Reports the NYT’s Douglas Jehl, George Voinovich, the Ohio Republican senator who famously delayed a committee vote on John Bolton as U.N. envoy, has circulated “a letter urging colleagues to vote against Mr. Bolton when his name reaches the Senate floor, possibly this week.”
James Goldsborough strenuously disagrees: “The Bush Administration deserves to have Bolton as a symbol of its foreign policy.” …
Au contrare, writes James O. Goldsborough for the Voice of San Diego:
… Such an appointment
doesn’t reflect on Bush, it reflects on all of us, say
the protesters. As long as we believe in the
importance of the United Nations — and opinion polls
show it still stands high in American eyes — we
should have someone there who believes in it.
I don’t think so. I believe the standing of America
under Bush has sunk so low that Bolton should be the
symbol of how far we have sunk. Because Bush has shown
total contempt for the United Nations and the
collective effort led by Americans since World War II
to outlaw wars of aggression through the United
Nations, it is fitting that our U.N. representative
reflect that contempt. After what Bush has done to
weaken the United Nations, it would be a sham to send
someone there who actually respected it.
The more we allow Bush to heighten the contradictions
of his own policy, the sooner we will have the whole
bad dream swept away. …
– Goldsborough’s column was sent to me by Carol G. in San Diego.
What’s the point in defeating Bolton. He’ll be replaced by someone equally nuts. I hope he’s approved on a straight partyline vote so he can become another millstone around the GOP’s neck. We need to get over the idea that we can ameliorate the horrors of the Bush/GOP regime. Our only reasonable goal must be to make that regime as short as possible. Bolton and the rest of the unalloyed scum that makes up the Bush administration will help the cause.
Yup. Straight party line. The Republicans, Lieberman and Nelson from SD.
Oh man – that’s a tough one. It’s like my staunch DFL friends who were thinking of voting for Bush because he deserved to clean up his own mess. Same line of thinking.
Did you catch MTP on Sunday? I was a bit taken aback when Timmy listed all of the characteristics in which the Democrats hold against Bolton – then he asked Howard Dean, “Don’t you share those very same traits?”
Lastly – where do you find the time to post all these articles?
Yes, Susan. I’ve wondered the same thing. But I’m awfully glad you do find/make the time.
Sending Bolton as rep. of Bush’s realm would certainly send a message. I’m in three or four minds, though, how that message would be received. St. George V., the dragon slayer. I don’t know a thing about him, do you?
re: MTP: Tim Russert was talking about Dean’s abrasiveness in saying he “hated” Republicans — is that what you mean? I know everybody was wanting Howard to be wonderful. I think he wasn’t, but can’t tell if he was nervous or unprepared. However, if he did say he hated republicans, why back away from it? Just maintain a decorous silence. Silence can be eloquent, too. It would have made Russert look even more like the big-headed fool he is.
I don’t think it’s the same line of thinking even remotely. Voting for Bush, for whatever reason, was turning away from choosing the better alternative. Not palpitating about Bolton is simply recognizing that whoever gets the job will be a Bushbaby, and hence human garbage.
Choice. No choice. Big difference.
Already have Bagram, Abu Ghraib, Gitmo.*
*Note: List being updated weekly. Check back for new atrocities.
on this one. In a frison of regret over their rational behavior that found the “Mod Squad” (“cabal” of moderate Reps. & Dems.) come together to produce a sane outcome in re the filibuster question, the right side of the aisle will jump back into its caucus and Go Partisan rather than Nuclear on this nominee.
Maybe Voinovitch is just sick of politics at this point? When is his term up?
He just got reelected last November.