Tuesday, June 21, 2005

Bolton blocked again

Well, I knew this would happen as soon as the news came out, in May, that 14 senators, 7 Democrats and 7 Republicans, had reached a compromise regarding the filibuster of Presidential nominees.
I said at the time, This compromise was no compromise at all, but a strategic win for the Democrats. It is incredible to me that Senators, who are supposed to be intelligent, would agree to a compromise with such an obvious, huge loophole. In this blog, I stated that most of these guys are lawyers and who knows better how to create and exploit loopholes better than lawyers? And to think, I used to say one had to be smart to be a lawyer. I think I'm about to change my mind about that. Maybe only Democrat lawyers are smart. Or so it would seem in this case.
So, it happened exactly as I said it would. The Democrats would use the "extraordinary circumstances" loophole that they created and to which somehow they fooled the 7 Republican lawmakers into agreeing. These 7 Republicans, in my opinion, had to know to what they were agreeing. I believe they knew this would happen. Why, then, did they agree to this preposterous compromise? Perhaps the 2006 elections will give us a clue, but for now, we can only speculate.
Sen. George Voinovich, R-Ohio, who voted in May to advance the nomination, switched positions and urged Bush to consider another candidate, while only three Democrats crossed party lines. Well, we all suspected that he had another agenda then.
So, it appears that President Bush will have to exercise his option to make Bolton a recess appointment, which is a temporary solution, but hopefully, it will convince the Democrat senators and those few turncoat Republican senators that Bolton is the right choice after all.

41 comments:

Garza said...

Mark, reckon this was a strategy to cause public opinion to get even more fed up with the filibuster issue so they can eventually curtail it, maybe even nix it? Just a thought.

Toad734 said...

We are on a roll
Bolton
Schiavo autopsy
No WMDs

Whats next? Are we going to find out that Cheney is really a robot?

Mark said...

toad, who says there are no WMD's? I most assuredly believe there are and were WMD's hidden somewhere in Iraq, or in Syria or elsewhere. Saddam certainly had enough time to hide or move them.

Mark Wears A White Hood said...

There are no WMD's Mark...your Chicken little president Bush Laden even said that. Pay Attention and catch up...

Bush Is A Scumbag said...

CHIMPEACHMENT 2006 CHIMPEACHMENT 2006 CHIMPEACHMENT 2006CHIMPEACHMENT 2006CHIMPEACHMENT 2006CHIMPEACHMENT 2006CHIMPEACHMENT 2006CHIMPEACHMENT 2006CHIMPEACHMENT 2006CHIMPEACHMENT 2006CHIMPEACHMENT 2006CHIMPEACHMENT 2006CHIMPEACHMENT 2006CHIMPEACHMENT 2006CHIMPEACHMENT 2006CHIMPEACHMENT 2006CHIMPEACHMENT 2006CHIMPEACHMENT 2006CHIMPEACHMENT 2006CHIMPEACHMENT 2006CHIMPEACHMENT 2006CHIMPEACHMENT 2006CHIMPEACHMENT 2006CHIMPEACHMENT 2006CHIMPEACHMENT 2006CHIMPEACHMENT 2006CHIMPEACHMENT 2006CHIMPEACHMENT 2006CHIMPEACHMENT 2006CHIMPEACHMENT 2006CHIMPEACHMENT 2006CHIMPEACHMENT 2006CHIMPEACHMENT 2006CHIMPEACHMENT 2006CHIMPEACHMENT 2006CHIMPEACHMENT 2006CHIMPEACHMENT 2006CHIMPEACHMENT 2006CHIMPEACHMENT 2006CHIMPEACHMENT 2006CHIMPEACHMENT 2006CHIMPEACHMENT 2006CHIMPEACHMENT 2006CHIMPEACHMENT 2006CHIMPEACHMENT 2006CHIMPEACHMENT 2006CHIMPEACHMENT 2006CHIMPEACHMENT 2006CHIMPEACHMENT 2006CHIMPEACHMENT 2006CHIMPEACHMENT 2006CHIMPEACHMENT 2006CHIMPEACHMENT 2006CHIMPEACHMENT 2006CHIMPEACHMENT 2006CHIMPEACHMENT 2006CHIMPEACHMENT 2006CHIMPEACHMENT 2006CHIMPEACHMENT 2006CHIMPEACHMENT 2006CHIMPEACHMENT 2006CHIMPEACHMENT 2006

Toad734 said...

