HOLD ON TO YOUR HAT'S!!! A MOMENTOUS EVENT!!! BW Eats A Bit Of Semantic Crow (Maybe*)

[Beetwasher]

Based on this article:

Obama puts bark in consumer watchdog: Elizabeth Warren

Read more: http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2010/09/16/100701/obama-puts-bark-in-consumer-watchdog.html#ixzz0zkFPCFvr

http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2010/09/16/100701/obama-puts-bark-in-consumer-watchdog.html

WASHINGTON — President Barack Obama's decision to appoint Harvard Law School professor Elizabeth Warren on Friday to oversee the creation of the new Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection cheered consumer advocates and Democrats Thursday, while dismaying Republicans and business groups.

--snip--

To avoid that, Obama chose to make her an assistant to the president and special adviser to Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner, a staff position that doesn't require Senate confirmation. The White House will announce her appointment on Friday, an administration official told McClatchy on condition of anonymity because the announcement's not yet public.

Even without being named the bureau's director, Warren's expected to wield broad power — hiring the staff and setting the mission. Once she's got the bureau up and running, Obama can appoint a formal director, to whom Warren could pass the baton of leadership, the administration official said.

Consumer advocates were thrilled.

--snip--

Read more: http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2010/09/16/100701/obama-puts-bark-in-consumer-watchdog.html#ixzz0zkFo2RjQ

Ok, now assuming THIS report is true, and I actually believe this is more accurate since I trust McClatchy's reporting more than other sources, I will eat crow. I was semantically wrong. Warren will not be TECHNICALLY Interim Director. There you have it. I will be wrong if THIS report is true, which I suspect it is.

However, there IS also this report, which I suspect is merely bad reporting, that may have lead me to the erroneous conclusion she WOULD be Director. But leave it to Obama to fuck me and find a third, BETTER way of doing this thing:

"By appointing Warren to a post within the administration - much as the White House did with "car czar" Steven Rattner and "compensation czar" Kenneth Feinberg - Obama would free her to act as the bureau's director beginning immediately while avoiding a confirmation battle. The move also will thrill the consumer groups, labor unions, academics and liberal lawmakers that have lobbied relentlessly for her to lead the new regulator."

So there you have it. When the announcement is made and it's official, I suspect that I shall be eating a big fucking helping of crow.

On the bright side: Even without being named the bureau's director, Warren's expected to wield broad power — hiring the staff and setting the mission. Once she's got the bureau up and running, Obama can appoint a formal director, to whom Warren could pass the baton of leadership, the administration official said.

Consumer advocates were thrilled.

[Beetwasher]

1. Hey! Doesn't Anyone Want To Serve Me Some Crow????

I'm hungry.

[lonestarnot]

11. I will I will, but crows are my kid's friends, so nope no can do.

:evilgrin:

[Beetwasher]

12. When I'm Through Deciphering That, I Will Swallow

But it will cost you extra.

[lonestarnot]

13. Who taught you to read anyway?

[Beetwasher]

14. Your Kids?

:shrug:

[lonestarnot]

20. Nope. You can't get anything correct can you.

[Beetwasher]

21. Can I?

:shrug:

[lonestarnot]

29. Nope.

:shrug:

[Beetwasher]

31. Well, You Are The Expert In Being Wrong

So I guess I'll just have to take your word for it.

[roguevalley]

17. he needs to appoint her on recess. I trust no one but her. I love her to death.

[Beetwasher]

19. No Way, Recess Appointments Have Set Durations

This appointment doesn't.

[kenfrequed]

49. Actually

There is absolutely nothing stopping the president from refilling an appointed position with another recess appointment at the end of the next session.

[Beetwasher]

52. So The Post Remains Empty Until Then, Yeah, That's Smart

Good plan. That wouldn't be disruptive at all, on any number of levels.

