Good news from team Obama:
In a defiant display of executive power, President Barack Obama on Wednesday will buck GOP opposition and name Richard Cordray as the nation’s chief consumer watchdog even though the Senate contends the move is inappropriate, senior administration officials told The Associated Press
With a director in place, the new Consumer Financial Protection Bureau will be able to start overseeing the mortgage companies, payday lenders, debt collectors and other financial companies often blamed for practices that helped tank the economy.
The GOP is already freaking out, but any way you slice this, imho, it is a win for Democrats. First, it gets someone in the CFPB and working, which is good news for all Americans. The best politics is delivering for the American people- do the right thing, and often you will be rewarded. Second, it pushes a confrontation with the GOP, who will then have to explain why they are more interested in bickering over someone whose entire mission is to protect American consumers rather than creating jobs and helping the economy. Additionally, even if this is somehow reversed, it might possibly force the media to take notice of the GOP’s unprecedented attempts to block all Obama appointments. Again, I realize that is a big “if,” since they are all now focused on Rick Santorum’s sweater vests. And finally, it might, if only for a brief moment, shut up some of the critics who constantly complain that Obama never fights back. Bwahahaha. Just kidding.
Ok, so the last two aren’t very realistic. The first two are pretty worthwhile, though.
(via)
Ben H.
Obama never fights back. Until after the first caucus/primary of his own re-election campaign.
david mizner
Good move. This is a executive power move I can get behind.
For the millionth time, Americans don’t give a shit about process.
Dodd – Frank still sucks though.
Zifnab
This is actually good news for Mitt Romney. Now he can go on TV and talk about something other than the fact that he can’t break freezing temperature in the primaries.
Linda Featheringill
If the Obama team wants to consider the complaints of the Occupy movement in making decisions, that’s all right with me. And it would be good for the country, too. He doesn’t have to say that he’s trying to get in line with Occupy. Just do it. And I don’t care if it is only for the political gain. Hooray.
merrinc
It would be nice if the mainstream media would pull some clips out of their own goddamn libraries of the Republicans screaming ” UP OR DOWN VOTE” over and over and fucking over again when Bush was president.
Kane
Every politician who has the best interests of their constituency at heart should support Richard Cordray and the mission of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau.
An informed consumer makes wiser decisions. And consumers who make wiser decisions generally have better credit ratings and more purchasing power. That’s a good thing for consumers and the economy, and it’s something that politicians from both sides of the aisle should support.
And every law-abiding bank, credit union, financial institution and business that seeks to treat their customers fairly should support the CFPB so that the disreputable institutions and businesses can be forced to play by the same rules or be weeded out entirely.
comrade scott's agenda of rage
As for the last one, one of the worst firebaggers over at Teh Orange (prominent Wrecks List denizen, works a literally secret Facebook group to game the list, etc) graciously admitted that “she was wrong on this one”.
That sentiment is about far as that crowd will go. I’m sure later today it’ll be back to Hate Obama/Purity Troll 24/7 by the usual suspects.
John Cole
@Ben H.: Invalidating my fourth point in one. Well played.
Phil Perspective
@merrinc: Especially when Miss McConnell(and yes .. he’s as well .. just think Marcus Bachmann) .. whines about John Bolton .. which he did when the Democrats blocked that crackpot asshat from becoming UN ambassador
dogwood
Good timing by the White House. I suppose he could have done this a couple of weeks ago, but it would have flown under the radar. I see that Mr. Cordray will be with the POTUS in Ohio today. That’s nice.
Poopyman
Since the Senate is controlled by Democrats, does this mean that the Dem wimps are squealing, or is this “sloppy” reporting?
PeakVT
What I don’t get is why the Senate doesn’t adjourn so that Obama can exercise his AII.S3.C2 power and then fill the vacant positions without causing a ruckus. Can Reid not get the votes to adjourn? I believe that can’t be filibustered.
Villago Delenda Est
@Kane:
Informed consumers cut into corporate profits.
We can’t have that.
Elizabelle
Obama speaking now, in Shaker Heights, OH.
Kola Noscopy
Gosh, I wonder if this sudden aggressiveness as anything to do with the election season?
And why would anyone think this sudden aggressiveness would continue after November?
Obama seems to have “flip flopped” on his reluctance to use recess appointments aggressively, challenging the bullshit Repuke ploy of being always in recess, at long last after three years of accepting it as the status quo.
Flip flopper!
fasteddie9318
It is regrettable that President Obama has chosen to exercise his executive powers in a fashion that may accrue some benefit to the Moocher Class. If only he had thought to use his powers on behalf of those doing god’s work, for example by unilaterally overruling Dodd-Frank, or commanding his IRS to cease and desist its collection of crippling capital gains taxes, which can approach levels as high as a few thousand dollars for the powerless millionaires among us, while those fortunate enough to have no capital gains earnings are not forced to bear the burden of this onerous sanctioned theft. Ah, once Mitt has been elected, the scales of justice will again be balanced!
kay
@Kane:
He was a great AG for consumers. Great.
He’s also a really smart, agressive lawyer and a (personally) intimidating… presence, one on one, which can’t hurt, in that job:)
Villago Delenda Est
@merrinc:
Will never happen.
The vermin if the Village are paid the big bucks to NOT look at history for examples that make the Rethugs look like the hypocritical sacks of santorum that they are.
WaterGirl
Obama speaking on MSNBC. He is jazzed! At some point in the speech, he will announce Richard Cordray.
Edit: Obama just announced his appointment.
wobblybits
@Kola Noscopy: *sigh* okay I’l bite, what is the point of the comment? Should he not do the recess appointments?
david mizner
@Ben H.:
Could get ugly in his second term when he’s not running for anything. Maybe his inner liberal will come out. Just kidding. Maybe he’ll run for an illegal third terms, as per Van Jones’ fantasy.
kc
Good, I like it when Obama stands up to the got-damned Republicans. I, for one, will stop bitching about him for one whole day.
BBA
@Poopyman:
No it isn’t. As the past five years have taught us, the Republicans can control the Senate even when the Democrats have a majority.
wobblybits
@david mizner: wait, what?
JScott
Once the benefits of the ACA and CFPB hit the streets it’s going to be increasingly difficult for even a Republican administration to roll those programs back.
I imagine we all know otherwise well off folks who are relieved that they are able to keep carrying their seeking employment young adult children on their family health insurance. Example.
TooManyJens
I just sent an email to Mitch McConnell’s office consisting of “STFU, this wouldn’t have happened if you assholes did your jobs,” only in more polite language. “Arrogantly circumventing the American people,” my ass.
I’m gonna go gloat at Boehner, too. Good times!
Cris (without an H)
deleted
fasteddie9318
@BBA:
FTFY
kay
@WaterGirl:
Cordray endorsed Obama in Ohio, early, when most (well, all who pledged, actually) of the state Democrats went for Clinton. It was a risky move.
MattF
It would be nice to see the ‘running against Congress’ tactic in-real-life. And who knows, maybe this is it. I also agree that this is good stuff, regardless of the tactics or even the ultimate outcome.
Kola Noscopy
@wobblybits:
The point is that Obama will once again dance the dance to get elected, and then revert to center/right/republican lite type. Just because the agency has a figurehead at long last, doesn’t mean it will necessarily act aggressively or do anything at all.
The point is Obama has demonstrated that he cannot be trusted once in power.
JC
Good one, and three cheers for POTUS!
Kola Noscopy
@fasteddie9318:
Which would lead a rational person to question the benefit of having a “democratic” white house, senate, or house at all?
Catsy
Yes. More of this, please.
I don’t doubt that Team Obama figured out long before now that the Republicans have no intention of governing or doing anything but wage war against his administration and the American economy. But Until now the examples of them acting as if they know this have been few and far between.
This is huge. The Republican strategy of obstructionism and nihilism only works for as long as the risk (to them) of inaction is less than the risk of allowing a confirmation vote to happen. This has been the case as long as they could count on preventing recess appointments with these sham “pro forma” recesses.
If they can’t count on that, it presents them with a stark choice: allow a vote and take the risk of the nominee being confirmed, or do nothing and guarantee that the nominee will be appointed during the next recess and serve out the next two years.
TooManyJens
I am seriously enjoying this. The Republicans in Congress have clogged the plumbing for three years and now they’re crying foul when someone finally grabs a plunger.
ornerycurmudgeon
And finally, it might, if only for a brief moment, shut up some of the critics who constantly complain that Obama never fights back. Bwahahaha. Just kidding.
Good news, bad news, all news, any news … that invisible hippie must get punched, that’s the main thing.
That’s how we got into this state of affairs, what, stop now?
dmbeaster
Per TPM, Obama appears to have used the recess appointment when it is not clear that he has the power; i.e., during a time when the Senate is allegedly not in recess pursuant to pro forma gaveling of the sessions. He could have clearly done it yesterday under the Constitution, but apparently opted to do it today when a challenge is possible to the efficacy of the appointment. Speculation is that he welcomes the politics of such a fight, which is a good idea.
Not your usual accommodating Obama, and probably is a hint of more to come this election season. If true, I welcome it as it is essential to bring the fight.
J.W. Hamner
I guess I’ll give the requisite concern troll about how worried I am about the ever expanding power of the executive and how we wouldn’t like it if a Republican president was doing it blah blah blah… so now we can dismiss it.
fasteddie9318
@Kola Noscopy: Because there’s a difference between having batshit Republicans in the minority blocking everything the Democrats want to do, and having batshit Republicans in the majority actually doing all the things they want to do?
over_educated
@Kola Noscopy: @Kola Noscopy: So, what was the optimal course of action for Obama to take in this situation? Not to make the recess appointment? You kvetch that Obama doesn’t fight back and when he does you kvetch because he fights back?
Or was it to magically force the Republican Senate not to filibuster through a combination of personal magnetism and unicorn droppings?
I’m just trying to understand here.
J.A.F. Rusty Shackleford
@TooManyJens:
I’ve been debating whether I should fax Bachmann HQ and congratulate her on being a ONE PRIMARY CANDIDATE!
Elizabelle
CNN covering Walnuts endorsing Romney.
MSNBC doing a splitscreen.
Our household switching to C-Span, quick as can.
Elizabelle
@J.A.F. Rusty Shackleford:
Loved your suggestion that God pwned Bachmann.
Good riddance.
Catsy
@dmbeaster:
This is an important point to keep in mind when assessing the significance of this action.
This isn’t just about getting the CFPB functional. He could’ve done that yesterday and it would’ve been a one-off victory–a good one, but with no lasting implications.
This is about neutralizing a key weapon in the Republican arsenal, their use of the legally dodgy “pro forma” sessions to sabotage the democratic process. Once again, Obama is playing a long game.
Comrade Javamanphil
@TooManyJens: Appointing someone to head an agency that protects consumers (i.e. literally all Americans) by ignoring the objections of a minority of
millionaireslordssenators is circumventing the American people. McConnell finds math challenging.JGabriel
John Cole @ Top:
I think that’s why Obama waited till today to appoint Cordray to head the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau: To keep it from being news while the caucus was taking place, so it would be a secondary story while the caucus results were leading the headlines.
Don’t get me wrong, I think Obama wants people to know about the appointment, but he wants them to know it subconsciously, to just know that he’s still getting shit done in the background, while the GOP bickers in the foreground over which insanely right-wing nutjob to nominate as his opponent in the next election.
.
Catsy
@over_educated:
Don’t waste your time. Kola Noscopy is one of our resident anti-Obama trolls, and is not arguing in good faith.
Just add him to your pie filter; you won’t be missing anything of value.
JoshA
I think its apparent that Obama’s become more combative toward the GOP than he was previously. The man has a powerful belief in his own ability to persuade people to behave responsibly, but the GOP seems to have been obstructionist enough to make him question that viewpoint.
Marc
@ornerycurmudgeon:
Did you read the other comments in this thread? Notice that a dismissal of Obama came in the first comment, and one of our energetic trolls is in the process of clogging the thread up with “no credit for Obama ever” nonsense?
TooManyJens
@Comrade Javamanphil: They’ve been circumventing the American people who elected a Democratic Senate and President for three years. Cry me a river, Mitch McConnell.
Special Patrol Group
One can’t help but wonder how the current President’s recess appointments compare to other recent Presidents.
Oh, look:
http://motherjones.com/mojo/2012/01/chart-day-presidential-recess-appointments
Huh. Dutch Reagan had by far the most, followed by George Bush, Jr., followed by George Bush, Sr., then Clinton, with Obama a distant last. Wow. It’s almost as thought the Republicans are a bunch of whiny ass titty babies who look for attention by being perpetually faux-outraged. Who could have predicted?
Cris (without an H)
@TooManyJens: I’m glad McConnell said that, because I was considering attacking that position but at the time it was a straw man. Thanks for giving my scarecrow a brain, Mitch!
So here’s the thing: Bush made signing statements, Obama makes signing statements. Bush made recess appointments, Obama makes recess appointments. What’s the difference? The difference is that Obama’s are for good (undermining infinite detention, appointing Cordray), Bush’s were for evil (undermining humane treatment of detainees, appointing Bolton).
Is that partisan? Of course it is. Am I cherry-picking? Probably.
wobblybits
@Kola Noscopy:I still don’t get your point…should he not do the recess appointments?
wobblybits
@Catsy: Ah, brigada (thank you)
Kola Noscopy
@Catsy:
Horseshit. Care to expound on how you would know that?
I am arguing from reality.
You, Batsy Catsy, are a blind Obot troll.
Fargus
@PeakVT:
As I understand, Reid could get the votes to adjourn, but the Constitution says that neither body shall adjourn for more than three days without the consent of the other, and Republicans control the House, so they’re forcing the Senate to hold pro forma sessions.
eemom
A win? Oh really?
Sure, if by “win” you mean you are cool with killing Muslim babies.
Sloegin
Consumer protection iz communism!
…which I guess means the BBB is Trotskyism or something.
Kola Noscopy
@Special Patrol Group:
Damn. I wish “our guys” were such whiny ass titty babies. If only.
TooManyJens
@Cris (without an H):
Well, and Obama can’t fill vacant positions without using recess appointments. He flat out can’t do it. The Republicans won’t allow him to perform this central function of his job. So yeah, fuck their fake non-recess.
Cris (without an H)
And if it bothers anybody that Obama governs most aggressively for what is right when there’s an election staring him in the face, well, looks like elections have consequences then doesn’t it. Good ones.
I care about motives but I also care about results. I’ll take good results even if the motives aren’t pure.
wobblybits
@Kola Noscopy: Why do you frequent this blog, may I ask. We are going to support Obama in the generals because the alternative is not an option.
WaterGirl
@kay: I did not know that! Either way, Cordray seems like one of the good guys.
