The Washington Post ought to be ashamed of itself.
President Bush installed John R. Bolton as ambassador to the United Nations yesterday, employing the presidential power to make temporary appointments to break through a wall of Democratic opposition to Bolton's confrontational brand of conservatism.
Frustrated by the refusal of Senate Democrats to permit a final vote on Bolton's nomination, Bush said he resorted to the 17-month recess appointment to circumvent "partisan delaying tactics" in Washington and to send a resounding message that the White House is serious about reforming the United Nations....
Yes, the Democrats were, for a wonder, fairly united in opposition to Bolton's nomination. That much is true. However, what was dragging the appointment down was the lukewarm (at best) response from moderate Republicans -- including what would normally be a devastating 9-9 tie in the Senate confirmation hearings, resulting in his nomination being forwarded to the full Senate without a recommendation. Add to that the very real possibility that, without some serious arm-twisting from the majority whip, Bolton would not have been confirmed, and it's very clear that what shot down Bolton's nomination was not the unified Democrat opposition, but the ladk of firm Republican support.
That aside, one wonders what it is that Bush hopes to gain from this. To describe Bolton as damaged goods would be understating the case massively. The international community seems to loathe him. He's been battered in confirmation hearings so badly that everyone in the world -- or at least those to whom it matters -- knows that he's being sent forward with an effective vote of "no confidence."
THAT said ... anyone want to lay odds on whether or not Bush puts him forward a second time as a recess appointment, forcing Bolton to serve two years without pay?
Posted by iain at August 02, 2005 07:18 PM
