Well... I find it kind of funny that while preaching bipartisanship and compromise with the new congress, Bush pushes the more controversial parts of his agenda through in the last couple months before the Democrats take power... Es la vida...

Well, until they are ready to fight, we should just leave the post vacant.

Matt, I posted exactly the same sentiment at another blog earlier this morning. I don't think Bush should make a big deal about it -- no threats, no denunciations, basically no comment -- just ignore the fact the the UN even exists. Maybe, with any luck, it will just fade into the ash heap of history.

The news that's being reported is that Bush has acknowledged that Bolton can't get enough votes in the Senate Foreign Relations Committee to send his nomination to the Senate floor. Just an educated guess, but I suspect that we probably have Chuck Hagel and Lincoln Chafee to thank for this. I know George Voinovich is also on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and has opposed Bolton in the past, but I seem to recall that he has since changed his mind. Without Hagel and Chafee's support, however, the nomination comes up 1 vote short in the Committee.

Georgia,

Bolton, who has been stellar as our ambassador to the UN, is controversial? Only to the DU/Daily Kos/Michael Moore wing of the Democratic Party.

It is an outrage that this fine man cannot continue his service to our nation - this is even worse than Rumsfeld being forced out.

And, yes, I realise that it was Chaffee who reallyh did him in - but as he's auditioning for the Democratic Party, I'm still laying this entirely at the feet of the hate-filled Democratic Party.

John Bolton was a partisan lighting rod so this comes as no surprise now that the Democrats have been asked by the American people to put an end to the extreme right wing power grabs from the last 6 years.

Mark:

The November election was far more than a vote demanding a new direction in Iraq. It was a repudiation of Bush and Republicans in general.

The American public voted against Bush's partisan extremism which includes nominating unsuitable people such as Bolton.

You may like him, but the American people did not, fully aware that a Democratic controlled Congress would prevent Bush from appointing certain people.

Democracy kinda works that way, Mark. Tough, ain't it, eh?

Good riddance, Bolton.

Wade

It's a disgrace and a big disappointment; Bolten was a leader unlike Biden and Chafee who don't know what leadership means. In the middle of everything that is going on Bolten bolts - democrats suck!

I just heard an interesting suggestion: nominate Joe Lieberman. That would be interesting in at least a few ways. First, I assume it would be hard for Dems to block his appointment. Second, it would be embarrassing for them if they tried. Third, the Connecticut governor, who is a Republican, would then get to nominate his replacement in the Senate. And boy, would THAT annoy the Dems -- they'd lose control of the Senate before they ever got their seats warm.

I doubt Lieberman would accept the nomination, but it sure would be interesting if he did.

Sorry, Matt, rules are rules. Bolton simply didn't have the votes to get out of committee, so his nomination was a non-starter. Even if he did get through committee, he would be filibustered in this Congress, possibly losing an actual vote in the next Congress.

As an aside, I don't know why you continue to whine about filibusters. Don't you realize that that may be an effective tool for the coming Republican minority? I would have thought you'd change your mind on filibusters now that Republicans may need them.

Finally, your idea of simply not nominating anyone for Ambassador is childish and harmful to our nation's interest. Yes, it sucks losing power, but real leaders don't just 'take their ball and go home' when the rules don't go their way. Grow up, and acknowledge this reality: in a time of war, its important that the US has an effective ambassador at the UN. Democrats (and some Republicans, too), felt that Bolton was the wrong man for the job last year. Bush showed what he thinks bipartisanship means, and went ahead with the recess appointment. Bolton is still a bad choice for ambassador, and so he's not going to get the job. Deal with it, don't cry about it.

Watch how quickly the Republican minority will call for filibusters to thwart Democratic legislation.....

Of course when Democrats filibuster it is "obstructionism" and when Republicans employ the filibuster it will be to protect American "values" or some such non-sense.

No one is listening to Bush's sad little diatribe about not getting his way in the Senate when the Rubber Stamp Republicans would do his bidding.

Quick.......I need the world's smallest violin when I hear Bush whine....

