Be-Think [Please visit BeThink.org]

BOLTON. CONDIE, WILL THE OBSTRUCTIONIST BE THE VICTOR? ©

From the beginning, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice has pushed for the passage. She wanted John R. Bolton to reign supreme at the United Nations. Secretary Rice has her reasons; she does not want Mr. Bolton to serve in the position that he covets, Deputy Secretary of State. In that post, he would be too close to her.

In her former position as National Security Advisor, Miss Rice experienced the rancor of John Bolton. She knows that she does not want an intimate working relationship with a man such as he. She acknowledges that others feel the same. Nonetheless, she is loyal to her President. She understands his position. Mr. Bolton helped the President get into office in 2000 and the Administration feels a need to return the favor. Rice can accept this. Yet, she wants to ensure that while John Bolton is repaid, and reimbursed well, it will not affect her directly.

Therefore, the Secretary of State does all that she can to ensure his appointment. She routinely calls Senators; she reassures them. Miss Rice is known to have said, “We think that we can control him. If he strays from the reservation, he's out.”

Secretary Rice has made promises. During the course of the Bolton, hearings Senator Joseph Biden [Democrat-Delaware], member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, requested the full Bolton record. Biden, said a full accounting of Bolton’s service is necessary; it will facilitate the approval process. Bolton once served as Under-Secretary of State, Arms Control and International Security. Therefore, the appeal was made to the State Department. Condoleezza Rice now heads this office.

Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice assured the senator, the Department would gladly provide the Bolton papers. Miss Rice promised to cooperate. She stated, "We have every desire to have the committee have the information that it needs.” Condie declared, the State Department will respond "as rapidly as possible.” Yet, they have not. They have not produced the documents requested. While Condie acknowledges her pledge, she asserts that she did not say when the documents would be delivered and so we wait. The Senate waits, the nation waits, and John Bolton’s appointment moves on, though slowly.

It is hindered. The Foreign Relations Committee sent the nomination on to the full Senate without a recommendation. Still the papers did not come. Miss Rice was and is not forthcoming. She offers no reasons for the delay.

The vote is again postponed. For now, we are standing still, some holding their breath. One wonders, will Secretary Rice get her way, will the President get his.

Ultimately, might Mr. Bush dare to do as he does? President Bush is authorized to appoint Mr. Bolton to the position of United Nations Representative temporarily. If appointed, Bolton would serve for one full year. The possibly is frightening, though a reality. Citizens and Senators alike ask, with a history of unilateral actions, will the President attack aggressively, this time striking at the Senate and the United Nations? Will we all feel the blows?

Please visit the thoughts of Steve Soto, The Left Coaster, Is Bush Forcing A Nuclear Option On Bolton?

Nico, at ThinkProgress.org shares an interesting perspective on the Bolton appointment.
Sen. Roberts: Bolton Recess Appointment Would ‘Weaken the United States’

PUBLICLY RICE SUPPORTS BOLTON. YET, PRIVATELY? ©

President Bush nominated John R. Bolton for the office of United Nations Ambassador. There is much public support for Mr. Bolton; however, there are those on both sides of the aisle that do not believe that he would serve this nation well. Privately, there are questions and concerns. However, the President stands strong; he wants the former Under Secretary of State to represent our country. The President is very vocal in his support of Bolton. He is certain that he made the “right” choice and “Right” it is. Though many express qualms; the president continues to persevere.

There are those that speak softly of their reservations; among them is Republican, Senator George V. Voinovich of Ohio. After hearing testimony from people that voluntarily came forward to testify against this nominee, twenty of them staunch republicans, Voinovich publicly voiced his concerns. The hearings were postponed; the vote to approve was delayed. Karl Rove, the “architect” and the president's most powerful political adviser stepped in; he called Mr. Voinovich to stress the need for unity. Chief of staff, Andrew H. Card Jr., chimed in as well. Each reminded the Senator that publicly support must appear solid.

Condoleezza Rice sings the party line; she also supports the appointment of this nominee with resolve. She has reason. The reason, she does not want Mr. Bolton to serve as deputy Secretary of State! Miss Rice acknowledges that John would prefer a position in the State Department; however, she is certain that she does not want to work with Mr. Bolton directly. She knows that Bolton helped the President to get into office in 2000 and that the Administration feels a need to return the favor. Condie understands the Administration’s belief; John “deserves something.” Nonetheless, she cannot bring herself to work closely with this man. Therefore, she offers her outspoken support to the nominee.

