Blogs for Bush Team
Matt Margolis, Founder/Editor
Russ Emerson, Webmaster
Mark Noonan, Senior Writer
Kevin Patrick, Senior Writer
Paul Lewis, Senior Writer

News Tips

Guest Bloggers
Sister Toldjah

Blogroll For Bush


Above are the 43 most recently updated blogs. Click here for the full blogroll

Allies


Archives
Categories

B4B Coverage Of...
The 2004 Republican National Convention
The Alito Nomination
The Roberts Nomination
The Roberts Hearings
Hurricane Katrina

Recent Posts
Syria Plays the Fool
Kossacks Support Wal-Mart, Halliburton Investor
Anti-Hezbollah Offensive to Take Weeks
GOP Bloggers 2008 GOP Primary Straw Poll, July 2006
The Last Word Against Gun Control
How is the GOP Doing in New Jersey?
How the Iraqis View It
A Facelift for GOP Bloggers
Confirming Bolton
The End of Lieberman?
The Victims of Peace
Gay Marriage Pioneers Have Split Up.
Gone Fishin'
Open Thread: Everybody's Working For The Weekend
"Thousands" of IDF Soldiers in Lebanon
Saddam's Letter To Americans
Impeach PAC
Yeah, There's No War Against Christianity
Voinovich Explains Why He'll Vote For Bolton
Clinton, Obama Call Bush A Liar


Margolis Media Works

Add to My Yahoo!


CentCom

GOP Bloggers

Thank you, President Bush

Social Security Information



Blogs for Bush Store





Search The Grand Old Portal

Donate to Blogs For Bush to help keep us blogging!
Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons License.
Prime Sponsor

Visit Our Sponsors!


Visit Our Sponsors!


GOP Bloggers


Subscribe To B4Bcast!


Site Credits
RSS 2.0

Powered by:
Movable Type 3.2

Design by:






July 22, 2006
Confirming Bolton

Senate Republicans are now determined to get John Bolton confirmed, and The Senate Foreign Relations Committee with hold a hearing on July 27. A vote could happen in September, and while Republicans are confident Bolton will be confirmed this time, as the Democrats alleged concerns about Bolton are clearly unfounded, some still oppose him.

Sen. Joseph Biden of Delaware, top Democrat on the Foreign Relations Committee, said on Thursday Senate should not vote on Bolton unless the White House turns over documents that the Democrats sought last year.

Biden also said Bolton's U.N. performance "confirms my conviction he is the wrong person for this job" and the administration should find someone else.

Senate Democrats have not yet discussed whether to try to block a vote on Bolton, a spokesman for Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid of Nevada said.

White House spokeswoman Dana Perino said there was a desire to move to a Senate vote because "people have seen the fruits of John Bolton's labor at the United Nations," and said he was "doing a tremendous job."

I think September will be a good time for a vote. If Bolton is confirmed, it's a victory for Bush leading up to the November elections, and if the Democrats block Bolton, their actions will show once again that the Democrats are a bunch of bitter leftists with no agenda but to oppose Bush... Bolton has been in the position as Ambassador to the U.N., clearly he's doing a fine job, and Democrats would be unwise to block him again.

Posted by Matt at July 22, 2006 09:59 AM



Trackback Pings

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.blogsforbush.com/mt/whitehouse.cgi/7551

Comments

So exactly what is it about Bolton's U.N. performance that convinces Slow Joe he's "the wrong person for this job"? Is it that Bolton strongly favors reforming the UN Human Rights Commission, a stance that even the NY Times praised, saying "John Bolton, is right; Secretary General Kofi Annan is wrong"? Is it that Bolton repeatedly warned the world about Iran's secret nuclear buildup and that Iran was lying to the IAEA, for which Bolton was nominated for a Nobel Peace Prize in February 2006? Is it that Bolton has strongly supported Israel?

Come on Joe, tell us.

