"America is undermining its message to the world ...." with Bush administration foreign policy and its own national elections, in general.

Point 2 is already in play at the UN. But the folks at Maison Blanche are tone deaf and live in their own surreal world. The loser in all this is Bolton.

Steve,

Your posting would seem to indicate that a recess appointment is quickly becoming the inevitable step the White House will take next week. Is that correct? Is this long battle going to end with a constitutional whimper?

I'm under the distinct impression that Bush couldn't care less what anyone thinks about Bolton's appointment to the UN, at home or abroad. Perceived legitimacy has never ranked way up there on their list of concerns, as far as I can tell.

Heck, at this point, I wouldn't be surprised if Rehnquist retires on Friday, and Bush does a recess appointment to the SCOTUS over the weekend! :-D

(He can't actually do that, can he?)

How could the White House reconcile their stated interest in UN reform with the appointment of a temporary Ambassador, with an 18-month term?

Bush himself already lacks "the validation of American citizens behind him."

BTW. does he STILL engage in group sex escapades? how many lurid stories will emerge when he gets his recess appointment?

Steve Clemons >"...America is undermining its message to the world with this..."

One of a series of underminings, if you will, by the presence of Bush Handlers, Inc. in a position of power.

I suspect that the intended larger message of all this IS "...a lesson that legislatures can be ignored and minority rights in government trampled by the demands of the Executive Branch..."

The Bush family, according to their long history, is fascist so why would they change now ?

"Politics is just high school with guns and more money" - Frank Zappa

Well, after reading Steve's comments about how it would be bad for America were Bush to appoint Bolton by a recess appointment, I've come to the conclusion that there is no way in heck that Bush is going to not go through with it. It's just what he does.

Can the Democratic Senators refuse to "officially close" the Senate for Recess by refusing to agree to it by not granting "Unaminous Consent"?

Can the Democratics keep the Senate open with one Senator staying in the Senate, rotating, over the course of the July 4th break?

If no recess is agreed to, then NO recess appoint!!

If Bolton ends up in the Senate I dont see how Democrats can claim any victory. It would mean that the Neocons, via Bolton, have won as they try to install their unilateralist and imperial view on the next Country/Market that is on their PROJECT FOR THE NEW AMERICAN CENTURY list.

Come on Dems, Get some Spine!!!

I have $5 that says Bush announces his intention to make the recess appointment tonight on television. He'll work it into the speech somehow as a critical part of the ongoing war on terror. My guess is that they (Rove) can't pass up the opportunity to take a whack at the Dems for putting politics ahead of national security on national television. (sigh)

I think that's what's up.

There is a third BIG mistake the White House would be making and that is telling the Senate that it has no valid right to see the information it has sought about Bolton in its role of "advise and consent."

Cheney et all no doubt think that is a GREAT thing to do to those pesky Democrats like Biden, Dodd, etc., but the real danger is that it winds up frosting the cookies of some GOP senators who are already miffed about the White House's pushing of a clearly unqualified candidate and about their refusal to give an inch on requests for data from the Senate. In their minds, it is an issue of the rights of the Senate and its traditions. They are NOT going to be happy and making your potential allies unhappy in these times when Mr. Bush clearly needs all the help he can find, would NOT be a smart thing to do....

But hey...who's talking smart....there seem to be a number of signs that the wheels are falling off the wagon...not the least of which is Cheney stating one day that the terrorists are in their "last throes", only to be followed by Rumsfeld a few days later saying we could be in Iraq for at least 12 YEARS.

As has been noted before, when you look at the numerous positions and causes Cheney has been behind over the years, it is amazing how consistently damaging he has been to the President he serves. As Ted Kennedy said to Rumsfeld the other day, "Shouldn't you resign?"

semper fubar:

You asked: "Heck, at this point, I wouldn't be surprised if Rehnquist retires on Friday, and Bush does a recess appointment to the SCOTUS over the weekend! :-D (He can't actually do that, can he?)"

As a matter of fact, yes, he can. President Eisenhower put Earl Warren and William Brennan on the Supreme Court via recess appointments.

