[Lurking Libertarian]

Frustrated with such pesky nuisances as the Constitution

The Constitution very explicitly permits recess appointmernts, and every President has used them. I agree with the attack on the merits of the appointees, but calling the tactic unconstitutional is simply wrong.

[Secret Agent Man]

The dems called it that when Republican presidents made recess appointments. We’re just tossing their own standard back at them. Nothing wrong with making dems live by their own words.

[Verginius Rufus]

Congress used to be gone for months on end. Until the 20th amendment was ratified in 1933, Congressional terms would begin on March 4 of an odd-numbered year, but Congress would not actually assemble until the following December, unless called into special session. The Presidential power to fill vacancies was meant for those long intervals.

In fact, the wording of Art. II, Sec. 2, is "The President shall have Power to fill up all Vacancies that may happen during the Recess of the Senate..." Obama is not talking about vacancies that happened since the Senate went on recess, but positions that have been unfilled for months. If the President can do this, why bother giving the Senate the power to confirm appointments?

[Jimmy Valentine]

Yes, but.They are only good until this fall when a new Congress is elected and is seated. Then they have to be re-submitted.

Also he cannot do successive recess appointments of the same person.