Wade

Wade,

i find it interesting how you specified legislation - which Senators have every right to filibuster.

however, when it comes to nominations, judicial or whatever, filibusters are unconstitutional.

that being said, I think Republicans should filibuster liberal legislation, and the next time a democrat is president filibuster his nominees. The democrats should be force to lay in the bed they made.

"that being said, I think Republicans should filibuster liberal legislation, and the next time a democrat is president filibuster his nominees. The democrats should be force to lay in the bed they made."

KCJ,

Do you think that's hypocritical, considering all the ridiculousness Frist and others put forward about getting rid of the filibuster? YOUR party was the one who wanted to get rid of the filibuster; now you're going to cling to it when it so happens that the Permanent Republican Majority was a myth. The Democrats have never advocated that it be abolished.

Gar Wood

Mark,

I've said all along that bipartisanship is about compromise. Both sides are going to have to compromise to accomplish things in Washington. Why would you expect Bush to not have to give up anything? What do you think would be a fairer thing for the Republicans to do in the same of compromise and bipartisanship? Of course you would like Bush to continue what he's been doing, but the spankin' a month ago reflect that the American people are opposed to such an idea.

It seems to me that your definition of bipartisanship consists only of Democrats making concessions to Republicans, and Republicans continuing as if it was 2004 again.

Gar Wood

The democrats? should be force to lay in the bed they made.

Do you remember Ken Starr?

Gar,

But Bolton has strong, bi-partisan support - the reason he was blocked in committee is because his opponents knew they didn't have enough votes to block him on the floor of the Senate. The only place Bolton is controversial is in the fevered imagination of leftwing hate-mongers, and the rather dim recesses of Chaffee's mind.

This is a disgrace that America should be denied the services of this great man because some put hating Bush above the interests of our nation.

Wade,

Democracy is certainly something you don't like - otherwise you'd be just as outraged as I am that rather than having a vote on the man, he was torpedoed by backroom political wheeling and dealing.

Boo-hoo. George doesn't get what he wants when he wants it anymore. That's life after the 2006 midterms.

Get used to it, Mark. There's a lot more to come.

Bipartisanship? The GOP spent the last 12 years running Congress in the most partisan manner imaginable and now that the Dems are taking over, we hear this insufferable "No fair!" whining?

Grow up, Republicans. You lost. Deal with it.

I wish for once the Republicans would force the donks hand and make them filibuster. Has there actually been a filibuster in the last 20 years?

I want to see Steny Hoyer or Barney Frank reading page after page of the DC Yellow Pages, or better yet the installation instructions for a MRI unit.

however, when it comes to nominations, judicial or whatever, filibusters are unconstitutional.
-KCJ

I would like to see your basis for this statement... I just skimmed over article one, and I didn't see anything about whether members of the senate are prohibited from filibustering Presidential nominees. So... from where do you get this comment?

In fact, I remember many times during the Clinton years when nominees (usually Judges) never got out of commitee and thusly never recieved an up or down vote on the floor of the senate... does this make you guys hypocritical or will you condemn members of the Gingrich Revolution?

Mark:

Bolton did not have the votes to make it out of committee, let alone win a Senate vote.

You decry "backroom political wheeling and dealing" as if Republicans have not stooped in that for the last six years? Oh Please.

Almost every appointment and legislation put forth in last six years has been a foul product of wheelin and dealin with business and special interest groups.

Do you want me to refresh your memory......

Wade

Georgia,

What we have here is another case of right wingers simply making stuff up. The constitution doesn't require the Congress to vote on ANYTHING.

Bolton was a partisan lightning rod, who was among the worst possible choices to be the US's representative to the world (it's beyond me how you could give that post to someone has done nothing but show contempt for the rest of the world). It's nothing short of breathtakingly hypocritical for the administration complain about the lack of bipartisanship, and then nominate the most polorizing choice for ambassador that they could possibly pick. It seems to this administration, and most people on this site bipartisanship means nothing more than "giving Republicans everything they want."

Republicans trampled all over the Democrats for years. Now Republicans have the gaul to complain about the mean democrats not letting them get whatever they want. Boo fucking hoo. As Republicans were very fond of saying for years losing elections has consequences.