And it is hard to see how the Senate can take exception: they voted to confirm Bill Pryor after he was put on the 11th Circuit by recess appointment, even though Shumer called it "a stick in the eye."

This outcome was anticipated by the political types at the White House when the Bolton fight started to spiral out of control a few months back, and at that time I put up a post saying that Bolton would be recess appointed. There are Republicans that share Steve's point of view, and they are not wihtout influence in foreign policy circles. But they carry no weight with Rove's shop. The only way this could ever have been stopped would have been if Rice had asked the President to drop Bolton, but she was not willing to use a chip.

Somewhere around the web I read the only analysis that makes sense of why Bush does what he does with the flaming incompetents he surrounds himself with.

He has learned that if he fires someone, they give nasty interviews (DiIullio) or write frank 'the emperor has no clothes' book (O'Neill). So to stop the screwups from turning into this present day Deep Throats, GW awards them the Medal of Freedom (Tenent), sends them off to the World Bank (Wolfowitz) or otherwise appoints them to another position well past their level of incompetence (our boy Bolton) so that only the Judgment of History will be left to condemn the whole lot of them as knaves and fools.

There is also one reason why the President should do it. He was re-elected to fight the war on terror, and he needs the best people available to accomplish this. You Democrats lost power and you need to learn to accept it.

Davis.....you state the President was re-elected to fight the war on terror and he needs the best people available to accomplish this.

So explain how Bolton's attempts to undercut his own Administration's efforts to negotiate with North Korea over nuclear weapons aided the effort against terrorism? Both Armitage and Powell were furious at what he had done and had to tell the Koreans that only they spoke for the US.

So explain why the British were so upset over his involvement in their efforts to reach an agreement with Libya that they specifically asked (and got) Bolton's removal from the process?

So explain why, if Bush uses a recess appointment to put Bolton in place as US Ambassador to the UN, Bolton's clearly weakened status as a result, will enable him to accomplish anything in terms of combatting terrorism?

So explain why Bolton's repeated efforts to get rid of skilled career intelligence analysts who would not go along with his exaggerated claims of WMD in Cuba and the Middle East would aid our national efforts against terrorism since the end result, if it had happened, would have been to weaken still further our intelligence service and destroy staff morale in the process?

I could go on, but I think you get the point....no wait....I lost, so none of these questions is relevant. Sorry, I am going to my corner now for quiet time. I know my place....I will never question Mr. Bush's motives again. I recognize that he is our noble leader and would never lie to us.

Davis --

Yes, you're right. The President does need "needs the best people available." There have been many such people noted here, here, here, here, and here that qualify as "the best people". Bolton is far from such a nominee. I think you should stick to you guns and help us find the best person to represent us.

By the way, the Democrats did not lose some revolutionary coup d'etat. We lost an election in a democratic government based on checks and balances, one in which the President is held accountable by Congress. An election in this country is not a "Get-everything-you-want-free" card. I think that kind of government is the one we deposed in Iraq - a move you surely supported, right?

dweb and Tony - The President has the right to make a recess appointment after being obstructed for months. All of the allegations about Bolton in his previous job have been refuted. Bolton had a tough assignment at State, with little support from the career appeasers there who co-opted Powell and Armitage. Bolton was there working for the elected President and the elected Vice President.

No one disputes the president's *right* to make a recess appointment. The argument here is that in doing so he destroys any possible efficacy Bolton may have had as it will be apparent to the world that Bolton cannot win confirmation by constitutional means and does NOT have the support of the American government - only its president.

Bush has not been obstructed here, he has refused to cooperate. There are many speculations as to why, but the fact remains that by allowing the Senate (which includes Republicans and Democrats) to see the requested materials on Syria, on NSA intercepts, and on the Freedman consultancy clients, he could have the up-or-down vote he cries such crocodile tears for.

Bolton/Bush supporters can 'catapult the propaganda' about supposed obstructionism all they want, but it doesn't change the FACT that Bush will not share the requested documents with the Senate. That is what is holding up the Bolton nomination - not some nefarious, conspiratorial plot to obstruct. It's simple checks and balances. You know, what we're dying for in Iraq - democracy.

