dems' opinion of john bolton?

Question

john bolton was pretty active in the UN and stood against enemy interests. why wont the democratic congress give him another hearing for nomination? i guess he hates those who hate america too much.

wineboy, the UN deserves to be mocked

Answer 1

Interesting way to take your ridiculous viewpoint and shove it down people's throats.

But let me answer your question with a question of my own. John Bolton has nothing but disdain for the United Nations. Before he was sent up to NY (btw, a request made by Condi Rice because Bolton was such an incompetent boob, she wanted him out of the State Department) he did nothing but mock the UN. So, that being the case, why would he even want to be ambassador to the UN? Would you date someone you hated or live in a town you despised?

Answer 2

John Bolton stands up for the USA at the UN.
Democrats do not like that.
Democrats want the UN to push America around because Democrats just don't like America.
Democrats are going to get Bolton out, and put an Ameican Hater in.

Answer 3

The Democrats believe that the President doesn't have the right to choose his own staff. President Bush chose Bolton to be Ambassador to the UN and the land swindler from Nevada, Dirty Harry Reid and the Honorable hairplugs Joe Biden have said that they will not allow Bolton's confirmation to come before the full Senate. It's just more dirty politics by Dirty Harry and Company.

Skippy needs to change his name to dippy.

Answer 4

properly, battling to your u . s . a . interior the UN is kinda like copulating for abstinence. a diplomat is assume to be diplomatic and Bolton isn't purely no longer diplomatic he's intentionally abrasive. properly, it is hassle-free to assume any US Ambassador despatched to the UN to place American hobbies especially others. even nonetheless, it is hassle-free to additionally assume a willingness to compromise for the cast of the entire international. u.s. isn't an island unto herself. tch! what u . s . a . denies the lifestyles of terrorism? and while flexibility is needed while entering settlement with different international leaders it is not talked approximately as "bowing". that's talked approximately as international kin and international kin is often extra low-priced in blood, money and sources injury than conflict. the international is getting too small for Yeehaw Cowboy Shoot Em Up mentalities.

Answer 5

Its not at all hard to imagine that a better UN represenative could be found. One who actually respects the institution, would be a good place to start. It would also help to find an envoy capable of presenting US intrests to the UN without being a divisive and widely hated figure, like Bolton.

It is clearly in our intrests to find a better UN Ambassador. One who treats his job as an opportunity to further our agenda of world democracy, rather than someone who just uses the UN as a mouthpiece for Bush to further alienate the rest of the world.

Answer 6

i like his no none sense approach to these do nothing officials at the UN i think they should approve him again .and I'm a independent who vote demarcate

Answer 7

He doesn't deserve to be in the UN! Your own party doesn't want him!!

"A staunch backer of the Nicaraguan contras, Bolton played a key role in trying to undermine efforts by Sen. John Kerry to investigate drug smuggling and gunrunning by the contras, according to Nation columnist David Corn, and was later put in charge of stonewalling Congressional efforts to obtain Justice Department documents and interview Meese's deputies about their role in the Iran-Contra scandal."
Such views set him apart not only from the Democrats but also from the Bush, Sr. administration. When Senator John Kerry (D-MA) raised the Taiwan issue at Foreign Relations Committee confirmation hearings last month, Bolton dissembled, "It's not my function to advocate diplomatic recognition for Taiwan and it would be inappropriate for me to do so."

Yet on the AEI website, Bolton's views remain clearly spelled out. He writes that "diplomatic recognition of Taiwan would be just the kind of demonstration of U.S. leadership that the region needs and that many of its people hope for? The notion that China would actually respond with force is a fantasy, albeit one the Communist leaders welcome and encourage in the West."

And, according to the Washington Post (April 9, 2001), Bolton is motivated by more than his ultra-rightwing ideology. He's also been on the payroll of the Taiwan government. According to the Post, over a period of three years in the 1990s and at the time he promoting diplomatic recognition of Taiwan before various congressional committees, Bolton was paid a total of $30,000 by the government of Taiwan for "research papers on UN membership issues involving Taiwan." Bolton has denied that his testimony was in any way tied to the fee paid by the Taiwanese.

A Yale-educated lawyer, Bolton has held a variety of posts in both the Reagan and Bush Sr. administrations at State, Justice and USAID. Besides his tenure at the pro-business AEI, Bolton was a senior fellow at the equally right-wing Manhattan Institute in 1993.

Bolton's hardline and right-wing credentials were affirmed in 1999 when he signed a statement prepared by the Project for the New American Century criticizing the Clinton administration for its failure to offer unequivocal support of Taiwan. The statement, signed by other neoconservative and right-wing luminaries such as William Kristol, William Buckley, Paul Weyrich, James Woolsey, Paul Wolfowitiz, William Bennett, and Elliott Abrams, called for a "state-to-state" relationship with Taiwan.

Additional evidence of Bolton's extreme, take-no-prisoners worldview is not difficult to find. He is a prolific writer and speaker.

In an article for the right-wing Weekly Standard (10/4/99) entitled "Kofi Annan's UN Power Grab," Bolton excoriates the UN Secretary General for trying to limit warfare and to establish the supremacy of UN forces. In Bolton's words, "If the United States allows that claim to go unchallenged, its discretion in using force to advance its national interests is likely to be inhibited in the future."

On U.S. arrears to the UN, Bolton proclaimed, "[M]any Republicans in Congress--and perhaps a majority--not only do not care about losing the General Assembly vote but actually see it as a 'make my day' outcome. Indeed, once the vote is lost... this will simply provide further evidence to may why nothing more should be paid to the UN system." Not surprisingly, Bolton is also a hard-line opponent to U.S. peacekeeping missions, whether under the UN or unilaterally. When George W. Bush denounced the use of the military for so-called "nation building," he was repeating Bolton's criticism of the Clinton administration's efforts in Somalia and elsewhere. Nonetheless, Bolton did favor the bombing of Serbia--which was presumably not nation building, nor was it pursued under UN auspices. On North Korea, Bolton has declared that the U.S. should make "it clear to the North that we are indifferent to whether we ever have 'normal' diplomatic relations with it, and that achieving that goal is entirely in their interests, not ours."

After the Senate voted not to ratify the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty (CTBT), Bolton declared categorically, "CTBT is dead." Here he's at odds with much of the American public. Public opinion polls consistently show that more nearly 80% of Americans support a ban on all underground tests.

Bolton's reputation has the advance man for the right wing has continued to grow during his tenure in the George W. administration. Although his office has no purview over human rights or international justice issues, he was the one to sign the letter to Kofi Annan in May 2002 renouncing any role for the U.S. in the International Criminal Court. Bolton has been a staunch advocate of the administration's revival of the "Star Wars" missile defense system, and its rejection of the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty.

A speech by Bolton at the Heritage Foundation, also in early May 2002, signaled that the administration may be targeting Cuba in its war on terrorism. His "Beyond the Axis of Evil" speech claimed, without any evidence, that Cuba was developing biological weapons and sharing its expertise with other U.S. enemies.

He as far right as you can get!

Answer 8

You are correct, he will not kiss up to the terrorist nations and that is against the policy of the Democrats.

Answer 9

Well they are democrats. Just remember: whats good for USA is bad for dems, what is bad for USA is good for dems.

They have zero brains.