Tuesday, August 02, 2005

Wrong Job, Wrong Man, Wrong Way to Do It

I wish I had gone to elementary school with Bush - I'm sure he would have been exactly the sort of kid who would have made golden memories - easily manipulable by dares and forbidding. "George, I dare you to stick these tweezers in the electrical outlet." "George, Mrs. Smith says we can't mix baking soda and vinegar in a sealed mason jar." Evidence suggests he is exactly the type of person who can't handle being told "no", even where pushing back will force self-destructive behavior.

Unfortunately, 51% of us have chosen to give him the opportunity to damage the whole world when he is reacting badly to limits.

Yesterday, we learned that he is recess-appointing John Bolton, the lying, abusive, self-righteous asshole that even the lying, abusive, self-righteous republicans don't like, to the UN ambassadorship.

I guess he's showing us who's boss.

Unfortunately for no-limit twits like Bush, though, sometimes you have to play within the limits to accomplish what you want, whether that is to retain recess privileges or to accomplish reform within the UN.

Kos's summation of the situation is dead-on:
Bush claims that Bolton will be a force for reform at the UN. Problem is, Bolton has been foisted upon the UN without any consensus in the Senate. He has only a shred of legal authority to the post, and no moral authority. His tenure is necessarily limited to a year.

So how can he effectively push for reform when the UN bureaucracy can simply run out the clock on him? And how will such delaying tactics blow back on the UN when Bolton couldn't even garner the support of his own countrymen in the U.S. Senate? And how could anyone take Bolton seriously given the number and severity of the allegations against him?

Bush thinks he's flashing the middle finger at Democrats, but in reality he's setting back his own cause for reform at the United Nations. As for U.S. diplomacy, it's yet another setback. But this administration has done nothing but give F.U.s to the world community for five years running. This is simply par for the course.


Blogger antimedia said...

Well, let's see....John Kennedy placed Thurgood Marshall on the bench through a recess appointment, Clinton had 140+ recess appointments, George Washington used the recess appointment to put a controversial judge on the Supreme Court, but Bush isn't allowed to use it because - well - it's just not right for him to use it!

Makes sense to me.

8/02/2005 10:31 PM  
Blogger Dan said...

Antimedia -

I've come to expect a little more intellectual integrity from you than this "everybody does it" argument, comparing apples to oranges. Yes, Thurgood Marshall was a recess appointment, because of racist opposition, but he eventually got a 54-16 vote. Senate opposition because someone is black is different than opposition because he is unfit for the job.

Yes, Clinton had 140 (not 140+, according to my sources, but that's a trifle) recess appointments, but they were almost all for minor posts, or uncontroversial. True, the opposition to Hormel was due to the right-wing's homophobia, but it was for the Luxembourg ambassadorship. If Bush wants to send Bolton to Luxembourg, he has my support.

Yes, Washington did recess-appoint John Rutledge to the Supreme Court, and the Senate then rejected him, just as I hope they reject Bolton (unless he totally changes his spots), so my point that the recess appointment is ineffective for a long-term project is demonstrated by your attempt to argue against it.

Finally, the simpering, woe-is-Bush, dishonest whining about Bush not being allowed to use the recess appointment is nonsense. He has already over 100 times, without a peep of protest from this site. Quit revelling in your supposed victimhood - it's pathetic and dishonorable.

8/03/2005 6:11 AM  

Post a Comment

<< Home