elizabeth Warren’s original design, which included a five-member commission that was funded and overseen by Congress. Senate Republicans have correctly called for reforms to make the new agency accountable before confirming a nominee and allowing it to begin writing rules that could have a major negative impact on the economy.
Obama doesn’t care. He’s making is up as he goes along. What a difference four years makes.
Phil Kerpenis vice president for policy at Americans for Prosperity and author of Democracy Denied: How Obama is Ignoring You and Bypassing Congress to Radically Transform America – and How to Stop Him.
Publicado: 01-05-2012 02:29 PM
President Barack Obama's Complete List of Historic Firsts
Directorblue ^ | January 4, 2012 | Doug Ross
Yes, he's historic, alright.
• First President to Preside Over a Cut to the Credit Rating of the United States Government
• First President to Violate the War Powers Act
• First President to Orchestrate the Sale of Murder Weapons to Mexican Drug Cartels
• First President to issue an unlawful "recess-appointment" while the U.S. Senate remained in session (against the advice of his own Justice Department).
• First President to be Held in Contempt of Court for Illegally Obstructing Oil Drilling in the Gulf of Mexico
• First President to Defy a Federal Judge's Court Order to Cease Implementing the 'Health Care Reform' Law
• First President to halt deportations of illegal aliens and grant them work permits, a form of stealth amnesty roughly equivalent to "The DREAM Act", which could not pass Congress
• First President to Require All Americans to Purchase a Product From a Third Party
• First President to Spend a Trillion Dollars on 'Shovel-Ready' Jobs -- and Later Admit There Was No Such Thing as Shovel-Ready Jobs
• First President to sue states for requiring valid IDs to vote, even though the same administration requires valid IDs to travel by air
• First President to Abrogate Bankruptcy Law to Turn Over Control of Companies to His Union Supporters
• First President to Bypass Congress and Implement the DREAM Act Through Executive Fiat
• First President to Threaten Insurance Companies After They Publicly Spoke out on How Obamacare Helped Cause their Rate Increases
• First President to Threaten an Auto Company (Ford) After It Publicly Mocked Bailouts of GM and Chrysler
• First President to "Order a Secret Amnesty Program that Stopped the Deportations of Illegal Immigrants Across the U.S., Including Those With Criminal Convictions"
• First President to Demand a Company Hand Over $20 Billion to One of His Political Appointees
• First President to Terminate America's Ability to Put a Man into Space.
• First President to Encourage Racial Discrimination and Intimidation at Polling Places
• First President to Have a Law Signed By an 'Auto-pen' Without Being "Present"
• First President to Arbitrarily Declare an Existing Law Unconstitutional and Refuse to Enforce It
• First President to Tell a Major Manufacturing Company In Which State They Are Allowed to Locate a Factory
• First President to refuse to comply with a House Oversight Committee subpoena.
• First President to File Lawsuits Against the States He Swore an Oath to Protect (AZ, WI, OH, IN, etc.)
• First President to Withdraw an Existing Coal Permit That Had Been Properly Issued Years Ago
• First President to Fire an Inspector General of Americorps for Catching One of His Friends in a Corruption Case
• First President to Propose an Executive Order Demanding Companies Disclose Their Political Contributions to Bid on Government Contracts
• First President to allow Mexican police to conduct law enforcement activities on American soil
• First President to Golf 90 or More Times in His First Three Years in Office
But remember: he will not rest until all Americans have jobs, affordable homes, green-energy vehicles, and the environment is repaired, etc., etc., etc
Publicado: 01-06-2012 08:54 PM
Rubio in letter to Obama: You are turning America into a ‘deadbeat nation’
by Jason Mattera
Contacted by HUMAN EVENTS, the White House press office did not have a response, but requested questions in writing.
In a scathing letter sent to Barack Obama this morning, Senator Marco Rubio said that under the President’s first term in office, “more and more people have come to believe that America is becoming a deadbeat nation.”
Rubio went on to pledge that he would challenge any further increase in the debt ceiling, arguing that “we [Congress] need to make it routine to actually spend no more than we take in.” In the letter obtained by HUMAN EVENTS, the Florida Senator said that President Obama’s upcoming request to increase the debt ceiling by a whopping $1.2 trillion will cause the nation’s public debt to surpass the $16 trillion mark.
“I will oppose your request to continue borrowing and spending recklessly.”
President Obama is expected to request the new borrowing power from Congress once the Senate and House return from their holiday recess.
