Posted on 05/13/2005 7:00:06 AM PDT by areafiftyone
Democrats in the US Senate have made a fresh bid to derail the appointment of John Bolton, the embattled White House pick for UN ambassador, after a Senate panel declined to back him ahead of a floor vote.
Democratic Senator Barbara Boxer "put a hold on the nomination" of Bolton as US ambassador to the United Nations, her spokeswoman Natalie Ravitz said without indicating how the process could be delayed.
The move is intended to either force further negotiations or ultimately to prevent his nomination from reaching the Senate floor.
A Senate panel took the rare step Thursday of refusing to endorse President George W. Bush's choice for UN ambassador, although it did send the nomination to the full Senate for confirmation.
The White House had hoped that Bolton would receive the seal of approval of the committee's 10 Republicans, whose backing would have improved his odds for success in the Senate vote.
Instead, Bolton barely squeaked out of the polarized Senate committee.
His nomination was apparently saved after several Republicans agreed to forward his nomination for the UN post, without giving him explicit support.
Despite the lack of a congressional endorsement, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said she was "pleased" by the outcome, and expressed hope for Bolton's quick confirmation.
Rice argued that Bolton, currently undersecretary for arms control and international security at the US State Department, would bring the "skill and dedication necessary to advance the president's reform agenda" at the UN.
A date has not been set for the vote in the Senate where Republicans hold a 55 to 45 majority. But Democrats promised they would continue to fight tooth and nail against the nomination as it moves to the chamber.
"If this comes to the floor, we're going to have a fight," Senator Barbara Boxer said during the committee meeting.
Democrats have been united in opposition to Bolton, while four of the committee's 10 Republicans expressed serious reservations.
Chief among Bolton's Republican critics was Senator George Voinovich, who expressed grave reservations about allegations Bolton mistreated staff during his long Washington carreer and shaped intelligence to fit his views.
He also issued a scathing denunciation of the nominee, saying the president could have chosen any one of a number of equally qualified, less controversial, candidates.
Nevertheless, the Ohio senator said he would approve sending Bolton's nomination to a vote before the full Senate, in deference to the White House.
The debate in the divided committee was the latest showdown between Senate Democrats and Republicans, after weeks of bitter wrangling over Bush's nominee.
Bolton's Republican supporters acknowledge that he has at times been "blunt," but they say his direct manner is just what is needed to help whip the scandal-plagued UN into shape.
"I think the American people want someone at the United Nations who pushes strongly for reform," said Senator George Allen. "We are not electing 'Mr. Congeniality.' We do not need 'Mr. Milquetoast' in the United Nations," he said.
The panel has spent weeks examining allegations that Bolton misused or hyped flawed intelligence on issues including China, Iran, North Korea and Syria.
Even his ex-boss, former secretary of state Colin Powell, reportedly told lawmakers that Bolton had been a problematic official. Powell's former chief of staff was quoted by the US press as saying that Bolton would make an "abysmal ambassador."
If confirmed by the Senate, Bolton would have to fight the US case on vital foreign policy issues, ranging from nuclear programs in Iran and North Korea to the future of the world body itself.
Maybe, but I see it that this is all coming together quite nicely.
This is the very reason that they do not want Bolton, a house cleaning for the UN is underway and Coleman is revealing all of the corruptness to weaken any UN objection to the fumigating.
These people are absolutely childish.
They still think that they are in power, and that they control things when they don't.
It's up to us voters to show them the door.
The Repubs in Congress let them act like that. The Repubs have no backbone!
So is this a philabuster or not?
After all this, a single lib can just call a timeout and "put a hold on the nomination" -- WTF does that mean?
Aw...this ploy has been around for several minutes now, and to resist it would be going against seconds and seconds of Senate history and could interfere with this asinine branch of Government's ability to confirm over and over that it is the only mistake our fore Fathers made when designing our government.
That buzzard gagging stench that hovers over DC, is from those feet of decay-our fore bears only mistake that is capable of causing the death of this Republic.
From NRO:
Hold Off
A Senate insider writes in with some additional information on Barbara Boxer’s “hold” of John Bolton’s nomination:
“Traditionally, holds are placed in order to signify an intention to filibuster a nominee or piece of legislation. Any Senator can place a hold but it is the majority leader's prerogative to honor the "hold." I'd bet on Frist ignoring Senator Boxer's hold.”
LOLOL!
Fred Barnes was all fired up on FOX's panel on Hume's shows last night on that.
He said there was no reason to delay the vote for Bolton, and it should be brought up on Tuesday. Putting it off only further endangers the nomination.
Sadly, so have a lot of Republicans.
In the House, it used to be possible for members to sign on to the hold list secretly, and it was impossible to find out who was on the list for a bill. Inhofe pressured the House to change this procedure.
Sorry for the misdirection.
Committee on Foreign Relations: Committee ordered reported, without recommendation, the nominations of John Robert Bolton , of Maryland, to be the U.S. Representative to the United Nations, with the rank and status of Ambassador, and the U.S. Representative in the Security Council of the United Nations, and to be U.S. Representative to the Sessions of the General Assembly of the United Nations during his tenure of service as U.S. Representative to the United Nations.Thanks for that. Pryor was voted out too (see the "Business Meeting" entry following the entry recited above), and Pryor's name is on the Exec calendar. There must be either a timing issue (i.e., Bolton's confirmation came later in the day) or some other hurdle that caused Bolton's name to be absent from the Exec Calendar.Senate Daily Journal Page D476 <-- Link
Timing and or printing schedule most likely. However Frist still has to decide upon when to bring the nomination to the floor. Who knows when that will be. His job is a lot like herding cats, imo.
Glad you liked it (RNC add regarding the 'party of no' (for those who haven't seen it))
It seemed to fit.
I've been on the same train for a long time. The best way to get rid of the filibuster is to let the Dems stage one. And let it go on and on and on and on and on until the public screams for action against it.
A filibuster over Bolton would in many respects be ideal because the dividing issue could be cast as support for the UN status quo vs. a strong message of change. The Dems would shoot themselves in the foot again.
Maybe the answer is for us to take up a collection and send Voinivich 50 roses too -- on behalf of DU :-)
Don;t miss today's The American Thinker.com piece today about how the NYT fudged the credentials of its non-expert, psych expert who slimmed Bolton on its op ed page.
or G. Gordon Liddy.. or Ann Coulter.. or Harry Browne libertarian.. or (jeese theres so many).. raise the bar.. Immediatly appoint another seconds after their denied..
Force multiple denials as many as possible.. with news conferences of course.. to highlight.. the charade and Mirage' of the democrats.. The political fallout would be good.. The Senate and the President COULD make the democrats EAT this grandstanding.. RAW.. a force feed could make the democrats goosey to do this in the future.. The democrats are basically Barney Fife with media attention.. they should be very easy to dis-credit.. Played right.. pity most republicans are not very far from democrats ideologically.. or they WOULD DO THIS...
Solution: U.S. withdraws from UN, resulting in its collapse and no need for Ambassador. Turn UN building into condos for former diplomats who drink their tea with one uplifted pinky. Surely they have stolen enough money by now to be able to afford a Manhattan condo!
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.