Bijou
“…focused on Santorum’s sweater vest.” Where are the really important journalists, the style reporters? They would be telling their clueless colleagues that the sleeveless vests don’t fit right and make Rick look like he has sloping shoulders, or OMG, worse, that he has NO shoulders. Everyone knows a president has to have shoulders you can land a huge aircraft on, like Romney. The style press might even forgive Romney’s FAIL jeans, because at least his sweaters have long sleeves.
over_educated
@Kola Noscopy: Obviously you are a sad troll. The indicator here is that no matter what Obama does, you are going to criticize the action. So what incentive do we have to take anything you say seriously? Pretty much zero.
Seriously though, I mourn the steep decline in the quality of trolls that this site is attracting, compared to your predecessors you are a gnat among giants!
LTMidnight
@wobblybits: Kola is just having one of his ODS flare-ups.
This is classic “He’s just throwing a bone to “the base”” tripe. Perpetrated by the same losers who will complain that “obama needs to use the ‘Bully Pulpit’ more”, and when he does just that, come back with “Just words”.
Cris (without an H)
@eemom: what
comrade scott's agenda of rage
@wobblybits:
The firebaggers hit other widely-read librul blogs in an attempt to control the narrative. They’ve succeeded over at Teh Orange, at least anywhere outside the Front Page or Community Spotlight. Fortunately, this place isn’t setup to allow that shit.
Kola Noscopy
@wobblybits:
What’s with the plural? lol
Hmmmm…”should” he do it? Not my call.
My point, as you well know though pretend otherwise, is that this grand gesture is empty in light of O’s past performance of betrayal and “bipartisan comity.” It cannot be trusted to represent authentic intent.
So I would answer that it doesn’t matter one way or the other; O has no credibility other than to his credulous cheerleaders.
Comrade Javamanphil
@TooManyJens: You could make Mock Turtle Tear Soup. I hear it is delicious.
Citizen_X
@ornerycurmudgeon:
Paultards / = hippies, are anything but invisible (evidence: this thread; every thread), and deserve to be punched at every opportunity.
Hill Dweller
@Elizabelle: The MSNBC split screen was hilarious. They used the audio from the President’s speech, which naturally pulled the viewer to that side of the screen. But even the optics looked bad for Willard and a red faced McGramps(who, by the way, hates Romney).
Halperin waxing poetic about McCain’s meaningless endorsement was also amusing.
As an aside, the jeans aren’t working for Romney. I’m sure his handlers thought it made him look like a regular guy, but Willard is just way too stiff to pull it off.
WaterGirl
Was anyone else watching the president speak on MSNBC? At some point, they split the screen so we could watch/listen to the president but could also see Grandpa McCain endorse Romney.
Once again, the optics were terrible for McCain. And for the entire republican party, I would say.
On one side is Obama, in a dark suit, looking very presidential, fulfilling presidential duties. On the other side is McCain, on stage with a little stool, at something that looks like a town hall meeting, seemingly still campaigning against Obama, 3 years after he lost the election.
Whoever thought that would be good for Romney is nuts.
Kola Noscopy
@TooManyJens:
Yeah, finally…in an election year.
So gullible.
wobblybits
@comrade scott’s agenda of rage: Gotcha, but that is just bat guano stupid. Are they really pushing for a republican president? In what world does being liberal warped all the way around to supporting a republican?
different-church-lady
@over_educated:
SHHHHH! You want everyone to find out?
gogol's wife
@wobblybits:
They think it’s going to lead to worldwide revolution of the proletariat.
I was called a “moran” last night by Corner Stone for predicting that he’d find some way to criticize Obama for this move. I note his absence, but Kola Noscopy Prep is doing his job for him.
Kola Noscopy
@wobblybits:
Who is this “we” of which you speak? Is there a pro-Obama requirement for reading and commenting on this blog? No, I didn’t think so.
Your blogmaster is not nearly the Obot you imagine him to be. Try reading his actual words, not your fantasies.
I don’t need to hear my own thoughts echoed back at me constantly, for self validation, as you apparently do.
wobblybits
@Kola Noscopy: I asked a serious question and it was neither sarcastic or mocking in tone. I had hoped that you would answer in the spirit of the question but you would rather talk down to me. Okay, gotcha. Thank you for the non-answer.
tBone
@eemom:
Exactly. Cheering on this kind of unconscionable executive power grab makes you objectively pro-baby-Muslim-murder. There is no other possible interpretation.
But hey, if you want to continue to support Obama, that’s cool. I just ask that you acknowledge your support of one of history’s biggest monsters and admit that you are forever stained from bathing in the rivers of baby blood that have resulted from his depredations. It’s the honest thing to do.
rlrr
Whenever Obama does something along these lines, we should ask WWMRD (what would Mitt Romney Do)? I’m pretty sure most Americans would not like the answer…
over_educated
@Kola Noscopy:
So vote Republican?
“it doesn’t matter one way or the other” – Correct, you will not support Obama no matter what he does. Again, why should we take you seriously again? Do you have a policy position beyond “Obama bad!!!”?
Mnemosyne
@Catsy:
Poor Kola haz a sad because I was sick yesterday and was unable to fulfill my promise to him that I would post a comment on every single thread. I won’t have time to do it today, either, so maybe on Friday. He loves to keep track of how often I post.
Kola Noscopy
@Cris (without an H):
But Cris, what about what does and does not transpire during the OTHER THREE (non election) YEARS this guy is in office?
Those don’t matter? You don’t care if your candidate follows thru when not under constant, imminent threat of eviction from the WH?
wobblybits
@Kola Noscopy: I never said anyone here is an obot. go back and read what I said. in fact, nevermind. I’ll just scroll past. I was trying to give you the benefit of the doubt but forget it. sheesh
The Moar You Know
Shorter Kola Noscopy: Sit at home and let the Republicans win. That will learn all of you dumb bastards who were stupid enough to vote for the darkie in the first place.
That about right?
Mnemosyne
@eemom:
@tBone:
C’mon, guys, put the snark tag on for the newbies.
Elizabelle
@WaterGirl:
So McCain was endorsing both of the winners of Iowa’s caucuses last night?
Catsy
@tBone: Please clarify your snark level. It’s getting annoyingly difficult to tell the difference between poorly-flagged snark and the unhinged blather that comes from the usual trolls.
different-church-lady
@over_educated:
I think you may have entirely misidentified the intent here.
Jennifer
@Sloegin: No, consumer protection is theft!
rlrr
One should be aware of internet traditions when naming a salad.
Mnemosyne
@Hill Dweller:
Put you in mind of this classic photo, did it?
wobblybits
@different-church-lady: I did as well.
comrade scott's agenda of rage
@rlrr:
Except for the 50 million, give or take, who will cast a vote for him in November.
Or the 27 Percenters, whichever is greater.
over_educated
@different-church-lady:
I apologize if this is a well known spoof I am missing, its just so hard to tell these days!
Kola Noscopy
@Hill Dweller:
I have to say that I think Willard looks delicious in those jeans. Who cares if they’re stiff?
He could be useful from the waist down. Stiff is good from the waist down.
The Moar You Know
@wobblybits: The whole firebagger crowd believes exactly this.
Why?
It boils down to this: since the Dem electorate was too stupid to do it their way, they deserve to suffer under unending Republican rule until they learn better.
Pretty Maoist, if you ask me.
rlrr
@Elizabelle:
Near my old stomping grounds…
Judas Escargot
@Kola Noscopy:
Will he DETAIN you for making that comment, or DRONE you?
Maybe both. He’ll DRONETAIN you!
kindness
@wobblybits: He’s posting out of both sides of his ass, not out of principled opposition. Don’t bother wasting your time.
One reason I saw elsewhere that putting it through today rather than the ‘between’ terms yesterday is that this recess appointment will be good through the end of 2013, rather than the end of 2012. Smart move if that’s why it was done today.
Now if he could only do the same with a bunch of dfh judges.
@tBone: I see someone enjoyed yesterday’s shitstorm. Either that or my sarcasm meter is broken.
TooManyJens
@wobblybits:
Sixties-radical world. It’s called “heightening the contradictions.”
chopper
@over_educated:
“go back in time and prevent himself from being born” is what i would expect her response to be.
Kola Noscopy
@wobblybits:
I did answer you, just not what you wanted to hear.
This appointment is an empty gesture, of itself it means nothing, given O’s past history.
So whether or not he does it is of not consequence to me.
I mean, do you want me to answer as his campaign advisor or what?
wobblybits
@The Moar You Know: great oogly moogly, that is some twisted thinking and they deserved to be fully mocked at every turn.
different-church-lady
@over_educated: It’s no spoof: it’s more just basic psychology.
The point is not to be taken seriously. The point is to get on people’s nerves. Yeah, I don’t understand the motivation for it either, but it’s pretty common.
Kola Noscopy
@over_educated:
Repeat: I do not care if you take me “seriously.” Matters not a whit in my life.
dmbeaster
@Kola Noscopy:
She doesn’t have to. Your final turd fling proves the point You, Batsy Catsy, are a blind Obot troll.
wrb
Has anyone had any luck with a pie filter & Safari?
I tried once but it didn’t work & I forgot the link.
The trolls here have become unbearably boring.
Kola Noscopy
@The Moar You Know:
Your internalized racism is shockingly transparent. Why do you hate dark skinned people?
Your implication is that the only basis for opposition to Obama’s re election is racism. To that, I say fuck you idiot.
srv
Republican Senators: Lazy or Obstructionist? You decide.
AA+ Bonds
Oh thank god
Cris (without an H)
@Mnemosyne: Take THAT, Dick
Hill Dweller
@Kola Noscopy: I didn’t say the jeans were stiff. I said Romney is way too stiff to pull that look off.
Besides, a nearly 65 year old man, with a ridiculous dye job, wearing artificially ‘weathered’ jeans is absurd. All he needs is a brightly colored Porsche to round out the look.
Marc
Ignore the pathetic call for attention from the troll. He’s admitted that Obama could do nothing to satisfy him. He’s either a Republican plant or a Republican tool, and there’s no use engaging either.
(Granted, “just stirring things up to get his kicks” is also possible. But not to be encouraged with engagement.)
Kola Noscopy
@wrb:
lol.
I love these cute pie filter posts where people pretend to be trying to install one, but just can’t quite get it to work, just right….
arghhh!
The best part of this appointment is that it takes the wind out of the sails of Romney’s spun “win” in Iowa.
From my very peon position, I’ve seen some of the new CFPB procedures. Light years ahead of the OCC. If we can keep the Repubicans from poisoning the well and watering down the procedures, CFPB can make a real difference.
Kola Noscopy
@Hill Dweller:
I would guess that he has one of those. Or ten.
Cris (without an H)
Seriously, didn’t John just threaten us all with a timeout like two days ago? But we can’t seem to stop ourselves.
Kola Noscopy
@Marc:
Please verify and link to where I EVER said such a thing. I would LOVE if president Obama followed thru on what Senator Obama proclaimed.
Sadly, I have little hope of this event occurring.
wobblybits
@Cris (without an H): In my defense, I didn’t know he was a troll. Now I do, and knowing is half the battle (cue G.I. Joe music)
srv
@Hill Dweller:
There you go.
cat
Who why couldn’t he appoint Elizabeth Warren again? Oh, rights, she’s running for Senate in MA. Funny how that worked out for Obama…
pragmatism
ok firebaggers, time to take a lesson from the conservatards. set your selective outrage machines to “butthurt” and fire at will! oh, you’ve already done that. carry on then.
Hill Dweller
@Kola Noscopy: That’s my point. It is entirely believable.
The handlers were going for ‘regular guy’, but on Willard it screams mid-life crisis.
pseudonymous in nc
@Catsy:
The Dems used pro formas in the Senate for the same purpose in 2007-8, but Turtle McConnell’s filibastardry raised the stakes. That said, like PeakVT, I’ve wondered why the White House hasn’t gone to the enumerated Article III power to declare Congress adjourned when there’s a disagreement between House and Senate.
wrb
@Kola Noscopy:
There is supposedly some third party software that will run the pie filter under Safari, but when I tried it it froze the browser.
The tedious idiocy from you and Veritas has inspired me to try again.
Mattminus
So, what would our response be if President Obama was to rape Richard Cordray on TV?
What, too soon?
chopper
@wrb:
it works with safari, but not as well as with firefox. you need greasemonkey first.
Cris (without an H)
It’s dangerous to take your queen out too early in development.
chopper
@wrb:
greasekit is a sort-of greasemonkey for safari.
http://www.simplehelp.net/2007/11/14/how-to-run-greasemonkey-scripts-in-safari/
pragmatism
@Mattminus: what is more “pro” rape? unauthorized killings of foreign nationals or not allowing abortions in case of rape? discuss.
over_educated
@Kola Noscopy:
1. What are you repeating? I don’t see where you said it the first time.
2. You provide a useful instructive tool on the lunacy of firebaggers. You are performing a valuable public service!
Note you have never bothered to answer my question which is “What specifically from a policy standpoint should Obama have done in this situation?”
All you can do is throw out a bunch of ad hominen attacks because you know your entire argument is absurd. You aren’t talking about a policy issue you disagree with, you are just repeating over and over again that you don’t like the black man.
Racist. (See, isn’t this game fun?)
Spectre
I wonder why he didn’t stick up for Elizabeth Warren?
WaterGirl
@arghhh!: What is OCC?
Catsy
@Kola Noscopy: I normally don’t do this, but my name popped up in a quote so I had to see the source. Silly me; I thought it was going to be interesting.
Because you have exhaustively demonstrated your bad faith argumentation–with great consistency–over a period of months.
There is literally nothing–nothing–that the president has done or could ever do which you would not contort yourself into impossible knots in order to find an excuse to use it as an attack.
And everyone here knows it.
If it walks like a duck, and quacks like a duck, I don’t need a biologist or notarized statement to tell me it’s a fucking duck.
Words fail.
You wouldn’t be able to summon even a nodding acquaintance with reality or facts if they were tattooed on the inside of your eyelids in phosphorescent ink.
Three thoughts immediately come to mind.
The first is that this is a very revealing comment: if you don’t care whether or not you’re taken seriously, then by your own admission you’re not presenting a meaningful argument intended to have any value–you’re just flinging poo.
The second is that this is, I suspect, a lie: you devote far too much passion towards fighting those who make you an object of fun to be that blase and uncaring about the outcome.
The third is that if true, no one can accuse you of unrealistic expectations: you don’t care if anyone takes you seriously, and the content of your writing ensures that no one ever will.
And with that, the pie filter goes back on. Talk amongst yourselves.
wrb
@chopper:
thank you kindly
FlipYrWhig
@Mattminus: Everyone who watched would be droned within minutes, and Obama would cackle and put his feet up on a pile of skulls. Then all the 2008 Obama gear would spark to sentient life, wrap around us like exoskeletons, and force us to march into the voting booth to ratify Obama as Scourge of God and Emperor for Life. When you really examine the signs, you’ll find that there’s no other defensible interpretation. Only a ragtag band of dissidents will be able to fight back and save humanity from the Obamatrix.
