Buh-bye, Bolton.
- Thread starter Kerad
- Start date
SouthernMdRocks
R.I.P. Bobo, We miss you!
That's just too bad!
A shame. I had no opinion of him until I read about things he'd said and done regarding the U.N. that weren't written by someone antagonistic towards him. Then I decided I liked him. I'd heard all kinds of things about him from liberals, and was prepared to think "aw crap, I really don't want to be defending some nitwit even though I'd really like to see SOMEONE kick Kofi's condescending hypocritical azz". But the more I read about him, the more I realize what people were critical of him was all hyperbole.
Good guy. Sorry that the Senate wants to put a suck-up in there.
Good guy. Sorry that the Senate wants to put a suck-up in there.
Larry Gude
Strung Out
This...
...might be interesting.
Well, Kerad, why are you happy about this?
ylexot said:
...might be interesting.
Well, Kerad, why are you happy about this?
ylexot
Super Genius
Drudge is saying that George Mitchell is on the short list...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_J._Mitchell
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_J._Mitchell
Kerad
New Member
Larry Gude said:
I see this as a positive sign in the sense that this could be another indication that President Bush may be accepting reality...as opposed to stubbornly holding on to what he wants reality to be.
It has been obvious for some time that Bolton would not be confirmed. Who knows what Bush was thinking a year ago...when he snuck Bolton into the job? Maybe he was thinking Bolton would do such a great job, everyone would change thier opinions of him. Obviously, that isn't the case.
Instead of trying to shove Bolton through again, he would have been better served to find a replacement who could get nominated. Surely, the President can come up with somebody with the necessary diplomatic skills. Right? If our diplomatic future is "John Bolton or bust"...we're completely screwed.
It now appears Bush has accepted the reality of the situation.
As for who I would like to see in that job? Let's just say he won't get nominated by this President. Never in a million years. Just the mere mention of his name would cause most of you Righties to spontaneaously combust.
ylexot
Super Genius
I'm still waiting to hear what Bolton has done wrong. If the answer is nothing, then why is he being opposed?Kerad said:
Translation: Bill ClintonKerad said:As for who I would like to see in that job? Let's just say he won't get nominated by this President. Never in a million years. Just the mere mention of his name would cause most of you Righties to spontaneaously combust.
Kerad
New Member
ylexot said:
You win the cookie! Not that I made it too difficult to guess...As for Bolton, I have written previously that if he has indeed done a great job, I wouldn't oppose keeping him on for the next couple of years. I really don't know what the specific reasons the members of the committee have for refusing to vote on him. It's not just Democrats opposing him, either...but I've already been through all of that before.
PsyOps
Pixelated
Folks this is what we can expect for the next two years. Appoint... No confirmation...Appoint... No confirmation...Appoint... No confirmation...Appoint... No confirmation...Appoint... No confirmation....................................
nothing gets accomplished...................................
This is what Kerad is in support of.........................
nothing gets accomplished...................................
This is what Kerad is in support of.........................
SouthernMdRocks
R.I.P. Bobo, We miss you!
Kerad said:
You've smoked one too many!!
Larry Gude
Strung Out
So...
...you were certainly not happy with Bubba for any of his 140 recess appointments, right?
I'm just looking for consistency.
Kerad said:
...you were certainly not happy with Bubba for any of his 140 recess appointments, right?
I'm just looking for consistency.
Toxick
Splat
Kerad said:
The Democrats have the majority. It is their ball-game, and this is their behavior. Except for filabustering, Republican action in Congress has become tantamount to simple speechmaking and/or jerking off.
Maybe they've just given up. Maybe their opposition stems from a "scratch your back now-scratch my back later" mindset. Who knows. It's a moot point.
Now, having said that, I feel the need to expound more on my 'partisan pettiness' answer...
This whole Bolton thing is oozing with the creepy feeling of "We're doing this because we can". In other words this feels like a vulgar display of power. You've said yourself more than once that Bolton was doing fine. So the only reason I can think why they would do this is because they're trying to flex their political might for the sake of flexing.
And that's pretty rotten if you ask me.
Kerad
New Member
Larry Gude said:
:shrug:
Certainly President Clinton had to come up with secondary appointees at some point...correct? I sincerely doubt he got everyone nominated into the job...either by recess appointment or by comfirmation.
Without looking it up, I'm under the impression the number of recess appointments between the two Presidents is pretty close to even...with Bush (obviously) having 2 more years to go.
What makes this particular one more newsworthy? The visibility of the post, and the visibility of the opposition, I'm guessing.
ylexot
Super Genius
Actually, the only opposition that I've seen was the last time around. The current opposition is...where? Why? Who's opposing him now? I could actually understand previous opposition. I don't understand why there is opposition now. He's been in the job, look at his performance. Tell us why he should not even be considered for the job...not even worthy of debate in the Senate.Kerad said: