Reply
Thu 12 May, 2005 08:41 am
Quote: A Senate panel is to vote Thursday on President Bush's nominee to be U.N. ambassador, John Bolton, three weeks after questions about his fitness for the job delayed committee action.
Source
Quote:Bolton drew fire from Democrats in 1994 when he said at a Federalist Society forum that "there is no such thing as the United Nations."
Source
Seems like a hardliner who has openly opposed the UN.
Is this is sole purpose in the appointment?
Quote:"John Bolton is one who will not suffer wastefulness, is one who is going to scrutinize the spending at the United Nations," Senator Allen says. "We as taxpayers in this country pay 439 million dollars a year, which is 22 percent of the United Nations budget. I want someone who is going to be a watchdog, to reform them, to make sure they do not have these scandals like the oil-for-food scandal that was propping up Saddam Hussein's regime."
Source
He is the worst man for the job. Therefore the Busheviks are sure to get him in.
blueveinedthrobber wrote:He is the worst man for the job. Therefore the Busheviks are sure to get him in.
Why? The last thing we need is anoth UN "lackey".
If the UN is behaving in a way that we consider incompetent and/or unhelpful to us, our smart next move would be to send over someone who will agressively promote our interests.
Why?
It won't get anything more done if the man cannot work well with others. It will only make us look like blowhards and fools.
Cycloptichorn
Brandon9000 wrote:If the UN is behaving in a way that we consider incompetent and/or unhelpful to us, our smart next move would be to send over someone who will agressively promote our interests.
There is a difference between aggressive diplomacy and just plain aggressive.
Ordering other countries to behave a certain way or else doesn't get you very far. Eventually you find yourself in the position of no power to order them to do anything.
Cycloptichorn wrote:Why?
It won't get anything more done if the man cannot work well with others. It will only make us look like blowhards and fools.
Cycloptichorn
You are correct, however, I am convinced his "attitude" is being overblown/exagerated.
I dunno. This is the guy, after all, who has said things in the past like 'there should be no UN.'
I mean, he's got a right to his opinion and all, but that hardly makes him the man for this particular job, yaknow. Oh well, we all know how Bushco. works:
(in this order)
Loyatly to Cheney/Rove
Loyalty to Party
Loyalty to Money
Loyalty to America
Cycloptichorn
From what I gather from news reports Bolton tended to be the office SOB. So a lot of people are using this as an opportunity for some payback. I suspect he will be confirmed, but if he has any brains and insight he will regard this as a personal learning experience.
Yes, Bolton is opinionated. I am glad to see it go to a vote and will support whatever decision is made. If he is as is described, he won't last long and our standing in the UN could not be hurt worse than it already is.
If he is a "watchdog" type, maybe it will help clean our some more of the corruption in the UN that we all know is going on.
the "bolton affair" is really causing the ultra-right to show it's stripes.
where as it's been 10 years of right wingers complaining about "liberals", today i had to chuckle when, on msnbc's "connected" regarding the emerging republican resistance to bolton, gop strategist jack burkman referred to voinovich and others as "these moderates"... said it in the same disdainful way the ultras say "libb-urr-ulllzzz".
so i guess some republicans just aren't republican enough for some of these whackos...
Cycloptichorn wrote:I dunno. This is the guy, after all, who has said things in the past like 'there should be no UN.'
I mean, he's got a right to his opinion and all, but that hardly makes him the man for this particular job, yaknow. Oh well, we all know how Bushco. works:
(in this order)
Loyatly to Cheney/Rove
Loyalty to Party
Loyalty to Money
Loyalty to America
Cycloptichorn
oh cyclo, you're just being cynical. just because bolton sat there in florida representing baker's representation of cheney's, uh, i mean, bush's bid for president during the scrutinizing of the chads, you seem to think there's something fishy goin' on.
:wink:
DontTreadOnMe wrote:the "bolton affair" is really causing the ultra-right to show it's stripes.
where as it's been 10 years of right wingers complaining about "liberals", today i had to chuckle when, on msnbc's "connected" regarding the emerging republican resistance to bolton, gop strategist jack burkman referred to voinovich and others as "these moderates"... said it in the same disdainful way the ultras say "libb-urr-ulllzzz".
so i guess some republicans just aren't republican enough for some of these whackos...
No, McG would contend that they
just don't understand compassionate conservatism, and are therefore not really conservatives at all.
Acquiunk wrote:From what I gather from news reports Bolton tended to be the office SOB. So a lot of people are using this as an opportunity for some payback. I suspect he will be confirmed, but if he has any brains and insight he will regard this as a personal learning experience.
yes, if only. His ego and his pathological need to bully in order to bolster his own weak self esteem will win out over his intellect though. And I say that not because I have intimate knowledge of John Bolton but out of the knowledge of the pathology of bullies. They are one of natures most pathetic creatures. They are also bundled together and running this country currently, more's the pity.
woiyo wrote:You are correct, however, I am convinced his "attitude" is being overblown/exagerated.
Being exaggerated by the Republicans? Interesting.
ehBeth wrote:woiyo wrote:You are correct, however, I am convinced his "attitude" is being overblown/exagerated.
Being exaggerated by the Republicans? Interesting.
Who made any statement about WHO is exagerating?
Try some objective analysis instead of your partisen BS.
Have a nice day.
Woiyo,
Given how the UN works, what makes you think having an opinionated bully on board is going to help ANYTHING?
Cycloptichorn
woiyo wrote:Who made any statement about WHO is exagerating?
Try some objective analysis instead of your partisen BS.
Have a nice day.
I linked an article where several Republicans' views of Bolton, and his attitude, were quoted. You stated that you were convinced that his "attitude" was being overblown. No analysis required.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
The rest of your post was simply rude and not appropriate to a debate forum like this one. This is not westcoastBuzz.
candidone1 wrote:DontTreadOnMe wrote:the "bolton affair" is really causing the ultra-right to show it's stripes.
where as it's been 10 years of right wingers complaining about "liberals", today i had to chuckle when, on msnbc's "connected" regarding the emerging republican resistance to bolton, gop strategist jack burkman referred to voinovich and others as "these moderates"... said it in the same disdainful way the ultras say "libb-urr-ulllzzz".
so i guess some republicans just aren't republican enough for some of these whackos...
No, McG would contend that they
just don't understand compassionate conservatism, and are therefore not really conservatives at all.
yeah, that chuck hagle is a really an undercover operator for the
liberal elite...
he better knock it off. he's got a bronze star and 2 p.h.s from vietnam. rove could come after him at any time...
Stumble It!
Tweet This
Bookmark on Delicious
Share on Facebook
Share on MySpace