Bush to bypass Senate to appoint Bolton

Reuters

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - President Bush plans to bypass the U.S. Senate and install John Bolton as U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, officials said.

Bush can go around the Senate and give Bolton a "recess appointment" when the Senate begins its August recess this weekend. Bolton would be able to serve until January 2007, when a new Congress is sworn in.

Honestly, I hope the Senate finally realizes that this administration is abusing its powers and comes crashing down. What are the odds?

A recess appointment is an act of sheer desperation on Bush's part. The question for me is, just what in the world is so important about Bush appointing Bolton? It makes no sense on the face of it. If Bush had a clue, he'd dump Bolton. The man is nothing but a liability - especially now with the Plame affair heating to a boil. Fitzerald might just bring down Bolton b/c he seems to be somewhere in the mix (in the outting of NOC Plame).

Here's another take on it from someone I admire and usually agree with.

July 31, 2005 -- The reception John Bolton will face at the UN. The swaggering dolt in the White House believes that after he gives a recess appointment to the boorish John Bolton as U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, his mustachioed gunslinger and sworn liar will go to the East River in Manhattan and shake up the international organization and kick and whip them into kow-towing to the neocon line. What Bolton doesn't realize is that he will be working and living in a virtual fish bowl. Bolton will not only be under the scrutiny of intelligence agents that at least three-quarters of the 191 members of the UN place within their missions and the UN Secretariat and specialized agencies, but also the UN staff itself, an aggressive UN press corps, and an intensely anti-Bush population of New York City and its suburbs. So, if Mr. Bolton decides to engage in the type of group sex activities he once "enjoyed" at New York's Plato's Retreat in the 1970s and 80s and the physical and mental abuse he dished out to USAID contractor Melody Townsel in Moscow and Bishkek in 1994, he will face the kind of scrutiny he's never before experienced. The Russians clearly have the goods on Bolton from his past antics in New York, Moscow, Bishkek and they will be doubly sure to have him under heavy surveillance at the UN. Ditto the Chinese, the Arabs, Cubans, Venezuelans, Brazilians, French, South and North Koreans, Germans, South Africans, Iranians, Indians, Turks, Spanish, Canadians, and others. One screw up by Bolton, one temper tantrum, one sexual indiscretion, one episode involving espionage with the intelligence service of a so-called U.S. "ally" in the Middle East, and it will be surely leaked to the UN press corps and New York's scandal-hungry media. And then Bush and Rice will have to decide if they want a discredited clown like Bolton continuing to represent the United States -- and if they do -- the American people may decide otherwise and that will hammer yet another nail in the coffin of the Bush dynasty, the Republican Party, and the neocon movement.
www.waynemadsenreport.com...

A recess appointment is definately called for. The only act of desperation I see is the Democrats refusing to give this guy an up or down vote.

I personnally think since we don't have an Ambassador to the UN, we should pull everyone out, down to the clerk typist.

What good is a UN Ambassador anyway? The Democrats obviously don't think it is an important position, otherwise we would have someone serving their now.

He did it.

WASHINGTON - Frustrated by Democrats and even a few Republicans, President Bush on Monday circumvented the Senate and appointed embattled nominee John Bolton to be ambassador to the United Nations.

Well U.S. citizens can kiss all hope of saving our foreign relations goodbye. Why on earth would any nation want to appoint someone to the UN who had the following to say about it:

"there's no such thing as the United Nations," and that if 10 floors of the 38-story U.N. headquarters building were eliminated, "it wouldn't make a bit of difference."

And his response to critics was "What I was trying to do at that audience of World Federalists was get their attention. And the comment about the 10 stories was a way of saying there's not a bureaucracy in the world that can't be made leaner and more efficient."

This country is doomed.

Originally posted by CyberianHusky
Why on earth would any nation want to appoint someone to the UN ...

As far as I can figure, the nation didn't want it. That's why Bush did his end-run around the Senate to make it happen. My guess is that the puppeteers wanted it to happen, so the puppet jumped.

It's an abuse of power when any president does it, and in the past few decades alone every president has done it.

I don't approve of it, mainly because it's against the intent of the power in the first place and everyone knows it. The conservatives who think Bush can do not wrong are with Bolton, but there are many who are not.