Loviatar
Its amusing and kind of sad how the
Obotscommenters seem to constantly throw around the “troll” word in response to questions they don’t want to answer or respond to in any way..
Here a few of my own, I don’t really expect an answer, but what the hell I haven’t “trolled” in awhile.
– Q1. Why Richard Cordray and not Elizabeth Warren?
– Q2. Why now and not any other time Congress was recessed since the Bureau began operation (July 21, 2011)?
– Q3. Is this nothing more than a political act directed towards helping Obama get reelected?
.
FlipYrWhig
@Spectre: Yeah, whatever happened to her after that?
Marc
@Kola Noscopy:
Hmm. How about “every single post that you’ve made in this thread?” Look at what you wrote just above this:
(troll quote) “My point, as you well know though pretend otherwise, is that this grand gesture is empty in light of O’s past performance of betrayal and “bipartisan comity.” It cannot be trusted to represent authentic intent. So I would answer that it doesn’t matter one way or the other; O has no credibility other than to his credulous cheerleaders.”
(Sorry, I just couldn’t resist the softball from the fellow under the bridge. “What I said five minutes ago” isn’t hard to find…)
FlipYrWhig
@Loviatar: Yes, it’s clearly a blatant attempt to rob momentum from the burgeoning Progs For Paul movement.
arghhh!
@ Watergirl:
OCC = Office of the Comptroller of the Currency. In theory, the banks’ regulator.
SIA
@dmbeaster: Thanks for that explanation; I was wondering about why he did it today instead of yesterday. It’s certainly working well in the news cycle whereas yesterday it would have been drowned out by Iowa.
Did anyone see McCain endorsing Romney? He looked and acted quite bizarre.
comrade scott's agenda of rage
@Spectre:
I *think* because some of Obama’s chief economic advisors didn’t want her. I’d swear I read somewhere that Geitner was really opposed. Given the fact that Obama has surrounded himself with Wall St insiders, it would be no surprise that most if not all of em wouldn’t support her and as such, Obama probably didn’t want to go to the proverbial Constitutional map for her.
http://blogs.alternet.org/speakeasy/2010/07/17/elizabeth-warren-vs-timothy-geithner/
Oh yeah, it was in the Vanity Fair profile:
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/vanity-fair-on-elizabeth-warren-geithner-hated-her/
I will admit, Obama’s choice of financial advisors has always given me pause, not so much pause as to espouse the firebagger world view but pause nonetheless.
Oh well, all’s well that ends well…assuming she ousts Brown’s sorry ass in November.
WaterGirl
@arghhh!: I see. They have been so active that I have never even heard of them. Thanks!
David in NY
@Cris (without an H): “enumerated Article III power”
Um. Article III is the judiciary, that’s why.
over_educated
@Loviatar:
“It’s not good enough for the President to do the right thing. He must also do it for reasons of which I approve, but really can’t specifically detail. And I know he didn’t because I’m magic and can read his mind!!!”
Scott
The idea is disturbingly common among the firebaggers that making people suffer under the yoke of unfettered Republican rule will make them leap to vote for the True Liberal Uberman. It hasn’t really worked yet — it was Nader’s line of reasoning in 2000, and all that got us was closely split election results in 2004 and 2008.
I suspect the overwhelming majority of firebaggers are white enough and well-off enough that they know they’ll never actually suffer too badly under a truly wingnut presidency.
Kola Noscopy
@wrb:
Oh good. Well, please do let US all know how that turns out!
Marc
@FlipYrWhig:
Why, it’s almost as if she decided to run for Senate.
And Rich Cordray is a tremendous fellow – strongly progressive. He barely lost for statewide office in Ohio in the 2010 Republican wave. In fact, I’d have favored him over Warren if both were available.
What’s fascinating is the tunnel vision of the internet purity squad. They don’t know much of anything about Cordray, but they do have influential people telling them that AnyoneButWarren is a betrayal. So even a superb alternate choice is irrelevant because it doesn’t meet the arbitrary line in the sand.
It’s very similar to the attacks on Sherrod Brown in his Ohio primary, because there was a netroots darling also running in the primary. Therefore, by purity squad “logic”, Brown had to be a tool of the establishment.
Yea, that Sherrod Brown. The one who’s now one of the highest profile liberals in the Senate. Sad but utterly unsurprising at this point.
lacp
@WaterGirl: An alleged regulatory agency that carries water for the banksters.
Taken by itself, this looks like a good appointment – a strong pro-consumer advocate in a position that requires just that. I’m in no way an Obama fan, but you have to give credit where credit is due.
TooManyJens
@Loviatar:
I think Elizabeth Warren saw the writing on the wall and decided she could be more effective running for the Senate than getting a temporary recess appointment to head the CFPB. Remember that she’s been nothing but supportive of Cordray being nominated instead of her. She knows how the game is played.
Cordray wasn’t filibustered until December. Others have also noted that the timing means that Cordray will be able to serve until the end of 2013 instead of the end of 2012.
I think it’s both that and a legitimate desire to fill this post and get the agency running.
LTMidnight
@Kola Noscopy: Obviously you do care, kid, since you keep posting.
Kola Noscopy
@Spectre:
Gosh…I wonder that too.
Can’t imagine, though…
Ben H.
@Kola Noscopy “Obama has demonstrated that he cannot be trusted once in power.”
I agree but I feel that because of the ‘Citizens United’ decision allowing unlimited anonymous corporate donations to 3rd party PACs, Obama has ignored issues like the 15% top tax rate for earned-interest income from investments while the rest of us pay 35% and non-prosecution of Wall Street fraud… and almost any politician on the national scene would’ve done the same. These issues weren’t on our radar 4 years ago, so why should we expect that they should’ve been on Obama’s?
Since I’m not willing to risk 8 more years of a destructively crazy GOP Presidency, Obama’s got my vote. But I’ll agree that we need to be constantly pushing back against the conventional wisdom spouters and constantly pressuring the Dems… and refusing to give them ANYTHING (except our votes) unless they put creating jobs, raising revenues (by killing the 15% tax loophole and taxing the 1%) and stopping a repeat of the financial meltdown by prosecuting Wall Street fraud at the TOP of their agenda.
Dr. Squid
@Kola Noscopy: Seeing as you’d believe anything said negative about Obama anywhere, like he wants to be a big black brute looking to rape a little white nun on TV, you have no credibility.
What is it with the Geegee cult?
Kola Noscopy
@Catsy:
Fraud. YOu don’t have any fucking pie filter.
TooManyJens
Troll-B-Gone is awesome, BTW.
Unsympathetic
Just because the OCC is the nominal “regulator” doesn’t mean they actually do the things called regulation. We’ve had all the laws on the books to prevent the housing bubble from blowing up; however, The Coke-bottled Idiot decided that all things bank were inherently good and therefore no regulation was needed. But taxpayer bailouts of bad loans Were Good, you see.
Here’s an example of pre-CPFB (OCC) “regulation:” Bank wants to give a loan that would result in 40% back-end leverage. This has been known to be a bad loan since the beginning of time. Greenspan, however, would have allowed it – because “Teh Person Wnts Teh Monies.” And, of course, the greater the risk, the more paper profit the bank can book. When the loan inexplicably blows up, Gummint bails out the bank and the bank resells the home — thereby getting double the cash value of the original loan while taking no risk whatsoever.
The main reason Republicans are a’hoppin mad about the CPFB is because they want the profits of this country to go straight to banks and nobody but the banks.
Hill Dweller
@Loviatar:
1) Obama gave Elizabeth Warren the option of being nominated, and stand by quietly while the wingers destroy her, or temporarily appoint her to run the agency, where she could set it up while fighting back publicly. She chose the latter. When it became apparent they would never confirm her, I suspect he gave her another choice: wait to be recess appointed or run for Senate with his and the party’s full backing, and choose her own replacement.
2) The Republicans had been using pro forma sessions to prevent recess appointments. I suspect once the administration decided to use a recess appointment, they wanted their money’s worth. So, they do it at a time that sets up a very public fight, keeps Cordray on for two years(instead of a few months), and garners the most political benefit.
3) It is both political and pragmatic. By recess appointing Cordray now, as oppose to last year, it allows him to stay in the position longer.
tBone
@Mnemosyne:
@Catsy:
Killjoys.
@kindness:
It’s going to take months to replenish my popcorn supply.
WaterGirl
@Loviatar: I don’t actually know, but since I had already given thought to all 3 things earlier today when I first heard the news, I will tell you what my thinking was.
Why Richard Cordray and not Elizabeth Warren?
My thinking is that he wanted this organization to move forward, and he felt there would be too much resistance if he nominated Elizabeth Warren and I believe Elizabeth Warren shared that view. They both put organization ahead of trying to make sure the head was Elizabeth.
Why now and not any other time Congress was recessed since the Bureau began operation (July 21, 2011)?
My guess as to that is two-fold. Recess appointments only last so long, so i’m guessing that he wanted to make the appointment when Cordray could serve at least through the end of Obama’s first term. But i haven’t researched the rules so I am not certain of that. It also occurred to me that he gave them 6 months to hang themselves, which makes his point more strongly than 2-3 or 4 months.
Is this nothing more than a political act directed towards helping Obama get reelected?
I think it helps energize some of the folks who have been discouraged. But I also think it’s a bigger part of having set the stage to get people paying attention to what the republicans have been up to, and then to make his point this way. I love the optics of the republicans with their outrage, having to explain this bullshit “we hit the gavel and were in session for 60 seconds” and then adjourned. I mean, who can take that seriously as actually being in session? Timing is everything.
My two cents.
Kola Noscopy
@comrade scott’s agenda of rage:
Now why would that be, RACIST?
Svensker
Per this TPM article, the decision to appoint today rather than yesterday was very well thought out. Obama and his team did a great job here.
Nice to be honestly pleased with Big O!
And, yes, I can confirm from personal experience that the firebagger types want Repubs to win, crash the economy and send the U.S. into total chaos. From the rubble the underpants gnomes will lead the American people in a revolution to throw off the chains of their corporate overlords and install the perfect liberal state. This is truly what they believe is both necessary and will happen. Some of the people who believe this are very intelligent, sadly.
Loviatar
@over_educated:
No, not if he has a history of not doing the right thing
Also, Q2 is directly connected to my Q3, if he is only “doing the right thing” to help his reelection bid then of what purpose does it serve if he then changes his mind once reelected.
Finally a recess appointment is only valid for approximately a year, so Obama once elected could easily leave the post vacant for the 4 years or appoint someone not so acceptable to the Obots.
LTMidnight
@Loviatar:
1) Because Warren is running for Senate with a good chance at winning
2) Because the appointment will last until the end of 2013 doing it today
3) Because the president wasn’t aware he had to do shit under the emoprogs’ time table.
arghhh!
@lacp:
Not because they were bought and sold, like the Office of Thrift Supervision, but because the sheer numbers overwhelmed them. Banks quickly learned that OCC deadlines were unenforceable and that they could respond in their own sweet time. From what I’m seeing so far, the CFPB is a new animal and management seems to be heeding their timelines.
rea
@Fargus: the Constitution says that neither body shall adjourn for more than three days without the consent of the other, and Republicans control the House, so they’re forcing the Senate to hold pro forma sessions.
Except that when the two houses disagree on adjournment, the president gets to resolve the issue.
Kola Noscopy
@Dr. Squid:
Wow, some of you Bots really give away your secret racist fantasies with those you project onto others and accuse them of having.
Wow.
There were a bunch of slaveery-themed novels published in the 70s like “Mandingo.” YOu might want to read those instead of embarrassing yourself in public this way.
slag
I’m so old I can remember when we got scary Muslim Marxist healthcare reform passed in spite of much bitching and moaning on all sides.
Triassic Sands
The Cordray appointment is good news. It’s hard to see how the lunatics successfully spin this as somehow bad for the country, since most people think of themselves, their families, and their well-being as being an important part of the country. It will be funny if the GOP attributes anything and everything bad that happens now to consumer protection. If history is any guide, they’ll blame events of the past on Cordray’s appointment.
Republicans really suck. Yes, they really, really do.
Svensker
@Loviatar:
Read the article at TPM I linked to above. Obama appointed today rather than yesterday to address this very issue.
Arm The Homeless
The GOP Hive is agitated, as evidence I present the fact that for the first time in my experience, the pie-filter has turned the odometer in a single thread, with only one ‘nym actually in the filter.
But on a happier note, it’s kind of jarring to seeing people respond to black-quotes about pie with reasoned rejoinders. Keep up the good work, folks!
Loviatar
@LTMidnight:
1) she wasn’t running when the Bureau was first setup.
2) so what happens then, do we get 4 years with an empty seat or 4 years with a Geitner/Paulson clone in the seat? Based on his history I can easily see Obama nominating a Geitner/Paulson clone.
3) I was wondering if you could get through a whole response without making an insult. Glad to see you made it to Q#, most Obots usually cave before Q1.
grandpajohn
@wobblybits: Of course you don’t get his point, there isn’t one. trolls don’t post to make points, they post to disrupt the thread so no one else can make a point.
Hill Dweller
@Loviatar: It has been repeatedly explained on this thread that by waiting until today to recess appoint Cordray, it allows him to stay on until at least 2013.
Joseph Nobles
Just breaking: He’s going to make recess appointments to the NLRB as well. The ant hill is good and kicked.
TooManyJens
@Joseph Nobles: I love today.
JPL
@Joseph Nobles: I just saw that at the plum line.. hahaha
Cris (without an H)
@David in NY: I’m sure pseudonymous in nc meant Article II, section 3.
Kola Noscopy
@grandpajohn:
poor grandpa and his poor disrupted thread. How will he get by?
WaterGirl
@TooManyJens: You have been on fire today in some of the threads. I love today, too! And your fire has helped me to love it even more.
Loviatar
@Hill Dweller:
Recess appointment
Just so I’m clear about this, Congress must remain in session through out 2012, because if not the recess appointment becomes void.
That doesn’t seem like a guarantee that the appointment will last to 2013. It seems like a hope.
Hill Dweller
@Joseph Nobles: Now he just needs to fill the two open Fed seats for the FU trifecta.
LTMidnight
@Loviatar:
1) She’s running now.
2) We’ll find out in 2014
3) It’s only an insult if you’re an emoprog who expect the president to consult you before making any decision. Because that’s what it’s about. It doesn’t matter if Cordray will do just as good a job, if not better, as head of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau than Warren. The emoprog wanted Warren, and they expected Obama to give them Warren, like a good boy.
WaterGirl
@JPL: Timing is everything!
Edit: I love the combination of Obama and Plouffe. They are made for each other.
kindness
@grandpajohn: Ding! Ding! Ding! Ding! Give that grandpa a stuffed critter off the shelf.
