The Politics of Bolton
Writes Michelle Malkin:
The Democrats want John Bolton’s scalp. This is a moment for conservatives to stand up to the Left’s empty, vindictive obstructionism and support a strong voice for America’s interests at the corrupted, soft-on-jihad offices of Turtle Bay.
Or, maybe it’s time to recognize the following:
1) The Democrats won the elections, and hence as per the Constitution, the new majority has the right to reject a nominee of the President.
2) Beyond the current election, the Senate has built-in powers given to the minority party. This is not unreasonable, given that a given majority may not actually represent a majority of citizens. As such, there are solid democratic (notice the small “d”) reasons to give the minority in the Senate certain protections. I sometimes get the impression that some would like to do away with the advise and consent power of the Senate.
3) If Clinton (or Gore or Kerry or any other Democratic president) had appointed someone to the position as a recess appointment over the objections of the Republicans the same bloggers and pundits who are so outraged about the opposition to Bolton would be making the exact opposite arguments that they are making now (i.e., how dare the President bypass the Senate, etc.).
4) John Bolton is not the indispensable man who has to represent the US at the UN or all is lost. It is not impossible for the President to find someone else.
5) If the argument now is continuity, President Bush could have avoided the issue had he found someone else to nominate once it was clear that the only way to get Bolton into the job was a recess appointment.
6) The President gambled that the GOP would have a good midterm result when he gave Bolton a recess appointment, and he lost that bet. When you lose a bet, you have to pay up.
Also, I must confess, given all the time that is spent arguing about the impotence and insignificance of the United Nations, I have to wonder about all the emotion and energy over Bolton.
Further, I would argue that this is ultimately about partisan point-scoring far more than it is about the core necessity of Bolton’s work at the UN.
[Cross-posted at PoliBlog]