Skip to comments.Next shoe to fall in Bush WH: John Bolton as US-UN ambassador?
Posted on 11/08/2006 11:31:37 AM PST by West Coast Conservative
Next shoe to fall in Bush WH: John Bolton as US-UN ambassador?... Developing...
With the help of the media they will be portrayed as "darlings" as our wallets get thinner and our security dwindles, soldiers decide there are other ways to make a living. The country will not be able to wage another war even if the enemy is on our borders with missles. Unless it is a Dem Prez that is. Who else would dare?
So will the Republicans block their vote with a filibuster?
Perhaps you are right , perhaps the President didnt get enough fighting support to win. However dont you believe he could have fought a little bit on his own?
I know many Grass Roots Republicans who fought and fought hard, and kept wondering when he would defend himself.
What were people supposed to believe when the entore democrat machine attacked and he didnt ven make a move on defense. He could have called the Republicans to the White House and given them a pep talk at least. I blame a lot of people for not fighting for the President , however I believe most of the blame falls on his soft spoken , "I dont want to make anyone mad" demeanor.
The man has done nothing but fight since the day he entered office. He has been fighting for the long term interests of this country like no President in recent memory. We currently enjoy an incredibly strong economy while fighting a very aggressive war against a threat unseen since the days of the Third Reich. The President is doing his job as the Commander in Chief. That he doesn't pull a Clinton and shake his finger at the camera to rally the weaker members of his party says more for him than against him. There is a difference between fighting and yelling. We are led by a fighter. Apparently, some (not necessarily you) would rather have a cheerleader.
Well...that's my method, and sometimes the message STILL gets murky. LOL.
If a majority of the American people are lending aid and comfort to our enemies, then they're not our enemies any more. You may not like it, the president may not like it, and the think tanks may not like it. but it is by definition impossible for the American people as a whole to betray the country because THEY ARE THE COUNTRY.
Sir, with all due respect...he is been fighting his heart out. He has been fighting Islamic terrorists, the media, us, democrats and his own team in congress and the Senate, not to mention idiotic investigations and entrenched bureaucracies like the CIA.
Just how much do you expect him to do?
Just like the case with Bolton, he could only be a recess appointment. The Dems would never confirm.
The president has to pump up Americans along with the troops. You cannot give a mixed message and have the everyday guy understand it, If you are fighting Islamic fascism, you cannot say they are good guys, Muslims are peaceful, and and make any sense as to why you are fighting them. He never has understood jihad, until too late. His idea is noble, but he hasn't dealt with the threat with absolute clarity. He should have approached it from a world wide jihad stance and screwed political correctness. This is why he has failed. We will not win this until we do address jihad.
They wish to kill Americans. They have been actively making war on America and Americans since 1979. They are our enemies, no matter how much the treasonous voting bloc in America wishes to pretend that they aren't.
After the Islamofascists successfully use a nuclear weapon against an American city, we will need to hunt down and execute every registered Democrat--or recently reregistered ex-Democrat--we can find before we can fight the war we will need to fight.
Not true. Senate rarely doesn't confirm one of its own, at least relative to certain positions. There is no way Rick could get confirmed for a USSC justice, for example, but clearly he could be confirmed as UN Ambassador.
That said, we can still get Bolten confirmed during the Lame Duck session.
It hasn't got anything to do with being smart IMO. It's trusting the wrong people. I know people, I have family that believe everything they hear on "the news" The media, campaigned hard and they won last night.
I haven't noticed him marching much the last 6 years. I doubt that he is worried about impeachment.
That's because they know how to take advantage of being the majority party. Unlike the Retarded Party which has no idea what it means to be in the majority. They are about to get a very sobering lesson...as are all of us. My contempt for the millions of short-sighted dem voters, and stay at home "conservatives" in this country could not be stronger.
I doubt that. Had Rumsfeld stayed, he would have spent the next two years planted in a witness chair. I like Rummy but this is a good cut-your-losses move.
