“If this were a dictatorship, it would be a heck of a lot easier… just so long as I’m the dictator.”
— George W. Bush, Dec. 18, 2000
President Bush is inches shy of achieving his dream. Really. How else can you explain his recess appointment of John Bolton to be UN Ambassador, an act of incredible arrogance that shows an absolute disregard for the separation of powers our founding fathers wisely ensconced in the Constitution? I think Sen. Edward Kennedy summed it up well:
“The abuse of power and the cloak of secrecy from the White House continues,” Kennedy said. “It’s bad enough that the administration stonewalled the Senate by refusing to disclose documents highly relevant to the Bolton nomination. It’s even worse for the administration to abuse the recess appointment power by making the appointment while Congress is in this five-week recess. It’s a devious maneuver that evades the constitutional requirement of Senate consent and only further darkens the cloud over Mr. Bolton’s credibility at the U.N.”
Republican Sen. George Voinovich, who had previously warned that such a “controversial and ineffective ambassador” would put at risk our nation’s ability to fight the war on terror — and who had made a tearful plea to his colleagues not to approve Bolton’s nomination — said he was disappointed by Bush’s action.
“I am truly concerned that a recess appointment will only add to John Bolton’s baggage and his lack of credibility with the United Nations.”
Hell… why bother with confirmations at all? Why not just have Bush make all his appointments recess appointments, so he doesn’t have to deal with that pesky Senate? Of course, when Bolton’s tenure proves to be a disaster, and when revelations about his prior abuses of power continue to trickle out — including his own involvement in Valerie Plame’s outing — the American public will know exactly who to blame for embarrassing our nation by sending Bolton to the UN.
See, what Republicans label as “Democratic obstruction” was really the proper exercise of the checks and balances provided for in the Constitution. Senators representing a majority of American voters refused to confirm the President’s nominee, and so Bush decided to ignore the advice and consent of the Senate by abusing a rarely used Constitutional loophole… a vestige of a time when Congress was in recess for months at a time, and took weeks to reassemble for special session.
President Bush exercises power because he can, and Americans need to understand that.
Should we suffer a catastrophic terrorist attack on his watch — such as a nuclear detonation in a major American city — Americans should be prepared for Bush to act according to character… to declare a state of emergency, suspend the Constitution, and seize powers that can only be described as dictatorial. This would essentially be the end of our democratic republic. I’m not saying this is likely scenario, but it is certainly one that is easily imagined given the tone, tenor and history of this authoritarian administration. And we need to start talking about it now, while we can still do so freely without fearing imprisonment.
Impeachment NOW!!!
Bullshit dumbass.
Check your FACTS:
Waggin’ his Willie: 140 recess appointments over two terms.
President Bush: 106 recess appointments.
This is despicable.
“President Clinton: 140 Recess Appointments Over Two Terms.” (“A Look At Presidential Recess Appointments,” The Associated Press, 8/1/05)
“Former Sen. Wyche Fowler, D-Ga., Ambassador To Saudi Arabia, August 1996. Put In The Post Two Months After A Bombing That Killed 19 American Soldiers Stationed There, He Received Senate Confirmation In October 1997 And Served Until March 2001.” (“A Look At Presidential Recess Appointments,” The Associated Press, 8/1/05)
“Mickey Kantor, Commerce Secretary, April 1996. He Replaced Ron Brown, Who Died In A Plane Crash, But Left In January 1997 Before His Nomination Went Before The Senate.” (“A Look At Presidential Recess Appointments,” The Associated Press, 8/1/05)
“Roger Gregory, 4th U.S. Circuit Court Of Appeals, December 2000. He Was Later Re-Nominated By Bush And Confirmed By The Senate.” (“A Look At Presidential Recess Appointments,” The Associated Press, 8/1/05)
•Gregory Was Opposed Because He Was Nominated For North Carolina Seat On 4th Circuit, Though He Was From Virginia. (Nation Master Website, “Encyclopedia: Recess Appointment,” http://www.nationmaster.com, Accessed 8/1/05)
“Bill Lann Lee, Assistant Attorney General For Civil Rights, August 2000. Blocked By Senate Republicans, He Was Appointed Acting Assistant Attorney General In 1997, Then Received The Recess Appointment To Serve Out Clinton’s Term.” (“A Look At Presidential Recess Appointments,” The Associated Press, 8/1/05)
•Lee Was Opposed Because Of Support For Affirmative Action. (Nation Master Website, “Encyclopedia: Recess Appointment,” http://www.nationmaster.com, Accessed 8/1/05)
“James Hormel, Ambassador To Luxembourg, June 1999. A Gay Philanthropist Whose Nomination Was Blocked By Senate Republicans, He Remained Ambassador Until Near The End Of Clinton’s Term.” (“A Look At Presidential Recess Appointments,” The Associated Press, 8/1/05)
•Hormel Was Opposed Because He Was A Gay Activist. (Nation Master Website, “Encyclopedia: Recess Appointment,” http://www.nationmaster.com, Accessed 8/1/05)
Bush had to get Bolton appointed to some position in order to keep the records closed. Bush is protecting others, including himself, not Bolton, by thus being able to keep the records closed. This is my hunch, anyway.
I suggest the UN could conduct business in languages other than english; disrupting Bolton’s intention to screw things up.
Bush has always been a puppet dictator in the president’s office. But he is not running the show. He is the useful idiot put before the public to conceal the real culprits behind the scene. Bush senior was also a puppet dictator. Both Bush’s have the same mannerism of being able to say nothing, very much like con artists and used car salesmen.
The Bush Dynasty is over.
