Bolton To Be Considered By The Entire Senate
By California Yankee Posted in Breaking News — Comments (8) / Email this page » / Leave a comment »
The Senate Foreign Relations Committee sent John Bolton's nomination to be U.S. ambassador to the United Nations to the full Senate without an endorsement after Ohio's RINO Senator Voinovich again sandbagged Bolton and President Bush and announced he would not support the nomination:
"It is my opinion that John Bolton is the poster child of what someone in the diplomatic corps should not be."
While embarrassing, the lack of an endorsement from the committee should not prove fatal because Republicans hold a 55-44 majority in the Senate:
According to the New York Times, "Voinovich said he was convinced that a vote for Mr. Bolton, whose detractors have described him as a head-strong bully, would send exactly the wrong signal to the thousands of Americans working in the State Department in the United States and abroad."
I couldn't disagree with Senator Voinovich more. Voinovich has it exactly wrong. As Chairman Lugar said:
"The picture is one of an aggressive policy-maker who pressed his missions at every opportunity and argued vociferously for his point of view.
That is precisely the kind of a leader we need in the United Nations, not some Casper Milquetoast. That fact that Bolton's bluntness alienates some is to Bolton's credit, not disqualifying.
« Toward an Understanding of the Obamian Language — Comments (4) | BREAKING: Voinovich Goes Off Reservation
"Can Do Better Than John Bolton" — Comments (70) »
Bolton To Be Considered By The Entire Senate 8 Comments (0 topical, 8 editorial, 0 hidden) Post a comment »
I agree with the criticism of the UN that the Bush Admn. and Mr. Bolton have raised (actually I think the UN is useless and we should leave, but Im not in charge and nobody asked me.) but I think that Mr. Bolton is way to far outside the mainstream and caries too much baggage to get anything done. Other UN nations will simply ban together and block anything that he proposes.
that multiple powerful nations working together would have a further reach and more influence in the world than individual countries. Whether this works or not is debateable, but the UN is useless if it is not based on cooperation and communication, hardly two traits that Bolton seems to be known for. Other countries are not going to allow Bolton to bully them into things, so he will be ineffective.
You mean like disavowing that Zionisn is racism?
Oh, that's right, Bolton got the UN to do that. Imagine if he had a stronger position at the UN, what he could do.
While we are on the subject of the UN, one thing I very much resent about the organization is that numerous thug countries send their diplomatic staff to NYC in addition to their embassy in Washington (if they have one). This means that people who we might normally deport for being Islamofascists are allowed into the USA. I mean Iranian, Sudanese, Yememni, etc. diplos. I have read of some of them being deported for taking pictures in sensitive locations. USA security comes before hosting UN diplomats.
When I hear Senators say that John Bolton has contempt for the UN, I say fine with me.
...Condi Rice should announce that the US intends to withdraw from the UN and treat it as any other NGO.
My recess appointment trumps your hold.
...but decisions on whether to be in the UN or not are the purview of the executive branch.
The on-line NYT report made it sound like this was some kind of insurmountable development. That the Senate committee just sent the nomination to the full senate wthout endorsement. But as you point out, the R's have a 55-44 majority, and even if a few R's defect, it should be approved. Also, I think I heard that Sen. Lieberman supports John Bolton and perhaps a few other D's as well.