Yay...we get John Bolton at the UN

Post by **tnf** » Mon Aug 01, 2005 3:09 pm

This should be interesting. I wonder what kind of reception he'll get.
Bush bypassed the Senate to put him there. Wonder why? This should really help build a stronger coalition for the US. heh.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/8758621/

Post by **Canidae** » Mon Aug 01, 2005 3:15 pm

This will be like the second coming of Nikita Kruschev.
God knows that place needs a shit kicking.

Post by **R00k** » Mon Aug 01, 2005 5:14 pm

First few months? lol, more like the first term.

Post by **seremtan** » Mon Aug 01, 2005 8:16 pm

“It will be a distinct privilege to be an advocate for America’s values and interests at the U.N. and, in the words of the U.N. charter, to help maintain international peace and security,” he said.

:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

Post by **seremtan** » Mon Aug 01, 2005 8:18 pm

Canidae wrote:This will be like the second coming of Nikita Kruschev.
God knows that place needs a shit kicking.

well quite. the sooner these commies in the general assembly realise that their job is to provide a quasi-legal veneer to US foreign policy decisions (and thereby render themselves 'relevant'), the better

Post by **R00k** » Mon Aug 01, 2005 8:19 pm

Well said.

Post by **rep** » Mon Aug 01, 2005 8:21 pm

seremtan wrote:
“It will be a distinct privilege to be an advocate for America’s values and interests at the U.N. and, in the words of the U.N. charter, to help maintain international peace and security,” he said.
:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

YOU LISTEN TO US. THE UN IS NUFFIN'... YOU DO WHAT THE US SAYS. THE US SAYS SIT, AND YOU SIT. MOUSTACHE. - John Bolton.

He was right, but that doesn't mean it's right. The idea is for all of us to work together. The way it currently is, you're all our bitches.

Post by **seremtan** » Mon Aug 01, 2005 8:31 pm

R00k wrote:Well said.

fuckin' A :icon14:

Post by **Dave** » Tue Aug 02, 2005 4:47 am

I have no idea who Bolton is beyond one or two things, but I don't blame Bush for bypassing the Senate because of this:

"Blocked for nearly five months by Democratic lawmakers, President Bush on Monday used his power to bypass the confirmation process and name John R. Bolton as ambassador to the United Nations."

5 months? Vote on the guy and get it over with already. The Senate's delay tactics are just as bad as some of the shit Bush does. No wonder government never gets anything done.

Post by **tnf** » Tue Aug 02, 2005 4:49 am

The recess appointments are very common. I don't mind the fact that Bush used that method to do it, its just that I think John Bolton is the worst possible choice for a *credible* ambassador to the UN.

Post by **Dave** » Tue Aug 02, 2005 4:51 am

Well, if it's a bad decision, he won't be back... but all that shit stirred up over stalling judge nominations is completely unnecessary

Post by **tnf** » Tue Aug 02, 2005 4:54 am

He's in there for a few years no matter what though. I just don't see how he can reconcile the comments he made about the UN in the past. And although investigations never proved he did anything to disqualify him from a position like this, it didn't seem to be argued by anyone that he was a genuine prick to work with and not a very good diplomat. But maybe he'll work out. Who knows.

Post by **R00k** » Tue Aug 02, 2005 5:07 am

The UN can still vote to accept him or not as well. He could be basically in a 'temporary' or 'honorary' seat until a panel of 9 countries votes to confirm him.

http://www.btcnews.com/btcnews/1050

Post by **Hannibal** » Tue Aug 02, 2005 5:15 am

Recess appointments are nothing new (Reagan had over 200 of them). Having said that, I have no problem with the senators doing everything they could to try to keep this fucker out of the UN.

Post by **ajerara** » Tue Aug 02, 2005 6:45 am

maybe the UN will decide they don't want to deal with him.

Post by **Ryoki** » Tue Aug 02, 2005 10:03 am

Heheh that would be a nice embarrassment to the Bush administration

Post by **seremtan** » Tue Aug 02, 2005 10:11 am

unless a bunch of lackeys (*cough* britain *splutter* israel) can be found to support him. the fact that he has a history of hostility to the very institution he is now a part of is reason enough not to appoint him - and is the very reason he has been appointed to that institution.

Post by **Ryoki** » Tue Aug 02, 2005 10:22 am

I wonder if it can be vetoed (sp?) by one of the permanent security council members...?

Post by **R00k** » Tue Aug 02, 2005 1:12 pm

Hannibal wrote:Recess appointments are nothing new (Reagan had over 200 of them). Having said that, I have no problem with the senators doing everything they could to try to keep this fucker out of the UN.

I completely agree.

And the White House was the one doing the stalling, by refusing to release very pertinent information on his behavior because they knew it would damage him.