It really doesn't matter, we weren't there for the WMDs we were there to spread freedom for people such as the Kurds for whom we care so much about that we told them that we would support them if they tried to overthrow Saddam after the 1st war but pulled out at the last minute as they were slaughtered, again.

Garza said...

Mark, sounds like the lib's are a bit touchy today. Maybe the new Hillary book has once again crushed their dreams?

Garza said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Erudite Redneck said...

I don't think the agreement on judges had jack to do with other appointments.

Mark said...

I find it interesting that whenever the liberals don't have a legitimate argument, which happens most of the time, that they resort to personal attacks. Rarely do they have a legitimate reason why they hate Bush, or any other conservative. Sadly, I believe liberals, for the most part, are good people who really do love their country, but have a different idea of how to make things better. I have asked in this blog a couple of times why Bush haters hate Bush, and I recieved one lucid answer. It consisted of the same liberal propaganda that the liberal press (as opposed to the conservative press) constantly spews forth, but it was a lucid answer nonetheless, and i thanked the contributor for that. have a nice day.:)

Toad734 said...

I actually started out not being a Bush hater, I did vote for Gore but I was willing to give him the benefit of doubt and don’t disagree with a few things that he has done such as withdrawing from the Kyoto accord.

I am as fair as they come when it comes to judging people, I have 1000 reasons to hate Delay, Frist, Rush, Hannity and now Bush. Bush did this all himself, I'm not a Republican hater at heart, Lincoln was a great guy! And don't get me wrong Ill bet Bush is a reasonably fun guy to hang out with, especially when he’s drunk and all coked up, but he couldn't run this country with three more Cheney’s at his side. And quite frankly I don't think he has ever read the constitution of the United States, or the Patriot Act for that matter. We know he never read weapons inspector’s reports on Saddams military capability. This is not the United States of Jesus and I hate anyone who thinks it is and especially the ones who try to force that on others.

Oh ya and I almost forgot about what a great job Bush has done about securing the borders and keeping hijacked planes from flying into our buildings.

Maybe he shouldn't have thrown out all the Clinton era intelligence files on Bin Laden after all.

Toad734 said...

There is a reason Bush's approval rating is dropping at a steady rate.

Mark said...

Toad, I agree that Bush has failed badly in securing the borders, but i don't remember any other presidents in the past (not even Clinton) doing any more. Of course, Clinton was much too busy trying to avoid scandals which he created by not being able to control his own sexual urges which makes him suspect, in my book, of being able to control the country.

Garza said...

Oh yes, but Clinton knew a fine cigar when he say it...or half of it.

Daffy76 said...

Toad,
Why do people who aren't Christians hate Christians? This country has quite a few you know. We're not exactly a minority. I can believe things a certain way without forcing that opinion on anyone else. We're not evil. Sincere Christians stand for good things.

But I know I can't change your mind on this. You are so busy being angry at Bush that you can't be objective.

tugboatcapn said...

Garza, I wondered what brought them out onto the warpath... I'll bet you are right.
Mark, did bachelor thank you for the comment that you left me on my comments page, or did you mean it for him? Very confusing...
By the way, with fans like these, who needs enemas??

tugboatcapn said...

I think I'll hang out on your blog for a while...Mine has gotten too hostile. Why can't we all just get along??

shadylayne said...