Posted by: JPL [TypeKey Profile Page] at July 22, 2006 11:14 AM

Bolton is "human scum" and any Democrat who votes for his confirmation should be considered the same. Peace

Posted by: steve at July 22, 2006 11:19 AM

that convinces Slow Joe

Who cares what that clown thinks? He's dumber than a box of Boxers.

Bolton will get his vote and be easily confirmed. Biden will remain clueless. I just wish the President would nominate Biden as ambassador to Sudan - right away.

Posted by: Reverend Scaramonga [TypeKey Profile Page] at July 22, 2006 11:54 AM

I too support the renomination of John Bolton as U.S. Ambassador to the U.N.

Please accept this commenatry for your readers:

Paralyzed

UN Reacting Badly

By John E. Carey
July 22, 2006

The U.N. is setting a new standard of ineptitude and weakness in international conduct.

Currently, the U.N. is paralyzed as Israel battles terrorists including Hezbollah. It is pretty clear that Iran and Syria have been backing the terrorists.

"Iran is standing by the Syrian people," Iran's foreign ministry spokesman Hamid Reza Asefi proudly told reporters.

Last Friday, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad boasted that Israel was not tough enough to counter Iran and also warned against an attack against Syria.

"Thanks be to God, despite its criminal and savage nature, the Zionist regime and its supporters in the West do not have the power to look in the same way towards Iran," the fiercely anti-Israeli president wailed.

"If Israel commits another act of idiocy and aggresses Syria, this will be the same as an aggression against the entire Islamic world and it will receive a stinging response," Ahmadinejad said in a telephone conversation with his Syrian counterpart Bashar al-Assad.

The hard-line Iranian president, who said Israel should be "wiped off the map" or moved as far away as Alaska, has also compared Israel's military strikes on Gaza and Lebanon to tactics used by Nazi Germany's Adolf Hitler.

The U.N. has reacted with: nothing.

Israel and Hezbollah are engaged in a life or death struggle. Hezbollah, backed by Syria, Iran and large part of Lebanon, has proclaimed its intent to remove Israel from the earth.

Israel, backed by the United States, won't go without a fight. In fact, it looks like Israel may now be in the business of shelling its way to a new buffer zone on the border with Lebanon.

How do you make friends with a nation, or dare I say a people (What did Ahmadinejad call it? "The Entire Islamic World") when they are not shy about screaming that they want to destroy your country?

Israel's move against Hezbollah has revealed one of the reasons behind everyone's frustration in the region of South Lebanon. The United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon - known by its acronym Unifil -- has a long history of ineptitude, laxity and corruption. As a "peacekeeping" force, Unifil is a totally ineffective..

Some might say that the U.N.'s "peacekeepers" have allowed this pot to come to a boil.

Other smart Americans say we should give the U.N. more of a chance to solve the problems of the Middle East and elsewhere. Well, Unifil has been working to keep the peace in the Middle East for only 28 years. How much more time should we give them?

"They [Unifil] are barely able to take care of themselves," said Timur Goksel, referring to the UN peacekeepers. "How can you expect them to do their work?"

The blue-helmeted UN Unifil soldiers include a moderately trained and semi-disciplined Irish brigade. These Irish UN troops were routinely referred to as the "whisky army" by both Islam and Jewish observers who came into contact with them. The Israeli-backed Christian militiamen - known by the Unifil acronym LAUIs (Lebanese Armed and Uniformed by Israel) countered any effort by the Irish troops to stray far from their base at Camp Shamrock.

And we hate to give red meat to "red necks" but our dear friends the French command Unifil just now.

Over the past few years, with the U.N. paralyzed, Israel consolidated its border "security zone" and Iran began to openly support the terrorists, many of whom are called the Lebanese Shia Amal movement. Rememeber: these guys are in a life or death struggle.

Right now the U.N. is paralyzed again, or further, depending upon ones point of view.

Unable to effectively manage and organize the evacuation of innocent civilians from Lebanon, the U.N. is enviously eying USS Nashville, USS Trenton, USS Whidbey Island, USS Iwo Jima, USS Gonzalez, a bunch of CH-53 Super Stallion helicopters, the commercial liner "Orient Queen," [leased by the U.S. to evacuate U.S. citizens and their families] the U.S. Marines, and a protective cover including U.S. Navy destroyers.

