Lifestyle > Train of Thought
Bush Appoints Bolton To The UN
Don Rizzle:
it wasn't an abuse of power i was just commenting on how good yoour democracy when your senate doesn't want to appoint bolton to the un as top diplomat because hes about the least diplomatic man in america the man behind the current spread of democracy and freedom ignores his senate and just cashes in on his political capitol
J Bananas:
^^
OK, here's democracy, you have a bunch of elected officers to rep the people, when not everyone can agree on a course of action, the majority of influence towards one course of action wins. Like lets, say, choosing an ambassador, not everyone wanted him, but enough people did. Democracy.
Thirteen:
yep, it's still democracy... the senate was sitting there arguing about bolton, nothing was getting done so bush used his power to appoint him... it's not like everybody besides 1 person in the senate voted against bolton. it was pretty close
Don Rizzle:
for a post like this shouldn't you pick someone that everyone agree is fit for the job and someone shadowed with so many doubts?
Ant:
All the White House had to do was release requested documents on Bolton and he would have received a vote, but they refused to do so. There was bipartisan agreement that Bolton was the wrong man for the job, but Bush appointed him anyways.
Sure all presidents use recess appointments. That doesn't mean such a procedure can't be abused. Recess appointments are allowed to make sure things get done when the Senate is in recess, but this recess appointment had little to do with efficiency. If the president wanted Bolton to be nominated in an efficient manner he would have complied with the requests of the Senate. The actions of the White House stalled the vote, they are to blame for diminishing the efficiency of the review process. To say just because something is allowed means its also beyond criticism is ridiculous.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version