What's so wrong with questioning your government? If you ask me, it's one of the most patriotic things we can do--to be aware, involved, and active in our support and dissent. 90% of Americans would say Bolton was that guy who sang crappy ballads in the early 90s. They won't even know what you're talking about.

Some of us who actually read, watch the news (not just Hannity & Colmes) and keep up with the world have every right to question those a clearly biased President with an obvious agenda has nominated for government office. How on earth is that wrong when you know Republicans did the same thing to every Clinton appointee?

Jj said...

Wow, looks like there are some hard-party-liners here. POliticians in both parties are fallible, and members of each party resort to name-calling when they don't get their own way, or cannot prove that they are right. As someone who was raised Catholic, I try to vote for the person who has everyone's interests at heart, and that changes. I voted for Bush in 2002 & I voted for Kerry in 2004. Everyone really needs to explore the world beyond their own party propaganda. That's the ONLY way to cause change, which this country & both parties definitely need.
~Peace.

Jj said...

Um, I mean 2000? Gee, do I know when I voted???

Mark said...

Shady, someone has used my name to attack you on your blog comments...That is not me. I respect you and your right to say what you want. I am sorry this person thinks that impersonating me to besmirch my carachter and to insult you is funny.

Mark said...

JJ, Thanks for your comments. I too believe that we must vote for whoever best expresses the ideologies that we believe in. I don't belong to any particular political party, but i defintely lean to the right. You are welcome to come back and post all the comments you like. You may notice i don't delete anyones comments, no matter how innane. I mean look at the comment by one who identifies him/herself as "bush is a scumbag" lol

Mark said...

wooohooo! this is fun!

Erudite Redneck said...

Re, "Why do people who aren't Christians hate Christians?"

Because they have not been touched by the Holy Spirit. Come on! Do you know yer stuff or what?

I mean, I don't mean to sound condecending here, but being a Christian is not the same thing as being a Lion vs. a Rotarian, or in the VFW vs. the DAV, for God's sake. And it doesn't have crap to do with whether yer a Reepub or a Dem -- OR a liberal or a conservative.

Those who believe, believe, and HAVE to have a certain amount of patience with fellow Christians with whom they disagree. And Christians can for damn sure disagree.

And, you know what? We're not supposed to judge. Period. Whether it's someone's present relationship with God, or the specific stage in which they think they find themselves in the incredible, tangled dance between God's undeserved grace and the putrid, pathetic attempts at goodness by the barely redeemed recipients of God's Grace. So, don't.

Micah Gendron said...

The Holy Spirit touched my brother and then the priest got thrown in jail...

Mark said...

You know, Micah? I remember my first beer....

Poison Pero said...

I hope they keep throwing Bolton out there.......Let the Dems filibuster till their hearts are content.

1. The real goal is to get the Supreme and Appelate Courts filled with Conservatives --> Which is happening, and will continue to happen.........The people are getting sick of these filibusters, and if they waste one on Bolton so be it.

2. I could care less if we ever fill Bolton's position........The Circle Jerk Group (UN) is a joke, and we should withhold dues until we get Bolton in.

The WordSmith from Nantucket said...

The Democrats are just being obstructionists with imagined gripes against the Bolton nomination. "He was mean...he's a bully" Good grief!

Bolton is more than qualified for the position. If we're stuck in the mire that is the UN, we might as well have someone represent us there who won't take their bull.

Mark said...

ha ha ha...28 comments and only 4 of them actually about the post. that's ok, keep em coming, 28 is a new record on my blog

Daffy76 said...

I wasn't trying to judge anyone. I'm just a little offended by the "United States of Jesus" comment in Toad's post. That seems a little harsh considering that so many faiths are represented in our country.

I agree with you that being a Christian has no political affiliation. If I came across differently before, I apologize.

I'm just sick of people using "Christian" like it's a bad word.

Erudite Redneck said...

"Christian" IS a bad word to the enemies of Christ and the Church.

