Confirmed: Senate will hold hearings on Bolton nomination

[rawstory]

The Senate Foreign Relations Committee has confirmed that they will hold a fresh hearing on the nomination of Bush's pick to the United Nations, John Bolton, who failed to be confirmed by the Senate after his initial appointment by President Bush last year.

In a posting on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee website -- which has not been reported previously -- the Committee has publicly confirmed that they will hold hearings on Bolton's nomination next Thursday at 9:30 am ET.

A spokesman for ranking Foreign Relations Democrat Joe Biden (D-DE) said a notice went out this morning.

According to a senior Democratic aide, Sen. Biden demanded a hearing earlier this year to highlight the dubious nature of Bolton's recess appointment. Bolton was appointed by President Bush during a congressional recess after the Senate refused to appoint him.

http://www.rawstory.com/news/2006/Confirmed_Senate_will_hold_hearings_on_0721.html

[VegasWolf]

1. Well, it SHOULD be obvious to all by now that Bolton can't handle the job.

[babylonsister]

6. You'd think, but lookee here.

http://www.sltrib.com/opinion/ci_4075917

Why I'll vote for Bolton
By George V. Voinovich
Special to The Washington Post

WASHINGTON - As a member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, I have had the rare opportunity to witness firsthand how the diplomatic process works and, in some cases, how it fails. Recently, despite our nation's best efforts, the world - and particularly the Middle East - has become a more dangerous and volatile place.

Since Sept. 11, 2001, and our nation's initial response in Afghanistan, the global war on terrorism has taken many twists and turns.

First, Iraq became the primary focus of our troops and our public attention. Then, the nuclear ambitions of Iran and North Korea reached critical mass, followed by the quickly changing and deteriorating situation with Israel, Hezbollah and Hamas.

Meanwhile, the administration nominated John Bolton to be U.S. ambassador to the United Nations...

[ChairmanAgnostic]

20. it has become a more dangerous place BECAUSE of Bolton, you

ninny!. Not you, but Voinovich.

[spotbird]

80. Which means confirmation is in the bag.

Also, I don't' remember how Lieberman voted last time, but even if by some slim chance he did the right thing then, he'll vote with the side of evil this time. He'll be out of the closet by then.

[Thor_MN]

42. I know he can get the job, but can he do the job?

"I'm not arguing that with you... ", Mr. Waturi

Bolton is a waste of oxygen.

[Spazito]

2. The Dems in congress can filibuster this if, and I believe it will this

time, come before the full Senate, right? If so, will they?

[truebrit71]

4. Will they? Hell no! That would require a spine...

...and the Senate Dems are too busy supporting the violence in the ME to have the operation....

[Efilroft Sul]

9. Filibuster? Not after the Dems let us down with Alito.

So many on DU poured our hearts, souls, and reason into persuading our so-called leaders to filibuster Alito, and what did we get from the Democratic Senators? A fascist tool on the Supreme Court. The Democrats won't filibuster the Walrus, either. Guys like Biden (D-Citibank) will huff and puff, but he'll vote for Bolton anyway just because the Senate finally got its chance to debate a nominee.

[electropop]

15. Biden (D-Citibank)

:rofl:

[LynneSin]

30. Citibank has little presence in delaware

at least if you're going to collaborate him with banks (which is the number #1 employer of people in our state) at least pick one that is actually in our state

:grr:

And btw we filibustered him last time

[True Bleu]

43. Biden (D-Citibank) —

Now THAT is dam funny!

[politicasista]

85. LOL!

:rofl:

[Totallybushed]

21. I love that description,

"the Walrus". Very accurate. Actually he sort of reminds me of the Walrus in Disney's "alice in wonderland"

[PegDAC]

45. Coo coo ca choo

Couldn't resist. ;)

[ShortnFiery]

56. a.k.a. Rootin' Tootin "Yosemite Sam" Bolton :P

[KnaveRupe]

72. Yosemite John...

[ShortnFiery]

74. Yosemite JOHN it is!

I stand corrected. :blush: :hi:

[geardaddy]

84. Me too.

I take back my Wilford Brimley comparison!

[geardaddy]

27. John Bolton = Wilford Brimley

Everytime I see him on TV, I think he's going to start talking about his diabetes and Libery Mutual, or Grape Nuts or something.

[Bushladen]

50. Or how

About Geppeto from Pinocchio.

