Another reason why Presidential Powers need to be curbed

Two words. Recess Appointments.

Yesterday Bush, after decrying the Democrats for taking their spring vacation (ironically since the guy has spent an average of 2 out of every 5 days on vacation since he took office 6 years ago), did what he always does. He turned around and pulled slimey reprehensible actions behind everyone's back.

This time he appointed three people to offices who had no shot in hell of being appointed. Most notable was Sam Fox as Ambassador to Belgium. Fox is the Missouri billionaire who gave $50,000 to the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth, who slimed, lied and distorted John Kerry's record so horrifically in 2004. Wonder why Bush didn't denounce those ads? They were the best thing he had... well aside from election fraud scams in Ohio, to win that damned thing. So when the Senate showed Mr. Fox some serious teeth (including a fantastic rebuttal by John Kerry fighting back against the liars who tried to assault his character), Bush asked that the nomination be withdrawn.

Likely with the complete intention of putting him in as long as Congress was looking the other way.

Fox though wasn't the only person that Bush installed.

Bush's second recess appointment, Andrew Biggs, was appointed as deputy commissioner of Social Security. Biggs has been working very hard to privatize social security and had no shot of being put in to work for the very organization he wants to overhaul and dismantle.

Same can be said for the third appointment, Susan Dudley. Dudley, appointed to the Office of Management and Budget in a regulatory oversight capacity has been a stern opponent of regulatory practices at George Mason.

According to Nicole Belle at Crooks and Liars:

Some of her targets have included EPA health standards for smog, opposition to lower-polluting cars, opposition to air bags, and opposition to stronger regulations for arsenic in drinking water. For some reason, the Senate had some concerns about her nomination. The White House not only doesn’t care about the concerns, it also decided it doesn’t care about the constitutional nomination process.

Nice. Sort of reminds me of August 2005 when Bush used these same recess appointment tactics to install the no shot in hell of being confirmed, John Bolton.
You know the guy who said, "There is no UN" and that "we could lose 10 stories [at the UN building] today and it wouldn't even matter"?

Yeah that guy, who was appointed during recess to be the US Ambassador to the United Nations. Foxes guarding the chicken coop. Bush seems to like putting people in place to work at the very agencies they want to destroy.

Something like Grover Norquist's whole we need to "reduce government enough so we can drown it in a bathtub" comment I suppose.

The whole point is to deregulate everything for big business to make more of a profit. Get rid of government programs that help the poor and the environment and you can cut taxes for the rich and give corporate subsidies and government contracts. Then those favors turn into money back in the form of large contributions to the Republican party and candidates. Essentially Republicans are stealing your tax money and using government policy as a money laundering scam.

Recess Appointments, much like signing statements and executive privilege have been taken to the extreme by this President. Sure they have always been there and available to all previous Administrations but none of them combined have taken as many liberties with Presidential power as Bush has. When Democrats regain the Presidency and a larger majority in 2008, they need to work to reverse the massive damage this Administration has caused to America and then hand power and accountability back to Congress and the American people.

One final note, while nobody is crediting Pelosi for the end of the Iranian-British hostage standoff one has to wonder. Conventional wisdom says Tony Blair did the negotiating on Britain's behalf. Iranian President Ahmadinejad didn't concede that point and took credit for himself declaring their release a "gift to Britain". But even though she has taken no credit for anything other than supposedly reinforcing Bush's policies (as narrow minded and foolish as they are), Pelosi going over there still has Republicans most notably Dick Cheney himself, in a hell of a tizzy.

The Syrians actually claimed some responsibility for the release of hostages though and that has to make you wonder, if Pelosi had some impact. She might not want to accept credit for fear or political repudiation, but in my view if she helped to get a deal brokered even by just her mere presence and no other implied commentary then it shows what American diplomats could do to ease tensions and correct a lot of the problems we have in the Middle East.

Of course, first you need a President who wants peace, not unending war.

-Rp