Artie @ 3
‘..But he is not running the show.’
‘Bush senior was also a puppet’
‘..Bush Dynasty..’
Make up your mind. (Dynasty, or puppet?)
Ted the Swimmer passing judgement on someone’s fitness to serve. ROTFLMAO ! ! !
As shown above, there’s nothing to overreact about regarding recess appointments any more than there is to overreact about the sky is falling freeway predictions of one Horses Ass. But as usual, you find a way.
Does it occur to you that many Americans want Bolton as Ambassador, just like we want Rice as Sec State, etc.? Bolton has a tougher approach to terror than naive people like you Goldy. What a concept! We’ve tried 40 years of appeasement, why not try something new like confronting terror?
And if there is a nuclear attack on the US, do you think that under any administration, it would be a no big deal event? Get real. Grow up. If it comes down to temporary martial law because we’ve got to go door to door an root out these assholes, then so be it. I frankly don’t like the idea of trampling the constitution any more than you do, but what I like less is the concept of being blown up.
To you, freedom is doing whatever the hell you want, at any time. To you freedom is heading to the Black Party in NYC and participating in the bachinnalian sex in the streets without protection, while high on meth. Or burning the flag, etc. That’s not the freedom intended by our Founding Fathers.
True Freedom comes with personal restraint. One has to be willing to tread lightly on the bound of one’s neighbors and to respect some basic modicum of structure. Freedom to tax the rich into oblivion for the sake of the poor, is not Freedom Goldy, yet you preach for it almost every day.
This is what all of you leftists don’t get. There are limits in a civilized society.
We’ve put people like Jimmy Carter in office and basically watched as terrorists have come closer and closer to home soil blowing us up all the way, all in the name of a “religion of peace” just because they don’t agree with our ideas.
The majority of Americans (remember, we’ve been winning because we speak to the majority) now see appeasement, or pacifist approaches to terror as no longer acceptable.
You can whine all you want, but get used to things getting tougher, because that’s what the majority of America wants.
I say the worse, the better! Just as the right wing hysteria sweeping the country is a backlash against perceived liberal excesses, the right’s very real excesses inevitably will provoke a counter-backlash against the right. The worse the right wingers get, the deeper the backlash will go. Yes, America is going to suffer tremendous damage while people go through the process of getting the right wing madness out of their system; but when it’s over, the Republican Party will be discredited for the next 100 years.
6
The majority of liberals now see appeasement, or pacifist approaches to right wingers as no longer acceptable. Get ready for the civil war you bastards are asking for, because it’s coming your way.
@ 6
What a dipshit you are! 40 years? Well that includes the presidencies of Nixon, Ford, Reagan and Bush I – appeasers all!!!!
Confronting terror? I’m all for it just as long as 10 of thousands of people aren’t slaughtered as “collateral damage” breeding more terrorists in the process.
You don’t like getting blown up? Do you like being in car accidents? You’re way more likely to be in one of those than getting blown up by a jihadi. It’s a fact. Grow up asshole. Grow a brain while you’re at it.
Freedom’s a bitch ain’t it?
Freedom to tax the rich… Fuck you! The rich should pay their fair share! We’re at “war” right? They should pay more to protect their fat asses! The poor of course serves as convenient cannon fodder. Sycophant.
Last time I looked at the polls the “majority” didn’t seem to care too much about Nero in the White House.
7) Roger Rabbit. Oh that’s going to solve a lot of problems. A civil war. So it’s not enough that we are at war with Islamics who kill indiscriminately. We’ll need to fight Democrats who disagree with our political views too?
So how do you propose to fight this civil war? Hand out Red and Blue T-Shirts?
This just shows how stupid and un-American leftists that think like you really are. The Western world is under attack, and you want to kill Republicans in response.
Dying to fight someone who straps a bomb belt on to kill as many innocents as possible is at least worth something, dying because of someone who doesn’t like I-912 and hates recess Presidential appointments, etc. is a bit of a joke.
Talk about your sour grapes! The democRATS obstruction by unconstitutional use of the filabuster failed! Bush won. Get over it and move on. If you don’t like it, move to canada or cuba you will fit right in in either place
GLT @ 6 You really putt the Ass in Horeses Ass.org
“Does it occur to you that many Americans want Bolton as Ambassador, just like we want Rice as Sec State,
etc.?”
Does it occur to you that MOST Americans do not?
“We’ve tried 40 years of appeasement, why not try something new like confronting terror?”
No we have spent 40 years in bed with the devil. How about we get out of the Bed and tell them fend for themselves?
“To you freedom is heading to the Black Party in NYC and participating in the bachinnalian sex in the streets without protection, while high on meth. Or burning the flag, etc. That’s not the freedom intended by our Founding Fathers.”
To you freedom is obviously building straw men and putting words in others mouths. That is not the freedom our founding fathers intended.
“Freedom to tax the rich into oblivion for the sake of the poor, is not Freedom Goldy, yet you preach for it almost every day.”
Uh… you must be reading another blog. Or you are just a republican and make shit up!
“This is what all of you leftists don’t get. There are limits in a civilized society.”
Uh,… uh… WTF? When did you hear anyone contradict that obvious statement? You truly are on a soapbox now.
“You can whine all you want, but get used to things getting tougher, because that’s what the majority of America wants”
So threatens the man with the propeller hat who pretends to speak for most Americans.
All of you libs just need a little education:
Calm down and read this. Especially Roger Rabbit and Donnageddon.
http://www.usnews.com/usnews/o...../8john.htm
Is there any cheese being served with this whine?
