Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 42

Thread: Bolton Out...

  1. #1

    Bolton Out...

    blocked by Democrats and several Republicans. Sen. Lincoln Chafee (news, bio, voting record), a moderate Republican who lost in the midterm elections Nov. 7 that swept Democrats to power in both houses of Congress, was adamantly opposed to Bolton.

    [url]http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20061204/ap_on_re_us/bolton_resigns[/url]

  2. #2
    another failed Bush appointment..

  3. #3
    Did he accomplish anything while there?

  4. #4
    [QUOTE=cr726]Did he accomplish anything while there?[/QUOTE]


    Nothing at all.
    Just another bag full of hot air who talked loud but carried a small stick.
    Another obnoxious, foolish man appointed by dubya to be his lackey in the UN.
    Outside of having a ridiculously funny moustache, there was nothing extraordinary about this jerk off.
    Enjoy retirement , ya windbag

  5. #5
    So who do you want in that Job bman, CR, Ken?

    Who is the best choice Bush could appoint?

  6. #6
    Jets Insider VIP
    JetsInsider.com Legend
    Charter JI Member

    Join Date
    May 1999
    Posts
    31,408
    it'll be hypocrisy as usual in the future when all the whiney little b!tches on the left complain that a rat president can't even get a vote on one of his appointees.....

    paybacks a b!tch and somehow I won't feel to bad about it....

  7. #7
    [QUOTE=Warfish]Who is the best choice Bush could appoint?[/QUOTE]


    THIS GUY!
    [IMG]http://sburt1.googlepages.com/new.rumsfeld.jpg[/IMG]

  8. #8
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Boston
    Posts
    11,692
    [QUOTE=kennyo7]Nothing at all.
    Just another bag full of hot air who talked loud but carried a small stick.
    Another obnoxious, foolish man appointed by dubya to be his lackey in the UN.
    Outside of having a ridiculously funny moustache, there was nothing extraordinary about this jerk off.
    Enjoy retirement , ya windbag[/QUOTE]

    Really? Hardly.

    Now, who knows if he was effective or not. I certainly don't know and it's too early to tell or to make statements like that, pro or con. The Dems wanted a scalp and they got one - this is pure partisan politics and nothing more, just like the Dems' treatment of Miguel Estrada recently and Robert Bork many years ago.

    But Kenny's knee-jerk parroting of the left-wing party line is quite lame and predictable and likely why no one really takes him seriously.

    As for what Bolton did, apparently he was main proponent of the:

    adoption of a first legally binding Security Council resolution sanctioning North Korea for its nuclear-weapons program;


    passage of a first ever Security Council resolution addressing the Iranian nuclear program;

    consensus-building among democratic states that resulted in 50 donor countries, responsible for 88 percent of the U.N. regular budget, taking a common position on management reform.

    Furthermore, he:

    had the foresight to refuse to lend credibility to the U.N. Human Rights Council, which as he predicted, has become a mockery of reform undeserving of American support;

    raised the profile of the genocide in Darfur and insisted on Security Council action;

    led the campaign against corruption at the U.N. secretariat, including the reduction of the gift ceiling for United Nations officials from $10,000 to $200;

    defended a free and democratic government of Israel from the relentless onslaught of anti-Israel and anti-Semitic attacks launched across the U.N. system.


    (The above is per NRO)

    Again, maybe he was good and maybe he wasn't. I sure as hell don't know and neither does kenny.

  9. #9
    In his statement Bush says that he was 'disappointed". Looks like he may use that term a lot in the next two years.

  10. #10
    [QUOTE=jets5ever]Really? Hardly.

    Now, who knows if he was effective or not. I certainly don't know and it's too early to tell or to make statements like that, pro or con. The Dems wanted a scalp and they got one - this is pure partisan politics and nothing more, just like the Dems' treatment of Miguel Estrada recently and Robert Bork many years ago.

    [B]But Kenny's knee-jerk parroting of the left-wing party line is quite lame and predictable and likely why no one really takes him seriously.[/B]

    As for what Bolton did, apparently he was main proponent of the:

    adoption of a first legally binding Security Council resolution sanctioning North Korea for its nuclear-weapons program;


    passage of a first ever Security Council resolution addressing the Iranian nuclear program;

    consensus-building among democratic states that resulted in 50 donor countries, responsible for 88 percent of the U.N. regular budget, taking a common position on management reform.

    Furthermore, he:

    had the foresight to refuse to lend credibility to the U.N. Human Rights Council, which as he predicted, has become a mockery of reform undeserving of American support;

    raised the profile of the genocide in Darfur and insisted on Security Council action;

    led the campaign against corruption at the U.N. secretariat, including the reduction of the gift ceiling for United Nations officials from $10,000 to $200;

    defended a free and democratic government of Israel from the relentless onslaught of anti-Israel and anti-Semitic attacks launched across the U.N. system.