When the President first nominated Bolton to serve as United Nations Ambassador, Republicans and Democrats alike wondered whether Rice influenced the choice. It is well known that that Rice wanted Bolton in a position where his contribution to policy would be limited. She felt certain that Bolton needed to be controlled; he needed to be given instructions and be forced to follow these. She also believed that Bolton was a loose cannon. Is it possible that Secretary of State Rice persuaded the President to appoint John R. Bolton to the United Nations to avoid having him in the State Department?

It is; after all, she could easily make the case. “Bolton’s critical stance toward the United Nations dovetailed perfectly with the administration's own thinking.” If she pressed her points well, she would be free; Condie would not be burdened with a closer confluence. Hence, Miss Rice publicly announced her support for the appointment. She made calls to members of congress, Democrats and Republicans. She asked them to endorse the nominee. She requested confirmation and reassured them. She emphasized that Bolton would be “strictly scripted by Washington.”

Three Senators confirm that Miss Rice spoke with them, stating, “We think that we can control him. If he strays from the reservation, he's out.” Senator Lincoln Chafee (R-Rhode Island) said Rice "was clear that he was going to work for her." The Los Angeles Times reports that a senior State Department official said that he could not comment on Rice's private conversations, however, he did offer this: “The secretary has made clear she proposed John and she wanted John for the job.” Of course she did, she did not and does not want an intimate working relationship with a man such as Mr. Bolton.

Therefore, Secretary Rice pushes the appointment. The man that calls her “part of the family,” does as well. Miss Rice and Mr. Bush are working on this mission together. They each are adamant; they state John Bolton is a team player. Is he? Let us look at the record, his history of plays and ploys.

Within the Bush camp and from the first there was a known riff between the neo-conservatives such as Vice President Dick Cheney and the more moderate republicans such as Secretary of State Colin Powell. It has long been believed that Powell was given his Cabinet position because he had the support of the “people;” however, he was never a party favorite. He was not among the religious or reactionary “rights.” Therefore, he was considered a problem before he began his service.

It is said that hawkish Vice President Dick Cheney saw the predicament and took action; he sent John R. Bolton onto the scene. Those in the State Department believe that Bolton was placed as an adversary, his assignment: obstruct the efforts of the more restrained Secretary of State Colin Powell. Bolton did! Bolton was being a team player; the question is which team was he on. Was he working for team USA, or for team Neo-Con? Was he working for either team, neither team, or was he merely teaming his interests with individuals whose beliefs parallel his own?

Possibly the Bolton biography will provide a greater perspective. Bolton, a lifelong conservative, was a student organizer for the father of true neo-conservatives, Barry Goldwater. He worked diligently on the Goldwater presidential campaign. Mr. Bolton was the protégé of extreme conservative, former Senator Jesse Helms [Republican- North Carolina]. He served under both Reagan and George H.W. Bush. Bolton, like G.W. and his Dad, is a graduate of Yale University. Mr. Bolton studied law and it was in this capacity that John R. Bolton endeared himself to Bush 43. As a well-trained attorney and as a self-proclaimed life-long combatant, he was able to fight for the President in the 2000 Florida election recount. Bolton helped the president to win his first national victory.

Though Bolton has allied himself with Neo-conservatives, those that know him said that he is actually an advocate of “America” first. He believes the interests of the United States are foremost. Bolton has no desire to protect, preserve, or prolong international relations. The “United Nations,” for Mr. Bolton is an oxymoron; his only allegiance is to his country, his beliefs, and his preferred policies, accurately assessed or not.

According to MSNBC and Newsweek, as an envoy Mr. Bolton is “alleged to have misused or hyped flawed intelligence against Syria, China, and Iran.” He has hidden expert information and threatened subordinates. He has belittled intelligent agents for not doing as he deems is best. He has attempted to fire experts when they have been unwilling to supply [the false] data that would benefit his cause. His cause, America above all others; other countries be damned.

In July 2003, while in Seoul Korea, just before engaging in crucial six-nation talks, Undersecretary of State Bolton gave a speech. In this talk, Bolton denounced North Korea calling it a "hellish nightmare." In referring to its leader, Kim Jong-il, he pronounced him a "tyrannical dictator.” This action was considered characteristically “undiplomatic;” the timing unbelievable. Superiors at the State Department felt forced to have Bolton return home. Asking him to negotiate with those that he demeaned, debased, and degraded would not be wise or politically correct.

Months later, in November 2003, Bolton was responsible for the stalled agreements with Iran. Our ally, Britain was working with us in an attempt to end nuclear proliferation in the country. Talks were not going well. British Foreign Secretary Jack Straw, noted that Bolton “was making it impossible to reach allied agreement on Iran's nuclear program” Straw, complained to then Secretary of State Colin Powell. He stated that Bolton was a hindrance and not a help, his language was harsh, his stance inflexible. Colin Powell realized that negotiations were at a standstill. Powell searched for answers. He asked a state department aide to speak to experts from Bolton’s own Nonproliferation group. He hoped to determine the truer estimations for what was and what could be.