Fact is Clinton had many more recess appointments than george W Bush. It is also a fact that those recess appointments are completely within the powers granted by the Constitution in Article II, section 2:
The President shall have Power to fill up all Vacancies that may happen during the Recess of the Senate, by granting Commissions which shall expire at the End of their next Session.
So feel free to whine all you want my liberal bloggers. Meanwhile John Bolton will be kicking ass at the corrupt to the core UN. I hope he starts with corrput Kofi Anan and son Kojo who was skimminh money off the oil for food program!
“Bolton has a tougher approach to terror than naive people like you Goldy. ”
Yes, you are absolutely right. Bolton is going to be a tough terrorist.
Who is this Leo asshole? What a dickhead! Maybe riding on the coattails of that other jerk Michael Barone..
Shit for brains wingnuts…
suspend the Constitution, and seize powers that can only be described as dictatorial. This would essentially be the end of our democratic republic.
Goldy – would HA survive? Also, whatever the DNC pays you to write this propaganda, you should ask for a raise.
NoWonder. The Bush’s are certainly a Dynasty. Before the George’s, there was Prescott Bush and his father Sam. Four generations of warmongers and war profiteers. Sam and Prescott were Nazi sympathizers and collaborators. George Bush Jr doesn’t have the mental capacity to be anything other than a puppet, though he’s still a member of a Dynasty. George Bush Sr was similarly inarticulate and played a similar role as puppet for others whose agenda he was appointed as president to conceal.
I consider all the Bush’s traitors, seeking monarchistic positions in a post-democracy era of puppet regimes controlled by international corporations. We should not forget that the Bush’s were prominent members of the American Eugenics Society. George Sr, WWII BOMBER pilot, “Nuke Hanoi” Goerge, only opposed abortion when it became expedient for him to win the nomination for Vice President in 1980. Prescott was never convicted for his Nazi collaboration because he too was a puppet.
The Bush Dynasty is over!
@ 17
How much does Ken Mehlman pay you to spew talking points? Is that why you’re pbj (perfunctory blow job).
reply@10
Confronting terror? I’m all for it just as long as 10 of thousands of people aren’t slaughtered as “collateral damage” breeding more terrorists in the process.
You mean like the the 100,000+ Democrats killed in Dresden during WWII?
You don’t like getting blown up? Do you like being in car accidents? You’re way more likely to be in one of those than getting blown up by a jihadi. It’s a fact. Grow up asshole. Grow a brain while you’re at it.
Then I guess you won’t be using the deaths of US servicemen in Iraqas a politcal football anymore since the number killed pales in comparison to the slaughter of car accidents. Oh, that’s right – you are a liberal, you don’t have to make sense.
Last time I looked at the polls the “majority” didn’t seem to care too much about Nero in the White House.
We had the only poll that counted in Novmber of 2004. You lost. Get over it. Please take the advice of your own liberal comrades and MOVE ON.
pbj @ 14: “It is also a fact that those recess appointments are completely within the powers granted by the Constitution in Article II, section 2.”
While this is true, I believe the founding fathers put this in the Constitution for unusual situations, not to be used as an end run around Congress. Bolton could have had an up or down vote, if the White House had produced the documents Congress requested… In the end this will lead to a fillibuster on John Roberts, which will give the Senate an excuse to kill all fillibusters, and change our Congress forever..
Lead, follow or get out of the way.
The libs/dems clearly are incapable of leading.
They only thing they follow is an obstructionist agenda, which they do quite well.
So they can get the hell out of the way.
The grown-ups are running the country.
Sit down and shut uo kiddies.
fire_one @ 20
You may be right. To that end, killing the fillibuster, and creating enough controversy even the Rove story could blow over. I would bet that Rove advised him to proceed with the appointment for that very reason. The white guy for SCOTUS was just not enough.
Meanwhile, the war grinds on, the rich get richer, the middle gets stuck with the bill. Biz as usual.
14
I concur, I think the Dems are going to filibuster Roberts (which I think they should do regardless of this recess appointment). In my view, this was an incredibly arrogant move by the White House, to show that they will brook no dissent from their views.
Bolton is a disastrous appointment for UN Ambassador. If anyone is to blame, Voinovich should be getting pummelled with accusations: he had the opportunity to stop this nomination from going forward, and he pussed out. (The GOP/Rove heat machine must have really been on full blast.)
here we go.
The liberal bleating begins.
Christine Gregoire passes what was it, 87 bills under and “emergency” provision and the libs support this.
President Bush calls bullshit on the Democrats stonewalling him and you clowns are up in arms
There is a war on for christ sake.
Clueless One @ 11
“this is a civil war … only one side will prevail, and … the other side will be relegated to history. This war has to be fought with the scale and duration and savagery that is only true of civil wars. While we are lucky in this country that our civil wars are fought at the ballot box, not on the battlefields, nonetheless it is a civil war.”
Pop Quiz: Who said this?
Answer: Newt Gingrich, in a speech exhorting his fellow Republicans to wage “civil war” against liberals with “savagery.”
Here’s another clue for you, Clueless One:
“Newt understood that conservatism thrives only when it has an enemy …. No longer would the Democrats simply be opposed; they would be destroyed. … Newt’s overarching strategy was to portray the differences between the two parties as … moral, not political, laying the rhetorical groundwork for an offensive …. He used certain outrageously stigmatizing language, long a hallmark of right-wing political organizing, to caricature the opposition as immoral, even evil. … Newt called Democrats ‘sick,’ ‘grotesque,’ ‘loony,’ ‘stupid,’ ‘corrupt,’ ‘anti-family,’ and ‘traitors.’” — John Taylor, Esquire Magazine
Do you get it now, Clueless One? The civil war rhetoric — and the civil war — is coming from the Far Right. All liberals are doing is defending themselves against those who consciously design to tear America apart.