On the broader agenda, we've been gridlocked for two years and we'll be gridlocked for the next two. I hate to say it, but we're dead in the water. The 2008 campaign started today. Let's see what Bush does on the next SC appointment.
You have put into words what many of us are thinking. Now is not the time to point fingers.
Regroup and start working for 2008!
""If he did, it would have been Rove who was gone!
Oh, the day's not over yet."
The only ones who care about Rove are the demented, traitorous moonbats; the DUmmie land types.
The uninformed voter (basically 99% of the population) probably has no idea who the hell Rove is. The only thing they see is Rumsfeld's picture on TV while some talking head is talking about what how bad and evil he is.
I doubt that the average voter would even recognize the name Rove.
Agreed. The same folks who waved the white flag of surrender and thought they'd teach the country a lesson by allowing the liberal enemy to take control have NO position to attack anyone for being weak. They (and we) are reaping what they sowed. And it sucks.
I'm an American and a troop. He pumps me up. But then, I don't demand to have my way on every issue. Maybe that's because I am a troop.
"If you are fighting Islamic fascism, you cannot say they are good guys"
When has the President EVER said Islamic fascists were good guys? I'm a big right winger, but I don't think right wing fascists are good guys.
"He never has understood jihad, until too late."
Actually, your previous statements indicate it is YOU who doesn't understand the war on jihad. This is going to come as a real shock to many, but the leading military warriors right now are advocating a strategy of victory through decreasing firepower. They want to pinpoint and destroy the sources that create jihadists because trying to kill all the jihadists is the equivalent of swatting mosquitoes with a baseball bat. Now, these military warriors have been fighting these jihadists in the trenches for years. They KNOW what they are talking about. And their approach is becoming very similar to what you claim Bush's is.
"This is why he has failed."
First of all, he hasn't failed. We are winning. But our greatest weak point is the very fickle and weak American public. We are truly a Burger King population. We want it our way and we want it our way now. The fact of the matter is, anything really worth having takes a lot of time and effort to achieve. Apparently, most Americans cannot understand that.
Oh yes buddy, I understand it, my son is in the military. You can't have it both ways. This is the nature of this struggle. I am speaking of how a lot of Americans that voted for the Dems see it and what the media has portrayed. I do not SEE it that way. These people see it that the enemy is not really defined. Some of them are okay and some are not. Confusing to the average Joe. I like Bush as a man, I know he means well, but he needed to sell it to those who are out there who are confused as to the threat. I Want Us to win and I support all you guys. The Dems and the left do not. They have obviously sold their bill of wares to the people. I never said they are good guys, but Bush does go to Cair stuff and tells them they are good Americans. To me they are not, to alot of us they are not. Is it possible that we can quit telling them that.? NO, BUSH HAS NOT TOLD ISLAMIC FASCISTS THEY ARE GOOD GUYS, BUT HE HAS NOT TOLD cair THAT WE AIN'T PUTTIN'UP WITH YOUR SHIT EITHER. Win the jihad and we win no matter what it takes.
i nominate Mr. Rogers, he will wow them with his soft demeanor and sweaters. besides, as Pelosi said 'the children would be in charge'.
Why????!!!! Bush might as well resign and ask Pelosi to become Der Furher. Bolton should stay right where he is and do just what he does best.
I just wish he had a little bit of Teddy Roosevelt in him and could use his Presidency as a bully pulpit. Right now thats about all he has left of it.
That's bs. What he has left are people like you and me who are willing to stand up and give the guy some loud unqualified support. He has a LOT of TR in him. The question is, do we have any TR in US! Are we going to demand the press give him a fair shake, to allow him to use the bully pulpit...or are we going to shrug our shoulders and write it off to bad communication on the President's part? Do we have his back? Help him with the things he needs help with? Look for places to get the message out?
