Bush may sidestep Congress on Bolton for U.N.

[MODU]

What a bunch of bullsh**t. The framers put it in because it took weeks for Congress travel to the nation's capital in those days.

Uh, no.  Even George Washington used the power a few days after Congress left on recess.  That's why there is a limit in how long the appointee can sit in the position until having to be confirmed.  It's a way for the President to get something they want done, yet not permanently (since it required Congressional approval).

[MODU]

What the hell is it about Bolton that Bush likes so much?

Probably due to ideology.  Bush thinks the UN needs urgent reform, so he's chosen someone who is willing to express himself without stumbling over all the diplomatic speak.

[MODU]

What the hell is it about Bolton that Bush likes so much?

Probably due to ideology.  Bush thinks the UN needs urgent reform, so he's chosen someone who is willing to express himself without stumbling over all the diplomatic speak.

But I mean this is the best guy he could find for that? I don't think his record is that strong anyway.

Not sure.  Most people who move up within any Administration tend to be more calm and "political,"  and therefore lack the teeth which might be needed.  Personally, I think Bremmer would have been a good choice, especially with the respect he built with the international community while controlling Iraq before the transition of power.

[MODU]

The Democrats were not obstructing for the heck of it, they were stopping a very dangerous and unethical man who refused to answer certain questions.

Dangerous?  hahaha . . . "Look out folks, he's stroking his mustache.  RUN FOR YOUR LIVES!!!"

[MODU]

The Democrats were not obstructing for the heck of it, they were stopping a very dangerous and unethical man who refused to answer certain questions.

Dangerous?  hahaha . . . "Look out folks, he's stroking his mustache.  RUN FOR YOUR LIVES!!!"

So you're telling me that someone involved in the Iran Contra scandal and Plame scandal who supports attacking random countries for no reasons, and wants the UN building destroyed isn't dangerous?

Hmmm . . . Reagan was involved with Iran Contra, yet he wasn't dangerous.  I want the UN building destroyed (and built with one not consisting of asbestos) as well as the UN being reformed . . . so I'm dangerous too?  Or how about many of your wild accusations?  Are you dangerous?

[MODU]

Bolton would have an up-down vote if the documents asked for were released. 

Unfortunately, I don't think that the vote would have occurred before recess even if the documents were released.  Bolton was one of the best/last chances the Democrats had in order to make a stand against Bush, and the document issue was just a way the could excuse their refusal to allow the vote.

[MODU]

Bolton would have an up-down vote if the documents asked for were released. 

Unfortunately, I don't think that the vote would have occurred before recess even if the documents were released.  Bolton was one of the best/last chances the Democrats had in order to make a stand against Bush, and the document issue was just a way the could excuse their refusal to allow the vote.

I doubt the Dems would refuse to vote after they got what they publically asked for.

I do.  And they would be right in doing so.  The problem is, they were fishing for something they could sink their teeth into, and most of the issues they had discussed were trivial, such as "he's tough on his subordinates."  If they had received the documents, they would have said "we need more time," or "we need more documents on this issue," prolonging the process into the recess, where Bush would have done what he did today anyway.