@Kola Noscopy: Moran. Go suck eggs.
Hill Dweller
@Loviatar: From the TPM article:
By definition, a recess appointment expires at the end of the next full session of the Senate. If a nominee is recess appointed in the middle of a Senate session, he or she serves through the rest of that year, and through the next session.
Yesterday, it turns out, the Senate made the switch from the first to the second session of the 112th Congress. Some advocates hoped Obama would use the brief seconds between those two sessions to make the appointment. Because previous Presidents had seized that opening to make numerous recess appointments, Obama could have avoided a procedural or legal fight with the GOP. The rub, though, is that Cordray’s appointment would have expired at the end of the year. The “next full session,” after all, would have began mere seconds after his appointment was official.
By acting today, with session two of this Congress technically under way, Obama has given Cordray the rest of this session and the full next session of the Senate to run the bureau. Cordray could potentially serve through the end of 2013.
TooManyJens
@WaterGirl: Aww, thank you!
@Loviatar:
You’re mistaken. They can recess without the appointment being terminated.
WaterGirl
@Loviatar: I see that several of us took your questions at face value, assuming you were asking your questions in good faith.
Please don’t disappoint me by attacking any answer you can find a way to attack, while ignoring the rest.
ruemara
@Spectre: Sweet goddess. This stack of horseshit. ELIZABETH WARREN CHOSE NOT TO GO THROUGH THE PROCESS! Jesus fucking christ on a hickory stick. If you’re seriously going to be all hot and bothered on an issue, at the very least know what the person you’re supporting has already said on the issue.
And JC, your trolls are truly disgusting. Between the racist shit and the rape jokes, you’re kinda really turning into the political 4chan.
grandpajohn
@wobblybits: What every poster here should print and paste on his monitor.
“ Never get into a pissing contest with a skunk”
Schlemizel
@comrade scott’s agenda of rage:
Yes, I understood it was because the goldman-sachs contingent in the WH did not want her. That is one of the subtle disappointments from Obama. (he says as he slips into his asbestos suit). While he has done a good job overall & certainly enough to earn re-election the missed opportunities are painful to contemplate. Many of them stem from that same group of 1%’ers from GS that want to maintain their stranglehold on the economy. THEY will stay in power even if Obama loses. Lets just hope he does not.
kay
@Loviatar:
Because Cordray is really talented, he was the top vote-getter in Ohio history in 2008, and he will eventually be the governor of Ohio, but not now (and then he’ll run for President) and Warren has a great shot to knock off Brown in the Senate in 2012, because Brown was a fluke in that state, in a horrible year.
There is more to this than the presidency.
Schlemizel
Does anyone know if the pie filter can also filter out responses to asshole flush? Between him & the liar listed as truth threads can die a painful death.
TooManyJens
@Schlemizel: See this comment. His filter will do it.
Satanicpanic
If he’d nominated Warren she might not be running for Senate right now, and I would prefer to have her there.
Kola Noscopy
@kindness:
I just manscaped mine this morning. Here, you can suck on them…
Kola Noscopy
@Schlemizel:
you don’t have any fucking filter. loser.
Schlemizel
@TooManyJens:
If this works I will travel to any part of the country you designate and kiss you on the lips – pasta be upon you, may you live in marinara all your days!
Kola Noscopy
@ruemara:
Vast majority of racist and rape remarks/jokes are made by Obama/ACL clones.
YOu should really consider not coming here anymore then, as it is stressful for you.
RD
@Kola Noscopy:
So…which one was your favorite?
Cassidy
If only Obama was as liberal as Ron Paul.
Mnemosyne
I do love the trolls who think that Elizabeth Warren would have been better off as the head of the CFPB than potentially being the Senator from Massachusetts where she can, like, write legislation and stuff.
Almost like they’re so unable to let go of past pie-fights that they’re unable to look at silly things like long-term strategy and positioning people like Warren to move up politically. Hmm, being a Senator for four years might put Warren in a good position to get the presidential nomination in 2016, eh? Nope, better to stick her in an office somewhere rather than risk something like that happening.
The Moar You Know
Instead of using a pie filter, going through the hassle and headache of making it work, configuring it, etc, you guys could possibly try to just not respond to the troll. I guess in a way I’m lucky. My browser of choice doesn’t run the pie filter.
Says a lot about some of you that you need to have inflammatory comments hidden from your view to keep you from responding to them.
It’s not like you don’t know who they are, right? Pretty fucking obvious from the get go, every time one of them gets a new identity you can tell in three posts or less, right?
So just stop yourself from expending the pixels and clicks and just try…letting it go.
lacp
@Joseph Nobles: It’s good that he’s seizing the opportunity – might as well go whole hog, he probably won’t get another chance.
TooManyJens
@The Moar You Know:
Unfortunately, people do respond to the fucking trolls. And I don’t like having to plow through that shit to read halfway sensible discussions. Why is this so terrible?
kay
It’s also a big “screw you” to Rob Portman, the OH GOP Senator, because the Tea Baggers pressured Portman to block Cordray, as part of their “gang of 44” stratergy, and they’re insane, so they’re going to blame Portman, for, I don’t know, not wrestling Cordray to the ground and tying him up with duct tape.
Kola Noscopy
@The Moar You Know:
A-fucking-Men.
Cassidy
I’m curious. Currently, the SEC and the FBI tend to handle fraud and financial criminal investigations. I’m wondering if those duties will be transferred to the CFPB?
wrb
@The Moar You Know:
I’m finding the repetitiveness, stupidity and negative energy and pervasive nastiness reducing the brightness of the day with no engagement required.
Schlemizel
@Satanicpanic:
But that really was not the point. EW was instrumental in setting up the agency and would have made a marvelous leader for it. The replacement is probably a great guy and I hope he does an even better job. Frankly I don’t know him but even that is not the point.
The point is: Why did Obama chose to fight for this guy but not for EW? If, as widely reported and not denied, it was because the Goldman boys didn’t want her then that says something about who has power inside this White House. And it would be something that a lot of Democrats would not be happy to know.
WaterGirl
@The Moar You Know: Completely agree!
Now let me ask you about Loviatar, because I did not recognize him as a troll. Is he an old “favorite” with a new name?
Berial
@The Moar You Know: I use the pie filter because I’m a bit lazy and don’t always look at the poster before reading the comments. So the pie filter is more to prevent me from wasting time reading known trolls than preventing me from responding to them. Others mileage may vary.
Schlemizel
@Mnemosyne:
except she had no plans to run when she was cut loose. Yes she will be a good senator but that was never the point.
TooManyJens
@Schlemizel:
That’s a bit “Mickey Kaus blows goats,” innit?
A Conservative Teacher
It’s illegal and unconstitutional. The Senate is not in a recess- it’s been running “pro forma” sessions, which are a gimmick, yes, but legally and constitutionally not a recess. Back in 2007 and 2008, Democrats did the same thing and Bush never nominated anyone during these pro forma sessions (Bolton was nominated during a real recess)- heck, Obama even spoke out against even trying to do real recess appointments.
At some point, your hypocrisy is willful lying, and not just accidental.
Schlemizel
@The Moar You Know:
I have begged for weeks DNFTFT – do not feed the fucking trolls – but it has not helped. “someone on the internet is being an asshole, I simply must respond”
les
@Loviatar:
Look, instead of moving the goalposts, reinventing your questions and generally being All Concerned, why not just say that you don’t like the Cordray appointment because you just know in your heart of hearts that Evil Obama is EEEEvil, he’s working from Evil Intent, and if you feel good now you’ll just have to feel bad later?
Schlemizel
@TooManyJens:
We have to go to politics with the media we have, not the media we wish we had.
joes527
@TooManyJens: I am not at all a fan of recess appointments. I think that the John Bolton fiasco shows exactly why they are a bad idea. But the difference between then and now is important too.
The Democrats were blocking Bolton because they thought that appointing someone who hates the very idea of the UN to be UN ambassador was a stupid idea. Bush could have worked around this by putting forward someone else who was even fractionally less crazy than Bolton (99.972% of the population meets this criteria) The D’s would have fallen over themselves to confirm _any_ second choice to show that they were willing to play along in general.
The Republicans are blocking Cordray because they oppose the idea of a functional government. There is no objection to Cordray per se. There is no one that Obama can put forward that would break the impasse. The Republicans, openly want gridlock and they are using the confirmation process to get it.
What is a president to do? Unfortunately, I don’t see the “The congress is stuffed to the gills with fucking assholes” problem getting better any time soon, so it wouldn’t surprise me if the Cordray appointment ends the same way the Bolton appointment did.
RD
@Kola Noscopy:
Since you’re ostensibly not racist, whose Torch of Spite are you carrying?
Hillary or John?
The Moar You Know
@TooManyJens: And the pie filter does not a thing to block out those replies, now does it?
The only solution, if people won’t exercise any self-control, is to not come here anymore. Which is exactly what our little buddies want.
(Full disclosure – I spent three years destroying a site by trolling, much as DougJ did back in the day. All it takes is time. What you guys are dealing with here is not someone who has an ideological bone to pick, but someone who wants the site gone, for whatever reason)
dmbeaster
There is no point in responding to trolls. But it can be fun to write a pithy retort that amuses everyone else i.e., not a true response and not intended to be one.
After all, that is all that the troll is doing. Writing crap, only his point is to amuse himself by farting in the elevator.
David Koch
Wait a minute…. what about the Rule of Law?
This move overturns a decades long ruling from the precious Office of Legal Council.
Shouldn’t you be consistent. People like Cole were freaking out when Obama over ruled the Office of Legal Council on the war powers act during Libya.
Now the emoprogs are fine with Obama discarding the OLC when it suits them.
Talk about hypocrisy.
SIA
I give up. Too much troll and troll-feeding.
TooManyJens
@The Moar You Know:
The filter I’m using does.
Congratulations?
I don’t know what you want people who already aren’t responding to KN, etc. to do. We should have to see all that shit because you’re mad that other people don’t control themselves? I don’t get the logic.
kay
@joes527:
I actually think there is, because he’s sort of an up and comer.
They really screwed this up though, because they ended up promoting both Cordray and Warren, and they’re afraid of both of them.
They should have let Warren through. Then Warren wouldn’t be up against Brown in Massachusetts and Richard Cordray would still be in Ohio, waiting for an Ohio governors or Senate race. Now he’s national, which is where he was headed anyway.
ruemara
@Schlemizel: For fuck’s sake, read. Just a little. http://www.marketplace.org/topics/world/full-interview-elizabeth-warren-protecting-consumers
Satanicpanic
@Schlemizel: I know, I’m saying it’s a good thing he didn’t push for her because it turned out well.
This has been pretty evident from day one to anyone paying attention though. I don’t know that it would be news to many Democrats. YMMV
LTMidnight
@Schlemizel: You total contradicted yourself in your statement. But at least you were honest in your assertion that this is nothing more than people “wanting” Warren and not getting what they wanted.
Kilgore Trout
@A Conservative Teacher:
Maybe, maybe not. But I don’t think it’s a coincidence that the President delayed his request for the debt ceiling increase after Congress complained that they weren’t in session to debate it, and today’s recess appointment. Can’t have it both ways.
Maybe he should have.
Look, this is uncharted territory. The constitution gives the President the power to make recess appointments. Does the Senate’s use of this “gimmick” unconstitutionally usurp the power vested to the President under the Constitution?
I personally hope the Republicans try to litigate this.
chopper
@Schlemizel:
it doesn’t filter quotes in other people’s posts.
Hill Dweller
@A Conservative Teacher: Obama has made less recess appointments than the previous 5 president(3 Republicans), despite facing far more obstructionism.
Furthermore, Republicans are blocking Cordray and the NLRB nominees because they don’t want the agencies to function, not because they aren’t qualified. It is nullification.
neil
This 2004 11th Circuit decision rejecting Kennedy’s challenge to Bush’s recess appointment of Richard Pryor is highly relevant. Note that the judges completely reject the notion that a recess has to be of any particular duration; and at the end, they basically say that if the President uses his powers like a dick, that’s a problem the voters need to solve.
arghhh!
@ kay:
This appointment will be a great talking point for Cordray if he chooses to run for Ohio governor. While I want him at the CFPB, I also really want him up on the debate stage against Kasich.
MikeJ
@The Moar You Know:
Out of curiosity, what browser? I may port to it if there’s not already a way to run gm scripts.
LTMidnight
@Mnemosyne: Now see, you’re making way too much sence here and getting in the way of a perfectly good emoprog poutrage.
Everyone knows Obama is not suppose to know how to tie his own shoes unless good white moonbats show him how.
grandpajohn
@Kola Noscopy: You have obviously confused me with some one who gives a flying shit as to what assholes like you have to say or think about anything.
RD
@The Moar You Know:
I hope it wasn’t the same site I worked.
Anyway, Kola is small potatoes.
lacp
@Cassidy: That might be nice, since both of those parties don’t seem to be doing shit to stop Wall Street
Schlemizel
@ruemara:
Thanks for your kind words and the link – had not seen that. Does not really change other stories I read. She never actually says she does not want the job, only that she is too busy to think about it. Thats a non-answer from a smart politician.
FlipYrWhig
@Schlemizel: You’re a crazy person. Obama likes Warren. Warren likes Obama. Warren likes Cordray. Cordray likes Warren. Obama likes Cordray. Cordray likes Obama. They’re all on the same motherfucking side. Stop venturing out in search of Dolchstosse fantasies that make you feel like a heroic holdout for a dwindling cause. You know who else does that? Christians who think someone’s taking Christmas away because the guy at the hardware store said “happy holidays” when he sold them some sandpaper.
joes527
@neil:
I think you meant William Pryor.
Here I was thinking that Bush was cooler that I had given him credit for ….
gwangung
So…why is Cordray acceptable? Are his credentials so much worse than Warren’s or less objectionable to the White House folks? Far as I can tell, Cordray is, at present, a little more savvy and experienced and may have a somewhat larger network to draw upon…
dogwood
@kay:
That’s the beauty of all of this. They could have approved Warren without fanfare and kept this woman off the broader public stage for years. Now there’s a better than even chance she’ll be a Senator, and a popular one at that. Same with Cordray. Approve him easily and no one knows who the heck he is. Now he’ll get attention and tons of requests to appear on news programs, and my guess is he’ll handle it very well.
Schlemizel
@LTMidnight:
sorry, not seeing where I contradicted myself – while I may be happy with the end results it is the process I would question. Is that better? It really isn’t that critical to me but some people seem to be willfully trying to imply bad intent in others statements and I hoped to offer a clear picture.
David Koch
Ironically, emoprogs hate Elizabeth Warren because she’s against….. wait for it… legalizing Pot.
kay
@arghhh!:
Right. I think it works out beautifully both politically and substantively, for both Warren and Cordray but not so great for Scott Brown, who just lucked out in a bad year for Democrats, anyway.