When did this place become so ugly? Most of these posts are unreadable.
No kidding… hard to find an organized thought. Lots of cut n’ paste though!
Reply to 13
Sorry, but I won’t spend 10 seconds reading anything written by John Leo. If and when he ever pulls his head out of his ass and stops being a shameless apologist for deceit and incompetence, maybe I’ll read what he has to say. Until then, I don’t have time for him.
Comment on 19
I see pbj is in top form today — he’s being the hateful, hysterical, irrational ranter we all know so well.
23
“There is a war on for christ sake.”
Yes, a war by right wingers against (a) Democrats, (b) unions, (c) the working class, (d) anyone who doesn’t fall in line with their extremist agenda.
There’s also theoretically a war against terror, but nobody is fighting it. Not anyone in this administration, anyway.
25
You’re new here, aren’t you?
Reply to 27.
Roger, hmmm, so regardless of the content having any rational or logical value, or even trying to understand an argument from John Leo, you simply dismiss anything he says at face value?
Interesting. Do you use this same method of analysis for deciding when to cross a busy street?
Your world must be very convenient. Don\’t like the price of a particular item in a store? Just dismiss it and assign the price you want.
Goldy, this is just stupid. The law allows for recess appointments. All presidents use them.
Anybody who thinks Bolton’s being at the UN helps Bush, the next 16 months should be fun.
31
Yeah and I’ll bet you read Democrats.com every day, don’t you?
Artie @ 18
Wow. You should call someone at the NY Times so that your information can get published. Or was Judith Miller your source?
‘..Bush’s were prominent members of the American Eugenics Society.’
Then why do the liberals dislike GW so much? He has the same legacy as Margaret Sanger.
All I can say is – keep up the good work.
Comment by From the Clueless @ 16
‘Who is this Leo asshole? What a dickhead! Maybe riding on the coattails of that other jerk Michael Barone..’
These two are actually middle of the road journalists, which for HA readers means the rabid neo-con far-right wing. Do a search – there is a whole world out there just waiting for you.
Dr. E @ 22
‘Bolton is a disastrous appointment for UN Ambassador’
Not. Bolton already had the UN quaking in their boots. He will shake them up and hopefully be “rude” while he does it. News flash – most Americans do not like the UN for what it has become and/or how it operates. Reform is required so that it can continue with the original charter. Bolton is the guy to bring the cowboy’s wrath on the pompous organization.
Roger Rabbit @ 27
‘..If and when he ever pulls his head out of his ass and stops being a shameless apologist for deceit and incompetence, maybe I’ll read what he has to say. Until then, I don’t have time for him.’
If you do not read the “enemy” how can you do battle? Not to mention how are to know if he “ever pulls his head out of his ass”?
Reply @ 36 The point is not whether Bolton would be a good UN ambassador, the point is whether the Senate gets to vote on him. Why did the Senate not get to vote? Because the White House withheld information about Mr Bolton, knowing this would infuriate the Democratic leadership, which will in turn fillibuster John Roberts for the Supreme Court, which will be all the excuse the Republican leadership will need to disallow any further fillibusters, giving the Republicans, in effect, free rein to pass any legislation their Corporate Masters decree.
@ 35
Who are you? Another RNC talking points spew zombie? Yawn…
Michael Barone
fire_one @ 38
If this whole thing is a setup why do the dems not thwart the plan and not filibuster? Not fillibustering is not possible, is it?
Comment by From the Clueless @ 39
‘Who are you? Another RNC talking points spew zombie? Yawn…’
Using Media Matters to justify your point is the same as a righty using WND or NewsMax. You proved my point, thank you.
RNC Zombie @ 41
Not in the same universe zombie. WND and Newsmax’ propaganda orientation is painstakingly documented by Media Matters. All Media Matters does is point out the falsehoods and puts them alongside the facts.
Michael Barone is a wingnut apologist for the Bush regime. Deal with it.
37
I don’t have to “read the enemy.” They’re right here on Horses Ass.
Goldy:
“See, what Republicans label as “Democratic obstruction” was really the proper exercise of the checks and balances provided for in the Constitution. Senators representing a majority of American voters refused to confirm the President’s nominee”
(my emphasis)
How do you know this to be true? There was never a floor vote on Bolton, therefore no record of which Senators refuse to confirm him. If a 129 vote margin is acceptable to elect a governor, why isn’t a 1 vote margin (or a tie with the VP breaking the tie) acceptable for confirming an appointee?
Plus your statement is really just disengenuous spin. To make yor statment true you’d only need 1 Senator from the 7 or 8 most populous states to oppose an issue.
“Should we suffer a catastrophic terrorist attack on his watch – such as a nuclear detonation in a major American city – Americans should be prepared for Bush to act according to character… to declare a state of emergency, suspend the Constitution, and seize powers that can only be described as dictatorial.”
That’s a long slippery slope from a recess appointment to dictatorship. Maybe you are being absurd to illicit posts. Wait, wouldn’t that be considering trolling?
NoWonder @ 40 I think the Democratic Leadership is capable of “not fillibustering”, the problem would be that they end up with Bolton in the UN and Roberts in the Supreme Court (and no debate or vote on either one). They would however be able to uphold the integrity of Congress.
What’s interesting is that you seem to agree that it is the Republican leadership that put them in this position… and it doesn’t bother you.. Rove and Co. have got to be chuckling in their beer over this one. We will see how they chuckle when they do the “perp walk”…
So, the Democrats prevent a vote on Bolton, and then complain that no vote was taken on Bolton. Huh?
