JOHN BOLTON CONFIRMATION IS DEAD
Several well-placed sources close to the Bolton nomination process have reported to me that the Bolton confirmation process is now dead.
The Senate Foreign Relations Committee is "highly unlikely" to reconsider Bolton's confirmation again as things now stand.
One insider reported, as far as the Committee is concerned, "we consider the confirmation over. It's dead."
American diplomacy may get a boost in January. She's tough and not a darling of many progressives, but my vote is for Bush's next nominee to serve as US Ambassador to the United Nations is Under Secretary of State for Global Affairs Paula Dobriansky.
Senator Lincoln Chafee gets this week's 'Conservative with a Conscience' Award for his principled stand on the importance of America's Middle East diplomacy and for making the Bolton confirmation process an appropriate vehicle to express his concerns.
-- Steve Clemons is Senior Fellow and Director of the American Strategy Program at the New America Foundation and publishes the popular political blog, The Washington Note.
Comments (16)
It sure would be nice to retire the "Bolton Watch". The guy is still there until the next Congress, I assume?
September 8, 2006 7:32 AM | Reply | Permalink
Well, I'm going to wait until all the earth is shoveled over the casket, and the thing is covered with concrete. You never know...
September 8, 2006 7:39 AM | Reply | Permalink
If it's truly "dead," does the January reference mean the world must continue to ensure John Bolton until then?
Dissent Protects Democracy.
September 8, 2006 7:43 AM | Reply | Permalink
Wow. Terrific work by Chaffee. Under ordinary circumstances, I'd be rooting for him to win his race, just to keep some sane people in that party.
September 8, 2006 8:48 AM | Reply | Permalink
Valdron beat me to it.
Have you checked the pulse yet? And since we're dealing with an administration of vampires, we won't necessarily be rid of Bolton even if he gets shunned by the Committee. Can Bush, at least in theory, give Bolton another recess appointment?
September 8, 2006 9:19 AM | Reply | Permalink
Steve,
You've walked the point on this one. Time to take a well-deserved bow.
September 8, 2006 10:13 AM | Reply | Permalink
Steve,
Like Bragan, I was wondering about a January recess appointment also.
Even if there are rules against it, using a second recess appointment for the same person, rules, laws, decency, logic, etc. have never stopped Bush from doing what he wants.
September 8, 2006 11:55 AM | Reply | Permalink
Right, and it's not like they have any shame.
I'm sure Bush would get up and say, "Bolton is the right man for the job." You'd think with all his speech writers, and hopefully the unrestrained use of a thesaurus, they could come up with another phrase. He says those same tired (and untrue) words for everyone he appoints.
Jan Knaus
September 8, 2006 12:31 PM | Reply | Permalink
The Wall Street Journal's James Taranto comments on the affair as follows
Chafee's objections turn out to be not to Bolton himself but to Israel. We've obtained a copy of the letter the senator sent Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, in which he offers this complaint:
Interestingly, while Chafee can't abide Jews building houses, his letter has nothing to say about the Palestinian Arabs who've been firing rockets at Israeli civilians from Gaza--which would seem to be a much more serious departure from the "road map."
Leaving aside the polemics, has this letter been widely publicised?
September 8, 2006 1:43 PM | Reply | Permalink
I wonder if the rockets have anything to do with the new 690 homes?
Just askin'.
"It is unknowable how long that conflict [the war in Iraq] will last. It could last six days, six weeks. I doubt six months."Rumsfeld-Feb.2003
September 8, 2006 2:42 PM | Reply | Permalink
I didn't see where he said the reason he was not supporting Bolton was because (as you put it) Jews are building houses. Did he say that later in "the" letter? Seems like if that were his objection, Bolton should AT LEAST have gotten a "cc." Maybe Chafee sent the letter to Condi because she is Secretary of State, and he wants to make a point independent of the UN position.
Maybe he has more than one idea in his head at a time. It is possible to be objective about Israel's provocative behavior and also have other opinions, after all.
Jan Knaus
September 8, 2006 3:28 PM | Reply | Permalink
I agree with Cville Dem's observation:
How do you draw the connection between Chaffee's letter to Rice and Chaffee's objection to Bolton?
There has to be some additional information out there to enable one to reach such a conclusion. Where is it?
September 8, 2006 3:38 PM | Reply | Permalink
I dunno. Maybe.
You were figuring that they're reprisal homes? Every rocket, build a new house in the occupied territories?
Or maybe they're celebration homes? Every 10 dead Lebanese civilians, build a new house in the occupied territories?
Is this a chastened and frightened Israel building 'comfort homes' the way an insecure girl reaches for the ice cream?
Possibly these are 'spite homes?' "F**** you, we may have gotten our tails kicked in Lebanon, but we can still build houses in the occupied territories like nobodies business. Nyah! Nyah!"
Or possibly these are distraction homes? Ignore the military disaster on the northern border, get a load of these digs!
Perhaps they're punishment homes? That'll show the Gaza Palestinians and the Hezbollah Lebanese what happens to West Bank Palestinians when they act up... And if Gaza or Hezbollah acts up again, well, the west bank will just get more where that came from.
How about vacation homes? Cottage country in IED alley in Iraq is pretty pricey. You never know...
I like this game.
September 8, 2006 3:54 PM | Reply | Permalink
I don't think it matters what the letter really said. It's all about the Laffey/Chaffee/Whitehouse battle for the seat. Chaffee is feeling the heat.
September 8, 2006 4:42 PM | Reply | Permalink
You were figuring that they're reprisal homes? Every rocket, build a new house in the occupied territories?
No. More the other way around.
There's Israel building more settlements again, even though that is against the UN whatever number. Why not shoot off a few rockets?
Israel seems to think everyone should follow UN resolutions, except themselves and the US. And if a party does break a resolution, then Israel is justified to use warfare. But not the other way around, if they break a resolution.
"It is unknowable how long that conflict [the war in Iraq] will last. It could last six days, six weeks. I doubt six months."Rumsfeld-Feb.2003
September 8, 2006 6:11 PM | Reply | Permalink
The other way around? They're building houses *out of rockets*? The more Rockets Hezbollah and Hamas sends, the more building materials the Israeli's are forced to construct with... Otherwise, its just letting dangerous scrap lie around.
September 8, 2006 7:37 PM | Reply | Permalink