Americans are leaving Beirut under a security umbrella of protected comfort and moving toward home in a fairly rapid manner. Non-Americans are mostly leaving by cargo ship to make the five hour U.S. vacationer's cruise ship journey in the hold of a hot cargo vessel in a 16 hour manner without toilets.

Today, July 21, the American-leased motor ferry Rahmah, with a capacity of 1,400 passengers, arrived in Lebananon and the high-speed ferry Victoria M, with a capacity of 330, also started taking Americans out.

"It feels wonderful to be back in the States. We just want to thank so much the State Department and the people that helped the government, the Marines, to help get us out," said one arrival at Baltimore.

But Americans who left Lebanon with European evacuees on non-U.S. vessels said they encountered a far rougher journey.

"We went on a cargo ship from the port of Lebanon. ... It was horrible. There were no facilities on the ship, just get out alive, that was it. We were on the ship for about 16 hours. It's a trip that takes about 4 or 5 hours," said Tom Charara from Long Beach, Calif.

The cruise ships the U.S. chartered to bring out U.S. citizens - equipped with duty-free shops, gourmet restaurants and beauty salons - normally carry up to 800 vacationers each on Mediterranean cruises.

Despite some criticism from the American liberal left, American evacuees coming out of Lebanon have mostly praised the U.S. State Department, the U.S. Navy and the Marines: but nobody has anything good to say about the U.N.

The U.S. Marine Brigadier General on the scene managing the civilian evacuation said he would wrap up the operation soon; and the Americans may have room for some of the allied civilians.

"That would be my suspicion," said Marine Brig. Gen. Carl B. Jensen, who was leading the operation.

"It wouldn't surprise me at all if we had some excess capacity," Jensen said. "We will of course make that available to other nations to assist in their orderly departure," he added.

Amidst all this, on July 14 a court handed down the first guilty verdict in the "Oil for Food" scandal at the U.N. In that caper, sneaky insiders at the U.N. and other influence seekers made millions from Saddam Hussein while they were supposed to be enforcing post Desert Storm sanctions.

We should all should take heed that we are in a world-wide war against terror that has any number of ramifications and dangers -- especially when one travels to the Middle East on summer holiday.

Thanks to the Kofi Annan U.N., the world is managed like a bad children’s’ team. But even a bad children’s team coach would tolerate less corruption and fiscal mismanagement. The way the UN runs the team today drives costs too high [but the US pays most of the bills so many don't really seem to care].

The U.S. Department of State, Ambassador John Bolton, and the U.S. Armed Forces are demonstrating true professionalism. The rest of the bit players, especially Kofi Annan's U.N., should be ashamed. But shame is an emotion that has lost its impact on most world "diplomats" and "peacekeepers."

Multi-lateralism doesn't seem to always be in the best national interest of UN member states.

So don't forget for one second that this is an all or nothing proposition for the Israelis. And not a joking matter at all. Or a matter to be left entirely in the hands of the UN.

Mr. Carey is former president of International Defense Consultants, Inc.

Posted by: John E. Carey at July 22, 2006 12:36 PM

Easy JPL - the thing that is unsatisfactory about his performance is that he was nominated by Bush.

Posted by: Ryan at July 22, 2006 06:23 PM

I just wish the President would nominate Biden as ambassador to Sudan - right away.

Or reestablish relations with Iran, and send Biden there instead. He could be the chief inspector of Iranian nuclear plants...

Posted by: LFFGF SGSPN NE... [TypeKey Profile Page] at July 22, 2006 06:27 PM

The problem is that if Biden can cause a delay, or if the dems in the Senate decide to fillibuster.

Posted by: kjstrouble [TypeKey Profile Page] at July 22, 2006 11:29 PM

The problem is that if Biden can cause a delay...

