Nbadan
06-21-2005, 04:05 PM
WASHINGTON - Senate Democrats blocked John Bolton's confirmation as U.N. ambassador for the second time Monday and President Bush left open the possibility of bypassing lawmakers and appointing the tough-talking former State Department official on his own.
The vote was 54-38, six shy of the total needed to force a final vote on Bolton, and represented an erosion in support from last month's failed Republican effort. Sen. George Voinovich (R-Ohio), who voted in May to advance the nomination, switched positions and urged Bush to consider another candidate, while only three Democrats crossed party lines.
And the Democratic Party traitors include Mark Pryor of Arkansas, Ben Nelson of Nebraska and Mary Landrieu of Louisiana.
"Some on the other side of the aisle are obstructing a highly qualified nominee and I believe by not allowing him to assume this position yet are doing harm to our country," Frist said.
I guess the concerns of Republican Senators who have aligned themselves with Senate Democrats don't count to Frist?
W may use a precedent setting recess appointment to bypass the Senate filibuster..
Interestingly, the Congressional Research Service reports that there has been no recess appointment in the last 20 years that has occurred during a recess shorter than 10 days.
Thus, if the White House does resort to appointing Bolton to the UN Ambassadorship this way, it would also be precedent-setting. And it would be remarkable that the Bush administration would send someone to the UN to do battle over reform efforts, over Iran and North Korea Security Council resolutions, and over other global policy challenges who was not stamped with a "mark of legitimacy" by the United States Senate.
Lastly, Bush could pound his feet and wag his finger at Democrats blocking him on Bolton, thump and holler that this is all the Dems want to do -- obstruct, obstruct, obstruct. And then blame the Dems for taking out someone Bush called a "good man."
Bush could then withdraw Bolton, offer him a position on Vice President Cheney's staff, and suggest someone else for the job -- probably Paula Dobriansky who is currently Under Secretary of State for Global Affairs. Some folks have a problem with Paula, but she is simply vastly better than Bolton, and if not Dobriansky, then nearly anyone else would be better.
It's impossible to tell which option the White House will choose. They are losing this battle after a series of flamboyantly bad decisions and miscalculations.
Bolton is now practically a household name. Doonesbury spoofs him. Jon Stewart as well. The White House thought they would get Bolton through on the basis that he was an obscure bureaucrat being appointed to a job Americans really didn't care about.
Now everyone is watching -- and the Bolton battle has become enormously consequential to the White House, to Republican moderates, and to the Democrats.
The White House now loses whichever direction it turns. The question will be to what degree?
Link (http://www.tpmcafe.com/story/2005/6/21/115616/853)
Bolton must be a very important piece of the NeoCon's attack Syrian and Iran policy moving forward for them to be fighting so diligently for this other-wise weak candidate.
The vote was 54-38, six shy of the total needed to force a final vote on Bolton, and represented an erosion in support from last month's failed Republican effort. Sen. George Voinovich (R-Ohio), who voted in May to advance the nomination, switched positions and urged Bush to consider another candidate, while only three Democrats crossed party lines.
And the Democratic Party traitors include Mark Pryor of Arkansas, Ben Nelson of Nebraska and Mary Landrieu of Louisiana.
"Some on the other side of the aisle are obstructing a highly qualified nominee and I believe by not allowing him to assume this position yet are doing harm to our country," Frist said.
I guess the concerns of Republican Senators who have aligned themselves with Senate Democrats don't count to Frist?
W may use a precedent setting recess appointment to bypass the Senate filibuster..
Interestingly, the Congressional Research Service reports that there has been no recess appointment in the last 20 years that has occurred during a recess shorter than 10 days.
Thus, if the White House does resort to appointing Bolton to the UN Ambassadorship this way, it would also be precedent-setting. And it would be remarkable that the Bush administration would send someone to the UN to do battle over reform efforts, over Iran and North Korea Security Council resolutions, and over other global policy challenges who was not stamped with a "mark of legitimacy" by the United States Senate.
Lastly, Bush could pound his feet and wag his finger at Democrats blocking him on Bolton, thump and holler that this is all the Dems want to do -- obstruct, obstruct, obstruct. And then blame the Dems for taking out someone Bush called a "good man."
Bush could then withdraw Bolton, offer him a position on Vice President Cheney's staff, and suggest someone else for the job -- probably Paula Dobriansky who is currently Under Secretary of State for Global Affairs. Some folks have a problem with Paula, but she is simply vastly better than Bolton, and if not Dobriansky, then nearly anyone else would be better.
It's impossible to tell which option the White House will choose. They are losing this battle after a series of flamboyantly bad decisions and miscalculations.
Bolton is now practically a household name. Doonesbury spoofs him. Jon Stewart as well. The White House thought they would get Bolton through on the basis that he was an obscure bureaucrat being appointed to a job Americans really didn't care about.
Now everyone is watching -- and the Bolton battle has become enormously consequential to the White House, to Republican moderates, and to the Democrats.
The White House now loses whichever direction it turns. The question will be to what degree?
Link (http://www.tpmcafe.com/story/2005/6/21/115616/853)
Bolton must be a very important piece of the NeoCon's attack Syrian and Iran policy moving forward for them to be fighting so diligently for this other-wise weak candidate.