Posted on 04/20/2005 11:08:31 PM PDT by FairOpinion
The Bush administration yesterday sprang to the defence of John Bolton as the next US ambassador to the United Nations, accusing Democrats of raising unfounded allegations over his character in order to delay a Senate confirmation vote.
Officials signalled that the administration was ready for a bruising fight with Democrats and possibly some moderate Republicans who have indicated they are also unhappy with President George W. Bush's choice of a "hawk" with a reputation for irascible behaviour and strong-arm tactics.
Democrats secured enough support on the Senate foreign relations committee to win another two weeks or so to investigate the background of Mr Bolton, the outgoing undersecretary of state for arms control, after one Republican, George Voinovich of Ohio, broke ranks with his party.
Mr Voinovich said afterwards he had applied the "old golden rule, the kitchen test of would you like to have a person like that around your table" and decided he needed more time to consider. Without Mr Voinovich's support on the committee, Richard Lugar, the Republican chairman, did not have the votes to approve the nomination.
Voinovich should be ashamed of himself and I hope he will pay a political price for his betrayal of his fellow Republicans and President Bush.
I think where the Republicans made their mistake was to pospone the vote on Bolton. They had the Republicans, the vote was going to be along partisan lines, so why did they cave to the request of the Dems to postpone the vote, when all that was going to do is to give more time to the Dems to get to the Republican Senators and try to turn them, and apparently they succeeded.
Because the Senate rules demand it. The minority on committees has the per se right to delay matters one week.
But didn't they delay two weeks for the first time?
And now of course, because they don't have the votes.
I think think they played the one week by right delay card until last week. I am really annoyed at Voinovich. His placing of a turd on the carpet without notice, claiming he was asleep at the switch, is a very shabby way to treat his GOP colleagues. I have never seen that happen before.
Sprang? SPRANG??!!!!! The Bush administration has left every single person the rats gang up on twisting in the wind. To H*** with the "New Tone"!!! Govern like a man, Mr. President. Stand behind your people and pound the living crap out of your opponents!!!!
Occasionally things are found out about a nominee after the pick, like with the New York chief who was supposed to become the first secretary of the Department of Homeland Security.
And like Thomas Eagleton (erstwhile first VP nominee with George McGovern) back in the 1972 presidential race.
I'll give Voinovich the benefit of his doubt until I see how the next couple of weeks go.
And .. as Rush pointed out - he could have allowed Bolton out of committee and onto the floor - and then if he had reservations - he could have voted against the guy.
Rush was livid that the committee is becomming the discussion or debate sessions - and not on the floor where it belongs.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1387642/posts
Hope everybody saw this. Apparently the MOB lady was lying through her teeth.
They had to postpone the vote, because without the Voinovich vote - the nomination was 9-9 - which would have killed it - and Lugar was not going to do that.
There was NOTHING that came out about Bolton, that would justify not confirming him.
This is what Voinovich said himself:
"Mr Voinovich said afterwards he had applied the "old golden rule, the kitchen test of would you like to have a person like that around your table" and decided he needed more time to consider."
That's why I made the comment in my first post -- since when is the requirement -- that you would want to have that person around your kitchen table -- for approval?
How many people would want Madelain Albright around their kitchen table? Can you imagine, if a Republican had used that as an excuse to not be willing to confirm her?
"Mr. President. Stand behind your people and pound the living crap out of your opponents"
===
I agree. Bipartisanship to the Dems mean doing everything THEIR way. Being nice to them, just encourages their nastiness.
Well .. in his statement to the committee - he went on a little too much about his "good friend" - Joe Biden. That should tell you all you want to know.
Of course she was lying -- she has been a Bush hater, a liberal Democrat from way back when.
Really .. he couldn't show up at the hearings and now he wants to hold up everything.
Somebody put him up to this.
Maybe his was one of the files Hillary has.
That's the only explanation -- the Dems have something on him.
I would. I'm on a diet.
Think what we would have been spared if they had.
You all may be right, but I'm just holding judgment till I see how things go.
Well .. in his statement he went on a little too much about Biden to suit me. I'd say there's the culprit.
But I think the dems are in trouble with the MOB gal - when her boss said, "Her poor performance, treatment of other employees and attempt to take over our contract became issues; and thus I was required to step in and remove her from her position. Mr. Bolton's role with [BTC] was unrelated. to her activities at the time."
I loved that - "treatment of other employees". So .. here are the democrats trying to use a person who mistreats other employees in an attempt to hang Bolton for putting his hands on his hips and yelling. These dems are just pitiful.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.