"Put Aside Politics"
Bush says that "politics" has stalled out the vote to confirm John Bolton to the seat of US Ambassador to the UN.
Or maybe, oh, I don't know, it's that you nominated an asshole. Maybe that's what's coming back to haunt this nomination.
------
Why do we here at the AntiCentenarian have our eyes so attached to John Bolton? Apart from that wriggling mustache and post-Trumpian haircut, it has to do with the concept that this nominee is: A) an ardent, vocal unilateralist with disdain for International support and particular disdain for the UN; B) this is a battle that the Democrats, for once, can win, and must win; and C) he's a bad bad bad bad man.
Or maybe, oh, I don't know, it's that you nominated an asshole. Maybe that's what's coming back to haunt this nomination.
------
Why do we here at the AntiCentenarian have our eyes so attached to John Bolton? Apart from that wriggling mustache and post-Trumpian haircut, it has to do with the concept that this nominee is: A) an ardent, vocal unilateralist with disdain for International support and particular disdain for the UN; B) this is a battle that the Democrats, for once, can win, and must win; and C) he's a bad bad bad bad man.
posted by General Stan at 10:11 AM
3 Comments:
What galls me about the Bolton sitch is that Bush had the unmitigated hubris to nominate a man who has publicly stated he has next to no use for the United Nations TO BE ITS AMBASSADOR. There was no one else? No other hard-line, drink-the-Koolaid Bushite who WASN'T on record saying there should be no UN? The faint ray of hope in all this is that, as someone once said, pride goeth before a fall: I've been waiting for the Republicans to overreach themselves and for the backlash to begin. Maybe, just maybe, this is the first indication that the tide is turning? Please?
You know, I just read the article again and now I'm really pissed. Bush is claiming that the resistance to Bolton's confirmation is an example of "politics?" Let's review:
This all started when high-level employees testified about Bolton's efficacy as a leader (i.e. he bullies and threatens people who dare to disagree with him-- even though, as analysts and advisors, THAT IS THEIR JOB). That led to a further review of his history on a global stage (i.e. calling Kim Jong Il a thug AGAINST the American ambassador to Korea's specific recommendation, which completely detonated the six-party talks, thereby extending the North Korean arms standoff). Which led in turn to a REPUBLICAN finally daring to say, "You know what? This may not be the guy for the job," which stopped Republicans from claiming that any objection to Bolton was partisan and biased, since now one of their own guys was objecting. And in the face of all of this, Bush insinuates that to vote against Bolton is partisan foot-dragging? What the hell does he call THAT: responsible citizenship? Smells more like a desperate attempt to steamroll an unsuitable nomination through despite reasoned and responsible BIPARTISAN objections. Also known, in saner circles, as "politics."
Pretty accurate take on things, jigga. (heh heh... that's funny to think in my head. Imagine some squeaky voiced munchkin saying that line in their best tough-guy voice...)
Of course, when things start to get interesting, we have to re-configure our forces- send in Big Dick and have him clean up these messes.
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireStory?id=695798
The the political play also takes an interesting turn: What will Powell suggest, and to who?
http://www.cnn.com/2005/POLITICS/04/22/senate.bolton/index.html
While Powell isn't a yes man, he certainly wasn't a no-man in the Administration either, so we'll see how he addresses this more divisive republican issues in the coming days. It may tell us a lot about how Powell is going to form his post-Admin career.
One of the primary problems with Bolton is how clearly ideological he is. It is said that he is a "very big fan" of VP Dick, so there you have the ego-stroke necessary to get ardent support from the top dogs, but his selection itself reeks of inadequate thought capacitiy. Because of the clear divisions which are coming out (the old, ideological established guard in the Cheney camp v. the "moderate" un-entrenched repos who have benefitted from a repo majority but aren't part of the "movement," ie Chafee, etc) I think we'll see some deals made and some brains busted. In the end, I think that the ideology will prevail, but there's a chance for the reasonable parties to prevent this one nominee from taking a seat of destruction.
And yeah, I do feel it's ideological politico-gaming- part of the whole ideological affront is preserving that american superpower which we're not predetermined to have. How do you preserve? break down the current international body before it gains the toeholds of legislation. Remember, we're also trying to prevent international tribunals (though we're hosting our own secret ones) and trials for war criminals because we're afraid we may be put on trial.
The road we're taking is desperate attempts to preserve a condition we're not lucky enough to deserve. Nobody is. We rose to power, but it's not like we are owed it- the variety of chance and fortune brought us here.
Post a Comment
<< Home