Aw c'mon Steve, give us a little space to just bash Bolton. Anytime there's a loose cannon on deck things get smashed, broken, tossed over board, and havoc runs aplenty. Bolton is insane. I know it, Kofi Annan knows it, and I think that you know it. Of course Bolton's lord high master George Bush is more insane than Bolton so, it sort of just figures, no? American foreign policy is trashed and the trailer park diplomats that are Bush foreign policy makers will have their destructive way with the United Nations and feel good about themselves and the damage they do. Isn't that the real reason Bush installed Bolton at the U.N.? How are we to take any diplomatic work by the Bush team as serious? The Three Stooges couldn't have done a worse job than Bush, Rice, and Bolton.

Article Two, Section 2.

The President shall have power to fill up vacancies that may
happen during the recess of the Senate, by granting
commissions which shall expire at the end of their next
session.

What's to prevent the ignorant, lying, weasel from appointing him again? Commissions expire, but the language doesn't say he can't appoint the same asshole again. Precedent as revealed in case law? Maybe. I would guess so.

But, you know, though precedent entitled to deference, says lyin' Sammy, you just can't ever say never. So, maybe we could revisit this, and maybe give the weasel a leg up, so he can continue to protect the "murcan" people.

So, if Bolton follows orders, we'll have nothing to say about it, even if the orders themselves are repugnant?

Maybe you want to make sure the comments are turned off, Steve.

Republicans are going to gain seats in both houses in the midterms and Bolton will be confirmed in the spring 2007.

Partially because you have chosen a cheap and easy target to attack and even then are oh so cautious about the manner in which you attack him, making sure there is no collateral damage or offense to those who are actually responsible for him. Republican Senators will not fear you or fear confirming Bolton, for there is no cost.

In today's Washington, the most ineffective, counter-productive, and despicable strategy is comity, bipartisanship, and reasonableness. We will not end the torture, detentions, renditions, surveillance by praising our opponent's good intentions and beating up on middle-management.

I'm not sure where I read this, but I seem to remember that a second recess appointment results in the individual getting the job without pay. And I do agree with Half that BoltonWatch should address the issue of whether or not the State Department surrenders to Cheney and Bolton. That is important, because then Bolton would be following orders.

I wonder if we will hear more from Bolton if the Iran issue htis the U.N.
What do you think his influence would be on this subject?
Raymond B
www.voteswagon.com

The good news is that Bolton will not be at the UN after one year. The bad news is that Cheney, a close ally of Bolton, will pressure Bush to give him a high-level position in the State Department. Bolton might do more damage at the State Dept. than at the UN.

Steve, which do you think is worse: Bolton doing his bull-in-a-china-shop routine at the UN or a secretary of state who, as you posit, doesn't know what he's doing? Malevolence v. incompetence? That aside, why exactly is it we're supposed to assume he isn't doing exactly what he was appointed to do?

Here's a tidbit for your new venture:

Bush Picks Wallace: Bush says he'll nominate Mark Wallace, husband of White House communications director Nicolle Wallace, to be the new U.S. ambassador to the UN for management issues. The announcement late Friday said Wallace will assume responsibility for building international support for the administration's reform agenda, which is being spearheaded by Ambassador John Bolton. Wallace has been a lawyer with Florida-based Akerman Senterfitt, and prior to that was a Bush-Cheney deputy campaign manager in 2004 and also worked on the 2000 campaign. He also worked at the Department of Homeland Security and other agencies, and campaigned for Florida Gov. Jeb Bush. --WSJ 1/9/06

To the morally spineless and nipple-fed intellectuals of the center-left liberals and their caravanserai of politically biased, naive, and wild-eyed supporters, John Bolton is the "ugliest" of Americans.

History's verdict however, which is the only verdict that counts, will re-affirm that John Bolton was the strongest and most sagacious of American Ambassadors in the UN, especially at a time when the tentacles of the ugly world of fanatic terror, threatened to throttle and stop the breathing of the lands of freedom.

History's verdict however, which is the only verdict that counts, will re-affirm that John Bolton was the strongest and most sagacious of American Ambassadors in the UN, especially at a time when the tentacles of the ugly world of fanatic terror, threatened to throttle and stop the breathing of the lands of freedom.

Posted by Con George-Kotzabasis

Whatta bunch of horseshit.

Is that a little Con George-Koocheekoochee I see sliming around? Welcome back Con George. I missed ya.

The nervous nellies of the last two posts are galloping once again.