[tanyev]

52. I have to vote for Yosemite Sam.

With both 6 guns ablaze.

[LynneSin]

29. WAIT A FUCKING SECOND!!!!! You were conscious last time?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_R._Bolton

John R. Bolton
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

John R. BoltonJohn Robert Bolton (born November 20, 1948) is an American diplomat, serving currently as the interim U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations.

Interim Ambassador Bolton was nominated by President George W. Bush to his current position on March 7, 2005. His nomination was the subject of a prolonged filibuster in the United States Senate by Democrats and George Voinovich of Ohio, a Republican. However, Voinovich has since recanted his opposition.

On August 1, 2005, President Bush installed Bolton as Ambassador to the UN via recess appointment. The recess appointment will last until a new Congress convenes in January 2007, or until Bolton is renominated and confirmed, whichever comes first. He previously served as Under Secretary for Arms Control and International Security.

For various reasons Bolton has been the subject of enormous media controversy. Some of such controversy has involved salacious detail which has arguably tended to obscure substantive issues, while other aspects of the controversy has raised deep issues not only relating to Bolton's judgment but also regarding the extent to which he enjoys the patronage of the Bush White House.
+++++++++++++++++++++++

Did we instill a new set of democrats since the last time that I was not aware of??

:shrug:

Here's your filibuster vote

http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=109&session=1&vote=00142

The vote was 54-38 with 8 senators not voting that day, but since 5 of those senators were democrats like Feingold, Kerry, Kohl etc I would suspect the filibuster will stick (and btw Lieberman was with us on the filibuster)

[Spazito]

53. Thanks for the facts on this re the previous position taken by the Dems

It is re-assuring to know that Voinovitch's "change of mind" doesn't intrinsically change the Dems ability to hold together a filibuster.

[Imagevision]

47. Democratic Senators? -- will go yaaaaaawnn on Bolton.. again!!

[enough already]

22. Of course not.

That would require a spine. If they didn't have the balls to filibuster Roberts and Alito, what makes you think they'll do it now?

[paulk]

44. always a breath of fresh air, aren't we?

why don't you try encouragement instead of this endless litany of doom?

btw - the Dems filibustered Bolton last time, that is who we're talking about here - BOLTON

but that isn't good enough for the doom doom doom brigade, is it?

always got to find a reason to bash the Democrats.


right?

[uppityperson]

3. k&r for obvious reasons

[Buzz Clik]

5. Bolton has been invisible

He'll sail through the hearing because his performance has been nondescript and not as bad as feared.

[FredScuttle]

58. "nondescript"? "not as bad as feared"?

Either you haven't been paying attention or you're willfully ignorant. Bolton makes Jeanne Kirkpatrick look like the Dalai Lama on quaaludes.

[sinkingfeeling]

7. Why hearings now? The post is filled (by Bolton) until Jan. 2007.

[IChing]

8. Hearings because he is "good to go" until Jan 3 2007 when

a new Democratic elected Congress takes over

[Demeter]

11. A Preemptive Appointment

before the apple cart is all upset. Disgusting... perhaps those who voted for the Voting Act will continue to protect and defend the country from BushCo? There can be no good reason to keep Bolton there, and lots of good reasons to get him out.

[BrotherBuzz]

10. And by which time his task will have been completed

Mission Accomplished

[enough already]

23. Only reason to do it now is because they know they have it won n/t

[threadkillaz]

12. He ain't no diplomat.

A chickenhawk.

[Vidar]

13. So the repubs are using the Israeli fracas to sneak Bolton by the

democrats?

[KoKo]

14. Article says Repugs doing it to drive a wedge in Democrats. Since

Voinovitch who didn't support Bolton turned back to now loving Bolton the Dems are on the spot as to whether to support him now.

here's a little more from the article:

Now that one of Bolton's most vehement Senate critics has changed his tune, the hearing is likely to embarrass Democrats.

"Now that Voinovich (R-OH) is back on the reservation and Bolton is seen as Israel’s biggest defender every day at the U.N., the White House sees a wedge issue in calling Biden’s bluff and embarrassing the Democrats by having a hearing after all," the aide said.

The posting says that the meetings topic is to consider, "The Honorable John R. Bolton To be U.S. Representative to the United Nations with rank of Ambassador and U.S. Representative to the United Nations Security Council and U.S. Representative to Sessions of the United Nations General Assembly during his tenure of service as U.S. Representative to the United Nations."