Davis,

This adminstration are WAR CRIMINALS, and you are an accomplice, evil bastard!

so that only the Judgment of History will be left to condemn the whole lot of them as knaves and fools.

Posted by Rod Hoffman

history schmistory:

‘History, we don’t know. We’ll all be dead.’”
GWB quoted in 'Plan of Attack'

Our nation will be addressed by our War Criminal President this evening. Be sure to watch as you may see Army troops of Fort Bragg, NC, take matters into their own hands by taking into custody the evil deceiver who betrayed them and their beloved country. Deliver us from Evil, loyal soldiers, and deliver up this Judas to answer for his War Crimes!

The Evil One will say tonite, "Bloodshed in Iraq Is 'Worth It'"

http://news.yahoo.com/fc/us/bush_administration

ALL THE BLOOD FOR A PACK OF LIES

Take him!, loyal soldiers. Our state I'm sure will be forgiven one last lynching.

since sacrifices are required from all in the GWOT, perhaps he'll announce that Jenna and not-Jenna are enlisting in the Marines?

Steve --
When Bush wants your advice about what "democracy" means, he'll ask you. Until then, it is your patriotic duty to STFU.

BLIND ALLEGIANCE!?! Appears that this board is attracting more of the gullible types. What will it take for just a few of them to finally wake up?

Bush is a liar and does not care about democracy. I wanted to be sick tonight in watching his hypocritical screed-- for Bush has no shame...

Bush has the gall to talk about sacrifice when:--

1. Bush was AWOL from a Champagne Brigade Unit when it was his turn to serve in Vietnam

2. Bush's brats, Jenna & Barbara, aren't in Iraq... Why doesn't Bush send them to fight?

3. Bush ignores the wishes of the majority of the American people to put an end to his botched-up Bloodbath in Iraq...

Bush's screed-writers couch his sordid & squalid intentions with cutesy-talk- scare-mongering- and, asinine propaganda...

--- Terrorism is never-ending-- it's been going on since the beginning of time and will never end... So it's Perpetual Warfare for Perpetual Profits for Halliburton...

--- The real intent of the War is for OIL-- and to make the Bush Crime Familie & the Oil Rapists filthy rich... Their kids aren't in Iraq fighting by the way...

--- Cheney has hidden his top-secret "Energy Task Force" meetings from the public held in the summer of 2001 (before 9/11-- which is when the Bushies planned their ugly War on Iraq, just read the U.K. Downing Street Memos) from the public, because there are all kinds of smoking guns, including maps of Iraq, showing what these neo-con war-mongers intended...

9/11 had nothing to do with Bush's War for Oil in Iraq...

Bush should be impeached. And, Bolton should return to "private life" (or a jail cell) where he belongs...

Steve-
If TWN had an "misc." thread I would post the above link there, but since you don't, this will have to do. From today's issue of '"THE ONION."

Corrected link:
http://www.theonion.com/wdyt/index.php?issue=4126

McCain was doing the rounds tonight. If he's not already campaigning I'll eat my hat, and it's not made of cheese.

He really stood up to Sean Hannity on Fox about the Bolton filibuster being about stonewalling by the administration on information, not the Democrats obstructing a nomination.

He may never be a favorite with conservatives but I do like the way he stands up for the truth.

Looks like a recess appt but I don't see that that will hamper Bolton's 'effectiveness.' His power extends from the president. The fact that the Senate didn't want him, won't mean beans to the UN or to Bolton and Bush. Bush wants a hatchet man, he's going to get one. My bet is that Bolton becomes the SINGLE most effective UN Ambassador we've ever had. Effective does not equal good, mind you. You can be effective at creating chaos, which is what I think Bolton's role is.

mbowdoin:

Given the ability of China to assert itself and Russia's fragile link with the US I don't see Bolton kicking ass. Going to the UN with GWB's backing carries no weight nowadays. The US has lost its moral authority and some of its ability to project power.