The president must notify Congress when the debt closes within $100 billion of the ceiling, according to the Budget Control Act passed in August. This triggers for Congress their only available option to block an increase, in this case $1.2 trillion, by passing legislation. However, even if the House and Senate do that, the president can still veto their objections. In short, there is very little Republicans can do in a Democratic-controlled Senate to block an increase.
If President Obama led the charge to reduce the country’s unsustainable debt in mid 2011 rather than punt the enterprise to a “Super Committee,” asserted Rubio, we’d already be on a pathway toward economic growth and prosperity. “Unfortunately, the first three years of your presidency have been a profile in leadership failure.”
The letter concludes: “America deserves leaders who will stand front and center, level with the American people about our challenges and offer real solutions to solve them. Instead of simply asking for another debt ceiling increase, I urge you to come forward with a real plan to tackle our debt in 2012.”
This is the latest salvo in the debt ceiling debate in Washington.
The Florida Republican’s warning letter to Obama can be read in its entirety below.
01-06-2012 08:55 PM - editado 01-06-2012 08:56 PM
January 6, 2012
President Barack Obama
The White House
1600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW
Washington, D.C. 20500
Dear Mr. President:
Any day now, news reports suggest you will ask Congress to approve yet another increase in the debt ceiling. The expected request is another $1.2 trillion, adding to a three year debt binge that has totaled $4.5 trillion on your watch and that has enabled our overall debt to surpass $15 trillion. Your latest request will push the federal debt limit well above $16 trillion.
This pending request will be the sixth time during your Presidency that Congress is being asked to keep allowing government and spending to grow at rates that are unsustainable. In other words, you have made it a routine part of your job to ask for more room to spend without any plan to reduce our debt.
Instead of making debt ceiling increases a routine Washington exercise, we need to make it routine to actually spend no more than we take in. Until then, I will oppose your request to continue borrowing and spending recklessly.
As I wrote in The Wall Street Journal in March 2011, I will oppose a debt ceiling increase unless such an authorization is accompanied by a real plan to tackle our debt. Ideally, such a plan would feature both pro-growth elements and spending restraints, including fundamental tax reform, regulatory reform, meaningful cuts to discretionary spending, a balanced-budget amendment, and reforms to save Social Security and Medicare.
If we had done this in mid-2011 when we last debated the debt ceiling, we could have set America on a path to economic growth and prosperity. This would have led to more jobs and, in turn, to more duly employed taxpayers generating more growth-driven revenue to help us pay down our debt. Instead, you failed to lead, punted the tough decisions and, in doing so, our credit rating was downgraded for the first time in our history. It's a tragic reality but, on your watch, more and more people have come to believe that America is becoming a deadbeat nation inevitably heading toward a European-sstyle debt crisis.
When you served in the Senate in 2006, you called raising the debt limit "a sign of leadership failure." Using your own standard, this request will mark your sixth "sign of leadership failure" on the debt ceiling issue alone. Throughout our history, Americans have revered courageous leaders and celebrated them as profiles in courage. Unfortunately, the first three years of your presidency have been a profile in leadership failure. While you may choose to run your reelection campaign against a "Do-Nothing Congress," your insistence on doing nothing to meaningfully tackle our debt poses a direct threat to America's exceptional character and is leading us towards a diminished future.
America deserves leaders who will stand front and center, level with the American people about our challenges and offer real solutions to solve them. Instead of simply asking for another debt ceiling increase, I urge you to come forward with a real plan to tackle our debt in 2012.
United States Senator
Publicado: 01-07-2012 09:53 AM
OBAMA UNEMPLOYMENT MAGIC TRICK: Indefinitely Detain 4 Million People from Workforce
Townhall.com ^ | January 7, 2012 | John Ransom
Although there’s little doubt that job creation is speeding up in the private sector, unemployment is not going down as widely touted by the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS). In fact, it’s likely unchanged since the beginning of the recession because the government is deliberately undercounting the workforce to make unemployment appear to go down.
Missing in the latest labor report are at least 1.2 million job seekers who have been added to the civilian population over the last year but not to the work force, thereby artificially deflating the unemployment rate.
Chart by Zero Hedge:
BLS is undercounting the workforce by lowering the Labor Force Participations rates
They are missing in part because the BLS no longer counts people who have been unemployed for so long that they have stopped looking for work. Since 1994 the BLS has discontinued the practice of counting the “long-term discouraged workers” from the workforce. If a worker stops looking for work after a period of time, they are no longer counted in the workforce. That means that government has created a system whereby the longer a jobs recession continues, the less reliable the unemployment numbers become- to the advantage of the government.