[Vidar]

19. Got it. Thanks.

[leesa]

67. You got it. It's war fever and they can ram Bolton through.

[BeHereNow]

16. Oh boy, what a relief! The Senate Foreign Relations Committee!

You mean the same rubber stampers who okayed the
building of the US Embassy and then pretended to debate
the withdrawal of troops from Iraq, knowing full well it
was all BULLSHIT, concocted to appease WE, the people?

SFRC: "Okay, it's time to fake another debate
on C-Span so that the American people will think
they still live in a two party free republic hosting a democracy!!!"

(Members chuckle and mutter, "Suckers!" under their breath.)

SFRC: " Okay, has everyone rehearsed their "debate" scripts?
Let get ready to "debate" Bolton..."

(Members roar with laughter as they ink their rubber stamps.)

BHN

[karynnj]

66. Totally uncalled for

Why do you think Bolton didn't have Senate confirmation to begin with? It was because the Democrats put together a very solid case for Bolton being a loose cannon and unfit to be in government. They did filibuster him - and indicated they would continue to do so. This is why Bush gave him a recess appointment - with the whole world knowing the Senate wouldn;t approve.

The amendments to withdraw were not debated in the SRFC. The Republicans control the committee and they have not established Fullbright type hearings. It was 3 SFRC members (Kerry, Feingold, and Boxer) who (with Harkin) put together amendments to a defense appropriations bill that pushed this issue before the Senate for the first time. (The Levin amendment came about as a way to provide cover for Democrats who needed to disagree with Bush, but who wanted to play it safe.)

I don't think the SFRC had anything to do with the size of the US embassy. They confirmed the ambassador - who is one of better (of a bad lot) Bush appointees.

This is one of the better committees in the Senate. The mystery is why the Republicans on it stick to Bush as much as they do - in Chaffee, Lugar and Hagel - they have 3 Republicans who should be better than this.

[chookie]

17. Dems will not filibuster or even object

Bolton has foremost been a passionate advocate of Israel and it's right to protect itself. Any criticism of him will condemned as "anti-Semitism" -- and we all know Democratic leaders faint when they are accused of this, even falsely -- especially with mid-term elections coming up.

Bolton is in like flint.

Republicans are making successful inroads in convincing Jews to abandon the Democrats. Israel will be a key factor in the upcoming elections -- Republicans hope to attract hawkish Jewish voters because of Bush's leadership in this area, and evangelical Christian activists, who work far harder than any Democratic activist group, will get the vote out in November and may well win this close one for the Republicans again.

Good lord -- they are so much smarter than we are!! Too bad I find their ideology reprehensible, as I would happily join a party that knows how to win.

The only time we take good aim at our opponents is when we are in the circular firing squad formation.

[Spazito]

18. From what I understand the Jewish communities in the US don't

vote as a block and there are a fair number who don't support what Israel is doing in Lebanon so the repubs may well be overestimating this as a wedge issue as it relates to the Jewish vote. That is not to say, given the recent votes in the Senate and the House re support for Israel, that the dems won't try to block Bolton. I guess it remains to be seen, much depending on what happens between now and when it comes before the full Senate.

[Patchuli]

48. Uh oh, not more doom and gloom!

I'm sick of Israel. I would like to see us just take care of U.S. The government could start by getting all the U.S. citizens that want out of the warzones out!

Anyway, forgive me for correcting you. I'm not the grammar police but the saying is actually "In like Flynn" which referred to Errol Flynn the famous actor who got away with much!

[chookie]

61. Hands up, officer!!

Thanks for the factoid about "In like Flynn." I *never* heard or saw that referenced before. All these years I have been looking like a philistine by saying "In like flint"! Thanks for sparing me further shame upon myself in the future.

[Patchuli]

62. No problem, I thought it was

pretty interesting history about Errol Flynn but he sounds like a baaaaaaaaaaaaad boy! http://www.worldwidewords.org/qa/qa-inl1.htm :spank:

[sellitman]

49. Well this Jew ain't switching over one issue

And I don't know any of us around here that would either. I think the Jewish vote will safely be in the Democratic circle for some time to come. No matter how you slice it the other side isn't doing anything in my best interests as a Jew or an American. His support of Israel is skin deep too. Remember....his family supported Hitler.