Schlemizel
@chopper:
actually this one is supposed to – have not been able to try it yet
Judas Escargot
@Joseph Nobles:
Imperial Overreach! Impeach! Impeach!
(Sorry, just preparing myself mentally for the winger response)
Apparently Obama does have some Chicago fight in him after all… he just prefers to fight at the time (and on the terms) of his choosing. This, it is good.
Arm The Homeless
@The Moar You Know: Because we have the technology to do so!
I guess some folks just don’t feel the need to be so stoic in the face of idiocy. I don’t believe the intention of our free-speech philosophies was to subject people to an open sewer. If you revel in it, more power to ya’. I don’t think I am missing anything worthwhile or trenchant.
Also, too: You kids get off my lawn!
ruemara
@Schlemizel: Obviously she forgot to say clearly she did not want to do the appointment process when she clearly says she chose to do the creation process. Ok, I tried to educate a conspiracy believer, with the usual results. How come so many politically educated folks come jam packed with confirmation bias? I’ll be kinder when people who are so invested in an outcome don’t betray the fact the issue is not EW, it’s BO.
Cassidy
@lacp: They’re very niche. IRS investigates financial crimes and taxes. SEC special agents investigate insider trading etc. The FBI investigates finances in relation to a crime, not so much a crime by itself.
catclub
@TooManyJens: “Others have also noted that the timing means that Cordray will be able to serve until the end of 2013 instead of the end of 2012.”
Why is this? I thought recess appointments lasted till the end of the session, and the session is the two years of the congressional term. In which case, it is till the end of 2012. Happy to be wrong.
Marc
@The Moar You Know:
A lot of the most persistent ones here will simply spam threads with crap if no one answers them. The trolls will write twenty, thirty, forty posts in a thread to get the attention they crave.
I’d prefer to have the vowels removed. It’s the same successful strategy used to fight graffiti: no one bothers to write on walls if their work is promptly erased.
kay
@dogwood:
I agree, except Republicans already know who he is, which is why they don’t want him promoted.
TooManyJens
@catclub: This TPM article explains it pretty well: http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2012/01/the-hidden-benefit-of-obamas-hardball-consumer-watchdog-gambit.php
Schlemizel
@gwangung:
as I said in the next part – because I don’t know about him. I don’t care if Obama appointed the love child of FDR and Hillary Clinton to the post; it was about how it came to this. If I were bright enough to stop responding on the thread I could spend some time looking at the guys background. but in the meantime it would be nice if people could dial it back a little and not assume that complaining about the process is demeaning to the guy appointed – those are two separate issue.
pragmatism
@neil: i can’t believe richard pryor made the 11th circuit after lighting himself on fire whilst smoking teh crack.
Marc
@WaterGirl:
He’s just a standard-issue Obama hater.
Kola Noscopy
@The Moar You Know:
Oh for god’s sake. Now you’ve jumped the shark. lol
Believe it or not, YOU are not a core requirement for the survival of BJ. No more than was ACL.
I love Cole’s writing and general demeanor, which is the heart of this site. The idea that blind loyalty to Obama fuels his world view is hilarious. Cole has evolved into a center/left-leaning skeptic with reluctant Obot tendencies which are fading rapidly.
This site would be vastly improved with fewer vicious bots, true, but I have no fantasy of running them off.
Why is it, when threads and threads go by without me posting on them, no one comments on how I am trying to destroy the site with my comments?
tools.
neil
@Kilgore Trout: See my link for why the “pro forma” session invention is very unlikely to prevail in court. The decision anticipates and rejects the idea that the duration of the recess matters Constitutionally.
Schlemizel
@ruemara:
sorry I don’t meet your excellent standards. I asked a legitimate question, one for which there is some evidence. You offer insults and a data point I considered against other data points. I found it to be unconvincing so you impune my motives. Thanks again.
kay
Richard Cordray sued big banks as AG.
I just think the idea that he’s a lesser Elizabeth Warren is not accurate, and I’m a big fan of Elizabeth Warren. They’re two different extremely talented people.
There can be two people. It’s not like we’re down to one :)
Marc
@kay:
Fun trivia: Rich Cordray is a Jeopardy grand champion.
The Moar You Know
@MikeJ: Opera.
dmbeaster
@catclub: I think you are right, and have wondered about that myself. It could be that someone read 2013 (when the current Congress technically ends in January) and thought it meant the whole year. It makes more sense to think of it as through 2012, even though it technically dribbles into the next year.
MikeJ
@The Moar You Know: I’ll look at it.
Kola Noscopy
@Marc:
Your standard-issue tribalism protects you from thinking, doesn’t it? Nice for you, I guess. For the country, not so much.
gwangung
@Schlemizel: Well, I was responding to the part about the White House guys objecting to Warren (and I was asking because I though YOU had some info). If that was the case, then she must be substantially better than Cordray. However, I’m not finding that much evidence to support that–from what I’ve read, he’s not that much inferior.
Given that, I probably wouldn’t put much stock in that theory about internal objections to Warren; it’s a good tentative first hypothesis, but I’m not seeing much evidence to prefer it to other conjectures.
dogwood
@kay:
Oh, I understand that completely. It’s just that it’s amusing to see them overplay their hand.
David Koch
MSNBC reports this is the first time a President has ever made a recess appointment while Congress is in session.
Cassidy
Shorter Kola Noscopy:
THE TRUTH! YOU CAN’T HANDLE THE TRUTH!
Do you do the Jack Nicholson voice as well?
Tonybrown74
@Kola Noscopy:
I HEART the pie filter!
RD
@Kola Noscopy:
Since you failed to clarify, I’m classifying you with the Nader tribe.
LTMidnight
@Kola Noscopy:
It seems anyone who wants the president to get re-elected is an “obot” to you, and Cole seems to want to see the president get re-elected. So what exactly do you mean by your statement?
FormerSwingVoter
@Hill Dweller: This would be awesome. I’m really excited by the fact that the CFPB and NLRB will be functional for the next year or two, but getting the Fed up and running would be the single biggest thing he could do for the economy right now.
kay
@dogwood:
I don’t really understand why people seem to think a Senator is a less powerful or prestigious job than the head of an agency, so Warren was somehow “demoted”.
I don’t really see the “dissing Elizabeth Warren” angle in all this, but maybe I’m not taking offense easily enough :)
Rommie
Obama makes recess appointment: pie/spam/poo-flinging filter scripts see large leap in installations. Yeah, I finally did it, I’ve seen enough streaking on the field through the threads. I wonder if the Boss would get a little more Invisible BanHand if he could see the filtered numbers…
As for the appointment itself, it’s not so much doing it by Obama than the incoming over-reaction by the GOP that will make it interesting.
Marc
@Kola Noscopy:
Nah. Some people are actually making principled criticisms of the President: for example, that he isn’t aggressive enough in countering Republican obstructionism. Others just reflexively detest everything he does. It’s pretty easy to tell the difference.
Honest critics will see actions like what Obama did today and will say “Great! He’s finally taking action!” Dishonest critics will make up reasons why positive things don’t count (e.g. your line that this is just show for re-election.)
It’s similar to the Iraq withdrawal. The reflexive Obama haters give him no credit at all – I’ve seen them claim that he only withdrew because he was forced to by the Iraqis, for instance. As opposed to reality, where he opposed the war from the start, campaigned on ending it, and kept his promise.
The difference between the two is that the reflexive critics are pointless to engage. They don’t give a damn about whatever issue is at stake; it’s just something to attack a guy they hate. So one week they’ll care deeply about whether ozone standards are 55 or 60 parts per billion, and the next week they won’t care about strict new standards for mercury emissions. Because one stance lets them attack Obama and the other would require them to give him credit.
dogwood
@kay:
Kay,
Your’re the best in the business on this blog, but please don’t get sucked into defending Cordray to the skeptics. You’re way too smart for that. For them Warren and Cordray are just proxies in their sanctimonious fight between good and evil.
Hill Dweller
@David Koch: I suspect they’re relying on the Clinton Justice Department’s interpretation of a recess(more than 3 days). The pro-forma gimmick, which both parties have used, cites that interpretation. But, as was pointed out earlier in the thread, the 11th Circuit ruling in the Pryor case seemed to contradict the Clinton Justice Dept.
neil
@David Koch: Congress is in session? Not according to CSPAN.
burnspbesq
@Kola Noscopy:
“The point is Obama has demonstrated that he cannot be trusted once in power.”
Wow. And after you’d said some things recently that suggested you might not be deranged. I’m disappointed.
WaterGirl
@Marc: Hmm, should have recognized him, I guess. But I learned some things from the comments in response to him, so there’s that.
Mnemosyne
@Schlemizel:
My point is, since having her not be appointed and running for Senate actually works out better for everyone, why the complaints about the original decision? I know that “Goldman Sachs” is the new “Trilateral Commission,” but other than that, why are people obsessing over something that will end with the Democrats in a better position than if Warren had gotten the appointment?
Weirdly, it reminds me of the people who are still obsessed with Jennifer Aniston and Brad Pitt’s divorce and want them to get back together even though it’s been over for a decade. They’ve both moved on, people! Get over it!
BarbCat
@kay: They really screwed this up though, because they ended up promoting both Cordray and Warren, and they’re afraid of both of them.
AA+ Bonds
@A Conservative Teacher:
I see A Conservative Teacher is back, the conservative blogger who thought a McSweeney’s story about an Ayn Randist parent whose kid attacked other kids who tried to get him to share was real, and wrote a blog post about what a good parent that author must be
A Conservative Teacher thinks everyone forgot this, but we didn’t, wang a dang doodle get the fuck off Balloon Juice you fuckin trick ass bitch
Kathy in St. Louis
@Ben H.: Because of all the re-election campaigns he’s had in the past? What, exactly, is your precedent for saying that?
WaterGirl
@MikeJ: what about safari? It seems like you need greasemonkey for it to run in safari, which makes it one too many hoops to jump through.
Since more and more threads are getting trashed with these bums, I would like to try it. Especially since it sounds like there might be some cleverness at work in the pie descriptions.
Tonal Crow
@Joseph Nobles:
Good. And if he’s really up for a fight, he’ll recess-appoint some DFH judges, too. FSM knows Republicans have badly abused the filibuster on judicial appointments.
wrb
I’ve got greasekit installed in Safari & both Balloon Juice Disemvoweler and Troll-Be-Gone, showing up there as enabled but they aren’t doing anything and there is no clue how to affect them.
Kathy in St. Louis
@Kola Noscopy: Well, then don’t vote for Obama. Vote Romney. He’s very trustworthy, in fact. Whatever you believe, at some point in his life, he’s believed that too. Yes, he sounds like he’ll do just fine for you.
vheidi
@Judas Escargot: or even
DERONE you!!!
The Moar You Know
@MikeJ: Thank you, sir. It would be nice.
A Humble Lurker
Wait…Oh, I get Kola now! He was the one saying that if a 10 year old was getting raped by an adult he might be enjoying it and that’s why you shouldn’t step in, right?
Now it makes sense. It’s the same with Obama. It’s why s/he doesn’t blame the GOP. THEY’RE not at fault just like the adult in the previous scenario, because the object of their abuse must like it, must want it or it wouldn’t be happening. The only reason Obama is having trouble is because he must want it. Just like a ten year old boy being raped.
See? He’s simply wrong.
David Koch
@Tonal Crow:
Recess appointments can’t legally be made to the Judiciary.
neil
@Mnemosyne: I would guess it’s because EW decided to withdraw before the recess opportunity presented itself.
MildlyAmusedRainbowPerson
@Kathy in St. Louis:
Shorter Romney:
Don’t like these positions? I’ve got some more in the trunk, along with three illegal gardeners and the family dog.
Brachiator
@Schlemizel:
Sigh. It’s not that it was “widely reported.” It’s that this is the standard pseudo-conspiracy theory of progressive fools, who need to believe that if only Obama listened to them and did exactly what they said, then unicorns would freely frolic on the White House lawn.
The plainer truth is that the GOP not only had it in for EW, but for any financial or consumer regulatory agency. And the larger agenda is to reject as many Obama appointees as they can. Progressives focus singly on EW, instead of looking at this larger picture.
So, as Gail Collins points out in a recent NY Times column,
So, again and again, progressive dopes keep flailing at the specter of Goldman issuing orders to the White House, and ignoring the big ass GOP elephant in the room, Republican obstructionism based on the fundamental belief that elected Democrats cannot be allowed to govern.
AA+ Bonds
Man Kola is pretty much the owner of BJ now, gj Kola
neil
@David Koch: Not true either. See the court decision I pasted above.
FlipYrWhig
@Brachiator: If Goldman Sachs drone-attacked an American child, Obots would defend it. Only Ron Paul is talking about these things.
Kola Noscopy
@RD:
Sorry, Nimrod, I voted Carter, Carter, Mondale, Dukasis, Clinton, Clinton, Gore, Kerry, and out.
I could smell Obama’s coming capitulation a mile away.
Paraphrasing pre-assimilation Howard Dean, I am a member of the Democratic wing of the Democratic party.
Bots are the Reagan Republican wing.
Tonal Crow
@David Koch:
Wrong. The Recess Appointments clause (Art.II s.2 cl.3) does not distinguish between different kinds of vacancies, but rather says that the President has the power to “fill up *all* vacancies that may happen during the Recess of the Senate…” (emphasis added). See Evans & Jordan v. Stephens et al, http://www.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/ops/200216424ord2.pdf (cited by neil above) that confirmed Dubya’s power to recess-appoint a circuit judge.
One might reasonably argue whether the appointments in question are void because the Senate isn’t really in “Recess”, but what you argued is just incorrect.
Kola Noscopy
@burnspbesq:
I’m only deranged during certain moon cycles or when my meds are off.
AA+ Bonds
It’s pretty adorable that some people come on a site dedicated to invective and then want to use software to make sure they dont see anything that rumbles their little tumblies
Kola Noscopy
@wrb:
giggle. Losers.
Kola Noscopy
@A Humble Lurker:
YOu need lots of therapy. Your projected fantasies are quite disturbing.
Kola Noscopy
@AA+ Bonds:
You’re a sad little person and wtf are you babbling about?
Marc
@wrb:
A line below the comment box called “pie filter stuff” should be present if Greasemonkey is enabled. You highlight a name, click “add selected”, and your target simply proclaims their love ‘o pie. The entries are actually pretty funny.
David Koch
@Tonal Crow: That decision is non-binding outside of 11th district. Nationally, it’s unsettled law. After all, Bush appointing Pryor was controversial enough to warrant a federal law suit because of the unsettled nature of the issue.
But in any event, I find it shocking that any liberal worth his salt wants any president to be just like Bush. I find it shocking that any liberal worth his salt wants any president to flaunt, if not outright break, the Rule of Law.
