The tagline on the radio news story was "The President Side-Steps Congress...The story... after these messages."
I waited through the subsequent ads for Geico insurance and Furman Chevrolet to hear how the President "side-stepped" Congress.
What I heard was that the President had, by recess appointment, installed John Bolton as the U.S. ambassador to the U.N.
My first thought was "Hey, Alright!! The President has sidestepped that hateful, obstructionist bunch of Democrats in Congress!!"
But then I realized that I had bought in to the slant (though not the way they wanted me to) that my local Media wanted to put onto this story.
Here is the story. The President , as is his right, (and responsibility,) has by Recess Appointment, installed his choice for U.S. ambassador to the U.N., John Bolton.
Did he side-step Congress though? I don't think so.
The way I see it, the President gave Congress five months to vote for or against John Bolton, but they didn't want to. They would rather filibuster and obstruct, and hold up progress.
So now they don't have to vote for him or against him. They had their chance to have their say.
I think that what the President did was absolutely appropriate, and within his rights. Ted Kennedy said that it was "devious." Well, that is not the first thing that Mr. Kennedy and I disagree on, nor will it be the last.
Now there will not be a vote on Mr. Bolton until after whoever gets voted out of this present congress in 2006 is gone, and whoever gets voted in is installed. January 2007. The President gets to have who he wants as ambassador to the U.N. for roughly eighteen months, no matter what the members of the Senate or the House of Representatives think about him. Or their constituancy.
Because Party Politics were more important to the Democrats than representing their voter base, they no longer have a say on this nomination. I hope everyone remembers this fact when it comes time to vote for Senate or House members, especially all of you Democrats out there.
Especially if John Bolton does something or says something that you disagree with.
It really looks to me like the Democrats in the Senate (especially), in a bid to exercise power that they DID NOT have, have thrown away the power that they DID have.
And in my opinion, in this case, it's good enough for them.
My sincere hope is that in this next round of elections, the Republicans will gain enough seats in the Senate so that the filibuster will not be an issue anymore.
And I think the chances are good.
I know one thing... I will NEVER miss a mid-term congressional election again.
EVER.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
8 comments:
What an interesting viewpoint! I didn't think of it that way at all. You are absolutely right! The Democrats did indeed screw themselves this time, and I think it won't be the last time, either. They havn't learned a thing since before FDR.
Well, their hatred for the President blinds them to the consequences of their actions. They did truly drop the ball this time, and I don't think that they even realize it.
I think that this is just another in a long line of defeats for the Democratic party.
Until they learn to let go of their hate, and come up with something positive to say or to stand for, the only path for them is down.
That's exactly right.
And if it is "devious" for the President to make recess appointments, then it was "devious" when Clinton did it as well. All 147 times.
If I was the President, I would appoint whomever I wanted for every open position between now and the time the recess is over.
I would take the issue completely away from them.
Which is why we're glad, over in the ER household, that Tug ain't el presidente! :-)
I think yer choking unnecessarily on some journalist's use of the term side-stepping, though. I don't think it suggests anything less than the fact that the president, as is his right, stepped around a Congress that couldn't get its s--- together.
There is plenty of other stuff in the Evil Media for you to complain about, Tug, without yer having to choke at a gnat like this.
Re: Bolton - President Bush again invoked a constitutional provision enabling him to bypass the Senate and install directly a nominee who had been blocked in the Senate. This time, he named Peter Flory to be an assistant secretary of defense.
This is a common practice with Presidents. Capt. Ted Kennedy of the SS Oldsmobile said the Bolton appointment was "devious", though a few years ago he was quoted as saying such appointments were within the bounds of a President. His brother used it often.
The old gas bag & the other Dems just want to get some PR points, not caring that they are hypocrites.
ER, if you thought that the subject of this post was media bias over the words "side-stepped", then you totally misunderstood what I was trying to say.
I am used to media bias. That was something I mentioned in passing.
What I meant to stress in this post was that the President is the President, and he has options other that waiting for the Deep-sea driver's permission to do what he wants to do.
I am not choking on gnats, I am celebrating progress in spite of rampant obstructionism.
OK, Tug. We're cool.
I just think that the president used the constitutional prerogative to sidestep a Senate that, actually, really, IS bedeviled by an arguably obstructionist set of angry, offended, pissed-off Democratic Senators.
The system IS working, despite what some of the more shrill Dems pretend.
But he sidestepped. Proudly.
Maybe we're agreeing on the propriety of the president's right to take the action he did, but quibbling over whether it was the right thing to do, and whether treating the word "sidestepping" as inacurrate.
Whatever. Congress threw up a block -- and the president used a perfectly legitimate play. Sort of a dipsy-doodle. Which is a sidestep. :-)
Now THERE'S the ER that I know and love...
Post a Comment