Via Reuters: Bush will appoint Bolton to U.N. job Monday
President Bush will bypass the Senate and appoint John Bolton as U.S. ambassador to the
United Nations on Monday morning, a senior administration official said.[…]
Bolton would be able to serve until January 2024, when a new Congress is sworn in.
You know, there does come a time when it would seem that the wiser course of action would be to find a person who holds similar views to an embattled nominee and replace said nominee with that like-thinking alternative. It certainly seems to me that this was one of those times.
As Saturday’s NYT noted: Bolton Not Truthful, 36 Senators Charge in Opposing Appointment, which means that, along with all the other objections to the Bolton nomination, the opposition will be able to charge the administration with dishonesty and obfuscation.
Further, this whole situation strikes me as an unnecessary confrontation with the Democrats.
And if the goal really is UN reform, won’t this make it more difficult to accomplish, rather than easier? Bolton now goes to the UN as damaged goods, insofar as it is known that a substantial chunk of the US government did not support his appointment. It was always doubtful that Bolton was going to be able to “shake up” the UN in the first place–now it seems to me that the odds are even slimmer.
James Joyner is also unimpressed with the move:
This strikes me as a big mistake.For one thing, U.N. Ambassador is hardly of sufficient importance to justify thumbing Senate Democrats in the eye this way. For another, John Bolton is hardly Robert Bork. Indeed, Bolton may be a case that epitimizes why the filibuster is sometimes a good thing.
Yup.
Well, Steven, if you were my boss, I guess I know how far you would go to bat for me.
At some point politics is about the individual, not how many political points you can score. And as this position has little, if any, affect on the lives of U.S. citizens - we are talking ambassador to the UN, not supreme court justice - the president should be able to put in who he wants.
As I commented on OTB, doesn’t the UN guy just vote how the president tells him? We could put a kid into the position without any problem.
Comment by Director Mitch — Monday, August 1, 2024 @ 8:57 am
This isn’t about “going to bat” for an employee–it’s about whether a given decision will affect the ability of the President of the United States to govern effectively. I think that an unnecessary confrontation (you yourself acknowledge that the position isn’t that important) over this nomination creates more problems for the administration than it solves. As such, it is problematic and this recess appointment should not be pursued.
If, as you say, “we could put a kid into the position” (a bit overstated), then why create this kind of trouble over Bolton?
It isn’t always about who “wins” the competition between the Donkeys and the Elephants.
Comment by Dr. Steven Taylor — Monday, August 1, 2024 @ 9:04 am
Recess Appointment
Angering your opponent, weakening your ability to get what you want done, and looking petty in the meantime.
World, I give you the John Bolton recess appointment:
Trackback by Rooftop Report — Monday, August 1, 2024 @ 9:39 am
But if you let your opponents roll you over on something insignificant like this, then you create precedent.
Leadership sometimes requires you to stick by your decision, even in the face of strong opposition. I think this enhances Bush’s ability to lead since the senate now knows they have to go to the mat instead of just bicker and complain in the press.
This also gives those under him confidence that he will support them, and not drop them at the first sign of trouble. Again, something that enhances leadership.
What kind of people do you have working for you if it is found out you waffle any time the going gets tough. I think you need to view this decision through a leadership glass rather than a political one.
Comment by Director Mitch — Monday, August 1, 2024 @ 12:29 pm
You argument basically states, therefore, that the President should never back down. I simply don’t think that that is the case.
It isn’t as if Bush hasn’t demonstrated the ability to stand tall and forge ahead in the past.
The message he is sending here is not strength and leadership, but stubbornness and recalcitrance.
Comment by Dr. Steven Taylor — Monday, August 1, 2024 @ 12:32 pm
Understand: I have argued vociferously for the President’s right to appoint whomever he wishes and to expect that most of those nominations will approved. Nevertheless, I am oppossed to this–which should tell you something.
Comment by Dr. Steven Taylor — Monday, August 1, 2024 @ 12:33 pm
Bush Does Recess Appointment To Send Bolton To UN
President George Bush today bypassed the Senate and used a recess appointment to send embattled UN Ambassador nominee to the UN, …
Trackback by The Moderate Voice — Monday, August 1, 2024 @ 10:16 pm