The Politics of Trampling

Warning: This post does not pull any political punches.

This just appearing on Comcast's homepage, release credited to Terance Hunt, AP White House Correspondent:

"WASHINGTON - President Bush sidestepped the Senate and installed embattled nominee John Bolton as ambassador to the United Nations on Monday, ending a five-month impasse with Democrats who accused Bolton of abusing subordinates and twisting intelligence to fit his conservative ideology.

"This post is too important to leave vacant any longer, especially during a war and a vital debate about UN reform," Bush said. He said Bolton had his complete confidence.

Bush put Bolton on the job in a recess appointment - an avenue available to the president when the Congress is in recess. Under the Constitution, a recess appointment during the lawmakers' August break would last until a newly elected Congress takes office in January 2007."

bold [italics in first paragraph are mine]

Another option that would have filled the post, Mr. President, might have been choosing another candidate that appealed across the board.

Each day the policies of our current administration bring me to new heights of incredulity. Bolton is, simply stated, the wrong man for the job. Why would anyone appoint an ambassador to the U.N. whose past record of disdain for the institution isn't even in dispute? It can easily be argued that Bolton's disposition has no business in diplomacy at all. Bolton has a reputation of displaying a nasty temperament when he is crossed, and his questionable tactics include attempting to attain the names of individuals who disagreed with him (Comcast article).

This leads to further speculation about the nature of our country at this time. The way our current administration uses loopholes, bullying and domineering tactics to shove through its agenda. It is time to call a spade a spade--there is no attempt being made to join this country or to respect opposing points of view. All Bush's claims are pure rhetoric, the sort used by his buddies Kenneth Lay and Carl Rove.

That a man with Bolton's record should never have been considered for this post seems quite obvious to me, yet again and again the president displays an unprecedented arrogance because he isn't interested in accommodating any agenda but his own.

The Senate response?

"Sen. Edward M. Kennedy, D-Mass., sharply criticized the move.

"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."

"Sen. Christopher Dodd of Connecticut, a senior Democrat on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, said, "The president has done a real disservice to our nation by appointing an individual who lacks to the credibility to further U.S. interests at the United Nations."

------------

More on Bolton:

Bolton v. Democracy

Bolton Often Blocked Information, Officials Say

Good-bye to Intelligence

Oh, and here is an "article," which I found on the ultra-right-wing WorldNetDaily site--actually stating the case against Bolton more eloquently than I can:

Bolton's Legacy