I am going to say this over and over loud and clear: At this point we have so weakened him, that YOU (and I) are PERSONALLY deciding the fate of millions of good and decent people here and in Iraq. Will we give them a shot no matter how tough that is, or will we wimp out and blame other people for "mismanaging" the war?
It's time we take this thing personally and not stand around with our fingers up our noses waiting for somebody else to make this right. This is work, this is incremental, this is painful, this is HARD. Are YOU up for it, or do you plan to turn around and hide under your bed until the adults take care of it for youassuming of course that you don't shoot them from your "safe and secure" vantage point under the bed because of a propensity to panic.
This is YOUR war, this is YOUR president. He is a man with strengths and weaknesses, which means we step up where he is weak, and stand back were he is strong.
We constantly expound about expecting that of the left, and yet somehow do not expect it from ourselves. Stunning, really.
Normally yes, but the Dems smell blood in the water.
...and don't forget "stupid". A great line from Men In Black..
"the person is smart..
the people are stupid".
That having been said, there's a gigantic stink about this whole affair. It doesn't make sense and it isn't logical, at least not to me.
I would really like to know the facts about which groups voted in which directions. I'm still not buying the "stay at home" scenario until I see the facts.
Not to worry though, we'll get over this hiccup. George W. Bush is a true leader and even he may feel let down and disappointed but I predict he's been misunderestimated...once again.
Forgive me for being a fatalist, but does anyone see the Second Amendment going the way of the dodo in the next 2 years? With Bolton out, the UN becomes a fertile ground for anti-gunners (IMHO), and anti-gun bills are certainly languishing in Congressional commissions that would now be passed into chambers for a vote, does W have the voting record to stand up for the Constitution?
With Bolton's possible exit, I already hear the whispers of IANSA and their ilk with plans to bring their global gun grab to the floor of the UN again. With a fickle majority in Congress, will the moderate Democrats, a la Joe Lieberman, see the importance of this issue, or should I start digging my "well oiled garden" now?
As a gun owner, and a proud one at that, I fear the removal of my ability to protect myself, the national network of cameras on every corner akin to present-day Chicago, and the rise in crime that will consistently be blamed on the sloth and degradation of society. Will we become the next Britain, or am I being completely delusional and hopeless for absolutely nothing? I'm not looking to be flamed, I really want to know if I have as much to worry about as the NRA tells me I do.
Incidentally, here in FL, they (NRA) asked that we vote Yes on Amendment 3 which brought the notion of "Majority" from 51% to 60% for Constitutional amendments. I voted No, yet the people of the great state of Florida said otherwise. I'm questioning the intent of the NRA now.
I'm just a young man... will the FRelders speak to me and wax nostalgic enough to sathe my fears, albeit temporarily?
They're in the majority. What are ya gonna do? Democracy is about the majority having its way. Are you against democracy?
If "poor" J.D. complained a while back he most assuredly knew what was coming.... Running on your competition's issues is not a new tactic. The Republicans lost this election...even the party core is admitting that....I don't blame the transparent liberal media either. I blame those of us who refused to call out the mistakes that were being made and force changes before the disaster. Regardless of the reading of the bones the fact remains that we had better get engaged on '08 quickly or we will face a (more) Democratic WH and a solid Democratic congress. The GOP has failed us big time and it is time to take names and kick b#tt. We need a conservative party and we can win if we hold to the core principles. If we can't find an articulate conservative candidate, we will lose in '08. Some will say McCain is the bridge builder that can win....I don't buy that but in that event he would be no better than Bush, possibly worse and could not draw enough policy distinction to bring back a Republican congressional majority...after all he is a RINO.
I wonder if Drudge is scanning FR. I posted this earlier way before Drudge made his post on his website (didn't see anyone else on FR saying the same thing earlier besides me, however, not wanting to be egotistical, perhaps I missed something):
Posted by flaglady47
On News/Activism 11/09/2006 2:35:27 AM PST · 7 of 7
The next "victim" of our losing the mid-term election to the Dems will be John Bolton. They will never approve him for continuing to be the U.N. Ambassador. Kiss him goodbye. And the Dems won't approve a replacement for him unless it is a U.N. *ss kissing appeaser that Bush nominates.