The neorads are rejoicing. Not surprising. Bolton had a backbone. They want someone who will bow to the corrupt UN and give in to their anti-American, anti-seminite views. Pathetic.

You may like him, but the American people did not, fully aware that a Democratic controlled Congress would prevent Bush from appointing certain people.

Out of all the moronic comments made by the trollbots, Wade, once again, emerges as the most moronic. How do you do it, time and time again, Wade? I guess when they gave you your lobotomy, they also sucked out your spine.

And Frawgie? Are you being made to repeat your freshman year? You're either lying about going to college, or all you do at college is smoke dope. There's a difference in nominees not getting out of committee and nominees being filibustered. You stupid moron, wake up!

Matt, it's evident that you allow these pukes to post here to illustrate what parrot lemmings they are. None of them know squat about what Bolton accomplished during his recess appointment to the U.N.--they're all just parroting the lies they're fed by the DBM. Every damned one of them should be banished from this site--maybe then, some of the old regulars would come back, and we could resume the intellectual discussions we once had here. You sure don't get that with this lot...

This is not the time for bipartisanship. This is the time to give back to the Democrats exactly the same thing they have dished out to President Bush and Republicans for the past six years.

This is not the time to help or concede anything to the Democrats. This is the time to block and stall their efforts the same way they blocked Republican efforts for the past six years.

This is not the time to give Democrats credit for their efforts. This is the time to blame them for their failures -- over and over and over.

This is the time for Conservatives and Republicans to stand up, unite, and fight!

AAR

'This is the time for Conservatives and Republicans to stand up, unite, and fight!'

Absolutely! AAR, Absolutely!

It's really good to have you back, AAR.

Hope you can help us more often!

Jeremiah

None of them know squat about what Bolton accomplished during his recess appointment to the U.N.-

Queefer, go ahead, list and defend the accomplishments Bolton had, since your such an expert, prove us wrong..

Mark/Matt:

I was under the impression that childish, personal attacks were deleted or heavily editted on this blog.

I guess I was wrong.

Resorting to personal attacks is the "ad-hominem" fallacy in the parlance of logic. It only demonstrates the immaturity of the individual and the vacuous nature of that person's argument.

Wade

Opus: Try googing John Bolton accomplishments. You will find a bevy of great items listing his accomplishments.

I'll flip it back on you donk's, what has he done that deserves your disdain? and to show you what a nice guy I am, I'll save you the trouble of answering. NOTHING!

Wade: he was making a truthful factual statement about you. They should remain for all to see and learn from. Can't take the heat?

Porter Jervis:

I am against any kind of editting of comments in blogs but I also understand the editors of this blog may choose to do so.

If I remember correctly, the editors of this blog deleted offensive comments and personal insults in the past.

In fact in their policy on commenting it says the following,

"Comments that will be considered for deletion include (but are not limited to):

Demeaning comments towards a member of Blogs For Bush or another commenter."

I was just curious how this policy was carried out in practice.

Mark?

Wade

Jeremiah,

I'm thinking and resting up for the coming fight.

I hope the Republicans' loss will be just the kick Conservatives and Republicans needed to get them off their seats, energized, motivated, and ready for the fight. We definitely don't need to offer any support for the nutty Democrats' agenda or the idiotic ideas, social engineering, weakness, and anti-Americanism of the fringe leftwing libbies. I'm ready for some kicking and stomping! Let's hope some good, strong, conservative leaders will step forward and lead the fight!!!

Democrats didn't win because they had an agenda -- they had nothing worthwhile to offer and still don't. Democrats won because Republicans allowed them to run their six year, 24/7 hate and propaganda campaign without doing anything to stop it, while at the same time, Republicans irritated and demotivated their conservative base by their own actions.

Say hi to Lucas.

AAR

Keefer...

Bolton wasn't filibustered, he was drowned out in committee... I was referring to the comment on it being unconstitutional for Senators to filibuster appointments, which is BS...

So... is it wrong for appointees to be blocked in commitee? Or just when the appointees of republicans that get blocked?

Wade..Keefer was being kind....very kind...
ROFLMAO!!!!!! and Frog you got off easy, too...

