Question Of The Week, 7/31/05
Will President Bush go around Congress during the recess and appoint John Bolton to serve as the United States Ambassador to the United Nations? After you answer this weeks question I hope you will go back to my July 27,2005 post and let us know what you are paying for gasoline in you area.
I will post my answer to this weeks question in the comment section Monday morning. You can already see what I paid for gas at the July 27 post.
God Bless America, God Save The Republic.
I will post my answer to this weeks question in the comment section Monday morning. You can already see what I paid for gas at the July 27 post.
God Bless America, God Save The Republic.
posted by David Schantz | 3:29 AM
11 Comments:
Yes, he will.
I do not like Bolton, and I hope the President finds somebody a little more "even keeled", but as much as I'd dislike seeing Bolton nominated, it is completely within the President's power and the Governmental structure to do so.
If the Senate does not do its job and vote on John Bolton then President Bush needs to do a recess appointment. It's amazing how Democrats didn't seem to mind when Clinton did all the recess appointments. The same Democrats belling aching about it now defended Clinton when he did the same thing.
First off, Clinton made very few recess appointments. Moreover, just about all of his nominees never lied on their Senate questionnaires. John Bolton did, never mind the fact that he's a terrible boss and doesn't understand the multilateral diplomacy that the United States needs to be successful in Iraq. I agree with Senate Democrats when they call him "damaged goods."
That and he looks like a walrus.
To answer the question, he'll be recess appointed. And people are going to be pissed about it. But its one of the tools you get for being president. In January 2007 he'll be gone and then we can figure out how to get somebody better to be our UN ambassador.
Hey, sorry for the long period of not commenting, but here I am either way.
Bush probably will do this unless something comes up. It would be a victory for him and Democrats could do little. If he doesn't, no liberal should be happy, because it'd be a definite sign something's up.
My guess is yes. As far as I know, such a step is Constitutional.
I've launched my weblog, Political Forecast, at a new location hosted on its own server and domain name. I hope you'll stop by and enjoy the new Political Forecast! If you could also change your link accordingly, that'd be awesome!
A few years ago I made the mistake of saying I thought the idea of creating the United Nations was a good one, but I felt the U.N. had out lived it's purpose. When I said this I was seated on the inside of a booth in a coffee shop. The man seated on the outside was a Korean War Veteran. Before I got a chance to get up he got me to change my mind,I now feel we never should have joined the U.N. Since that time I have supported any effort that was made to get the United States out of the United Nations.Since I don't see that happening ant time soon I'll have to go along with Gindy and say,"it would be nice to see somebody who is not a pushover take the position." I'm not saing Bolton is the right choice, but yes I do think Bush will appoint him during the recess.
God Bless America, God Save The Republic.
A little bit behind the curve posting on this post, but here is my two cents:
Bush should do a recess appointment. Just as judicial nominees are not "elected", the UN ambassador is not a choice of the people. It is a choice, and privilege of the President. The purpose of the confirmation vote is to ensure that the President is not trying to give the job to an unsuitable candidate.
However, the Senate has not been able to get to a vote. The minority party has blocked all efforts to get a vote, because they know they will lose.
The problem here lies in that they are trying to play this as if it was an election, and Bolton has to be what the people want. The truth of the matter is that it doesn’t matter if 98% of America hate him and think he has horns coming out of his head. The position is an appointment privilege of the President. Up or down vote is the least he deserves, and if the Senate cannot find a way to get there, then he can do a recess appointment. This appointment holds UNTIL the Senate votes.
If those fighting the nomination are so sure of him being unsuitable for the job, then they should plead their case, and move to a vote.
Truth is, they have become the part of appeasement, and do not want someone confrontational representing the United States.
Guess I'm too late in answering this one.
Enjoyed reading your posts.
He's just a recess appointee. Bolton served as the U.S. ambassador to the United Nations from August 2005 until December 2006. Very short term
Post a Comment
<< Home