That is about all that blowhard is good for, but the current sense in the senate seems to be toward confirming Bolton. Out of the 44 Democrats, we only need 5 to form a filibuster-proof debate. That, given the situation right now, will not be hard to come by. Biden is just looking for face time and trying to seem important - he's not.

Posted by: Reverend Scaramonga [TypeKey Profile Page] at July 23, 2006 09:35 AM

Well even if Bolton is confirmed, I hardly think that this is a cutting edge issue with most American voters. People are concerned about the cost and lenghth of the war in Iraq, the federal government's non-response in Katrina (November is the height of hurricane season), $3.50 gas, a growing conflagration in the Middle East that could lead to WWIII, the predicted failure of social security and the fact that our president just chose as his only veto an important bill on stem cell research that would have offered hope to millions. I highly doubt most people even know who Bolton is, and those who do see him as Bush's lackey who is carrying out a failing policy of nonengagement with our enemies.

Posted by: kritter at July 23, 2006 09:36 AM

The problem is that if Biden can cause a delay

This is yet another attempt to get a comment past the blue screen. Fix it guys. Please.

Biden is in a bad place on this. There are 55 Republican senators who will support Bolton and out of the 44 Democrats it will not be hard to muster up 5 votes. That means any attempts to delay or filibuster will be shut down easily. And of course there's always the nuclear option - which I support. But in any case, Biden is just looking for face time and is desperate for anyone to pay attention to the politician from a state smaller than most cornfields here in Missouri. Bolton will be confirmed easily. And Biden will remain pointless (except for the one at the top of his head).

Posted by: Reverend Scaramonga [TypeKey Profile Page] at July 23, 2006 10:24 AM

“If I told you who I thought we thought the best candidate would be [for Secretary General], it would probably be the kiss of death for that person.” John Bolton, July 18, 2006

John Bolton has no influence at the UN, as he recognizes in the quote above. Want someone to represent the US who has no influence at the UN? Then here's your guy.

Posted by: longz at July 23, 2006 12:42 PM

steve.............are you ill? off your meds???
human scum???? we're worried about you..peace

Posted by: Xango Annie at July 23, 2006 03:02 PM

Bolton is human scum?

Why, because he doesn't believe in rewarding mass murderers and terrorists? Or is it because he demands that the UN reform their ways after UN advisors rape women and money launder over a billion dollars in oil for food?

Yeah...what a human scum.

Good Lord the left is absolutely INSANE!

Posted by: Warriornation [TypeKey Profile Page] at July 23, 2006 05:27 PM

kritter...is stem cell research denied in this country?

No. All that veto did was keep federal money from supporting it, but there is plenty of money going into stem cell research right now including an unbelievable amount here in California.

Posted by: Warriornation [TypeKey Profile Page] at July 23, 2006 05:32 PM

Warrior- Yes, I know that it is proceeding at the state level. Maryland has devoted a small amount to it also. But the states are already overburdened- they are stuck with paying for underfunded mandates like "no child left behind", and educating illegal immigrants. Many things that were cut out of the federal budget are now left up to the states. I actually see the veto as more symbolic, anyway, of an administration that is long on rhetoric and short on encouraging scientific innovation, which is badly needed to bring us into the 21st century.

Posted by: kritter at July 23, 2006 06:43 PM

I actually see the veto...

Why not see it for what it was? His rightful function as President to disagree with the concept of using taxpayer dollars (stop with that "federal funds" euphemism) to pay for a research program that goes against his basic beliefs. In most circles that's called being someone who gives more than lip service to his stated beliefs.

His record-setting - and nearly non-existent - use of the veto you'd think that liberals would be happy. But, no, consumed with hatred, driven by BDS, you have to assign evil conspiratorial intent to a simple principled action.

BTW: The private sector - you know, the ones that will actually profit from this research - are more than capable of funding the research. Ever wonder why they don't/won't?

Posted by: Reverend Scaramonga [TypeKey Profile Page] at July 23, 2006 08:01 PM

Post a comment




Remember Me?
(you may use HTML tags for style)