The documents issue is a red herring. It is an act to delay the inevitable. The Dems knew that if Bolton came to a full Senate vote, he would be approved. They also know that if Roberts is given hearing and voted on, there is a high probability that he will be appointed to SCOTUS. They can’t stand it, so they use that old tool of the non-democratic, the filibuster.
By the way, the recess appointment is in the Constitution, but the filibuster is just a rule adopted over the years by the Senate. Which has more credibility?
JanetS @ 46 – “….there is a high probability that he will be appointed to SCOTUS.’
Well alrighty then… Let’s just run everything on a “high probability” basis… Hmmm, I think Hillary has a “high probability” of being elected, so let’s just skip the election… Okie Dokie?
As to the documents being a red herring? Well, I guess there is a “high probability” we will never know now!
reply @ 18
NoWonder. The Bush’s are certainly a Dynasty. Before the George’s, there was Prescott Bush and his father Sam. Four generations of warmongers and war profiteers. Sam and Prescott were Nazi sympathizers and collaborators.
It is ironic that you make such unsubstantiated charges, considering that Jospeph Kennedy was himself a Nazi sympathizer and anti-semite who thought the Nazis had the correct ‘solution’ for the ‘Jewish problem’.
During May of 1938, Kennedy engaged in extensive discussions with the new German Ambassador to the Court of St. James’s, Herbert von Dirksen. In the midst of these conversations (held without approval from the U.S. State Department), Kennedy advised von Dirksen that President Roosevelt was the victim of “Jewish influence” and was poorly informed as to the philosophy, ambitions and ideals of Hitler’s regime. (The Nazi ambassador subsequently told his bosses that Kennedy was “Germany’s best friend” in London.)
Columnists back in the states condemned Kennedy’s fraternizing. Kennedy later claimed that 75% of the attacks made on him during his Ambassadorship emanated from “a number of Jewish publishers and writers. … Some of them in their zeal did not hesitate to resort to slander and falsehood to achieve their aims.” He told his eldest son, Joe Jr., that he disliked having to put up with “Jewish columnists” who criticized him with no good reason.
Like his father, Joe Jr. admired Adolf Hitler. Young Joe had come away impressed by Nazi rhetoric after traveling in Germany as a student in 1934. Writing at the time, Joe applauded Hitler’s insight in realizing the German people’s “need of a common enemy, someone of whom to make the goat. Someone, by whose riddance the Germans would feel they had cast out the cause of their predicament. It was excellent psychology, and it was too bad that it had to be done to the Jews. The dislike of the Jews, however, was well-founded. They were at the heads of all big business, in law etc. It is all to their credit for them to get so far, but their methods had been quite unscrupulous … the lawyers and prominent judges were Jews, and if you had a case against a Jew, you were nearly always sure to lose it. … As far as the brutality is concerned, it must have been necessary to use some … .”
Janet S –
I actually agree with you that this is a political gift to the Democrats.
I think it would have been tough to filibuster Bolton. Even if the Democrats had won, they might have paid a political price by allowing the Republicans to call them obstructionist. Now they have him weakened in his position and – if he is as bad as he appears – the Bush administration has bought itself a huge liability, and left no one to blame but themselves.
President Bush exercises power because he can, and Americans need to understand that.
Uh…yes he can. Please read the constitution Article II, section 2. RIF Goldy.
Why do Dems want to weaken the US? This is ridiculous. Why can’t they just shut up, now that it is a done deal? Yes, they have the right to say whatever they want. But shouldn’t they be smart enough show a united face to the rest of the world? I guess not. It is more fun to carry on a “Hate Bush” crusade.
Did you notice that Jimmy Carter’s stupid remarks in Great Britain denigrating the US military, our president and our country, ended up in Al-Jazeera?
The world is just looking for weaknesses in America. The Dems are giving it to them on a silver platter.
JanetS @ 50 Geez take a valium or something. I know the Republicans want to repeal Freedom of Speech, you don’t have to make it so obvious… As to shutting up… If you can just tell me WTF we are doing in Iraq, then maybe… (nah not really)
The “world” is not looking for weakness in America. You listen to too much of that Republican “scare” talk (a very little of Rush goes a long way).
The world does not “hate” America, it just hates BushRoveHalliburton and Co…
Janet S –
You were doing so well, then you posted a lame, vaguely paranoid rant.
There is no reason for the Democrats to approve a belligerent, incompetent loose cannon like Bolton in the name of unity. Al-Jazeera prints the news. Carter was news. He spoke his mind, and stood for American values. He didn’t denigrate the military. The Bush administration has condemned the same acts he did.
Nations become weaker, not stronger, when they become one party states.
Stop whining, your unconstitional filibuster tactics did not work. You lost. Get over it. By the way, why were recess appointments OK for slick willie, but not for president Bush?
Thanks, CG, for being concerned about my mental state.
My point was that Jimmy Carter went oversees and let his mouth loose, without engaging his brain. And, big surprise, Al Jazeera printed it. He should be smarter than that, or just stick to building homes. A former US president ranting about the current administration makes us look weak abroad, can’t you see that? It has nothing to do with rights, everything to do with acting in the best interest of the country.
The president has the right to pick who he wants to serve in his administration. If the dems don’t like it, they need to get their guy elected president. In the mean time, they can do the American thing and VOTE on it. They choose to stay on the sidelines, and then wonder why they are on the sidelines.
I’m all for active debate between the two parties. It is the Dems that are refusing to debate, not the Republicans.
Comment by From the Clueless @ 39
‘..painstakingly documented by Media Matters..’