Matthew 10:22:
And ye shall be hated of all for my name's sake: but he that endureth to the end shall be saved.

Daffy76 said...

"Enduring" doesn't mean we have to like it.

The WordSmith from Nantucket said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
The WordSmith from Nantucket said...

Toad said:

I am as fair as they come when it comes to judging people,

After reading through your post, I doubt that.

Bush did this all himself, I'm not a Republican hater at heart, Lincoln was a great guy!


Bush did what all by himself? What does Lincoln have to do with anything? The nature of political parties changes over time. You really think JFK would recognize his political party today?

And don't get me wrong Ill bet Bush is a reasonably fun guy to hang out with, especially when he’s drunk and all coked up, but he couldn't run this country with three more Cheney’s at his side. And quite frankly I don't think he has ever read the constitution of the United States, or the Patriot Act for that matter.

Have you? You see, this is where you lose all credibility with me. You sound like a 16 year old kid.

We know he never read weapons inspector’s reports on Saddams military capability.

Now we know you certainly have not.

This is not the United States of Jesus and I hate anyone who thinks it is and especially the ones who try to force that on others.


You know what I hate? I hate the intolerance of groups such as the ACLU who make a mountain out of a mole hill and scare-monger people about "the religious right".

Do you believe that President Bush is "pushing" his religion on people? Is that why he lit a menorrah at the White House with 200 Rabbis and members from the Jewish community as guests? Is that why he has said prayer in mosques, and openly spoke out about tolerance and understanding for Muslims?

President Bush, speaking as President, has been no more religious than the majority of any other President of the U.S. On Average, President Clinton has mentioned Christ in 5.1 statements per year while President Bush has mentioned Jesus/Christ 4.7. Every President who has ever served these United States has made reference to God. President Bush rarely talks about his faith, unless it's to respond at the Press prodding him about it.




Oh ya and I almost forgot about what a great job Bush has done about securing the borders and keeping hijacked planes from flying into our buildings.

It frustrates me to no end that neither Party seems able to take a hard-nose stand on the border and illegal immigration issue.

As far as hijacking planes and flying them into buildings...how is anyone to take you seriously? You think the planning for 9/11 only began 9 months into President Bush's first term? It may have happened on his watch, but if you're going to lay blame at President Bush's doorstep, you might as well step back to the Clinton Administration which, because of their weak response to...what? 17 terrorist attacks on American soil and interests through the 90's?...Osama bin Laden said America was a "Paper tiger" and did not predict such a strong response from this President, who is showed him that America is no paper tiger. You think President Gore would have done a better job at protecting us? John Kerry certainly did have a plan: it's called the Bush plan, because he basically was saying he'd do exactly the same thing we were already doing under this current Administration.

Maybe he shouldn't have thrown out all the Clinton era intelligence files on Bin Laden after all.

Maybe the Clinton Administration could have been more of a class act and actually briefed the incoming Administration in a timely manner, rather than acting like frat losers vandalizing White House computers and property.

Mark said...

hey, folks, I beleive the original post was about the filibustering of John Bolton and how it appears the Democrats put one over on the Republicans. But if you want to discuss other topics, go ahead, don't let me stop you. I am rather enjoying this.

BRUISER said...

The real duty is to stop these "activist" special interest groups controlling our laws and civil liberties. I believe they are called lobbyists and the payoff is huge from these anti-democratic reactionaries. Just ask George Bin Laden who sides on the corporations over his constituency.

Mark said...

Bruiser. name calling only serves to make one appear mean spirited and ugly.

BRUISER said...

Yes yes it does ...its called sarcasm. Wow a Bush education doesn't buy much these days.
Kind of like the US dollar.

Anonymous said...

So who keeps censoring your comment board?

Homeland Security?

Mark said...

no one is censored here look at scumbags post

Erudite Redneck said...

Not every smart-ass remark is sarcasm. Sometimes it's just a smart-ass remark.