Who Needs Democracy When You Have Bush?

Wednesday, August 03, 2005

President Bush sure has been busy this week while Congress is on break.

First, on Monday, Bush made John Bolton the U.N. ambassador for the United States in a "recess appointment". This appointment was made despite the fact that Congress (you know, the body of government who is supposed to approve this type of nomination) did not vote on it. This means that Bolton will be the U.N. ambassador until a new Congress takes office in January of 2007. Why bother with a vote when you can sneak your man in the "backdoor"?

On Tuesday, in the newest and certainly not the last "recess appointment", Bush decided he did not need the Senate and appointed Peter Cyril Wyche Flory to the position of Assistant Secretary of Defense for international security policy. Much like Bolton, Flory had not been voted on in the Senate since his nomination in June of 2004.

Who needs democracy and Congress when you have a guy like President Bush? I don't know about you, but I trust him to make all the decisions and appoint all the people he wants without any argument or investigation. All Hail Bush!

12 comments:

krissasquared said...

Hey, if Britney Spears says that she trusts Bush completely, than certainly we all should!

Jon Blaze said...

Can you put down past presidents' "recess appointments?" Just to get the correct perspective. Bush can't be the ONLY one to use this afforded right as president....or is he? I need answers.

jon blaze said...

The Constitution
(Article II, Section 2)

"The President shall have Power to fill up all Vacancies that may happen during the Recess of the Senate, by granting Commissions which shall expire at the End of their next Session."

Kira Zalan said...

“If the UN secretary building in New York lost ten stories, it wouldn’t make a bit of difference.”
– At a 1994 panel discussion sponsored by the World Federalist Association.

jmcmaster said...

very fair question Jon, for a start check this site out http://www.senate.gov/reference/resources/pdf/RS21308.pdf. It is a list of recess appointments by Presidents since Regan up to Bush's firtst term. I think those numbers speak for themselves, it has been done before but never this frequent, and I suspect although more research is needed, not as important posistions as the ones being filled now.

jmcmaster said...

Never even mind how many recess appointments, how about Bush giving Attorney General William Pryor, his second recess appointmentto the U.S. appeals court. Now with his expierence as a judge he may be the next nominee for a Supreme Court vacancy. See how the snowball grows?

Sarah said...

All Hail Bush as he installs his divisive play-makers one abuse of power at a time.

Jon Blaze said...

Has the nomination process ever been so backed up? The further we go ,the more divide we got, and the less progress we see. I have no link for that one. Dare I say...It's my opinion.

jon blaze said...

If you had the right to do something, would you do it?

Jon Blaze said...

oh ya...ITS IN THE CONSTITUTION. Even Kerry agrees its not an abuse, doesn't agree with the appointment, but understands its a right he may have used. Here, read for yourself. You might not be so "closed minded" after. - "The president has the right to make this recess appointment, but it's the wrong decision. It only diminishes John Bolton's validity and leverage to secure America's goals at the U.N. John Bolton has been rejected twice by the Senate to serve as our Ambassador to the United Nations. This is not the way to fill our most important diplomatic jobs."
certainly NOT and "abuse of power". By the way why don't you learn what "abuse of power" is before you write it. Your being inaccurate.

Jon Blaze. said...

Oh wait. here is some education on Presidents' powers. (not to good with http://www.heritage.org/Research/LegalIssues/LM2.cfm links)

(ya, it's a conservative think tank surprise surprise.) This is "Outside the Box" right?

Sarah said...

It is possible to have the right to do something under our constitution as a elected official (I use that term loosely when refering to Bush, the thief) and still exercise it in an abusive way. Pushing someone through while the Senate is on recess for political reasons is an abuse. Notice that it says "Vacancies that may happen during the Recess of the Senate". This appointment was made before the Senate went on recess. Bush just waited until they recessed. That's an abuse.

 
 
 
 
Copyright © Outside The Box