    (The above is per NRO)

    Again, maybe he was good and maybe he wasn't. I sure as hell don't know and neither does kenny.[/QUOTE]


    This is so funny. Very typical of J5E's posts. Make a snide remark about "knee jerk" reactions then accuse me of parroting the Left.

    So what does he do???????

    Copy and paste a bunch of nonsensical statements from the NRO (The right's equivilant of Thinkprogress/Daily Kos etc.) and just parrot TPs from the right. Can you imagine J5Es response if anyone re-hashed statements from the Daily Kos...oh hed be in an uproar accusing us of being the very mouthfoamers that his post proves HE is.

    Too damn funny!

  11. #11
    As opposed to yourself and Dweeb constant crying about the media and liberals?

    [QUOTE=Come Back to NY]it'll be hypocrisy as usual in the future when all the whiney little b!tches on the left complain that a rat president can't even get a vote on one of his appointees.....

    paybacks a b!tch and somehow I won't feel to bad about it....[/QUOTE]

  12. #12
    Some highlights of Bolton’s “highly successful” tenure:

    • Bolton isolated the U.S. from its allies on the Human Rights Council. Because Bolton was unable to negotiate favorable terms on the creation of a new Human Rights Council, the U.S. was one of four nations to oppose the creation of the Council, while 170 nations voted for it. Out of 30 or so negotiating sessions over the creation of the Council, Bolton attended just one.

    • Bolton blocked the Special Advisor on the Prevention of Genocide from briefing the Security Council on Darfur. “Bolton said he had objected to the briefing to make the point the council should be ‘talking more about the steps it can take to do something about the deteriorating security situation’ in Darfur. [But] he gave no new proposals.”

    • Bolton unable to build consensus on U.N. reform. Kofi Annan’s deputy Mark Malloch Brown said that there is global consensus on the need for U.N. reform, but that international perception of U.S. motives are hindering those efforts. “There is currently a perception among many otherwise quite moderate countries that anything the U.S. supports must have a secret agenda aimed at either subordinating multilateral processes to Washington’s ends or weakening the institutions, and therefore, put crudely, should be opposed without any real discussion of whether they make sense or not,” he said. Bolton has not been able to breakthrough the deadlock, but has instead reinforced the perception.

    • Bolton blocked and delayed approval of funding for U.N. renovation plan. The United States was the lone holdout on a U.N. committee that tried to approve an estimated $1.6 billion renovation plan for the U.N. The U.N. building violates New York safety and fire codes; it is packed with asbestos, has no sprinkler system, and leaks about a quarter of its heating. Bolton’s position provoked “an America-versus-the-world standoff.” Ultimately, Bolton’s obstruction caused Louis Frederick Reuter, the official in charge of the renovation, to quit his post.

    • Bolton sought to undermine the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs). The MDGs aimed to convert rhetoric into hard numbers on such issues as reducing poverty and hunger, enrolling children in primary school, etc. Just days after he arrived in New York after a recess appointment, Bolton released over 700 edits to the draft document for the summit, excising all mentions of the MDGs. Bush and Rice later had to backtrack from Bolton, reassuring the U.N. of its commitment to the agreed upon goals.

    If you need more reasons as to why Bolton was a failure of epic proportions, read this:
    [url]http://www.thewashingtonnote.com/archives/Bolton%20White%20Paper%207-25-2006%20Final.htm[/url]



    From ThinkProgress (Hey if J5E thinks the NRO is a credible unbiased source, well so is TP)

  13. #13
    [QUOTE=kennyo7]Some highlights of Bolton’s “highly successful” tenure:

    • Bolton isolated the U.S. from its allies on the Human Rights Council. Because Bolton was unable to negotiate favorable terms on the creation of a new Human Rights Council, the U.S. was one of four nations to oppose the creation of the Council, while 170 nations voted for it. Out of 30 or so negotiating sessions over the creation of the Council, Bolton attended just one.

    • Bolton blocked the Special Advisor on the Prevention of Genocide from briefing the Security Council on Darfur. “Bolton said he had objected to the briefing to make the point the council should be ‘talking more about the steps it can take to do something about the deteriorating security situation’ in Darfur. [But] he gave no new proposals.”

    • Bolton unable to build consensus on U.N. reform. Kofi Annan’s deputy Mark Malloch Brown said that there is global consensus on the need for U.N. reform, but that international perception of U.S. motives are hindering those efforts. “There is currently a perception among many otherwise quite moderate countries that anything the U.S. supports must have a secret agenda aimed at either subordinating multilateral processes to Washington’s ends or weakening the institutions, and therefore, put crudely, should be opposed without any real discussion of whether they make sense or not,” he said. Bolton has not been able to breakthrough the deadlock, but has instead reinforced the perception.

