[kj] [OT] Any thoughts on this, from Americans on the list

[Christof hamille]

Not a surprise at all... His attitude is very flippant and a "I can do any 
god damn thing I want" (Foetus-Anything).  I am a little surprised he did it 
only because the majority (including Republicans) did nto want this guy.
Who cares at this point.
Bring on the doom.
"Barter Town is finished!"

Chris - having to speed home to vote one corrupt mayor out of Detroit to 
vote another corrupt one in.  Maybe I'll get a 40 oz. instead and mow the 
lawn.

>From: Mark Kolmar <mkolmar at gmail.com>
>Reply-To: Mark Kolmar <mkolmar at gmail.com>,"A list about all things Killing 
>Joke (the band!)" <gathering at misera.net>
>To: "A list about all things Killing Joke (the band!)" 
><gathering at misera.net>
>Subject: Re: [kj] [OT] Any thoughts on this, from Americans on the list
>Date: Tue, 2 Aug 2005 14:58:15 -0500
>
>U.S. Consitution, Article II, Section 2, Clause 3:
>
>"The President shall have Power to fill up all Vacancies that may
>happen during the Recess of the Senate, by granting Commissions which
>shall expire at the End of their next Session."
>
>All presidents do this with various positions hundreds of times.  The
>words "happen" and "during" seem relevant because this vacancy is not
>new.  But this is totally common.
>
>Clinton put in an ambassador to Luxembourg who Republicans wouldn't
>approve because the man was openly gay.  (Do they care about that kind
>of thing in Luxembourg?)
>
>I predicted this recess appointment shortly before it became hip to
>say so: http://concrete-tiger.livejournal.com/8072.html
>
>(Btw, about the appointment to the Supreme Court, this Roberts guy is
>not an in-your-face right-winger as I expected, but may still be a
>stealth wing-nut.)
>
>As for the real question of whether this recess appointment of Bolton
>was politically smart or otherwise helpful, I would say no.  He came
>out of committee with no recommendation, and has no vote from the full
>Senate.  Best I can say is people will recognize he is a jerk who Bush
>sent to the U.N. to be a jerk.  Any positive progress made at the U.N.
>will not have much to do with Bolton, though Republican apologists
>will insist after the fact it did.
>
>I'll only half-jokingly predict a melee at the U.N., sort of like
>those brawls you see on TV now and then in the parliaments of a few
>Asian and former Soviet nations.
>
>--Mark
>
>On 8/2/05, circuit bender <circuit_bender at yahoo.com> wrote:
> > Another constitutional abuse, from the champion of democracy in the 21st
> > century! :[
> >
> > 'President George Bush yesterday sidestepped the Senate and installed 
>John
> > Bolton as US ambassador to the UN, despite protests from Democrats that 
>the
> > controversial neo-conservative will undermine America's credibility.
> >
> > Mr Bolton's appointment has been blocked for more than five months by 
>Senate
> > Democrats who have been demanding the Bush administration release 
>classified
> > information they claim would shed more light on Mr Bolton's past, 
>including
> > claims that he tried to manipulate US intelligence to support his 
>hawkish
> > views..........As a recess appointment - a loophole that allows the
> > president to make appointments while Congress is not sitting - Mr Bolton
> > will only be able to serve until January 2007, when a new Congress is 
>sworn
> > in.'
> > http://www.guardian.co.uk/usa/story/0,12271,1540686,00.html
>_______________________________________________
>Gathering mailing list
>Gathering at misera.net
>http://four.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/gathering