[kenfrequed]

57. Uhm no...

It would be filled for a year and then, if congress was still being idiotic about it he could easily reinstall her with another recess appointment. There is nothing illegal about doing it. It would be strange and it might make people nervous about the precedent, but it wouldn't be illegal and the position would be filled.

[Beetwasher]

58. Umm, Recess Appointments DO NOT Work Like That

"To remain in effect a recess appointment must be approved by the Senate by the end of the next session of Congress, or the position becomes vacant again; in current practice this means that a recess appointment must be approved by roughly the end of the next calendar year. Recess appointments are authorized by Article II, Section 2 of the U.S. Constitution, which states:"

[kenfrequed]

59. Yes and at the end of the year it is vacant...

There is Nothing in the constitution that forbids refilling the vacant slot with a recess appointment. Nothing. I have read it a dozen times and while strange there is nothing technically preventing it.

[Beetwasher]

62. Umm, At That Point They MUST Have A Confirmation

That's what prevents someone doing what you're suggesting. The recess appointment MUST go through the confirmation process at the end of the recess term OR someone else. You think John Bolton would just willingly leave his position if he could've just been re-recessed when his term was up? Think about it, it's a silly notion. No one's ever done what you say because they CAN'T.

"To remain in effect a recess appointment must be approved by the Senate by the end of the next session..."

You understand what the word "must" means I assume.

If an admin. tried to pull what you suggest it would be quickly ruled against in the first court that had to rule on it. It's just downright silly.

[kenfrequed]

65. source

It cites the constitution but we sort of need to have the source listed.

[Beetwasher]

66. The Constitution Is Not A Good Enough Source For You?

That's MY source. What's YOUR source to support the legitimacy of your hair brained scheme?

[kenfrequed]

68. Actually I looked it up

Your source is wikipedia.

This is the constitution

"...and he shall nominate, and by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, shall appoint Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, Judges of the supreme Court, and all other Officers of the United States, whose Appointments are not herein otherwise provided for, and which shall be established by Law: but the Congress may by Law vest the Appointment of such inferior Officers, as they think proper, in the President alone, in the Courts of Law, or in the Heads of Departments.

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"


See, you (and wikipedia) sort of added some language about forcing the appointment to stand up to the senate when actually there is no such language. Of course it is implied to some degree but technically it can be circumvented. Aside from all that why not think of the good that a year of reorganization and retasking that an appointee can accomplish. And after all that (and a good PR run) how good do you think the repukes will look playing their obstructionist nonsense again.

From a political standpoint making the obstruction and blockage the story is advantageous, especially if it looks like there is no legitimate reason for it. It is what we have failed to do so far.

[Beetwasher]

69. Source Yr hairbrained scheme

you can't. It's not doable no matter how much you twist the const. Noone has ever wasted their time with this nonsense cuz a court will declare it unconstitutional in a heartbeat.

[kenfrequed]

70. right..

Like they did with things that were blatantly unconstitutional?

Like doing away with Habeus Corpus?

[Beetwasher]

71. who is they

that has nothing to do with this.

[kenfrequed]

72. Well

I would say congress for starters, and to be honest your courts have reacted at a glacial speed to the entirety of the Bush administration and the continuation of some of his policies.

[Beetwasher]

73. But What The Fuck Does This Have To Do With My Point? Answer: NOTHING

Don't change the subject. It's obvious you want to go off on some moronic, irrelevant tangent. I won't take your stupid bait. I asked him to back up his idiotic hair brained scheme, he can't and neither can you. Courts would rule it unconstitutional in a heartbeat which is why no one would even think of trying the idiocy the poster suggests.

So, again, WTF is your point? "Your courts"??? My courts? Seriously, WTF are you going on about?

[kenfrequed]

74. You asked.

I answered.

I did not change the subject, you are trying to strawman my use of a thrid person personal pronoun into a suggestion that I am speaking conspiratorially. I answered and suggested who I was talking about and you freaked out. Are you disappointed that you couldn't paint me into a capital letter 'They?'

Get over yourself.

[Beetwasher]

75. IOW You can't source or backup yr ridiculous hairbrained scheme

Got it.

[kenfrequed]

77. Uhm...

Since it sort of is my idea, I don't really have to give a source. I don't know what you are trying to win here? "I got the last post where I indirectly insulted you so nyeah-nyeah?"

I don't even know what you are talking about anymore.

[Name removed]

78. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[opihimoimoi]

2. KnR :o)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iDRBLtgAK-U&feature=related

Happy Days thanks to them Bagger Nut Jobs and Lolo GOP

[Beetwasher]

15. Opi!

Long time bud! Aloha! I'll be coming your way next year, possibly May. Going to the islands for vacation with the whole family for my FIL's 70th birthday!

[opihimoimoi]

43. When the time comes...pm me...I am 70...not sure of my health

in 6 months....

It would be very pleasant to discuss with a sane person....

Perhaps, like you, I am surrounded by Apathetics...many of whom just don't care enough to practice civics and responsible voting...

Thanks for responding...

Come, we go Sky Dive

[Beetwasher]

55. Cool! Will Let You Know When It's Closer And Where We Will Be

Would love to meet you, bud!

[POAS]

3. Of course her actual desires

about this matter will not matter one bit to the "nattering nabobs of negativism" on the internets.

And I think the rest of Agnew's statement fits perfectly also, "They have formed their own 4-H Club -- the "hopeless, hysterical hypochondriacs of history."

OK I know Safire wrote it but Agnew gets the credit for using the line.

[kenfrequed]

8. Results matter

I'm in the 'wait and see crowd.'

Though the levels of irony layered by quoting either Agnew or Safire while posting her with a Che icon next to your name are either stunning or stupifying to me. I'm hoping for stunning.

[POAS]

16. Interesting you worry more about

my icon and the source of a quote than whether the quote fits the situation.

Well coincidentally I changed my avatar earlier after you posted and it is fitting I think for your logic here.

Now perhaps you'll excuse me while I go think up some more irony to feed your need to snark rather than discuss.

[kenfrequed]

44. Right...

Because saying you will "wait and see" is so twisted and convoluted as to escape all reason and capacity for thought. It isn't as though we are talking about absolute scientific certainty here.

I want to see how much Geithner interferes here and if Warren is allowed a free hand and what the organization accomplishes.

[POAS]

47. Why are you responding to something not said?

I didn't address your point about "wait and see' so why respond to something I didn't say unless you find what I did say too challenging. Some people like to hand out snark but can't take getting it thrown back at them so they change the subject. Is that you, I think we both know the answer.

I only addressed your rather lame snark about my avatar and my quote being ironic. Of course you might want to argue that you weren't being insulting and snarky but then that would require some interesting contortions on your part. Perhaps to the point you would resemble my new avatar.

Have a wonderful day!

[kenfrequed]

48. You're original post

Was about insulting those that might have questions about this semi-appointment. By saying "I'll wait and see" I was addressing that. As to the rest of your post, I was merely pointing out how ironic it seemed that you would use the iconic image of Che to front what felt like a loyalist, moderate, Democratic position, while citing Safire. It was ironic and remains Ironic.

Afterwhich you accused me of pretzel logic... somehow. And to simplify my response I will merely say "Which part?"

I'm not trying to twist out of anything. It is strange. It is ironic (whether intentional on your part or not). It is what it is. Unless you saw some parallel future where I did actually try to twist out of calling it ironic or strange and presciently threw up a pretzel in preperation I don't know what the hell you are talking about.

[Electric Monk]

4. Hold on to my hat's what?

[Beetwasher]

10. Oh! A Mortal Blow! A Spelling Flame!!!!

I am sunk into despair.