Publicado: 01-07-2012 09:53 AM
In December of 2010 there were just shy of 239 million workers in the civilian pool available to the work force. In the last year, that number has risen by 1.6 million to 240.5 million people. At the same time, the officially-counted workforce as used by the BLS has risen by only 274,000 workers. At a participation rate of 64 percent, that number should be closer to 1.1 million workers. Indeed, over the last year, the participation rate has also dropped from 64.3 percent to 64 percent. In other words, fewer people from the available population are counted as available to the workforce, thereby decreasing unemployment numbers.
In making an apples-to-apples comparison with a year ago, the country should have about 1.2 million more workers in the workforce than the BLS currently calculates. If one accounts for those extra workers, top line unemployment is at 9 percent. But that’s not the end of the deception.
Since the beginning of the recession labor participation rates have gone down from an average of 65.8 percent since 1980 as calculated by Zero Hedge to 64 percent, a rate not seen since the early 1980s. Indeed the persistency of this jobs recession is shown in the precipitous decline in the labor participation rates regardless of where the official unemployment rate has stood.
Just using the average participation rate of 65.8 percent since 1980 supplied by Zero Hedge, there are 4.4 million workers missing from the work force. Zero Hedge predicts that if the BLS keeps dropping the workforce number at the current rate, unemployment will hit zero just prior to the general election no matter how many jobs Obama “saves”.
It won't surprise anyone that as of December, the real implied unemployment rate was 11.4% - basically where it has been ever since 2009 - and at 2.9% delta to reported, represents the widest divergence to reported data since the early 1980s. And because we know this will be the next question, extending this lunacy, America will officially have no unemployed, when the Labor Force Participation rate hits 58.5%, which should be just before the presidential election.
If you can give Obama a Nobel Peace Prize for a non-existent peace, you should also consider an Oscar award for a movie yet to made.
If there were a remake of Dr. Strangelove today, there’d be no better subject than the Obama administration’s deconstructionist assault on truth. The sad thing is that so many people are willing accomplices in that assault.
For this administration, lying is a state of mind; supplying guns to drug traffickers is a noble act; killing healthcare is “saving” healthcare; ignoring entitlement reform is “preserving” entitlements; ignoring laws on immigration, recess appointments, detention of Americans, wiretaps, declarations of war, are all the constitutional prerogatives of the great constitutional law-giver and professor-in-chief, Dr. Strangelove or; How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love Obama.
It would be hilarious, except it’s not a Hollywood movie.
Obama’s made it the truth.
Or whatever truth means now.
Publicado: 01-15-2012 09:47 PM
CANADA, FRUSTRADA CON OBAMA, OFRECE SU PETROLEO A CHINA
Canadian Prime Minister, Frustrated with Obama’s Dithering, Will Travel to China to Seek Asian Markets for Their Oil
January 15 2012 -
by Doug Brady
In a post last month, I noted that Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper’s patience with Obama’s dithering over the Keystone Pipeline in order to pander to the rainbow and unicorn crowd that forms his political base wouldn’t last forever. Harper, I wrote, fully understands what motivates Obama, and it’s not sound energy policy:
Harper looks at the Obama Administration and understands that they have no intention of ever increasing the supply of proven energy sources. With Obama and the far Left, of course, attempting to discern a logical reason for what amounts to economic suicide is a fool’s errand. It’s not like the pipeline hasn’t been “studied” for years, so Obama’s excuse that more time is needed is ludicrous. The other objection, as far as I can tell, is that many Lefties think that the oil sands shouldn’t be developed at all, as if stopping the Keystone Pipeline would achieve that result. It won’t, regardless of what Obama’s Hollywood brain trust says.
The fact is that output from the Canadian Oil Sands will triple in the next 25 years. The only question is who will benefit from its development: Canada and the U.S. — or Canada and China? For any president other than the current one, this would be nothing more than a rhetorical question.
At the time there were some on the left which claimed Harper’s threat to abandon the Keystone project and sell Canadian oil to China was just political posturing or something. I didn’t think so then, and I certainly don’t think so now, as the Canadian Government recently announced the Prime Minister will be visiting China next month with the expressed purpose of selling oil to China via a new plan which involves the construcion of a pipeline to link the rich oil fields of Northern Alberta to British Columbia for shipment to China, via Jim Fox:
Canada is now looking to Asian countries to market its abundance of oil, natural gas and minerals as plans to build the proposed Keystone XL pipeline have stalled with the U.S. administration.