David Brock is (now) a left-wing fanatic. He is a frequent guest on the Al Franken show, where he takes everything out of context and never corrects his errors. (Just like Rush Limbaugh?) We are talking the Michael Moore crowd. Sell your propaganda elsewhere.
Comment by From the Clueless @ 39
From 55 “Sell your propaganda elsewhere.”
I forgot where I was. This is a perfect place to sell your propaganda. Sorry about that.
Janet S comes from the Bill O’Reilly school of debate:
Just shut up!!
Same thing applies to the Republicans in the House led by wonder boy DeLay and his puppet Hastert – midnight committee sessions, holding the voting period open as long as it takes, voting on bills right after they’re printed before the D’s have a chance to read them.
We’re in the majority – just shut up!
In the Senate, there’s the looming threat of the “nucular” option against the filibuster, i.e. – just shut up!
Poor impotent Asses.
Poor Hillary!
@ 55
Again not even nearly in the same universe zombie. I’ll take Brock and Franken over Limbaugh, Newsmax, WND, Hannity, Savage Weiner and the rest of that crowd.
Go apologize for your heroes somewhere else.
I hope the Dems keep up this strategy. Never vote, never debate, never have a new idea, but always bring up “Hate BushRoveHalliburton and Co”, always make adhominem attacks against those who disagree with you, ignore any facts that may discredit your argument, and run and cry when things don’t go your way.
At this rate, you’ll never be back in power.
Comment by From the Clueless @ 58
‘..I’ll take Brock and Franken..’
That was my point. You have your propaganda and you think it has more credibility than Media Research Center or anything on the right. I apologized for saying “Sell your propaganda elsewhere.”
Keep up the good work.
But it was an “EMERGENCY”! Just like the state Damnocrats used on damn near every bill they passed this year. Not to Mention all the Clinton Recess Appointments. Ha Ha Gotta love it… Kinda hard to eat your own damn dog food. Chomp Chomp
I like Bolton, he will kick some ass in an otherwise useless liberal UN.
GS @ 60 – Yeah maybe he will. If only we could have debated his nomination and voted on him……
If only we could have debated his nomination and voted on him…… -Comment by fire_one— 8/1/05 @ 7:27 pm
The debate was there – your obstructionists refused to bring it to a vote.
Nice try.
fire_one @ 61
‘If only we could have debated his nomination and voted on him……’
That is what the repubs were trying to do. Up or down vote, debate like it was a real filibuster, etc. The dems kept delaying by asking for more docs. Dodd does not want Bolton in any position, and the rest of the dems have their nose rings hooked up.
Zombie @ 59
Franken is opinion, he has a point of view so one man’s opinion is another’s propaganda. I find Franken’s opinion much more reality-based than the sheer lunacy of Limbaugh, Hannity, et. al.
Brock’s mission through Media Matters is to expose winger misinformation which he and his staff have done through thousands of posts. They simply hold up the misinformation to the
facts – there’s nothing propagandistic about that unless you consider the exposing and documenting of lies and distortions propaganda.
NoWonder @ 62 “The dems kept delaying by asking for more docs.”
Oooh sorry about wanting some FACTS! What is the White House hiding? Eh? Oh that’s right, the Republican argument is “SHUT UP!”
http://tbogg.blogspot.com/
****************************************************************
Monday, August 01, 2005
Bully boys
There can only be two reasons why the worst President in American history appointed the foot-stamping, tantrum-throwing, woman-abusing, serial-lying John Bolton to the UN.
One, he needs someone in the United Nations who, when we launch an air attack on Iranian nuclear facilities, will stand up in the UN and say, “What are you gonna do about it, pussies? Fucking Euro-faggots.” while Condoleeza Rice plays ‘good cop’ and explains that this was something we “had to do” more in sorrow than in anger. This way the neocons can keep their five-year boner up, while one of their chickehawk compatriots plays fake ‘diplomat’.
Second, the Bolton appointment is just another example of a spoiled rich kid who has spent his life being bailed out of bad situations without repercussions, refusing to listen to someone telling him, “No.”. This is no different when then when he was told to report for TANG duty and then chose to not show up because he didn’t get his way.
Actually, it’s probably a combination of the two.
From this point forward Democrats should fuck with every Bush appointee that comes before them. Kneecap them. Humiliate them. Drag out every rumor, true or false and make them walk knee-deep through the muck and the slime. Everyone who accepts an appointment from George Bush should go into it knowing that they’re going to get fucked over for the neighbors and family to see.
In his chickenshit manner, Bush made the appointment, and then ran out of town. The only thing more consistent than Bush’s arrogance, is his cowardice.
John puts it a bit more nicely.
posted by tbogg at 7:46 AM
****************************************************************
Impeach the bastard.
Okay, folks, if we are to judge Bolton by his public statements on the record, what we have is the picture of a narrow-viewed unilateralist who feels that the UN is (and I’m undoubtedly simplifying here) there to do the US’s bidding. That seems to me to be the complete opposite of what any civilized nation would want to have representing their nation’s interests in a global deliberative body. I’ll try to conjure up a plain-English, dumbed-down analogy:
The UN is a punch bowl. Bush looked for the worst, stinkiest, and most nefarious turd he could float in that punch bowl, and John Bolton fit that description perfectly.
I don’t think I’m totally off-base here, either: the Bush administration is apparently power-drunk, having its agenda essentially unopposed due to Republican domination of all three branches of government. On that final point, many of my European colleagues simply scratch their heads and repeat to me the dictum: “a two-party government is only one party better than a one-party government”.