BTW....Hiya Chookie! Good to see you posting. Hope you are well.

Kevin

[chookie]

57. Where'ya been??

Great to see you again!!

I'm okay -- gloomy as ever, as you can see :-)

I strongly agree that the wacko Republicans aren't doing anything in the best interests of Jews. I think its best for us to be suspicious when Bush seems to be offering us something....

Interesting that you say his support of Israel is skin deep. He sure is doing a good imitation of some one transfixed upon the issue! It's very creepy and gives one pause to remember that his granddad bankrolled the Nazis and made a vast fortune from his investment in them. Is he now embarked on some twisted plan to use the Nazi's victims to obtain yet another vast fortune to finance an even great seizure of power?

[karynnj]

51. What inroads?

Kerry/Edwards got 77% of the Jewish vote, Gore/Leiberman got 79%. Some of that 2% was due to Leiberman being Jewish. There is also a 4 year demographic shift. It is likely that the elderly Jews, who associate Democrats with FDR are decreasing. But even if you take the entire change - they gained only 2% for turning the world upside down to remake the middle east.

Consider that more people thought it would work in 2004 than do now. By the way, I am Jewish and almost all Jews I know are both strong Democrats and strong supporters of Israel.

[chookie]

59. Thanks for those facts n/t

[Name removed]

24. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[mvd]

28. Here's one of his quotes

" There's no such thing as the United Nations. If the U.N. secretary building in New York lost 10 stories, it wouldn't make a bit of difference." That says it all - he is in the U.N. to dismantle what it stands for. He is against diplomacy in almost all cases. I wonder if * could do a second recess appointment?

[Name removed]

32. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[mvd]

34. I don't know - maybe somebody knows the rules

Either way, I'm in favor of another filibuster. We might get even more support this time.

[Name removed]

36. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[DELUSIONAL]

25. In a f***** up world -- bush wants a f**** up BOLTON to represent US.

Oh sure this makes a whole lot of sense.

NOT.

[Joe Bacon]

26. Does LIEberman sit on the Foreign Relations Committee?

LIEberman will sell us out again.

[LynneSin]

35. Do you even bother using google to research your facts?

Lieberman was opposed to Bolton and opposed the filibuster

http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=109&session=1&vote=00142

[Cocoa]

65. he was hoping no one would look it up

then the lie would take hold and people would believe Lieberman voted for Bolton, like the way people believe Iraq did 9/11.

So thanks for looking it up. :thumbsup:

[karynnj]

68. No ,

Kerry, Boxer, Feingold
Biden,Sarbanes, Dodd,
Obama and Bill Nelson are the Democrats

Purposely not listed by senority to list the 3 best questioners first!

[AtomicKitten]

31. BushCo is too weak to push this turd nominee through. n/t

[LynneSin]

33. Some of you people are an embarassment with your lack of facts

People talking about the democrats folding when in fact WE FRICKING FILIBUSTERED HIM the last time around. Oh, Joe Lieberman - HE WAS WITH US ON THE FILIBUSTER. Joe Biden? He led the charge on the Foreign Affairs committee to try and derail him but you do know we have a minority.

http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=109&session=1&vote=00142

There's the rollcall vote for the last time when we filibustered him. I'm reading this thread and absolutely flabberghasted at the totally unresearched posts that make piss-poor assumptions. Read the facts - he was denied last time and I would suspect he will be denied again because the filibuster had Four democratic senators that did not vote last time that I would suspect would side with us on the filibuster - Levin, Feingold, Kerry & Kohl (perhaps Johnson - always a crap shoot with him).

SO there, stop your whining - we did good with Bolton last time, even Joe Lieberman

[Dr Fate]

37. True- but then we have to ask why those false perceptions...

...are so prevalent and are so believable.

I think most folks just assume DEMS cave on everything- and they would be right a huge percentage of the time.

So you are correct, but I cant blame people for holding that perception- it did not just come out of nowhere.

[LynneSin]

41. Yeah but you know what Assume means

It just looks stupid especially when this was a major posting frenzy a year ago when they had the first round of nominations.

When democrats get it wrong we need to hold them accountable but they also need to know when they get it right and encourage them to continue along that path!

[FredScuttle]

60. So where was Joementum on Alito?

hmmmmmmmm?

