"...and that the bar he set on April 17th that he was preparing to vote against Bolton if one more major issue emerged. Well, about a dozen have since then. So, Hagel needs to consider the impact on his own credibility if he fails to make this an honest vote."

Credibility? Senator Hagel?

His 'bar' of April 17th was an attempt to make his vote to confirm - his vote, that is, on the originally scheduled April 19th date - appear statesmanlike and thoughtful. Nothing else. He's always intended to vote to confirm. And he will - there's no doubt of that at all.

Hagel's waffling and unctuous 'kiss-up-kick-down' deference to the current administration - which policy he believes is the only course to the nomination - is obvious. And, if I may, positively Kerry-like in its spineless pandering (which is not to say I think that Kerry wouldn't have been preferable as President: he would have been).

Hagel is a fellow-traveller of the theocratic neocons. I can't imagine expending any effort at lobbying to change his vote.

JF

Doonsbury asks a question I haven't heard being asked enough:

Why are we still talking about bullying? Why aren't we talking about perjury?

I mean, just about the entire diplomatic community has corroborated the stories of people who are saying Bolton was trying to fire people. Bolton, of course, told a different story, under oath, with Biden and/or Dodd explicitly asking whether he was under oath. I mean, if we can impeach a President over a lie about a blow job, why is it that we're so sanguine about lies about our country's security??

emptywheel:

...because it doesn't matter to any of the parties (i.e., the MSM) who might have cared, once.

It's just about power.

And blow jobs makes such a nifty, compact sound bite (pun intended). They sell a lot of papers.

In order to elevate the discussion to something approximating reality, our media would have to spend way too much time educating the public. Nobody'll buy ads around copy like that. Not any more.

JF

The GOP has so many "good cop, bad cop", "overt policy, covert policy" schemes going that, whatever is said, look 180 for defining actions. I think Hagel will support Bolton regardless of what he says prior to the vote. SOP for GOP appears to be say anything to obfiscate your real intentions. I think Hagel is a solid GOP camper. Incidently, I think Hagel and McCain are peas out of the same GOP pod. And I agree with JF.

lugbolt

McCain and Hagel ARE peas out of the same pod. But if McCain and his former campaign Chairman BOTH think they're going to run for the GOP nomination in 2008, then one of them is going to have to distinguish himself. And since McCain has all but abdicated his role as Straight Talking Express Conductor, that might be a way for Hagel to step away from the pack (or flock, as in sheep).

Can't help wondering if there's anyone out there with the $ to run an ad against Bolton. Something pithy tying him to Bernard Kerik, and Guckert/Gannon. "The President nominated Bernard Kerik to run homeland security, only it turned out he had mob connections. The White House gave a reporter access to classified documents, only it turned out he was a gay hooker. Now they want John Bolton to be our ambassador to the U.N...." If we're going to make them own it, let's make them own ALL of it.

Do you think it might be useful if we generated a barrage of HARD-COPY FAXES to the SFRC, formatted in such a way as to grab the most attention?

By that I mean sending a single page FAX, printed in landscape orientation, containing in the LARGEST FONT POSSIBLE to fill the page:

"BOLTON = PERJURER"

With nothing else on the page, just that. Bolded huge type.

Whattaya think? I'm gonna do it.