Senate panel puts off Bolton vote to September
Mon Jul 31, 2:56 PM ET
At the urging of Democrats, the Senate Foreign Relations Committee has put off a vote until September on whether to keep John Bolton as U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, committee aides said on Monday.
Democrats want to use that time to press the White House for documents they had sought last year during the dispute over Bolton's nomination to be U.N. envoy. They contend he bullied intelligence analysts to conform to his hawkish views in his last job as top U.S. arms control negotiator.
Republicans, citing the need for a strong hand at the United Nations during the Middle East crisis, had pushed for quick confirmation.
Recall that Republican opposition to Harriet Miers prevented a "fair" upordown vote on the nomination. It was a stinging defeat for Bush, and he wasn't going to let it happen again.
Enter
Roberts and Alito. To insure a favorable reception for his next choices Bush opted for nominees who would view Constitutional Law from a religious perspective. These nominees were sure to prevent the embarrassment of his earlier defeat, and guarantee the upordown vote (which equaled confirmation). He wasn't worried about a Democratic filibuster, he knew that the Democrats would complain and then vote with him.
Today Bush, and his warmongering, are wildly unpopular. This reality should give the Democrats courage to do the right thing. The Democrats can be assured that a vote against a bully at the UN will be a winner in November. Further, such a move is decidedly pro-Israel since Bolton couldn't lead a flock of ducklings across a road much less lead international consensus to work toward peaceful resolution, which protects Isreal.
The Miers' nomination demonstrates that Bush, the coward, is unlikely to choose someone as offensive as Bolton if this nomination fails. He will chose a a neocon, but minimum standards will be met. Even if I'm wrong and Bush's next nominee is on the record in favor of the destruction of the UN, if he refuses to answer the Committees questions, if he is belligerent to the Senate, even if he has such an abrasive personality that it is impossible for him to engage other nations diplomatically, then the next a nominee should be filibustered as well.
US foreign policy is driven by Christian Fundamentalists who believe that Armageddon is approaching or neocons who are still so deluded that they believe the US can assume control of the ME through military might. The rest of the world must learn that that there are pockets of sanity which reside somewhere in the US. That hope may make rebuilding our stature possible when the current insanity ends.