The aide discovered that Bolton had been withholding information and was choosing to use language that distorted the nonproliferation experts’ own conclusions. The aide passed this information on to then Secretary of State Powell and finally, with accurate facts in hand, the Secretary was able to resolve the nonproliferation issue. The talks succeeded; however, with no thanks to Bolton.

More recently, it was discovered that these experts told the aide that they feared retaliation from Bolton. These State Department officials said that they were frightened of the man; his erratic behavior was stifling. The aide, when interviewed revealed that that the experts were "adamant that we not let Bolton know we had talked to them.”

In December 2003, the United States and Britain were working together; they were attempting to achieve a nonproliferation agreement with Libya. They tried to force Libya to surrender its nuclear program. However, Bolton undermined the process here as well. In fact, Newsweek reported that the negotiations “succeeded only after British officials "at the highest level" persuaded the White House to keep Bolton off the negotiating team.”

There is so much more that gives Miss Rice pause. Bolton’s interactions with associates is noteworthy; and not for the good. Yet, there is the party position. This was well stated by Republican Senator Norm Coleman while speaking on Public Broadcasting’s, Nightly News-hour. Senator Coleman stated, “This is about the president's choice of a person . . . the president has said that we need to reform the U.N. He's chosen someone who is blunt, who is tough; that's needed in these times.” Admittedly, Coleman acknowledges, “there is some division, but I do believe the president will be able to pick the person he believes is most suited to the difficult task of U.N. reform.” Bolton was chosen to do as he does best, bully.

It might be said that in the past Bolton did as he was hired to do; he obstructed and intimidated. It might also be mused that if one does as he is hired to do, then he is, in fact, a “team player.” We might also consider that Bolton did not work in collaboration with Britain, with Powell, or with his own “team” of experts, and that the word “team” is loosely defined for a man such as Bolton. What is well defined and without doubt, Condoleezza Rice, though publicly supportive of Mr. Bolton, does not wish to be on the same team, or at least not in the same dugout with this man, John R. Bolton, and so the beat goes on!

For other thoughts on Bolton, please visit . . .
LeftCoaster, “Win Some, Lose Some”
Daily Kos, "Last Gasp for Moderate Republicans?" by Hunter.
Update; a recent report from The American Prospect, "The President's Man" by By Terence Samuel

BOLTON, BOLT-HIM, HER, THEM, AND NOW ME? ©

I believe in Karma; or in the axiom “What you do unto others will be done unto you.”

John Bolton righteously chose and chooses to continually demean, dismiss, and diminish others publicly. He did the same towards symbols, such as the United Nations, a symbol of global peace and unity. He is on record as saying, “The Secretariat Building in New York has 38 stories. If you lost 10 stories, today it wouldn't make a bit of difference.” Nonetheless, President George W. Bush nominated Mr. Bolton to serve as our Ambassador to the United Nations. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice strongly supports this choice; each speaks of his glorious qualifications. Bolton, himself, says that he is looking forward to the job.

Now, we await his approval. Some thought him a shoe-in. Yet, as the Senate Foreign Relations Committee assesses the man, they discover there is more to consider than the certificates that Mr. Bolton has earned.

Many of the man’s associates have voluntarily come forward to oppose this appointment. Numerous Bolton contacts have expressed, under oath, that they have witnessed Mr. Bolton’s abrasive demeanor. They have often observed or experienced this first hand.

Apparently, Bolton is well known for wishing to remove persons from their posts if they dare disagree with him. He has wanted to and worked to “bolt” many colleagues and subordinates from important positions, from their professions, and from his presence. Now, the tide has turned. The time is his! Now, there is talk of “bolting” him. Several members of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee are seriously considering voting against his appointment.

Those questioning the wisdom of this appointment are not only Democrats; some are Republicans. Members from each party have asked for a delay in the vote. According to The New York Times Ohio Republican Senator George Voinovich stated, “I don't feel comfortable voting today.” His offered that concerns were not political; he did not necessarily object to the opinionated philosophies of John R. Bolton. Voinovich expressed his concern for the “temperament” of the man.

Fellow Republican Senators Chafee and Hagel of Nebraska also voiced their reservations. Hagel was cautious. He offered his reluctance, stating that he may not support Bolton's nomination if it moves to the full Senate for a confirmation vote.

May I remind Bolton, that what we do unto others will ultimately be done unto us. Every moment is important, as is every entity. When you choose to be cruel to others, others will bring what may feel as cruelty into your own life.