Conservatives Vent Frustration, Sorrow Over Bolton's Resignation
by Jim Brown, Chad Groening, and Jenni Parker
December 8, 2006
(AgapePress) - - A Republican senator says United Nations Ambassador John Bolton will be sorely missed when he leaves his post. President Bush installed Bolton temporarily through a recess appointment in August of 2005; but his confirmation has been blocked by Democrats in the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and liberal Republicans like Lincoln Chafee of Rhode Island.President Bush reluctantly accepted Bolton's resignation this past Monday, saying, "I'm not happy about it." Neither is South Carolina Senator Lindsey Graham, who claims the recess appointee "was one of the best ambassadors the United States has ever had to the United Nations."
Bolton "was tough, he was good at building coalitions, and he urged the body to reform itself," Graham says. And the United Nations needs to reform itself, he asserts, "in terms of the way it does business and the stances it takes against rogue regimes."
As the U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations, Bolton succeeded in convincing the U.N. Security Council to impose sanctions against North Korea over its nuclear weapons program. The South Carolina Republican feels that was just one of the many important things Bolton accomplished while serving in the international body and believes the diplomat's absence from the U.N. will be keenly felt.
"He will truly be missed," Graham laments, adding that Ambassador Bolton "was treated poorly" by Democrats in the Senate. "I regret very much that he will no longer serve as U.N. ambassador," the senator says. "I thought he did an outstanding job, and he will truly be missed."
Author Tom Kilgannon of the Freedom Alliance, a staunch critic of the United Nations, agrees. He says Bolton was one of the most effective U.N. ambassadors America has ever had and believes President Bush should have done more to secure his confirmation.
Bolton "has operated in a climate that is viciously anti-American, and he has performed in a stellar way," Kilgannon contends. "And therefore," he says, "I think the administration should have said, 'If you don't approve Bolton, [the President is] not going to approve funding for the United Nations -- it's as simple as that.'"
The Bush staff's failure to play hard ball over Bolton's confirmation was a huge mistake, the Freedom Alliance spokesman suggests. "I think this is yet again another bungled opportunity by the administration," he says. "I think they could have gone to the Congress very aggressively before the elections and really pushed for the nomination."
It has been suggested that Bolton's direct style infuriated Democrats and even some moderate Republicans, who responded by allowing his confirmation to be held up for more than a year. Nevertheless, Kilgannon believes if President Bush had acted before the elections, he could have effectively used the threat of a veto of U.N. funding to get his appointee approved.
Does Bolton's Departure Foreshadow Future Democrat Blockades?
Now, with the Democrats taking control of Congress next year, Bolton's supporters see virtually no chance for his confirmation. And some fear this Bush appointee's resignation may be only the tip of the iceberg, as liberal lawmakers move to block other conservatives' confirmations.
Tom Minnery, Focus on the Family's Senior Vice President of Government and Public Policy, issued a statement earlier this week, noting his organization's deep sadness over the fact that the President and the nation have lost the services of John Bolton. Minnery says despite Democrats' efforts against the U.N. official, he "has served with distinction," and it is clear that his resignation is the result of "a political calculus that Bolton's temporary recess appointment would not be extended by Senate confirmation."
Unfortunately, the Focus on the Family official observes, Americans "can expect to see the Democrat-controlled Senate reject other nominees who do not march in lockstep with the Senate's liberal leadership." And unfortunately, he says, good men and women, "despite their impeccable qualifications," are going to be "denied the opportunity to serve their country."
The Democrats were obstructionists even when they were in the minority in Congress, Minnery contends. Now that they will be in the majority, he predicts, their obstructionist activities are only going to increase.
