Bush sidesteps Senate on Bolton confirmation

Yet another sidestep by Bush.... or Cheney....or whoever is really running that
administration.

http://www.japantoday.com/e/?content=news&cat=8&id=345195

.

 

I was waiting for someone to report on this, Gilligan hwo can you say this? Maybe THIS time there was some reason, but this is all implented, they let Bush bypas the senate one time for a certain reason, but in a year or two you will wake up and see Bush Bypassing the senate on whatever the fuck he wants

 

The Senate was still 6 votes short of the 60 needed to stop the filibusters on Bolton. What support there was for Bolton was declining in the Senate during the course of the summer. It shows what a dismal selection Bolton really was.

It doesn't look good to send Bolton to the U.N. under such circumstances, especially for such a high profile type position. If the Bush administration used some common sense, it would have selected a more appropriate person. The filibuster issue would have been a non-issue in that case. He didn't have to make a recess appointment.

Bolton will still have to be voted on in late 2006.

.

 

Reagan made 240 recess appointments. So there.

.

 

With a pending supreme court judicial nominee awaiting senate confirmation, Bush is clearly antagonizing the senate with a recess appointment knowing senators on both sides oppose Bolton.

 

Bolton is clearly an asshole from what his former employees said of him. it think it was the people from the state department that said his appointment would be a very big mistake. the UN needs someone who will kick it back inline again, not someone who will bully people around.

the senate wanted documents on mr. bolton, and the white house would not cooperate. they no doubt are trying to hide something.

 

But the ones who sit on the confirmation boards also deserve to have their questions answered. If there was no sticking point, no veracity to the concerns voiced by those who know or knew Bolton, then why deny the requests for documents? If there is nothing to the allegations, then hand over the documents! No documents? Then no vote. Were the majority on the other side of the aisle, the arguement would not differ.

 

The filibuster is here and has to be dealt with. It's not peculiar to Bolton. It's a larger issue if you want to argue whether or not the filibuster is Constitutional.

Also, Presidents have learned to misuse the recess appointment which wasn't meant to be a tactic of sneaking in unpopular nominees.

.

 

The Republicans used the filibuster extensively in the 80s and early 90s before they had control of the Senate and House.

The Republicans cry that he deserved a vote and scorn the filibuster. However, the Republicans had a chance to do away with the filibuster on judicial nominees earlier this year during the fight over Bush's judicial nominations but chose not to do away with it. Why? Because they know that the day will come when they won't be in control of the Senate and they want to retain that bargaining chip.

Neither party really wants to do away with the filibuster, even though both cry how terrible it is.

.

 

No one has ever filibustered a judicial nomination? I'm not sure what you are referring to there. Both Reps and Dems have filibustered judicial nominees or voted against cloture.

.

 

Thanks for the update.

Yeah, there is all kinds of gamesmanship that goes on in the Senate. Ideally, it would just be put up for a vote with no other complications. The real world just isn't that simple, though.

.

 

There have been cases, I believe, where a filibuster was ended yet the vote was delayed indefinately. Don't ask me for all the details on how this works.

.

 

Here's a summary of some of the Republican instuted filibusters. Of course, the Dems do the same thing.

http://rawstory.com/exclusives/byrne/democrats_open_fire_filibuster_509.htm

.

 

You know Gilligan, a funny thing happens when you actually review documented historic reality. You discover that Republicans are not only wanton liars (albeit I grant that both Parties are two sides of the same corrupt coin), but have very short memories of Congressional reality indeed.

http://www.pfaw.org/pfaw/general/default.aspx?oid=633&print=yes