Democracy is four wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for supper.
Are you against democracy?
Yes. This was, once upon a time, a republic.
We have failed to keep it.
Your relatives not withstanding, we lost on the issues. Until we acknowledge that and change our positions we will continue to lose. Blaming the media is not a winning strategy. Clearly the war in IRAQ has gone on too long...I'm for winning (still not convinced about how we got there) but this has been moving far too slowly and that is the problem...results gets votes...Failure to enforce a strong immigration policy is a major vote loser for the GOP. Bush's position is irrational and the irony and agony is by losing he has won the ability to press his irrational agenda on illegal amnesty. Failing to make Judicial appointments a campaign issue hurt us in the Senate, failure to follow through on Social Security reform, and on and on...The loss is no way a media caused event...as Pogo said "We has met the enemy and he is US." It is us we have to fix not the press; fixing the press in this country is not possible.
"Democracy is four wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for supper.
Are you against democracy?
Yes. This was, once upon a time, a republic.
We have failed to keep it."
Dead on. I want my Republic back. It's missing in action.
Which explains why those who did got thrown out unless they were in hypersafe gerrymandered districts.
It is us we have to fix
Well, that isn't going to happen. For the sake of this or that favored position, we have just lost the war on terror and stabbed our troops in the back for the second time in a generation. Yes, I dare call it treason.
I agree about the issues but we lost on how people were told things were going.
I remember seeing a list of judges that had not been approved (IIRC they hadn't even gone through committee) that Frist gave to the Pres. The Pubbies either need to push those through quickly or the Pres ought to recess appoint all of them!
If the Senate doesn't push Bolton through, I agree with whomever said that the Pres ought to make Bolton an ass't UN Ambassador or another position that doesn't need to be approved. Chafee owes the Pres and Pubbies BIG time for all the $$s they put in his campaign and their support - he better get on the bandwagon now and help get some appointments through (of course, I'm not counting on him for anything or Specter for the judges).
The RATs won't waste their time when there are bigger fish to fry (Cheney then Bush).
This is my biggest fear. They will go after Cheney first. They already have the ground work done-Haliburton,etc. Bush is going to run out of alligator food pretty fast. And I say this as a Bush admirer.
They saw it clearly and elected Democrats. And you're busily making excuses for them doing so.
I had baggies full of s*** thrown at me when I got home from Vietnam. Did you? Or were you one of the guys throwing the baggies?
I saw my country betray the sacrifices of my brothers once before. I'm seeing them do it again. The only comfort I have is that, unlike 1975, the spiteful, fickle, ungrateful traitorous bastards who elected Democrats will reap what they have chosen to sow. "My fellow Americans" can kiss my a$$. My family will not spend one more drop of our blood in their defense. Getting stabbed in the back does not improve the second time around.
They cast the votes. The GOP leadership didn't hold a gun to their heads and order them to vote Democrat. Neither did the Democrats.
The voters can take all of the blame on this one.
Right blame the messenger and ignore the message.....terrific.
my thought is that we need a better system. our republic started out fine, with limits on the power of government. representatives didn't have the kind of power and control that they now do, so the republic's life wasn't dependent on the whims of the 'common herd'.
now, the constitution, so amended and disregarded (especially by the 'commerce clause') that it means almost nothing, and representatives mean everything. it should mean everything and the reps near nothing.
a new system i'm thinking about is a constitutional republic where the only control and power the reps have is to spend/save a fixed % of revenue. the revenue is from a flat tax. the rest of the revenue is spent also by fixed percentages to roads, military, etc.
"Sort of General Sherman-ish in a bizarro-world sort of way"
LOL. It kind of reminds me of Saddam's scorched earth policy after Bush-I pushed the Iraqis out of Kuwait.