Posted on 01/04/2012 4:24:29 PM PST by mandaladon
Here’s a pretty clear sign of which way the politics are moving in the fight over Obama’s decision to employ a recess appointment to install Richard Cordray as head of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau.
Senator Scott Brown — who’s facing a stiff populist challenge from Elizabeth Warren, the creator of the agency — has now come out in support of the move. His statement, sent over by his office:
“I support President Obama’s appointment today of Richard Cordray to head the CFPB. I believe he is the right person to lead the agency and help protect consumers from fraud and scams. While I would have strongly preferred that it go through the normal confirmation process, unfortunately the system is completely broken. If we’re going to make progress as a nation, both parties in Washington need to work together to end the procedural gridlock and hyper-partisanship.”
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
You guys still want him for President?
Slow down, next time, jumping on those band wagons. There’s usually quite a bit of puke on the running board.
Sure am glad FR is now clear of the semi-orgasmic chants of “Scott Brown for president!!”
..your stimulus money at work
We get these yahoos in one of two ways (or three):
1)They are PLANTED by Progressives into the Republican Party to do their bidding
2) They have something in hand on the guy's background, which they will smear him with if he doesn't play along
3) Both of the above
Scott Brown is an idiot. This new Dodd Frank agency didn’t stop corzine from stealing a billion dollars on obama’s watch. Obama got his cut two days before they went under.
This is the crew that is going to repeal Kenyancare? Forget it.
“Brown has evolved...
Yeah. We wouldn't want the Constitution get in the way of political expedience. The system wouldn't be broken if professional losers like Brown stood up to abuses like this and fought. Congress is not at recess, from what I can tell and this is a blatant end run around congress.
You are a POS Brown and should shut up and sit down till you inevitable lose your seat to a Marxist.
Pack the truck
You’d think it would be politically expedient for some senator to stand against this too.
Like Lugar, or some other semi-RINO who wants to fight off a well-deserved Tea Party challenge.
If we’re going to make progress as a nation, Repubilcans need to end the pretense of resisting what the Leftist-DemoRats demand and just be good doggies and roll over.
Oh, they already ARE?
bothpartiesnWashingtonneedtoworktogethetoendtheprocedural gridlockandhyper-partisanship.” - what he said.
What?? The daugher peddler cant be trusted with the Constitution? Who would have thought?
1)They are PLANTED by Progressives into the Republican Party to do their bidding
2) They have something in hand on the guy's background, which they will smear him with if he doesn't play along
3) Both of the above
No, we get them because that is what can win in liberal strongholds. We support their campaigns because there is usually nobody else available that would have a chance to actually win - and we want to knock out or prevent the seat from going to some Democrat even further to the left. The Democrats have the same problems in Republican strongholds and it frustrates them just as much - only we call our fencesitters RINO's and they call theirs DINO's. This problem is never going to go away unless you are prepared to just cede elections in enemy territory to the other side.
You gotta be Southern...LOL
My B-I-L has a double-wide on 8 acres in Landrum, and we stop there on our way to FL as a layover. Great State, there!
...a recess appointment to install Richard Cordray as head of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. Senator Scott Brown -- who's facing a stiff populist challenge from Elizabeth Warren, the creator of the agency..."Populist"? Partisan media shill ping!
You would prefer Elizabeth Warren?
I was disappointed (but not surprised) to learn of your support of the recess appointment of Richard Cordray to the CFPB. You take the stance that allowing the President to bypass the normal legislative process is fine because of "hyper partisanship"?
The support I gave you, and the vote I cast for you is the most disappointing support/vote of my life.
I understand that you don't think you can win in a state like this without pandering, but your actions illustrate to me that we will still reach the same level of degeneration in this country with you in office rather than a legislator like Martha Coakley (or Elizabeth Warren), it will simply take just a short while longer, and it will all happen with the imprimatur of a withered form of conservatism.
Your actions ranging from enthusiastic support of homosexuals in the military to support of this anti-Constitutional end run by this President (who has vowed to do the same in the year ahead, presumably with your full support as well) have compelled me to condemn your candidacy, even in the face of a leftist opponent like Elizabeth Warren.
At least if Elizabeth Warren is elected, it is preferable to have the the figurative knife enter from the front where it is expected, rather than the back from an unexpected source.
I am not willing to support a candidate that endorses bypassing the Constitutional process for expediency, especially a pandering expediency in an election year.
Make no mistake, though I expect this to fall on deaf ears: there are many out here who feel exactly the same way I do.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.