36
“Bolton already had the UN quaking in their boots. He will shake them up and hopefully be “rude” while he does it. “
I seriously doubt that the UN was “quaking in their boots” at the prospect of a Bolton nomination. I think they’d probably be more worried about obstructionist impasses.
As far as being “rude” is concerned: the US Bureau of Consular affairs is slightly over 200 years old. Rudeness has never, to my knowledge, been a part of any diplomatic mission. To find rudeness to be a general virtue in any diplomatic appointment is crass, to say the least.
From this point forward Democrats should fuck with every Bush appointee that comes before them. Kneecap them. Humiliate them. Drag out every rumor, true or false and make them walk knee-deep through the muck and the slime.
From this point forward? That is what they have been doing since day one! You cannot threaten to do something you have been doing all along. By all means, follow through on that strategy. It only reinforces the truth that Democrats are the party of whine and no solutions.
@ 20,
While this is true, I believe the founding fathers put this in the Constitution for unusual situations, not to be used as an end run around Congress.
What you believe or do not believe is irrelevant. It is about the law as it is written – not how some looney tune liberal “feels” about it. If you have problems with your feelings see a therapist.
Roger @ 25,
Since you are so into po quizes here is one for you:
“To send men to the firing squad, Judicial proof is unnecessary. This is a revolution and a revolutionary must become a cold killing machine motivated by pure hate.”
Who said that?
E at 66,
On that final point, many of my European colleagues simply scratch their heads and repeat to me the dictum: “a two-party government is only one party better than a one-party government”.
I am sorry that it embarrases you at the cocktail parties with your Euro buddies that we don’t just roll over and surrender to terrorists. Must be a bitch to get the lecture over cocktails with the Euro weenies eh?
hey pee&jellybrains-
What kida lame duck pissant preznit can’t get his hand picked crapola candidate a confirmation from a Senate he’s got a majority in. That’s SOME bodacious politickin’ right there!
rujax206 @ 72
‘..confirmation from a Senate he’s got a majority in.’
In the Senate it takes 60/100 votes to break a filibuster. The minority can logjam everything if they get 41 lock-steppers.
Bout time we grew a pair!
pbj @ 71
“I am sorry that it embarrases you at the cocktail parties with your Euro buddies that we don’t just roll over and surrender to terrorists.
I’m not quite sure why my comments have caused you to be so defensive, but how does one exactly roll over and surrender to terrorists? I mean, what, do you just sort of wave white flags and say “I give up guys, come on and take over our country” then all the terrorists (who come from a several dozen nations, speak numerous, mutually incomprehensible languages, and share only a vaguely defined ideology based on a fundamentalist view of Islam) come and attack you? That must be the dumbed-down version of the Neo-Con Message to the Gullible.
It might surprise you to hear this, but a situation in which one party controls all branches of government is a de facto one-party system.
And just what exactly is a “Euro weenie” — is it something like a Vienna cocktail sausage?
Clueless@10: Check out the Latest numbers for taxation. The Top 50% of wage earners pay over 90% of all taxes: IRS income state. More lefty class warfare without the facts.
CAMPAIGN CONTRIBUTIONS, 2001-2002
($200 or more, Hard and Soft Money)
Amount To To To % %
given Count Total* Dems* Repubs* PACs* Dems Repubs
————————————————————–
$200-$999 363744 144.6 43.6 67.6 34.1 30 47
$1,000+ 236470 728.0 307.1 317.0 131.9 42 44
$10,000+ 8870 275.6 140.1 110.8 39.2 51 40
$100,000+ 309 105.7 71.5 33.6 1.8 68 32
$1,000,000+ 14 39.8 36.4 3.4 0.2 91 8
Don*****don@12: 56 senators were trying to approve Bolton’s appointment. Turbin Durbin, Chappaquiddick Kennedy, Boxed-in Boxer, & Harry Small Town Reid are filibustering the appointment. Your math is lacking.
Clueless@16: I thought Barone is a lefty!!! Check him out.
Artie@18: GWB is smarter than JFKerry. Check out the transcripts.
DR_E@22: I liked you until that comment. If your side could win important elections, then your side can nominate people. Since your side lost YOU ARE IN THE MINORITY! Get it?
Oops… Late at night here on the east coast. The numbers are from the WA Times.
Sure is amazing how cameras and tough interdiction is now the norm in GB. If we placed cameras in US subways, the ACLU would cry fowl!!! Yes I spelled it right. I know Mr. Cynical can figure it out!
Rujax206: You post a blog site for your anti-Bush rant. So lefties can’t create their own argument, they have to scour the Internet? How quaint!!!
#77
Better than your incoherent babble.
I just like the way my man “T-Bogg” turns a phrase. I knew you wouldn’t mind.
PuttyBrains @ 83
Perfect reason why Bush’s tax cuts most benefit the top 2%. They really need the money.
What’s fair puttybrains? Should the cannon fodder shoulder more of the burden?
Link went MIA:
Poor
Hillary
I know for a fact the HTML is correct and that it works, so if it’s MIA again, it’s all Goldy.
President Clinton: 140 recess appointments over two terms.
Bush the Fascist: 106 recess appointments.
So what happens when Bush ends up with over 200 recess appointments in two terms? You know that fucking coward ASSPRIDE is only making this argument because it is intentionally misleading. Once again our resident amateur intellectual troll is full of shit.
Clueless, if you looked at the tax law changes, more lower income people pay fewer taxes and more were taken off the books. And if I can refind the link, the rich are paying even more of the US tax burden now. But your side likes class warfare so keep the drivel up! I remember when it was asked of Ted Kennedy and John Kerry they changed the subject. Damn where is that link…
Most Presidents have used the option given them IN THE CONSTITUTION to make recess appointments including GEORGE WASHINGTON!!!!