[edit on 1-8-2005 by KrazyJethro]

Is it not also an abuse of power by Congress by refusing to vote on the nomination at all?
I do not agree with Bush going ahead and putting Bolton into place but I also have to place a larger part of the blame on our representatives for NOT DOING THEIR JOBS! (sorry for the yell).
This is a two way street. Yes Bolton is not the right person for the job but it is a failure of Congress for not expressing this by actually voting on the nomination. Instead they sit on their hands complaining about the nomination but they take no action.

Kenshiro is right on. I find it much worse that the Senate went on vacation without doing anything. A failure of the legislative branch is not a failure of the executive branch. Bush can do this sort of thing because otherwise Congress can go take their recess leaving us with no rep, as they did.

*yawn*
As was pointed out already, they all do it. Bush would have to really work hard at matching the number of times Clinton did it, and I don't think he has the time left to do it.
Americans really don't care if it is Bolton or Bugs Bunny. The U.N. is a pro-Communist organization that is funded by the U.S. government to destroy U.S. sovereignty, as well as every other nation's sovereignty. What difference does it make who is in there? The prudent thing to do would be to remove ourselves from that extremely corrupt alliance of globalists, and at the same time, send our own home-grown globalists packing. The first set would be the Clintons and the Bush Bunch; one set to Europe and the other to Mexico!

You know Mr. Bolton been apointed to the UN is only going to last a short time, it will be another apointee in the time around.

If he is "all that some has said he is", well the truth about him will shine, what all this mean with his bypass of the senate by Mr. Bush is that Mr. Bush has the power as a president and he is going to get his wish come true.

Let say like a child with a temper tantrum he will not rest until he shows that he holds the power of else.

Speaking of vacations, Bush happens to be on another of his patented vacations in Crawford, TX. It figures he would make this appointment and hide away in his ranch to avoid the press. This idiot has a proven record of being a coward, no matter how many wars he tries to start.

Yes, I agree Congress pretty much allowed him to do this. And before the Right points this out, Clinton made 140 recess appointments during his 8 years in office, NOT during his first two. I've seen this number around the net and it is false. Bush now has... something like 111. Of course this happens every time there is switch between parties. They spend so much time undoing each others' appointments. It's rediculous.

Is that allowed? Bypassing congress? that's like saying heck the people I don't care...

And that's sick cuz majority of the senate is republican...

Does the constitution allow such a thing or is this a new rule that one could label un-american?!

ed member circumventing censors

[edit on 3-8-2005 by DontTreadOnMe]

im surprise yall be complaining about Bush bypassing the Senate for this Bolton guy wen Clinton did the same thing as well to get his nominees to the jobs.

Originally posted by TrueLies
Is that allowed? Bypassing congress? that's like saying f'k the people I don't care...

Oh, yes, it happens all the time. It's just that this guy is so slimy it's obvious (to me) that Bush did it because the Senate would never vote him in. He got booed when he arrived at the UN. How embarrassing!

Bolton was booed and yelled at when he went to work. Also, Bolton is known for being a baby so just wait for when he snaps in the middle of a meeting and beats the Ambassador from Canada because they wouldn't agree to invading Iran. Then Canada and USA have a war, the world supports Canada, Bush nukes several people, we get nuked, and WW 4 is fought with sticks and rocks.

Originally posted by James the Lesser
Bush nukes several people, we get nuked, and WW 4 is fought with sticks and rocks.

Albert Einstein right thurr.

I don't think it's a huge thing people are playing it up to be. It's not out of the ordinary, and it isn't for too long. If the senate didn't do anything about it, it can't complain. If the senate WANTS to do something about it, it should just get down and do it, and not complain.

It's really very simple.

Just breathe a sigh of relief when I tell you that Congress gets to vote on him in after January 2007. But of course, all the damage could already be done by then. We'll just have to wait and see, and hope he somehow hangs himself in the meantime. Man... talk about egg in our face.

Alright AMZ someone recognized it!

Anyways this guy is known from past exp. to throw things, hit people, break other things, smashed a window when he threw something threw it in a fit of rage because someone wouldn't agree with him on something.

SO just wait for him to slap the Japanese Minister or kick the Brazillian Ambassador in the nuts and we can get rid of him.