    • Bolton blocked and delayed approval of funding for U.N. renovation plan. The United States was the lone holdout on a U.N. committee that tried to approve an estimated $1.6 billion renovation plan for the U.N. The U.N. building violates New York safety and fire codes; it is packed with asbestos, has no sprinkler system, and leaks about a quarter of its heating. Bolton’s position provoked “an America-versus-the-world standoff.” Ultimately, Bolton’s obstruction caused Louis Frederick Reuter, the official in charge of the renovation, to quit his post.

    • Bolton sought to undermine the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs). The MDGs aimed to convert rhetoric into hard numbers on such issues as reducing poverty and hunger, enrolling children in primary school, etc. Just days after he arrived in New York after a recess appointment, Bolton released over 700 edits to the draft document for the summit, excising all mentions of the MDGs. Bush and Rice later had to backtrack from Bolton, reassuring the U.N. of its commitment to the agreed upon goals.

    If you need more reasons as to why Bolton was a failure of epic proportions, read this:
    [url]http://www.thewashingtonnote.com/archives/Bolton%20White%20Paper%207-25-2006%20Final.htm[/url]



    From ThinkProgress (Hey if J5E thinks the NRO is a credible unbiased source, well so is TP)[/QUOTE]

    The unilateral approach of the Bush empire is a failure. The people finally realized this and voted against him. The US in now in a position to ressurect itself and I am confident we will.

    Again, It is my hope that "disappointment" is a word that Mr. Bush uses frequently over his last two years. It is clear that he frequently disappointed the nation with his policies.

  14. #14
    [QUOTE=Jetdawgg]The unilateral approach of the Bush empire is a failure. The people finally realized this and voted against him. The US in now in a position to ressurect itself and I am confident we will.

    Again, It is my hope that "disappointment" is a word that Mr. Bush uses frequently over his last two years. It is clear that he frequently disappointed the nation with his policies.[/QUOTE]

    There will be no more rubber stamping of his agenda. Everything he proposes will be finely and critically evaluated. He is getting what he deserves with his 6 years of failed foreign policy.

  15. #15
    Jets Insider VIP
    JetsInsider.com Legend
    Charter JI Member

    Join Date
    May 1999
    Posts
    31,408
    [QUOTE=Jetdawgg]The unilateral approach of the Bush empire is a failure. The people finally realized this and voted against him. The US in now in a position to ressurect itself and I am confident we will.

    Again, It is my hope that "disappointment" is a word that Mr. Bush uses frequently over his last two years. It is clear that he frequently disappointed the nation with his policies.[/QUOTE]


    [IMG]http://d.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/p/nm/20061107/2006_11_07t145306_375x450_us_usa_elections.jpg[/IMG]

  16. #16
    [QUOTE=kennyo7]There will be no more rubber stamping of his agenda. Everything he proposes will be finely and critically evaluated. He is getting what he deserves with his 6 years of failed foreign policy.[/QUOTE]

    It better be or else those guys will get tossed also. This was a good way to start the week for the newly elected Congress/Senate.

  17. #17
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Boston
    Posts
    11,692
    [QUOTE=kennyo7]There will be no more rubber stamping of his agenda. Everything he proposes will be finely and critically evaluated. He is getting what he deserves with his 6 years of failed foreign policy.[/QUOTE]

    Undermining the UN is EXACTLY what the US should be doing. The UN is worse than a joke, it's a completely corrupt organization. Hell, I am glad Bolton put the screws to them.

    The Dems wanted a scalp and they got one. This is all there is to it. Nothing more, nothing less. It's par for the course.

    Here's the easiest way to evaluate something:

    If Kofi Annan and his minions support it, it's not in our interest.
    Last edited by jets5ever; 12-05-2006 at 02:11 PM.

  18. #18
    [QUOTE=jets5ever]Undermining the UN is EXACTLY what the US should be doing. The UN is worse than a joke, it's a completely corrupt organization.[/QUOTE]

    I think undermining the UN is one thing. Going against the world is clearly another. The US in a bad position right now. Getting Bolton out was a good start for the new era in America.

    I don't always agree with the UN, but in this instance I think (as do the voter now) that the US was wrong to take these positions.

  19. #19
    [QUOTE=jets5ever]Undermining the UN is EXACTLY what the US should be doing. The UN is worse than a joke, it's a completely corrupt organization.[/QUOTE]

    My god, you have become such a joke. No wonder no one takes you seriously. Do you have any original thoughts, or do you just regurgitate everything you read on the NRO?

    While the UN may have plenty of faults, it still does alot of good worldwide. If you cant see that, then you are truly blind

  20. #20
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Boston
    Posts
    11,692
    [QUOTE=Jetdawgg]I think undermining the UN is one thing. Going against the world is clearly another. The US in a bad position right now. Getting Bolton out was a good start for the new era in America.

    I don't always agree with the UN, but in this instance I think (as do the voter now) that the US was wrong to take these positions.[/QUOTE]

    Please define "going against the world."

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Follow Us