[LynneSin]

73. Is Alito's nomination being voted on again?

:shrug:

[FredScuttle]

77. No. but since we're rehasing old history

I thought it relevant to bring up one out of a gazillion episodes where Joementum failed us.

[LynneSin]

82. Is this thread about Alito being revoted on?

Just stop being like a fricking gnat with ADHD. The thread is about Bolton being renominated in which Joe Lieberman has been opposed to.

When there is a thread about Alito being revoted on then I'll have to agree with you.

[paulk]

46. Some of these people have ulterior motives

Primarily - to trash Democrats at every opportunity.

to spread lies and misinformation

because some of these people are not Democrats

at least I hope they're not

I don't want someone on my team who says we're going to lose

before the game is even played

[Cocoa]

64. they saw the filibuster as a defeat last year

this is their second chance.

[Biernuts]

54. Interesting situation. Filabuster, followed by nuclear option

so that filabuster isn't available when Justice Stevens kicks the bucket. Good strategy.

[spotbird]

79. Fat chance

We wouldn't want our ammunition to get wet after all.

[Cocoa]

63. embarrassing is right

for people that claim to care so much about Bolton getting filibustered, they don't even fucking know what happened just one fucking year ago.

[DUBYASCREWEDUS]

38. Just a note

but the wimp Voinovich (the one who cried last year about Bolten) has done a flip-flop and has announced that he now plans on supporting him. Imagine - a Republican doing a flip-flop!

[BlueCaliDem]

39. I think getting the nomination hearing is about Rethug election strategy

because face it folks. Nothing pisses off a republican voter more, than to see Democrats filibuster a rethuglican---OR a rethuglican demand!

And lately, there isn't much the rethugs in Congress can use to shore up their piss-poor approval numbers.

I mean, isn't Bolton's seat at the U.N. safe until 1-2007? So, why this sudden need to get a confirmation hearing on him with 5 guaranteed months he can continue to be a pain in the ass at the United Nations?

Is Biden not even contemplating this, for the Democrats, potentially dangerous move?

[Beelzebud]

40. Great. Another chance for the D.C. Dems to keep their powder dry!

[deutsey]

55. Yes, it's going to be so nice seeing Bush usurp the Senate yet again

[badgerpup]

69. Well, there goes the planet...

Nice knowin' y'all...
:nuke:

[w4rma]

70. I say let him stay. He's a nutcase and noone at the UN listens to him.

He's actually harming neo-con goals at the UN, imho. He's an foolish boor who makes the position he supports look horrible to other countries. Anyone else that the neo-cons put in that seat at the UN will vote exactly the same way Bolten does, but could possibly be more persuasive.

[zann725]

71. As well they should! Most at U.N. hate the guy,& many have been "no shows"

at mtgs. Bolton scheduled, or an hour late at times. A clear sign of disdain and disrespect for the "leader of the pack."

Me thinks that's REALLY why his nom is being reconsidered. Too bad other Chimpy "nom's" aren't similarly being re-examined. Nearly ALL...maybe ALL lied under oath...many extensively. On that basis alone, they should lose their jobs.

But then taking oaths was disbanned during one of Chimpy's appointments...who was it...a Supreme Court nom?

[bdamomma]

75. will they give this idiot and henchman a pass also

just like they gave Alito and the rest of the unqualified and ignorant appointments of Bush co. This guy is no diplomat he is highly abrasive.

[samsingh]

76. i hope they vote him out.

[spotbird]

78. Who cares?

It will just be grandstanding with a razor sharp, successful confirmation vote. Same old, same old.

[bklyncowgirl]

81. GOP Strategy "Don't change horses in mid stream"

This would be a good thing if the guy in question was a questionable appointment who had turned out to do a better than expected job. Sort of like buying a bargain horse who put his last owner in the hospital and finding out that in different hands he not only remembers his training but becomes your very best worker.

The problem is of course Bolton isn't a horse--he's a horse's ass. Of course he's doing exactly what those war criminals in the White House want him to do and for that reason and that reason alone the Democrats should unanimously oppose his appointment.

What's the use of having a filibuster if you never use it.

[mvd]

83. I found something about my second recess appointment..

question here:

http://www.usatoday.com/printedition/news/20050802/a_bolton02.art.htm

He can be appointed by recess appointment again, but can't be paid? Let's hope Bolton's loyalty isn't that high.