You can’t be a true progressive and champion any of Bush’s means and methods.
Kola Noscopy
@Marc:
Or…I have some prime Butt Pie you could taste for free. :P
Brachiator
@FlipYrWhig:
Too much insider jargon here. It’s 2012. I’m focused on getting Obama re-elected. I have even less interest than usual in the snark and self-referential language that obliterates meaningful discourse.
I got no interest in third party candidates, except insofar as one of these dopes might draw votes from the Democrats (and here Ron Paul might be a danger). I got no interest in phantom challengers to Obama.
I got no interest in who is or who is not an Obot.
I have never had much interest in the purity school of Obama opponents who live in a fantasy land in which there are no Republicans, only Obama failing to live up to their expectations. But from now until November, I will mock these clowns whenever they drag their little fetid fantasies into the open.
By the by, I am not accusing you of holding any of these views. Just using your post as an opportunity to stake my ground.
LTMidnight
@Kola Noscopy: Ah, you voted for Carter in 1976, which makes you at least so that means you’re at least 53 years old acting like a middle school child. Where did your life go wrong, kid?
Seriously, kid, you voted for every Democratic presidential nominee since 1976 EXCEPT Obama, and you expect people to believe you’re some clairvoyant (big word, sorry) oracle?
Again, where did your life go wrong?
catclub
@dmbeaster: Check out TPM for the explanation of why I am wrong, and end of 2013 is correct. Recess appointments go to the end of the _next_ session, and since today has started the session that ends at end of 2012, the next session is the one that starts in 2013.
I hate learning new things.
jen @259 has the TPM link
RD
@Kola Noscopy:
Obama is the black Jimmy Carter.
Your argument is invalid.
FlipYrWhig
@Brachiator: It’s not a revolution if I can’t
dancemake arcane snarky remarks.Satanicpanic
@A Humble Lurker: yep that’s the guy. A proud Sandusky defender. If anyone needed proof that he’ll say anything to get attention, that was it.
FlipYrWhig
@Kola Noscopy: Dukasis never had a chance. You should have voted for Dukakis.
Arm The Homeless
@AA+ Bonds: I came for the pet-pictures, but I stayed for the over-wrought egos. If they were funny, I might give a shit. But it’s tedious at this point.
Are you done feeling superior yet, or would you like to complain to the community some more about how unfair it is that you’re not a front-pager, because you’re so hooked into the conservative-web zeitgeist?
Enough invective, or should I put my shoulder into it next time?
dogwood
@catclub:
Admitting you’re wrong on the internet simply isn’t done. Bad form old chap.
RD
@AA+ Bonds:
A Howard Dean compilation.
Brachiator
@FlipYrWhig:
The Tea Party People have been doing all they can to bring a revolution. Dancing and snark would be replaced by Bible readings. What else you bringing? There’s Somethinig in the Air
Call out the instigators
Because there’s something in the air
We’ve got to get together sooner or later
Because the revolution’s here, and you know it’s right
And you know that it’s right
Kola Noscopy
@FlipYrWhig:
Oh…damn, now you tell me.
Kola Noscopy
@Satanicpanic:
Simpleton.
Kilgore Trout
@David Koch:
But exactly what “law” is he flaunting?
He has the power, per the constitution, to make recess appointments. The Senate is engaging in what is essentially a sham activity to prevent him from exercising that power. Why is it not Congress that is flaunting the law.
Tonal Crow
[Hmm, the following reply keeps getting rejected. What’s up? It seems that doubled hyphens activate the spam filter. Meh.]
—–
@David Koch: You can’t cite any text, history, or precedent supporting your argument. Check.
On “just like Bush”, that’s pure concern-trolling. I have no problem with Obama pushing the recess-appointment boundaries given the Republicans’ extraordinary obstructionism and the constitutional ambiguities around such appointments. I do have problems with other things Obama’s done, particularly on warrantless wiretapping, indefinite detention, and the like, and have never hesitated to say so – and to back challenges to those policies. I love the ACLU!
Lastly, if you’re arguing that I should support a Republican – or vote for Nader or some other spoiler – because Obama has done things I disagree with, bah humbug to that. The choice is between Obama and the crazies that constitute the GOP. I’ve had more than enough crazy, thank you very much.
FlipYrWhig
@Kilgore Trout: Actually the word you’re both thinking of is “flout,” not “flaunt.” /pedant
(I once corrected my dad about that when he was in the midst of yelling at me about how I was “flaunting his authority,” and I think I was lucky my parents didn’t believe in hitting.)
PeakVT
FlipYrWhig
@Kilgore Trout: @Tonal Crow: I think Koch’s executive power remarks are supposed to be tongue in cheek, in light of the brouhaha over the uses and abuses of executive power amplified by the ABL/Greenwald exchange(s).
RD
@Kola Noscopy:
I blame the Slaveery-themed Mandingo novels.
Tonal Crow
@FlipYrWhig: It’s a sad fact that while the intertubes make it easier than ever to post snark, the ensuing profusion of snark makes it more difficult than ever to determine what’s intended to be snark and what’s intended to be in earnest.
boss bitch
@Brachiator:
BRAVO!!
Brachiator
@FlipYrWhig:
Hey, whatever … flouts your boat.
(The story about your dad is funny. I hope that in other circumstances he acknowledged your ability to think on your feet).
David Koch
@Tonal Crow:
Who has he wiretapped without warrant?
different-church-lady
@Kola Noscopy: Well, there was that whole winding down the Iraq war thing. Granted, it’s so tiny you probably forgot about it.
different-church-lady
@srv: Kerry dyed his hair grey? Who knew?
Odie Hugh Manatee
@ruemara: “And JC, your trolls are truly disgusting. Between the racist shit and the rape jokes, you’re kinda really turning into the political 4chan.”
Agreed. The resident pedo has once again turned a thread into their personal playground.
Leave him alone though, you don’t want the old guy to come out and yell at us to leave the yard trolls alone and to get off of his lawn.
different-church-lady
@Cris (without an H):
Cough.
different-church-lady
@ruemara:
Wouldn’t that just get in the way of the trolling? I mean, if the whole point is to exasperate us, then deliberately not being informed on basic stuff is a good tool to that end, right?
Egg Berry
@Odie Hugh Manatee:
It has a loooooong way to go before that analogy fits, no matter how bad the resident troll.
arghhh!
@Schlemizel:
Why not Warren? If you Google Warren and check conserative links, you’ll quickly see how they were gearing up to smear and debase her just like they did with Brookslie Borne. They can’t be dismissive of another man the way they feel they can with a woman.
If nothing else, Obama knows when to pick a fight and when to sit back and wait for his next turn.
FlipYrWhig
@Brachiator: Yeah, we’re a family of language dorks, so in retrospect he’d probably find it funny… although I haven’t brought it up.
Odie Hugh Manatee
@Egg Berry:
Note that there’s a slight difference between “is” and “turning into”.
Just sayin… :)
different-church-lady
@Loviatar:
The really great thing about Q3 is that you can use it in any and every situation up to the point where Obama chooses not to run for re-election.
“Obama cures cancer.” “Yeah, but he wouldn’t have it it weren’t an election year!”
different-church-lady
@Scott:
Misses the mark completely: they live in such an abstract world that the idea that there would be any repercussions beyond punishing the offending politician never even occurs to them.
Odie Hugh Manatee
@The Moar You Know:
That’s not a bad idea except that you then leave the new/newer members at a disadvantage because the trolls are left free to engage them, leading the new member into thinking that they are responding to a sincere post when they are really walking into a troll trap.
That is, unless you like to sit back in silence and watch the trolls act as the face of this place and greet the newcomers with open arms.
Much like John does.
ETA: When the pedo troll at #210 agrees that you should leave him alone, you might want to rethink your position. ;)
A Humble Lurker
@Kola Noscopy:
Oh I’m projecting, am I?
Here’s a tip, accusing someone of projecting when they’re actually quoting you doesn’t work when said quotes are so easy to find.
Emma
@LTMidnight: My bet? Seventeen. It’s the way he makes manscaping jokes and other nyah-nyah noises. I’m expecting a knock-knock joke any minute.
Kola Noscopy
@Egg Berry:
Hey, I thought Veritas was the “resident troll!”
Samara Morgan or whatever has also been labeled such.
Trolls Unite!
Kola Noscopy
@Odie Hugh Manatee:
Oh Dear Sweet Odie…I did not realize you were such a codependent BJ hall monitor. Your inappropriate emotional attachment to what you imagine BJ to be surpasses that of its owner, who is happy to let people be.
Do you have ANY life off of BJ?
And btw, how’s that decision to “almost” quit visiting here coming? Anything I can do to nudge you along?
Kola Noscopy
@A Humble Lurker:
Hey idiot, here’s a hint for YOU. Your reading perception/comprehension skills suck. I stand by everything I wrote and will be happy to rehash the entire thing with you.
Should we go there? I can copy and paste too!
Svensker
@Kilgore Trout:
He’s not “flaunting” any law. He may be “flouting” a law, but I don’t know for sure if he is or not.
ETA: Late pedant alert.
different-church-lady
@Kola Noscopy: Why didn’t you just say PUMA and be done with it then? Would have saved us all a lot of time.
different-church-lady
@Kola Noscopy:
Gosh, you’re adding so much valuable stuff to the discussion I can’t for the life of me see why anyone would want to filter you out.
different-church-lady
@FlipYrWhig:
Well, let’s be fair here: Dukakis never had a chance either.
Lojasmo
@Kola Noscopy:
Because center-right republicans never made recess appointments?
Some of us voted for Obaba BECAUSE he’s a pragmatic consensus builder.
Shorter lojasmo: fuuuuuuck yooooooo anal algesia.
ruemara
@Schlemizel: You have no evidence and frankly, calling you a person with confirmation bias is hardly an insult. I provided you with evidence, straight from the woman’s mouth, you then said that was insufficient to put rest to your speculation that there was shenanigans. You fit the description. Sucks to be you, but there it is.
Odie Hugh Manatee
@Sandusky Rape Apologist:
No thanks, your pedo assistance is not welcome.
Kola Noscopy
@different-church-lady:
So now you assume I supported Hillary? Can you Bots conceive of anyone operating outside the constraints of your tiny tribal thinking?
“us” Giggle
different-church-lady
@A Humble Lurker: Oh for christ sake, how the hell do you expect Kola to keep track of all the shit he makes up on the spot?
Kola Noscopy
@Odie Hugh Manatee:
Oh come on, baby killer…aren’t you sick of me and Samara and Veritas and Corner Stone?
And now that ACL is gone, wouldn’t your life be a lot easier if you didn’t come to BJ at all?
different-church-lady
@Kola Noscopy: Supporting Hillary is nothing to be ashamed of. Can’t understand why you’d want to keep that under wraps.
Mattminus
When they say this is “unprecedented”, they mean that no black man has ever made a recess appointment before. Thats where we have to draw the line to defend the Constitution. While I’m not a “racist”, per se, my principled originalism requires me to refuse to recognize his full personhood.
Kola Noscopy
@Mattminus:
You think this is profound but it’s stupid.
pseudonymous in nc
Congratulations, Kola, you and Veritas are now sharing a room in the Pie Filter Motel. Use protection.
Odie Hugh Manatee
@Sandusky Rape Apologist:
Not really, you child rape apologist. Maybe it would be a bit more peaceful but definitely not easier. If that was the case I would have quit long ago. CS is easy to ignore because he shits around in a few places so it’s easy to step over it. Moto4LocoChan actually makes valid points once in a while, though from a rather twisted viewpoint. Veritas is DougJ, so that’s easy to ignore.
On the other hand, you shit all over the place so much that it’s nearly impossible to avoid it.
Congratulations on your accomplishment?
pseudonymous in nc
@PeakVT: I’ll get the Article II S 3 reference right this time (my emph):
IANACL, so I don’t know whether the current reading applies the “on extraordinary occasions” clause to the enumerated power to adjourn Congress in the event of the two chambers disagreeing, but the verb structure, with the two instances of “he may”, suggests a plain-language interpretation that suggests otherwise.
Mnemosyne
@Odie Hugh Manatee:
You missed the high comedy from a couple of days ago when KC informed me that I clearly have a mental problem because I post too much and insist on putting comments on every thread.
No, really. He really did.
Kola Noscopy
@pseudonymous in nc:
You don’t have any stupid filter, loser.
A Conservative Teacher
@Kilgore Trout: Even Obama knows what he is doing is illegal and unconstitutional. In his statement issued by the White House, he said that he considers Congress to in effect be in recess- but not “in recess.” He says that their pro forma sessions are hurting him from doing his job- but not that they have recessed and now he can now legally make recess appointments. He knows what he is doing is illegal.
I’m surprised that you guys are all okay with this kind of activity- an executive deeming that the elected Representatives of Congress are in recess, even though they are not (which even Obama admits). Congress are our elected officials and you may not agree with what they are doing, but they are not in recess, Obama knows they are not in recess, and yet he made recess appointments anyways and is defying someone to stop him. That’s wrong. Don’t defend the guy when he’s wrong, even if he helps out you- that’s wrong to do.
Kola Noscopy
@Odie Hugh Manatee:
YOU LIE!
I am guessing I skip four out of five threads, and at times days at a time. You’re simply one of my stalkers, drawn like a moth to a flame. Even now you can’t help yourself. Here we are, cuddled up at the dying embers of this near dead thread, you still pleading for my attention. Cute…come here, you…
Kola Noscopy
@Mnemosyne:
Would you deny that you post multiple times in nearly every BJ thread?
YOU LIE!
Odie Hugh Manatee
@Mnemosyne:
Oh I saw it and laughed at the projection.
I decided to respond to the troll because every time I do the Reply link in my response to his original post now points instead to his sick post about the Sandusky rape.
Every time I respond to him that link will be right at the top for anyone to click on.
I hope he keeps engaging me because I like sharing! :D
Odie Hugh Manatee
@Sandusky Rape Apologist:
YOU’RE A PEDO!
Your turn.
eemom
@Kola Noscopy:
now Timothy, I have to interject.
You keep telling folks they don’t have a pie filter.
You don’t KNOW they don’t have a pie filter.
A Humble Lurker
@Kola Noscopy:
So how were your own words not saying what I’m saying they’re saying? I’m willing to listen to you explain it. I could use a good laugh.
By the way, paste away. I’ve got nothing to hide. Though I doubt you’ll find that much. (points at own name)
B W Smith
@eemom: So Kola is formally our very own Timmeh? How did I miss that?