Saw you on TV, got quite a kick out of your views on things. Am looking forward to your report on Bolton (as is the rest of his fan club). So far, what we have heard has delighted us! Keep up the good work, we can hardly wait to hear more about Mr. Bolton (you see, his views regarding the UN are shared by a majority of Americans).

The only thing that disappoints me is your comment that Bolton deserved a chance. Why? Is there anything about this Administration, in general, or Mr. Bolton, in particular, that would warrant such a gift? I won't go through the litany of messes this Administration has made, but to think Mr. Bolton was suddenly going to turn things around and be responsible and reasonable is silly. This is why Progressives lose. They keep expecting the right wing nut job to do the right thing. Well, wake up. These guys could care less about anything but asserting their crazy ass theory of the world. I appreciatee your efforts, but the damage has already been done. Quite giving any of them the benefit of the doubt, they don't deserve it.

"The only thing that disappoints me is your comment that Bolton deserved a chance..."

I agree:

Why, why, why do we always take bananas into a gun fight?

...why do we always take bananas into a gun fight?"

Susan,you're answering your own question, because you're "bananas".

"Bolton deserved a chance. Why? Is there anything about this Administration, in general, or Mr. Bolton, in particular, that would warrant such a gift?"

By way of introduction, I despise Bolton, his behavior, and his mission. I also recognize that he's going to be representing "us" for a couple of years more. Whatever the plan for the UN, we're stuck with it. I see Bolton involved in a more important game involving Rice and her future. I don't yet understand that game's objective.

The man was put where he is because of who and what he is. Intellectually, politically and behavior. He may be psychotic, but he is doing what he's being paid to do. He's a very loyal and devoted servant of the president doing his best. In any event, isn't Bolton only the messenger under the watchful eye of his employer?

What message is Bush sending to Rice when he 'allows' Bolton to publicly criticize and torpedo Rice?

Con, history will show that "...John Bolton was the strongest and most sagacious of American Ambassadors in the UN..."? Rather than personally attack you, which is what you did to those who found Mr. Bolton disagreeable, I'll leave my response to the issue and your opinion which borders on buffonery. My impression of Mr. Bolton's behavior is that it has been weak and stupid.

I doubt very much thirty years from now Mr. Bolton will be looked upon favorably by much of anyone, possibly his wife and family, but not by many others. What do you think will happen? Thirty years from now people will look back fondly upon Mr. Bolton's? I don't think so. My guess is he will be seen as that nut job who couldn't got a recess appointment, spied on his superiors, and offended just about anyone who came in his path. If that is strong and sagacious, then you need to take some time and look the words up in a Websters, might I suggest a College Edition - it's easier to comprehend.

FYI, New York Magazine did a sort of flattering piece on John Bolton last week.

Dear Matt: Thanks for the link to the New York article on John Bolton by Jennifer Senior. This is precisely the kind of information that is helpful to have when we launch Bolton Watch.

For those of you who want the new effort to have a nastier edge, we have to disagree. I've written some of the strongest critiques of Bolton on the web and don't intend to pull my punches, but the best kind of critique and oversight is that which is fair-minded, real, and empirically accurate.

Bolton was and is the wrong man for his current position in the U.N. We'll now make sure that he knows that we are turning up the scrutiny of his behavior and work. There are many benefits that can come from that -- including getting someone better than Bolton after his departure.

In any case, the most effective political and policy efforts are those grounded in reality, with some good theatre and marketing mixed in -- but it's not wise to make it all about theatre.

More later -- and thanks Matt and other folks for sending such useful material.

Steve Clemons

Steve, You should think about moving up the date. Looks like Pakistan doesn't like us bombing them. Imagine that? Perfect for Bolton to say, Screw you if you don't like it.

It's been a while since I engaged some of you during the confirmation process. And while Steve remains calm and collected, some of the usual suspects continue to spew jabberwocky.

So, here's more fuel for your campfire on the outskirts of reality. The Ambassador was recently in Berlin, Germany to lecture the Euros on what's what. The looks on the faces of some in the crowd were priceless.
Bolton goes to Europe is less the case of someone being a bull in a chinashop, and more that of a bull in Wonderland.

Keep warm.

I want to know what intercepts Bolton requested and why. This has gotten lost in all the confusion.

The guy looks like one of the gruff, faux-tough guys that seem to gravitate to Dick Cheney .

There's a "UN and Bolton" debate/discussion on the Kojo Nnamndi Show at noon EST today. His show is broadcast on WAMU, American University's NPR-affiliated station. You can listen online.