Dems Eat “Sour Grapes” Over Bolton

In his usual decisive and efficient way, President George Bush named John Bolton as Ambassador to the UN today with a recess appointment — coming shortly after the close of the Congressional session.

The Dems started bellyaching about the impending recess appointment before Congress had even broken for the “summer.” They knew it was coming. Bush gave them every opportunity to research, question and vote on his Bolton nomination. There were some disgruntled past employees, but by and large nothing significant was ever found to prevent his appointment or persuade Republicans to vote him down. The Dems took a stand and threatened with filibusters. It was their choice to let the session pass without filling this important vacant position.

“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,” [Senator Ted] Kennedy said.” — by Terence Hunt, AP

Now, some on the Left have begun to complain about the whole recess appointment process. Once again, they have forgotten how their last White House hero, Bill Clinton, used this tool 140 times during his eight-year tenure. Clinton had no problem employing this presidential power whenever he believed a nominee might have difficulty in the approval process. Most of these appointments hadn’t even experienced the prolonged opposition protest and stalling that Bolton has. Clinton’s recess appointments included judgeships, at least one ambassador and an assistant attorney general.

Although he has no need to defend himself, Bush certainly good reason for his actions. In September, long before Congress could consider and vote on another possible candidate, the UN will begin a new session with a very important agenda. It will include UN reform, renovation of the UN building and issues regarding the nuclear concerns of Iran and North Korea. Donald Trump recently offered his services to the UN for only the cost of building materials and labor. While the UN seeks to borrow 1.2 billion dollars — a good portion of which they expect the US to contribute, Trump generously offered an estimate of $700 million. Between Bolton and Trump, maybe the renovations can be completed without lining the pockets of any “friends and family” of the UN.

Ultimately, the Dems have no one to blame but themselves. It was incumbent on the President to fill this position in time for the September UN session. The Dems had been trying since March to find something to sink the Bolton nomination. Their efforts proved unsuccessful. Sometimes the measure of true statesmanship resides in knowing which battles to fight and which to cede.

Read more here.

UPDATE: See added quote above, courtesy of Big Dog’s comment on the linked article.



Print This Post

If you enjoy what you read consider signing up to receive email notification of new posts. There are several options in the sidebar and I am sure you can find one that suits you. If you prefer, consider adding this site to your favorite feed reader. If you receive emails and wish to stop them follow the instructions included in the email.

9 Responses to “Dems Eat “Sour Grapes” Over Bolton”

  1. Big Dog says:

    This is from the article:

    “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,” Kennedy said.”

    How come Kennedy thinks it is devious now yet the 140 times Clinton did it he said nothing?

    No Ted, devious is murdering a girl and covering up the drunk driving and murder for political gain.

  2. Big Dog says:

    And how about the Constitutional requirement of advise and consent. Not block and obstruct. If the boozer and his ilk had given an up or down this would be a non-issue.

  3. Surfside says:

    You’re absolutely right about that quote, Big Dog. If you don’t mind, I think I’ll update the story and add it. Should have done that originally. Thanks.
    :wink_wp:

  4. Thet knew this would happen. They knew he would be confirmed albiet by a small margin but confirmed nonetheless. It was more politically advantageous for the Dems to have Bolton recess appointed. That way they could blame and never have to put their vote on record.

  5. Surfside says:

    I believe you’re right on the money with that thought, NN. If one didn’t agree with their opinions, one could at least respect them for launching a fair fight over their convictions. Ever since the Clinton administration and ensuing scandals, it just seems the Dems, on a whole (granted — with exceptions), have taken the low road and slimed their way into their current powerless position.

  6. Big Dog says:

    Wow, Teddy the boozer seems to have forgotten that his brother Big John used a recess appointment to put Thurgood Marshall on a bench. Was that an abuse of power also? And why are so many libs saying that the President used a loophole in the Constitution? It is not a loophole. It is a legal method as authorized by the Constitution of this country.

    Oh, there is the problem. The libs are used to their laws coming from activist judges. They are not familiar with the Constitution and what it is for.

  7. Surfside says:

    I believe their argument has something to do with “It’s an antiquated practice which was only supposed to be used when the Congress was out of session for long periods of time.” This was back in the days of horse and carriage. (You know how hard it is to follow Dem logic, these days.) Apparently, this contention is only true whenever a Republican holds the office of President.

    Maybe that’s because every time they get one of their own in office they try to make it into Camelot — the best of times, “the once and future,” etc.

  8. Big Dog says:

    I believe that would be the argument I have heard. I will agree with them. Now they have to acknowledge that George Bush is the greatest president ever. While John Kennedy and Bill Clinton were using recess appointments because of the long periods of horse travel (must be for donks to use this appointment method) George Bush brought us into the computer age and we have cars, all that in 4 years. And, wow, we have people in space at this very moment.

    Thanks God we have Bush in there or we would be in the stone age….

    BTW, I wonder if the donks realize that the filibuster is an antiquated practice?

  9. Surfside says:

    It actually explains why the Dems were so devastated and bitter over Gore’s defeat in 2000. Since he invented the Internet and all (yeah, right), he was their best hope to bring the party into the 21st Century.