MattMinus
@A Conservative Teacher:
“Historically, the recess appointments clause has been given a practical interpretation. As Alexander Hamilton wrote in Federalist No. 67, the clause enables the president to keep the government fully staffed when the Senate is not “in session for the appointment of officers.” . . . [A 1905 Senate report] cautioned that a “recess” means “something actual, not something fictitious.” The executive branch has long taken the same common-sense view. In 1921, citing opinions of his predecessors dating back to the Monroe administration, Attorney General Harry M. Daugherty argued that the question “is whether in a practical sense the Senate is in session so that its advice and consent can be obtained. To give the word ‘recess’ a technical and not a practical construction, is to disregard substance for form.”
The Senate, of course, does not meet as a body during a pro forma session. By the terms of the recess order, no business can be conducted, and the Senate is not capable of acting on the president’s nominations. That means the Senate remains in “recess” for purposes of the recess appointment power, despite the empty formalities of the individual senators who wield the gavel in pro forma sessions.”
Guess who made this argument?
ksmiami
Why is “Conservative Teacher” polluting my favorite Blog? Clue to you – Since Obama’s inauguration, the Republicans have done everything in their power to basically prevent the President from governing despite the fact he BENT OVER FUCKING BACKWARDS to include them and reach out to them. However, with a nation of 330 million people, he actually has to well govern, and his recess appointments are a great step in doing the business he was elected to do.
I am not an OBOT, but it has been abhorrent to watch the Republicans ruin the gears of our Democracy. I am hardly a fear mongerer, but I strongly believe that if any more of these Republican asswipes get elected, we will simply no longer be a democracy and you can kiss the American experiment goodbye. You see, I want to fight them because I think we are in the middle of a long cold revolution and our side needs to wake up.
So you can take your sanctimonious “concern” while ignoring the causes somewhere else. YOUR SIDE HAS NO STANDING to make the case that Obama has somehow run against the grain of his duty when your side has been driving our country off a cliff FOR 30-40 FUCKING YEARS!!!!!!!!
chris
The WAPO (caution wapo link) gave an explanation and some accompanying legal precedent as to the opinion that senate is truly not “in session” Since they are not “in session” in a manner in which they can fulfill their advice and consent role the session is in effect a sham.
chopper
@Kola Noscopy:
♪one of these things is not like the other♪
MattMinus
@eemom:
C’mon, they never do. I, myself, had the pleasure of catching the world’s shittiest blogger in the act on such a claim.
The kind of forum warriors that have to crow about filtering people can’t stand not being able to see what s being said.
chris
forgot linky
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/10/14/AR2010101405441.html
Obama probably just put the nail in the coffin on the pro forma session scam. We all know the Dem’s used it to great effect but UPPERDOWN VOTE!! UPPERDOWN VOTE!! will happen a little more often now. I think thats a good thing.
PeakVT
@pseudonymous in nc: I wouldn’t extend “extraordinary” to the adjournment portion because of the addition of “and in case”.
What I do think the wording leaves open is whether both chambers have to agree to adjourn, but only differ on the time, before the President has authority to adjourn. Only a broader reading would apply right now, where one chamber would (presumably) like to adjourn, and the other doesn’t. And don’t know if “time” was meant to imply a starting point or a duration, though it obviously could imply any time-related issue.
chopper
@LTMidnight:
hey now, she voted for bill ‘DOMA/DADT/welfare reform/deregulation/dropping bombs on yugoslavia’ clinton twice and that dude was a super liberal.
PeakVT
@A Conservative Teacher: Well, if you’re going to be a stickler, you should also note that the Senate is failing to do it’s job as well.
You see here that the Senate is obligated to provide “advice”, which it isn’t doing. It is not voting down nominees it doesn’t like, and it’s not providing advice on whom it would confirm. It is flat out refusing to vote on anyone because it doesn’t want the affected agencies to do their jobs. That’s nullification.
Kola Noscopy
@eemom:
YOU LIE!
FlipYrWhig
@A Conservative Teacher:
Oh, you have NO IDEA what evils we’re capable of defending around here. Drones, rapes, laughing helicopters, Corner Stone, it’s like something out of Hieronymous Bosch. This ain’t nothin’.
Kola Noscopy
@A Humble Lurker:
OK. I’ll try again, why not?
My point was…that if the child involved was a willing participant IN THE MOMENT of the alleged sexual incident, then it could well be horrendously traumatic/humiliating/embarrassing for a third party to go charging in, guns blazing, to break things up at that moment. The child would know he had been viewed cooperating by a third party, and would be horrified and further scarred.
IF THAT WAS THE CASE, and I’m speculating, as is anyone who wasn’t there, then why WOULDN’T it be more humane to leave the scene and notify higher ups as appropriate, leaving things to be dealt with in a less traumatizing manner?
In the comment you linked to, I also went on to say that it is probable that Sandusky IS a pedo and should be dealt with accordingly. So please tell me where I’m defending Sandusky?
The commenters who were all about running in to break things up no matter what, etc, etc, seemed to me to be all about their own imagined bravado and faux heroism, the child’s feelings be damned.
Finally, if you’ve been following the PSU case, you’ll know that McQueary’s testimony related to that incident appears to be falling apart and the prosecution may end up not even using his “eyewitness” account.
Mostly, I’m just tired of Internet heroes in general pretending to know the unknowable and projecting themselves as self righteous heroes into situations they know almost nothing about, other than what is in the news.
AxelFoley
@Linda Featheringill:
OWS can go eat a bag of dicks. They’ve wasted whatever chance they had to make a real positive difference.
MattMinus
@Kola Noscopy:
All the pedo comments used to confused me.
Now I get it.
A Conservative Teacher
@ksmiami: Buddy, the ends don’t justify the means. You can argue all you want about treating people unequally and violating the law when it serves your purpose, but I’m not going to buy it.
Seriously guys, even Obama doesn’t think that the Senate is in recess. In the White House document that was released, it says “the Senate has effectively been in recess for weeks”. Effectively is not the same as technically, and the only thing that really matters here is whether or not the Senate was in recess or not.
And go ahead and quote TR- the Senate has been meeting every three days, and no President has ever considered that ‘in recess’ and made an appointment. Go ahead and trot out all your ‘Bush is evil’ and ‘GOP is obstructing’ arguments, but those are simply justifications for breaking the law.
Don’t worry though, I’m sure when they come for you someday, you’ll be well-versed in reasons why they can break the law if they think it’s good and you’ll go meekly.
Mnemosyne
@Kola Noscopy:
As do you. So I take it that you’re confessing here that you have a serious mental problem that you need to get some help with since, according to you, posting multiple comments in a single thread is a warning sign of mental illness?
chopper
@Kola Noscopy:
how the fuck can a child be a willful participant in that act? what the hell is wrong with you?
Chuck Butcher
What I do wonder about in the Left/middle debate isn’t how to punish pols, but exactly how bad things have to get for the voters to get the idea? Now I mean that quite seriously. If 07-09 wasn’t bad enough to get the idea across sufficiently that the ’10 elections didn’t turn out as they did – what precisely would it take?
Despite the horseshit peddled around here, ’10 happened as it did because the “middle” didn’t come out and those that did swapped to “R”. My question is what does it take to get those idjits to come out and vote, first, and secondly to look at the GOPer ideas in regard to outcomes.
Addressing “D” voters willingness to play at farther and farther right bullshit is dependent on what those middle idjits will get up to. People like Kola “head up butt” will reflexively act as though those pols didn’t get elected.
It is not helpful to refuse to criticize “your guy” when what you mean isn’t that “he” isn’t your guy but id not as scary as the others, you convince no one and do enhance the “they’re all the same” argument. If you mean “he isn’t as bad but we’re trying to do better” then say that. Quit acting as though “your guy” can walk on fucking water when it isn’t the case.
Mnemosyne
@A Conservative Teacher:
You have no idea what either of those words mean, do you?
Here, I’ll help you out: “effectively” means that since the Senate is not able to do any actual business (like, say, vote on the extension of the debt ceiling) because they don’t have a quorum, it is, for all practical purposes, in recess. The Obama administration is arguing that if Congress cannot conduct business (since they need a quorum to do so), they are effectively in recess.
“Technically” is a word that 13-year-olds use to try and argue that since they didn’t actually poke their sister’s arm while sitting in the back seat chanting, “I’m not touching you!” while hovering their index finger a centimeter away from her arm, they shouldn’t be punished because, technically, they never did touch her.
Clear now?
AxelFoley
@Loviatar:
Oh, shit, speaking of trolls, looks who’s back.
Odie Hugh Manatee
@MattMinus:
He’s just the kind of guy that Obama opponents want on their team.
They can have him.
A Humble Lurker
@Kola Noscopy:
Tell me something. Putting aside the whole question of consent, how is it ever fair for an adult to be in a relationship with a child? Even if said child ‘liked it’ (which is impossible to ascertain) the adult holds all the power in the ‘relationship’. Say the child DIDN’T like it, (shocker, I know) what could they do about it? What if the adult in the ‘relationship’ threatened to get the kid expelled if they didn’t comply with his wishes, or if the kid went to another adult to help him make it stop and that adult ignored it?
Taking that into account, even if the kid ‘liked’ it, how is is ever okay to not stop that when you witness it? How is an adult in that situation, even if the kid ‘liked’ it, ever not taking advantage of a child and should be stopped?
chopper
@Mnemosyne:
‘technically’ is what you’d use to excuse a recess appointment when the senate takes christmas off. ‘effectively’ is what you use when the senate takes a few weeks off but has one guy show up every 3 days to turn the lights on for 30 seconds.
i’ve never liked the horseshit ‘fake recess’ shit. if you really don’t want the president to recess appoint anyone then don’t go on fucking vacation.
Kola Noscopy
@A Humble Lurker:
sigh…where did I say that it is “ever fair for an adult to be in a relationship with a child?” I never fucking said that, or anything that could be construed as such except by the most biased and closed minded reader.
I agree with everything you just wrote AFTER your question in this comment, which implies otherwise. It is NOT fair; it is never ok for an adult/child sexual relationship. I agree with you. I am only addressing myself to the immediate situation as presented in the alleged Sandusky shower incident.
If the kid involved in a specific incident is witnessed enthusiastically participating in the act, I would advise going to the proper authorities as soon as possible, perhaps also confronting the adult OUT OF THE PRESENCE OF THE CHILD, or otherwise putting a stop to the overall situation without traumatizing the child in the moment by rushing in to make a huge scene and further humiliating the kid. If possible, in that instance, it would be good if the kid NEVER knew he had been observed at all.
If, however, it was clear that the child is being physically harmed, forced, injured, resisting, or otherwise not a willing participant then I would recommend physically intervening immediately. It just depends on the particular situation.
No one here has disagreed with me HONESTLY without attributing to me things I never wrote or advocated. Just black/white bullshit morality fantasies.
A Humble Lurker
@Kola Noscopy:
BECAUSE it’s not fair, why shouldn’t it be stopped when you see it?
And because it’s not fair and a kid may lie or fake ‘enjoyment’ so that the adult in the situation doesn’t hurt them, how can you judge if the kid is enjoying it and it would be traumatic to stop it if it appears the kid is enjoying it?
You can’t.
different-church-lady
@chopper: Name begins with a vowel?
different-church-lady
@MattMinus: The very subject of that thread proves beyond a shadow of a doubt that ABL could only be, at maximum, the world’s second shittiest blogger.
different-church-lady
@Kola Noscopy:
Irony just coughed up a fur ball.
Kola Noscopy
@A Humble Lurker:
Well, then, by all means, if you encounter this situation, rush on in. No one can stop you.
Mnemosyne
@A Humble Lurker:
Ah, but since KC totally would have loved to be molested by his coach when he was a kid, clearly we have to give the benefit of the doubt to the molester and assume the kid is enjoying him/herself.
The multiple testimonies from molestation victims and information from actual therapists who work with molestation victims saying otherwise have never and will never convince KC that kids don’t actually love being molested by adults. That’s how he built himself a reputation as a pedophile.
Omnes Omnibus
@FlipYrWhig: No one was defending the helicopters.
nastybrutishntall
@tBone:
See, this is why we put pretty words together. To make good things.
Kola Noscopy
@Mnemosyne:
You’re such a dishonest, biased, ignorant, tribal piece of shit. Just a sad, sad liar who can’t make their argument without totally distorting the position of the other side and twisting their words beyond belief.
I hope you are unaware of what you’re trying to do: Shaming me now, 40 years later, for feelings I had as an adolescent gay boy. Fuck you, witch.
I’m glad you weren’t around when I was a 12 year old and had fantasies about my coach. Had I confided in you, you no doubt would have slapped me a good one and informed all relevant authorities; maybe shamed me into suicide. Certainly you would have added to my then self-hatred and fear of being gay; people just like you did a pretty good job without your assistance though.
But never mind any of that, you sanctimonious child killer; your need to feel superior and RIGHT would have justified all.
Because it couldn’t have been that I had an adolescent crush on someone, complete with sexual fantasies…no, what I clearly wanted was to be “molested” (a dirty, nasty, bad, bad word!) by an older man and that is beyond the pale.
Never mind the older man was probably 19 or so. I’m sure that had something happened between us, you wouldn’t have hesitated to string him up as a PEDOPHILE. Because in your world one is a child until the day before their 18th birthday and an adult the day after; that’s it, period, finito, no room for shades of gray in the world of the self righteous child killer.
Freak. You and yours are proof that the right wing has no monopoly on insane, black/white, blind-ass, sex-hating puritanism.
Those knitting needles you use? Knit yourself a heart. Maybe a brain too, but the heart is the place to start.
Karen
@Svensker:
Which just proves that firebaggers and teabaggers are one and the same.
Mnemosyne
@Kola Noscopy:
I’m not shaming you for having fantasies as a child. I’m shaming you for being unable to grow beyond those fantasies and understand that the reality of an adult molesting a child and your childhood sexual fantasies are very different things.
When I was 10, I wanted to fuck Harrison Ford. That doesn’t mean that Harrison Ford should get to fuck as many 10-year-olds as he pleases because, hey, they were asking for it by getting crushes on him.
What I find horrifying is that you don’t seem to understand that you’re making the same excuse that every child molester makes: I didn’t want to do it, but that 10-year-old seduced me!
Kola Noscopy
What the fuck are you talking about you nitwit? Where did I say any such thing or anything close?
These statements you make are YOUR fantasies, not mine.
I really think you might be insane.
Kola Noscopy
I specifically stated in my original post and in multiple posts on this topic since that adult/child relationships/sex are wrong and should be appropriately dealt with by relevant authorities. I said Sandusky is more likely than not guilty of pedophilia.
Why isn’t that enough? What more do you want?
Do you honestly think that if I had had a fling with my 19 year old coach that would be the equivalent of what Sandusky is alleged to have done? Is it all black/white to you?