Don P.

Do possibly know if there would be a transcript available anywhere of the McCain interview with Sean Hannity?

Hannity is my least favorite talking head and I would enjoy seeing him get skewered a bit.

I couldn't think less of Bolton as a choice for this post.

That said, I don't think that the Admin is going to worry at all about his effectiveness being diminished. The audience the WH cares about here is not foreign diplomats, but red state conservatives. They'll be fine with a RA, as it means their guy is standing tall against Dem obstructionists. He'll be able to grandstand for them throughout his shortened tenure.

Foreign diplomats may already think Bush is a loser. It doesn't matter to us (of any stripe) what they think, and indeed it doesn't matter to their home governments. Bolton will be the mouth of the head of the global hyperpower, and foreign dips will act and react just as they would if Danforth was mouthing the same policy. At most, the foreigners get to make catty remarks. Big deal. Their policies aren't going to be different.

Finally, the power to make recess appointments is in the Constitution. And it doesn't have limits. No, I don't like it either, but one cannot say that the use of a specific power granted to the Pres is somehow a infringing of proper legislative role.

(OK, I'll say that I think it's probably correct that the recess appointment power is designed to be used in breaks between, rather than during, sessions. GWB, though, won't be the first to have used it in this way.)

I don't like Bolton, but I don't think any of the motives behind his nomination are compromised by a recess appointment, and I do think that the constuency for his appointment will be much the happier with a RA than a withdrawal.

sloc,you forgot to mention the War Criminals who lead our nation.
Never forget, sloc, we are dealing with Evil incarnate. Never forget.

I was very disappointed last night that reality-based soldiers did not appear on stage and lead the Boy King away to a secure location where he could await trial for Treason and War Crimes. I guess the soldiers who attended were rigorously screened to insure that only blind loyalists to The Deceiver in Chief were present. I feel confident that troops loyal to the People of the United States, and to American ideals, will be able to soon forcibly take our War Criminal to a place where he can do no further harm to our beloved country, a place where he can await a judgement that will lend to a national absolution and wash the blood from our collective hands. God Help America, so that He can rightfully Bless American again.

Could've come right outta Orwell's 1984 Ministry of Truth:

"I thank those of you who have re-enlisted in an hour when your country needs you. And to those watching tonight who are considering a military career, there is no higher calling than service in our Armed Forces. We live in freedom because every generation has produced patriots willing to serve a cause greater than themselves. Those who serve today are taking their rightful place among the greatest generations that have worn our Nation’s uniform. When the history of this period is written, the liberation of Afghanistan and the liberation of Iraq will be remembered as great turning points in the story of freedom." - Bush last night.

Davis....you stated:

All of the allegations about Bolton in his previous job have been refuted.

When Scott McClellan leaves as Press spokesman for the WH, you should apply for the job. This is one of Scotty's favorite tactics when confronted with tough questions about things like the Downing Street Memos....

"Those questions have all been answered and refuted...Next?"

Handy little disposal system, except that neither Mr. Bolton's past job incompetence/interference nor the DSM have been answered and refuted. In fact, that is precisely what is behind the Senate's demand for specific information about Mr. Bolton....

1- WHO was he trying to get more information about by requesting copy of NSA intercepts and was he trying to spy on his opponents in the process? We don't know and the WH has repeatedly denied the Senate that information. Could they be trying to hide something to protect him? We don't know.

2- What clients was Matthew Friedman representing as a lobbyist while he also served on Mr. Bolton's staff as a handsomely paid assistant and how and why was he able to do both? No answers.

If you have the answers, and the justifications, would be happy to see them posted here.

While I do agree with your take, I don't think Bush and Cheney really give a damn. During the past six months they've nominated many controversial candidates. How about John Negroponte to preside over all intelligence agencies? This man is directly responsible for thousands of murders and rapes in Central America during the mid 1980's, not to mention the recent murder in Iraq of the head of Italian Intelligence...Nicola Calipari, along with the shooting of Giuliana Sgrena.

There's no such thing as minority rights. Only individuals have rights.