[alfredo]

39. SNARF!!!

[Electric Monk]

40. flamé

;-)

[alfredo]

42. Eh?

[Ignis]

61. I'll fess up: That was my first thought, as well.

Pedants unite! :toast:

[Tarheel_Dem]

5. Word on the street is, she is eyeing a run for Teddy's old Senate seat, and...

anything other than this advisory role which, presumably, will give her all the powers of "Director", while affording her the opportunity to leave in time to run in '12. Mind you, it may just be an internet rumor.

[Touchdown]

6. She was once a light in my darkness...

A radiant flower that never died. She is at once and always my dream, my love, my...
Obsession; Calvin Klein.

[Beetwasher]

9. Are You Saying I Smell Nice? Why Thank You!

If you're coming on to me, you should know, I don't come cheap.

[Binka]

18. You Come Regardless

Pathetic gushing is unbecoming. But you would not understand that. You have lost your mojo BW. FAIL.

[Beetwasher]

23. I Got My Mojo Working

But it just don't work on you. I wanna love you so bad, but I don't know what to do!

C'mere baby, and let's just see how my mojo's doin'! Thanks for being a fan! :hug:

[Touchdown]

22. Oh' your name is BEETwasher. Ok! I thought it

... Was what Lewis Black would spend his billion dollars on. Sorry, my bad!

Actually, I'm not interested. I prefer men who form their own opinions, but thank you!

[Beetwasher]

24. You're So Cute! Your Crush Is So Adorable! Just Ask Me Out Already!

I might surprise you! *wink*

[Touchdown]

25. Unless you want to escalate this talk to body fluids, then you're out of your league.

If you can't relate how much pain you can endure in my dungeon, then you probably don't have the right stuff.

[Beetwasher]

26. Ooohhh!! Kinky!! That'll Cost Extra! But I'm Game!

Let's go, cowboy!

[Touchdown]

28. I don't pay for it, especially when it's sloppy seconds from whoever

you're doin in the WH.

[Beetwasher]

30. That's Not What I Heard!

Your reputation precedes you, sugar plum!

[Touchdown]

32. You really are not good at this.

You couldn't turn on a faucet. Try and get laid, then you'll know what you want, Kid.

[Beetwasher]

33. Then Why Is Your Chair So Moist?

*growl*

[Touchdown]

41. See, you need to know that males don't get moist, Scooter.

When you're older than 12, you'll figure that out.

And I also must ask you to stop IMing me about your Dad training you. It's a little too Ozark Forest creepy.

[Beetwasher]

50. You're A Male?

That's even more extra.

[SoxFan]

27. Snark is bringing sexy back

How can you resist their charms, Beetwasher?

[Beetwasher]

54. I'm Too Sexy For My Snark

[SoxFan]

60. Right Said Beetwasher

[Beetwasher]

63. Now Those Guys Know How To Partay!

:evilgrin:

[Forkboy]

34. "I don't come cheap"

How much do you charge?

[Beetwasher]

35. For You?

I'll have to think about it. You're WAY kinky.

[Forkboy]

36. Out of your price range, for sure.

I hear you come cheap.

[Beetwasher]

37. But I Cost Plenty!

And first you'd have to shave your back.

[Forkboy]

38. I have coupons, which I've heard you're fine with.

Glad you don't drive a hard bargain, you big softy.

I don't mean that literally....your wife never said anything about that.

[Beetwasher]

51. Oh, Those Twofers Expired

But I still might bargain, with you cupcake. But the back hair does need to go and you should think about doing something about those ass pimples too! Guh!

[Cha]

7. It's all good, BW...the country

WINS!

[flamingdem]

45. ruf ruf! go Elizabeth! nt

[flamingdem]

46. ruf rec nt

[Beetwasher]

53. Woof!

:hi:

[flamingdem]

56. Rooooorf! Not even Bark Off can stop it

[Beetwasher]

64. Can I Get A Meow!

:evilgrin:

[flamingdem]

67. kitty, kitty..

"MEOW"

[snooper2]

76. So you figured out how recess appointments work?

:)

[Beetwasher]

79. Never Had Trouble With That One