Prime Minister Stephen Harper will travel to China next month to discuss selling Canada’s bounty to the rapidly growing nation.
The preferred initial plan was to build the $7 billion Keystone pipeline to deliver Alberta’s oilsands crude to refineries in Texas on the Gulf of Mexico.
Harper reasoned that the U.S. government would prefer to deal with a friendly neighbor to help meet its energy needs while creating thousands of jobs.
With widespread opposition by U.S. environmentalists, the Obama administration has delayed its decision on whether to approve the project proposed by energy giant TransCanada Pipelines.
The new plan would market to China and Asian countries through the proposed Northern Gateway pipeline that would transport Alberta’s oil and natural gas to British Columbia for shipment by tankers.
Fantastic. With gasoline up 50 cents per gallon in the past year and expected to rise to $4.50 per gallon this summer, Obama’s message to our friend and neighbor Canada is “we don’t need your stinkin’ oil”. This, apparently, passes for energy policy in the Age of Obama.
Publicado: 01-15-2012 11:33 PM
Solyndra: Just The Tip Of The Iceberg
America's Conservative News ^ | 01/15/2012 | America's Conservative News
The $535 million loan to Solyndra Inc., issued by the U.S.
Solyndra is just the tip of the iceberg. According to a report from left-wing CBS News, the Obama Department of Energy handed over at least 6.5 billion in our hard-earned tax dollars to so-called "clean energy" companies that have already filed for bankruptcy or are in the process of going down the tubes. Watch the video for more details.
Publicado: 01-17-2012 07:36 PM
Gingrich: Obama “Most Effective Food Stamp President In History”
The number of those who use food stamps has jumped to 45,800,000 or nearly 15% of the nation’s population.
“I’ve said now for months, this is the most effective food stamp President in history. That sounds like it is an attack, it’s just a statement of fact. It’s just that his administration kills jobs. They are driving Americans onto food stamps. Most Americans would rather have a paycheck”
Newt Turns Racially Charged Question from Williams into Explanation of Conservatism
Rush Limbaugh.com ^ 1/17/2012 Rush Limbaugh
RUSH: From the debate last night, here's Frank Luntz. This is with Hannity after the debate last night.
LUNTZ: I've never seen it in a debate, a standing ovation in the middle of a debate. Remember, there's only five candidates up there so you would assume that only 20% would award them their support. Newt Gingrich got a standing ovation, and he did so fighting with your own Juan Williams over the whole welfare issue.
RUSH: Yeah, but Newt did something last night that he's not done before. Juan Williams asked the question, and Newt just answered it as though Juan Williams was a robot. He didn't say, "See, here we have another example of a distorted, biased media, you people trying to get us fighting with one another." He didn't waste any time going after Juan Williams; didn't accuse Juan Williams of ill motives; didn't even acknowledge Juan Williams had a motive, just answered the question. Juan Williams speaking, "You recently said black Americans should demand jobs, not food stamps. You also said that poor kids lack a strong work ethic and proposed having them work as janitors in their schools. Can't you see that this is viewed at a minimum as insulting to all Americans, but particularly to black Americans?"
GINGRICH: No. I don't see that. (applause) New York City pays their janitors an absurd amount of money because of the union. You could take one janitor and hire 30-some kids to work in the school for the price of one janitor, and those 30 kids would be a lot less likely to drop out. They would actually have money in their pocket. They'd learn to show up for work. They could do light janitorial duty. They could work in the cafeteria. They could work in the front office. They could work in the library. They'd be getting money, which is a good thing if you're poor. Only the elites despise earning money. (cheers and applause)
WILLIAMS: We saw some of this reaction during your visit to a black church in South Carolina. (booing) We saw some of this during your visit to a black church in South Carolina where a woman asked you why you referred to President Obama as "the food stamp president." It sounds as if you're seeking to belittle people. (booing.)
RUSH: Juan Williams got booed. Still, Newt didn't take the bait.
GINGRICH: The fact is that more people have been put on food stamps by Barack Obama than any president in American history. Now, I know among the politically correct you're not supposed to use facts that are uncomfortable. The area that ought to be I-73 was called by Barack Obama a corridor of shame because of unemployment. Has it improved in three years? No. They haven't build the road. They haven't helped the people. They haven't done anything. (cheers and applause) I believe every American of every background has been endowed by their creator with the right to pursue happiness, and if that makes liberals unhappy, I'm gonna continue to find ways to help poor people learn how to get a job, learn how to get a better job, and learn someday to own the job. (cheers and applause)