Why is it that both political parties are operating under the belief that the other side doing what they want is bipartisan?

Seriously... it's the President's job to nominate executive department officials and Judicial appointments. The Constitution expressly says the Senate is to ADVISE AND CONSENT. No where does it say they should take NO ACTION on nominations. Further, the Senate's power to create it's own rules CANNOT trump the powers of the President to appoint people he/she wishes to appoint.

Whether it's a D-President and a R-Congress or vice-versa it's wrong.

Andrew McCarthy at NRO has a great way of looking at this issue.

But out of curiosity... which Democrat is going to step up and work with the President? Remember that George Bush will be President until January 2009... You're going to have to deal with that.

AAR,

Yes, That's exactly right, I'm like you, I believe the American people were just fed up with the democrats hate campaign and were frustrated, and in turn, decided to give it to them, in order to get rid of the complaints, I think though, after two years of corruption, lies, and obstruction by the Liberal democrats, The GOP will be back on track for a unanimous victory once again, IMHO and in hopes! I'm pretty confident.

If only the fifty million or so Chritians would have stepped up to the plate this past election, We would still have both Houses right now, but unfortunately this was not the case, instead, they chose to stay home!

I believe strongly that this country has a good Christian Conservative base out there, who needs to step forward and do their duty, It's the Christians who keep this country alive spiritually and also keeps democratic society going!

There is much to do, and there will be much to fix after two years!

Hope to see you again!

:)

Jeremiah

Resorting to personal attacks is the "ad-hominem" fallacy in the parlance of logic. It only demonstrates the immaturity of the individual and the vacuous nature of that person's argument.

Wade

Posted by: Wade at December 4, 2006 08:06 PM

SO WHAT THE HELL ARE YOU BITCHIN FOR THEN WHINY WADE???

You know, I don't post much, but I read alot! One thing I've learned over the past few years of blogging, Liberals are whiny little asschewers! They can't hold their own in a debate, they can't hold their own in a dark ally, they can't hold their own at Christmas!!! What a bunch of pussies! Accept Opuss of course, "He's one scary sheep"! LMAO! G-night pacifists, thank God their are enough men/women in this world to protect your asses! Worthless as they might be!

Quick.......I need the world's smallest violin when I hear Bush whine....

The world's smallest violin would go great with the world's smallest brain--somebody, quick, get Wade that violin...

Queefer, go ahead, list and defend the accomplishments Bolton had, since your such an expert, prove us wrong..

They've been documented many times, Opussy. And I'm not going to do your work for you. Also, I only engage in intellectual discussion with those who possess intellect, and you're last in line, way behind the mentally disabled. And really, Opussy, please do some research on word usage. Your sentence I quoted above proves that you're a lobotomized moron--the proper usage of "your" and "you're" have been encouraged, ever since the days of yore.

Once again, Opussy, you, Wade, and the rest of the lobotomy club here are a simple waste of oxygen, and if you all were hit by a bus, it would only serve to cleanse the gene pool.

Now have yourself a nice Marxist day...

Wade,

Keefer says the same stupid crap about all Democrats: that our deaths will help the gene pool (despite his lack of belief in evolution), that we're cow dung, that we used a serial comma where it was improper, etc. Real clever stuff. Don't take his insults personally because your genitalia is probably larger than his. I know this because I've been sleeping with his wife.

Gar Wood

I find it sad to see what Mark bans on here. He bans people who speak against the president and his allies, but he encourages people like "bearmanUSMC" who calls people he disagrees with "asschewers". And then we have real MENSA-types like Kimberly and Jeremiah who use words like "anti-seminite" and have trouble commanding the English language that they think should be made into law for all the Mexicans to speak. When confronted with political questions, Jeremiah, the American Taliban, wants to talk about relligion and how all of our leaders and laws must be rooted in Christianity. America is open to all faiths, Jeremiah. If you impose your views on others, you open the door for reciprocity.

I didn't realize we were being graded on this blog, RM (or is it you Dougie?). LOL!! BTW, Mark and Matt can ban whomever they like. After all, it's their blog.

