| Submit your comments on this article |
| Home Front: Politix |
| Washington Post: "Democrats . . . refused to lose gracefully" on Bolton |
| 2005-08-02 |
| EFL, LRR. PRESIDENT BUSH was within his rights yesterday to install John R. Bolton as ambassador to the United Nations by recess appointment. Mr. Bolton's nomination has been pending a long time, and a majority of the Senate probably would have voted to confirm him. Yet Senate Democrats denied him an up-or-down vote, . . . . Using that power to circumvent the normal advice-and-consent process is politically provocative and should be quite rare. But having thwarted the usual process under which the Senate gets to vote on a president's nominee, it takes a bit of chutzpah for Democrats now to cry foul at Mr. Bush's decision to exercise his other option. Mr. Bolton, as we have noted before, would not have been our choice for this job. . . . Moreover, Democrats are correct in noting that Mr. Bolton, by dint of the recess appointment, will go to the United Nations under less than optimal conditions. An ambassador who lacks the explicit support of Congress speaks less securely for the nation than one who enters the U.N. Security Council with the Senate's blessing. But, again, whose fault is that? Democrats had every chance to muster the votes to defeat the nomination; they couldn't do it. If Mr. Bolton is now heading to New York without the Senate's imprimatur but with a figurative asterisk beside his name, that's only because, having failed to defeat him, a minority refused to lose gracefully. . . . |
| Posted by:Mike |
| #16 Ya know, I used to know there was a Voinovich important in Ohio - Governor, Senator, somesuch. Buy I freely admit, comment #15 has me confused! |
| Posted by: Bobby 2005-08-02 20:19 |
| #15 *sob* |
| Posted by: G. Voinovich 2005-08-02 16:57 |
| #14 Over at Arianne Huffnpuff she allowed as how Bush was thumbing his nose at the Senate. I replied to her that he wasn't thumbing his nose at the Senate, just the obstructionist Democrats. Someone else corrected me and said it wasn't his nose, but a certain middle finger. Way better than what I said. |
| Posted by: Deacon Blues 2005-08-02 16:34 |
| #13 he was a Democrat when that meant defending your country against dictators as opposed the Tories, I suppose. |
| Posted by: 2b 2005-08-02 13:25 |
| #12 Yes Bobby, he was a Democrat when that meant defending your country against dictators. Peace loving Kennedy (Invader of several countries) sent this bulldog to the un and he kicked ass (diplomatically) all over the communists block. |
| Posted by: Cyber Sarge 2005-08-02 13:20 |
| #11 interesting 3dc...can't collect dues if you don't have workers. |
| Posted by: 2b 2005-08-02 12:46 |
| #10 Hey, Cyber Sarge - wasn't that Adlai Stevenson, from Illinois, a (dare I use the word) Democrat? |
| Posted by: Bobby 2005-08-02 12:43 |
| #9 2b - that's because they are sill in complete shock after their SUGAR DADDY the AFL/CIO shattered over worthless contributions to Dems. That's the big story. Note how the privately employeed types (Teamsters, Service Workers Int and others split) while the government emply types with secure jobs -you don't outsource teachers and cops- stayed. Expect to see the CIO turn into a bureaucrats union and sole support of the dems. |
| Posted by: 3dc 2005-08-02 12:11 |
| #8 I personally love the line about chutzpah, but I would add that it really takes gall to stand there and say that the President is overstepping his authority when clearly he is not. I watched Chris Mathews and the Donk on the show could not come up with one fact or specific reason to hold up the vote. He had a lot of innuendo and rumors but couldnât nail down a specific reason for Bolton not to get a vote. The best he could come up with is that Bolton lacked the âtemperamentâ to be the ambassador to the un. Chris pointed out that Kennedy sent Stevenson to the un to deal with the Soviets and we know how his âtemperamentâ was. I think he was the first ambassador to threaten the Soviets in open session. We desperately need someone just like that today. I really hope they spend the next three years whining, it will really help them in the polls. |
| Posted by: Cyber Sarge 2005-08-02 11:16 |
| #7 It will be interesting to see if the Donks get the message:.. Not very likely. |
| Posted by: Bomb-a-rama 2005-08-02 11:13 |
| #6 The 'quiet before the storm,' 2b? |
| Posted by: Bobby 2005-08-02 11:08 |
| #5 re: WAPO. It's really strange the way the dem dogs have been chained in over the last several days. Without all their senseless yapping - it's so quiet... it's almost creepy. |
| Posted by: 2b 2005-08-02 10:43 |
| #4 P'raps they're planning mischief in the Committee then? |
| Posted by: eLarson 2005-08-02 10:30 |
| #3 It will be interesting to see if the Donks get the message: a filibuster of Roberts would be a big mistake. |
| Posted by: Mrs. Davis 2005-08-02 10:28 |
| #2 I can agree 98% with this wapo editorial |
| Posted by: mhw 2005-08-02 09:54 |
| #1 This is from The Washington Post? The one in Washington, DC? Wonders never cease... |
| Posted by: Jonathan 2005-08-02 09:53 |