Do you read?
nastybrutishntall
@TooManyJens: cleek’s BJ filter has some people toutin’ pies like it’s Barnum & Bailey’s out here! http://ok-cleek.com/blogs/12952/bj-pie-filter-update/
Kola Noscopy
@nastybrutishntall:
you don’t have any fucking pie filter, loser.
nastybrutishntall
Oh lordy, the BJ pie filter is giving KN Jelly some ROFLs. Please, I need a doctor.
eemom
@Kola Noscopy:
She is not insane nor heartless; far from it.
The problem here, Timster, is that you are making a very subtle point from a very unique perspective. I think I understand what you are saying — but when you are talking about grownups having sex with kids, the deck is far too stacked with justifiable horror at the undeniable fact that most if not all such situations are abusive and exploitative — a point which you acknowledge yourself — for most people not to react with similar horror at what they PERCEIVE you to be suggesting.
I hope that makes sense.
Kola Noscopy
@eemom:
THANK YOU for at least trying to understand what’ I’ve been saying, eemom. I appreciate it.
Would that most people weren’t afraid of subtlety…of trying to push the envelope of what they are willing to consider; ie. shades of gray.
And who is this “Timster” of which you speak?
eemom
@Kola Noscopy:
ah, c’mon. You got me to admit that I have the hots for that image of sulking, scowling, “vaguely menacing” Greenwald wearing the same old yucky sweat clothes every day at NYU Law School back in the ’90s…..the least you can do is admit that You. Are. Tim.
Mnemosyne
@Kola Noscopy:
I want you to admit that the fact that you fantasized about sex when you were a child doesn’t mean that kids who get molested are participating voluntarily. It’s like saying that, because you once fantasized about how great life would be if you were an orphan, Erik and Lyle Menendez shouldn’t have gone to jail.
A 10-year-old having a “fling” with a 19-year-old? That sure as shit is child molestation. Because — newsflash — it’s always bad for an adult to take advantage of a child’s sexuality because the child is incapable of understanding what the ramifications of an adult sexual relationship are. Playing doctor with another 10-year-old is not the same thing as intercourse with a grown adult.
And I’m especially indignant about this because, believe it or not, many gay men were molested as children because perverts took advantage of the fact that boys who were gay were easier targets:
And your argument is, “Well, since they were gay, they must have loved being molested, so what’s the big deal?”
Mnemosyne
And since I’m sure there are guys on here who can’t talk about what happened to them, here’s a helpful link:
http://www.malesurvivor.org/
eemom
@Kola Noscopy:
Also too, while that is true in general — you have to allow for the context here, as I was trying to say above. Mnem and the other good folks here are VERY perceptive to shades of gray. It’s just that the ice is very, very thin on a topic like this.
Kola Noscopy
Wait a minute. When did you admit this? You have the hots for GG and this is why your rage against the Zilla with such passion? Of course I suspected, but I missed the confession.
darn. It explains so much.
OK. Fine. It’s me. :D
You’re good.
Mnemosyne
@eemom:
KN is taking the “if it’s going to happen, why not lie back and enjoy it?” stance of someone who’s never actually been assaulted. I find his insistence that his childhood fantasies about sex should take precedence over the lived experiences of actual survivors to be extremely offensive.
eemom
@Mnemosyne:
I know I am going to regret this….but I think what he is trying to say is not that the kid “loved it”, but that — maybe — the kid, if he WAS gay, and was attracted to the young man — was overwhelmed with conflicting feelings.
But that is not in any way to excuse what the adult did.
eemom
@Mnemosyne:
ok, I’m out. Over my head here.
Hope you’re not mad at me, Mnem.
eemom
@Kola Noscopy:
Dude. You ASKED me the question YESTERDAY, and I responded then.
How crushing to find that my heart’s darkest secrets make so LITTLE impression. : (
dogwood
Look BJ is a fucking free-for-all and I get that. But there are lines that just can’t be crossed. Period. Bringing up KN’s Sandusky post as a bludgeon is one of those lines. Twisting what he said is indecent and mean. And I don’t give a rat’s ass about the fact that he does the same thing all the time to others here. The fact is he is here, and you can respond to him or not. If you choose to respond, pick an honorable weapon. The Sandusky thing is sickening.
Mnemosyne
@eemom:
I’m not mad — I think you’re just coming in partway through. I actually tried to convince KN at one point that conflicting feelings pretty much define a molestation situation, but he wouldn’t even admit that much. He literally cannot distinguish between his childhood fantasies and reality when it comes to this.
Kola Noscopy
@Mnemosyne:
You are a dishonest idiot. Of course it doesn’t mean that of ALL kids, but it is true of some.
I was 12, but don’t let facts get in the way. So would you argue that a fling between a very mature 17 years and 364 day-old and an immature 18 years and one day old is molestation? Where’s the line?
Who the fuck do you think you are? I WAS an insecure, fearful gay kid, the kind you’re pontificating about. Don’t you dare lecture me on what it’s all about and what it’s like.
You and yours always pushed ACL as the “black female voice” on this blog. But when it comes to a “gay male, former gay child voice” in comments, your message is “shut up; I know better.” Just fuck you.
Some kids are raped and molested and abused by older people and it’s horrible. Some have sexual experiences with older people and it’s no big deal. Some have sexual experiences with older people and it’s a fond memory. Some have sexual experiences with older people and never give it a second thought until someone like you comes along to “educate” them on how fucked up they ought to feel. Them’s the facts, lady. It sucks for you that you can’t handle reality.
I’m all for helping those for whom it’s horrible. I am most certainly NOT for shaming and traumatizing and lecturing the rest, as you have a clitoral hard on to do.
You want to shove all those different cases, with their wide variety of individuals and circumstances and make them all the most horrible thing in the world. To that, I say you are an awful person who creates more trauma and damage than she seeks to heal.
Marc
@eemom:
It’s goddamn pathetic that Tim is pulling this crap. I remember when he showed up here, pissed people off, and developed the nasty persona he’s showing right now.
He really is motivated purely by spite. The actual subject doesn’t matter worth a damn; the only thing that does matter is yanking peoples chains. For hundreds and hundreds of hours. That’s why he’s talking about pedophilia: because it’s an effective way to jerk emotions around. He doesn’t care about anything but using words to hurt.
Kola Noscopy
@Mnemosyne:
Again: What the fuck are you talking about? You are such a fucking liar. You just make shit up and quote it as fact.
Kola Noscopy
@eemom:
Link please. Seriously, I missed it in the thread, I guess.
Damn, I would definitely have responded.
So you lusted over GG in college. That is awesome. :D
Kola Noscopy
@Marc:
You have NO idea what you’re talking about, Marc, but don’t let that stop you. It never does.
I say what I believe. You don’t like it, fuck you.
Mnemosyne
@Kola Noscopy:
So which group do you fall into?
Kola Noscopy
@Kola Noscopy:
eemom: ARE YOU CERTAIN that GG was over 18 when you lusted after him? Because if not, Mem would like you to know that you and or him or somebody somewhere should be traumatized and feel really, really ugly about it.
Mnemosyne
@Marc:
That’s why it’s especially pathetic he’s trying to pull the “don’t tell me what it’s like to be a gay man!” card when no one but him is talking about being gay.
It’s his favorite schtick: be vicious to people until they respond the same way and then sob about how he’s the real victim.
Kola Noscopy
@Mnemosyne:
That would be absolutely none of your busybody, judgmental, Puritannical business, child killer.
But maybe you can touch yourself while you imagine…the worst.
Mnemosyne
@Kola Noscopy:
I know that you’re dying for me to tell you the story about how I was molested at age 5 so you can jerk off to it tonight, but nah. gonna. happen.
Kola Noscopy
“That’s why it’s especially pathetic he’s trying to pull the “don’t tell me what it’s like to be a gay man!” card when no one but him is talking about being gay.”
wow, doubling down with the lying again, eh? You’ve been pontificating about the Sandusky case since it happened. This discussion started with another poster in this thread until you butted in; we were discussing the fucking Sandusky incident, which you might have noticed, involves alleged gay sex.
Dishonest child killer.
eemom
um, just to clarify, the part about lusting for GG was….what’s the word…..SNARK.
[plotz]
Mnemosyne
@Kola Noscopy:
Really? A 60-year-old man having sex with a 10-year-old boy is “gay sex” and not child molestation?
So, what, your argument is that there should be no age of consent for gay sex and 60-year-olds should be free to do whatever they want with 10-year-olds as long as they can get outward compliance?
This is the argumentation style that had us asking where we should send your NAMBLA card.
Kola Noscopy
@Mnemosyne:
Nice. you’re a sad little person who can’t see outside their own personal envelope of damage and imagine that there are other experiences completely different than their own.
And I wouldn’t believe such a story on your say so anyway. You want EVERYONE to be a victim, which only disrespects the experiences of those who truly are victims.
Mnemosyne
@Kola Noscopy:
Yep. I knew that would be your next ploy. Sorry, you’re going to have to surf for kiddie pron to get off tonight.
Kola Noscopy
@Mnemosyne:
Yeah, nimrod, that’s exactly what I said, right after the part where I said Sandusky is likely a pedophile and should be dealt with appropriately by the appropriate authorities and court system. Do you really hear the voices that say this shit in your ear? Or do you consciously just make shit up and don’t give a damn?
Mnemosyne
@Kola Noscopy:
You’re the one who keeps saying the Sandusky case is about “gay sex.” You said it two comments ago.
You seem to be unable to divorce “gay sex” and “child molestation” in your mind and end up sounding like one of the wackjob denizens of the religious right who insist that all gay men are child molesters.
ETA: And, yes, equating pedophiles and gay men is something that many gay men find offensive, which is why Yutsano calls you a pedo at every opportunity. After all, that’s what you keep doing to him every time you insist that a 60-year-old molesting a 10-year-old is “gay sex.”
Kola Noscopy
@Mnemosyne:
now you’re just playing word police. More dishonesty.
Sandusky allegedly put his penis in some boys’ butts and mouths and vice versa. These are physical combinations of orifices and organs generally included in any definition of gay sex.
The fact that the physical acts are under duress makes them molestation or rape or whatever AND gay sex, as in “the perp forced the victim to participate in various forms of gay sex.”
I’ll use whatever combination of words suits me. You’re invited to do the same. You don’t get to tell me what sentences and word combinations are permitted, see?
Do you REALLY think that I, an adult gay man, believe “all gay men are child molesters?” Of course you don’t. Why should you or I give a shit what word combinations twisted right wingers use, let alone allow them to control our speech?
???
Kola Noscopy
hmmm…after all this, moderation?
Maybe it was the word “penis?”
:P
Yutsano
@Mnemosyne: I just had to see where this Charlie Foxtrot of a thread ended up so far. Right about as I expected with Special Timmeh pedo leading the NAMBLA charge.
It was one of the main arguments for not changing the psychological definition of homosexuality in 1971. Until researchers determined most pedophiles are actually heterosexual. Timmeh is just special.
different-church-lady
@Kola Noscopy: Jesus, what a performance!
How anyone can’t see right through your shtick is beyond me.
Mnemosyne
@Yutsano:
You’d think that someone like KN who purports to be a gay man might have heard that smear once or twice, like maybe when the Catholic Church tried to claim that all of the priests that molested kids were gay. He must live in a cave somewhere.
Which would explain a lot, actually.
Yutsano
@Mnemosyne: He’s not even fun to provoke anymore. He just lives to be the contrarian gadfly and take the unpopular position because he thinks it shows his authenticity as an individual.
Oh and this:
is either a flat-out lie, or his claim to have not voted in elections for decades is.
Odie Hugh Manatee
@Yutsano:
I think Timmeh has made himself up to be a caricature of a gay man, a very negative caricature, deliberately. I think his ‘purpose’ is to denigrate gay people through his actions, spreading his special ‘message’ to all he can. Though it really doesn’t matter, I honestly doubt that Timmeh is gay.
All that really matters is that he’s one sick asshole.
Mnemosyne
@Yutsano:
Sadly, I must head off to bed now. My other boss comes back from vacation tomorrow and I have to remember what I forgot to do while she was gone. But I’m sure Timmeh will come charging back onto the thread after we’re both gone to declare VICTORY!
@different-church-lady:
Is it homophobic for me to say KN reminds me of Dr. Smith on “Lost in Space”? Probably is, and yet it’s so very true.
Kola Noscopy
Well lookee here: Four of the most foul, hateful, self righteous know it all liars on BJ, lurking in the alley, bitching about little old me.
One measure of a person is who and what their enemies are.
Thank you for assuring me I’m on the right track. You people are pigs.
different-church-lady
@Kola Noscopy:
The veins in your neck must be swelling with pride right now.
The prophet Nostradumbass
Is it bad of me to hope that this thread causes Colonoscopy to have an artery burst?
Kola Noscopy
Let me check…no.
But I’m sure the veins in your twat are swelling with pus, bile, and the viscous side effects of untold venereal diseases, all of which have also circulated thru your cranium and eaten away your brain.
Yutsano
@Kola Noscopy: Shorter pedo: I got nothin’.
You’re trite. But please feel free to be enraged at that word.
Kola Noscopy
Good night, Nuts! I’m off to rape boys. Have fun fantasizing about it while you tug at your tiny, clit-like peenie.
Sweet dreams!
The prophet Nostradumbass
Heh.
Yutsano
@The prophet Nostradumbass: I LIKE PIE!!
Odie Hugh Manatee
I think we hit a nerve with him. Notice that he blew a gasket when his being gay was being questioned? He went right off the deep end into the slime he loves so much. This piece of shit isn’t gay, he’s a ratfucker who is pretending he is a pedo gay liberal to make gay people look bad.
If he’s gay then Dubya was the greatest president ever.
PeakVT
@PeakVT: Scratch everything I said about adjournment in this thread. Cripes.
bob h
I’m guessing that their insensate rage at this will provoke Republicans to more self-destructive craziness about the debt ceiling, payroll tax, etc.
chopper
@Mnemosyne:
and she keeps missing the fact that when it comes to a child of that age, ‘voluntary’ doesn’t exist. it doesn’t matter how hard the kid might be crushing on some adult, he or she cannot by definition give consent. it is not, in any possible way, consentual or voluntary. full stop.
chopper
@Kola Noscopy:
no, it is not true of any. a 10 year old cannot ‘voluntarily participate’ in sex with an adult. a 10 year old cannot by definition give legal consent to that. it’s called just straight-up rape.
chopper
@Kola Noscopy:
rape, rape, rape and rape.
Kola Noscopy
@chopper:
You know, Chop Chop, you can try to control other peoples’ use of language all you want, it doesn’t change my reality or experience or opinion, so bite it, sanctimonious know it all.
chopper
@Kola Noscopy:
well, nobody can change your opinion, since you’re a buffoon. i don’t know it all, but i know what rape is. and an adult fuckin a 10 year old kid is straight-up rape no matter the feelings of the kid. full stop.
Kola Noscopy
@chopper:
“full stop” is such a concise, fully fleshed out argument.
Morons like ABL use it a lot when they got nothin’.