Just thought you should know that "seminite" isn't a real word. Kind of like "misunderestimate"

RM,

I certainly don't want to discuss my faith with the Taliban, and I don't think anybody else does either, except, only in the minds of the likes of you and your ilk, who wish to see America subjected to another 9/11.

Kimberly,

Pay no attention to the troll RM.

God will help us through these trying and difficult two years that lay ahead.

Pray for America!

Jeremiah

Really? I thought Seminite was another word for the Sheminite peoples (who came though the lineage of Shem).

And BTW, RM, there is no such word as "relligion". LOL!!

Jeremiah ... I pray for America every single day. :-)

RM, if people are banned from this site only for opposing Bush, then your repeat presence here completely contradicts that.

So, basically, you are a liar.

Don't take his insults personally because your genitalia is probably larger than his. I know this because I've been sleeping with his wife.

Gar "Woodie," just how do you come to the above conclusion? You can tell that Wade's pecker is larger than mine because you've been sleeping with my wife? How profound--I thought you knew Wade's was bigger because you were staring at us both the other day, in the gym locker room. I know you're envious, since Gar "Wood" is rather small. A gar is a fish; have you seen a gar's pecker before? Well, yes, you've seen your own. Had to squint, did'ya?

BTW, Fish D*ck, that wasn't my wife you were with; it was yo momma. I asked her what she thought of the Gar "wood," and she told me she doesn't sweat the small stuff. Yo momma's pretty cool...

Kimberly,

That's wonderful! :-)

Jeremiah

Jeremiah-

I am sorry your lack of education precludes you from basic reading comprehension. What I said, actually, was that you are an American Taliban in the sense that you think your very narrow, somewhat racist interpretation of Christianity should dictate the laws of America. That's similar to how the Taliban believes with regards to Islam. Face it, people like you are in the extreme minority now and once Bush is gone, you'll never get someone like him again. It's over.

Kimberly-

You got me on "relligion"! Nicely done.

And KCJ, you're the liar on this one. I explained why Mark banned me. It wasn't opposition to Bush, it was that I called him out for challenging the Christianity of those who do not vote for Republicans.

But facts aren't welcome here on B4B. That's why people like Jeremiah, who is barely literate, enjoy posting here. They can spout lies about our country and wish that we had iron fisted one party rule and they are so blind and ignorant so as not to see how dangerous that would be.

RM, your a frickin moron! You sound about as mature as teenage liberal also. Were you born in 1939 RM? If so then there is no hope for you, if not then.............! Well, as for you challenging Mark on the christianity of voting republican..........bwahahaaahaaaaaahaaaaa! If that's what you get out of Marks replies....then you deserve to be banned. I don't think it is so bad not to vote republican as a christian, but it is the devils advocate to be voting democrat.....that leaves little choice for us CHRISTIANS! Oh yah, and RM don't bother ripping my literacy & grammar as I could give a flip what you think about that, kinda like I could give a flip about my english prof. dads criticism!

Oh yah RM from Rio Linda, KJC's point was that as long as your posts continue to show up here....you weren't banned! Duh! A little slow are we. Lay off the screwdrivers bra! They don't help your comprehension of the english language! LMAO!!!

This GOP (Gang Of Pinatas`) who seem to like to get "smacked down by the mean-spirited Lefties" better start to show some real backbone and fight back, or they are going to lose AGAIN, come 2008.
They seem to just 'fold up, and slink away when being beaten up by the vicious Dems. IF, they don't start to retaliate like the street fighters the Dems are(even when they use smear tactics, lying and character assasination) then they will deserve to be handed their heads on a platter.
If you think the last 6 years have been tough with
the DAILY BUSH BASHING...just wait until "Hill the
Hun" starts her mean machines up"....It will be all over but the shout'in. Show some balls guys and gals, JUST like the Ball Bust'in, Hillary and
Pelosi...YOU HAVE TO LEARN TO STAND TOGETHER, AND FORGET THE RHINO BULLSHIT AND WANNA BE INDIVIDUAL STAR LIMELIGHT ROLES, OR YOU'RE GONNA BE SOMEONE ELSE'S LUNCH.