To all of you who think it’s abuse of power or dictatorial, you are clueless, partisan idiots. I suggest you break out a history book and read it.
I see you quote the “moral compass” of the democrat party, Sen. Kennedy the only senator to kill a woman. The man with no shame.
I guess bi-partisanship means the dems say NO, than they fillibuster with a minority and than claim partisanship when the other party bucks there crap. That’s bi-partisanship, yeah. A majority of senators would have voted to approve Bolton’s appointment, that is if the “bi-partisan” likes of Kennedy, Reid and Boxer would have let them vote. HYPOCRITES!!!!!!
Dr. E @ 74
‘..To find rudeness to be a general virtue in any diplomatic appointment is crass, to say the least.’
This was sarcasm. The primary red herring the dems have used repeatedly is that Bolton is abrasive, rude, etc.
ProudAss @87,
Fuck you. No really… FUCK YOU.
As everybody knows, I don’t ban trolls (as tempting as it is,) and I don’t edit the comments. And I really resent your implication otherwise. Assholes like you virtually ruin the comment threads as a place for intelligent debate, and then you have the nerve to accuse me of censorship.
If I do ever start banning people, trust me, you’ll be one of the first to go, if only for personal rudeness.
Dear Goldy, Read it again, then, grow up little boy.
Do you recogize this word: IF?
Really, it’s a little itty bitty one.
Let me help you out:
if conj.
In the event that: If I were to go, I would be late.
Granting that: If that is true, what should we do?
On the condition that: She will play the piano only if she is paid.
Although possibly; even though: It is a handsome if useless trinket.
Whether: Ask if he plans to come to the meeting.
Used to introduce an exclamatory clause, indicating a wish: If they had only come earlier!
n.
A possibility, condition, or stipulation: There will be no ifs, ands, or buts in this matter.
Okay Repubs, if it is SO common for Presidents to have recess appointments, some of them apparently appointing hundreds during the recess, why is it NOT ONE UN ambassador has ever received a recess appointment.
The real answer is that Bush wants John Roberts in the Supreme Court for at least the next 40 freaking years. And the next Justice that Bush nominates is going to be a right-wing nut job the likes of which we have never seen.
And I agree with whoever posted that if we suffer a major terrorist attack here in the US, Bush will declare a state of emergency, dissolve congress, and stay in office indefinitely(or at least till we can get a good bead on him…. )
Proudass-
YOU’RE being the BUTT in THIS matter.
Asshole.
you know, read a thread like this, and its just so disheartening. So many people right off the edge into the right-wing propaganda machine….
Oh, and dumbAss@94, you’re not really fooling anyone with your semantics games… You were implying that Goldy messed with your post, regardless of what you pretend.
92
“The primary red herring the dems have used repeatedly is that Bolton is abrasive, rude, etc.”
Not a red herring, but rather well documented fact. Also not the primary reason dems. object to Bolton.
But stop for a moment to compare the whining ninnies complaining about the Bolton appointment being stalled on the Senate floor with that of Richard Holbrooke: Holbrooke’s appointment was held up for 14 months, and Clinton refused to push him through on a recess appointment, so as not to undermine his credibility. Bush does not seem unnecessarily troubled by such trifles, though.
Dr. E @ 99
‘Not a red herring, but rather well documented fact. Also not the primary reason dems. object to Bolton.’
I know his rudeness is a fact. It is a red herring because it is irrelevant and the one thing the dems think the media will bite on. I think I know the real reason they dislike Bolton – he will not bend over for the UN, which is what the cowboy wants.
Christine G @ 56
“Nations become weaker, not stronger, when they become one party states.”
Kind of ironic from someone who’s namesake is governor of a state that has been mostly under one party rule for the past 30 years.
The amount of rhetoric and vitriol on this is amazing. The appointment is not permanent, it only lasts until he is confirmed or until the end of the next congressional term, which ever comes first. So the people who disagree with him will still have their chance to vote yea or nay, and in the mean time he can prove or damn himself in action.
It has nothing to do with Roberts, who has not been nor is hinted to be appointed in recess. Roberts will suffer the confirmation process in full. And even if not the same would apply, he would be temporarily appointed and have to be confirmed or his appointment would expire.
Honestly this is much ado about nothing, as the number show that in recent history, Bush’s recess appointments barely run average.
And @ 92, your paranoia over a Bush police state is as sad as is your veiled threat of a solution.
What so many of you are freaking out over is politics as usual in Washington. Nothing less, and nothing more.
Goldy @ 93
“If I do ever start banning people, trust me, you’ll be one of the first to go, if only for personal rudeness.”
If you started that policy you’d kill the blog because you’d have to ban yourself.
fire_one@96 – “And I agree with whoever posted that if we suffer a major terrorist attack here in the US, Bush will declare a state of emergency, dissolve congress, and stay in office indefinitely(or at least till we can get a good bead on him…. )”
And you think conservatives are “nut jobs”? Me thinks your the one with something wrapped a bit too tight inside your head!
Two words for ya – GET PROZAC!!!
Mike
And @ 92, your paranoia over a Bush police state is as sad as is your veiled threat of a solution.
Sorry this should have been directed at
@96
my bad
And here I thought the the power to appoint individuals to positions while congress was in recess was granted to the executive branch by the U.S. Constitution. Oh, wait… IT IS! (article two, section two, clause three)
If you want to talk about abuse of power, look no further than the democrats that kept Bolton from getting an up or down vote on confirmation.