I thought (conservative, heavyweight) Carl Ford's testimony would be an end to him. I've worked for a couple behind-doors psychos. I honestly am surprised to see the debate still going on.

Ford’s testimony was highly unusual. For a senior bureaucrat to speak out that way about that subject invites notice.

In the old days of the media monolith it might well have been over. Now we get to actually see hearings and read transcripts instead of hearing Uncle Walter tell us what is what. Things might well take a bit longer.

PS: I read your addendum post, and I wanted to add (anyway) that I am not defending or attacking anything else here about the NYT. And as to this particular "General" rule, I do not know it. I would expect at this point that they do. If you think they "have it wrong" in an incident or in general, write them and see what they say. I expect there is a long, convoluted, evolved, and conscious style which they carefully follow. Which insofar as the field goes, as I said, adheres to far more proprietries (Mr. & Mrs., et al) than almost all of the competition.

Criticizing the NYT for general ill manners seems like criticizing Martha Stewart for being a slob. Gee, I mean, there is a lot you can say about a lot of things, but .....

It wasn't Uncle Walter. It was Carl Ford -- raw.

I take it you did not hear him?

I don't think nobody meant nuthin personal by it.

Calls Bolton a "serial abuser". Is that the new standard for keeping nominees out? I don't know.

I'm asking if you heard him. I was rocked. I figgered Bolton was cooked through, then & there.

And that was sans a presumption that the UN should have an ambassador that found the institution worthy.

I hadn't heard of him until the hearings.

Since I don't find the institution worthy I don't pretend to want an ambassador that does.

You hadn't heard of Bolton, or Ford? As to the UN, that's what I was saying. Matters to me not. Psychotic abusive assholes do. I gather he is way beyond garden-variety rough.

What kind (if any) of institution would you find worthy of replacing the U.N.?

Ford.

It's fixable I suppose.

I am sincerely interested. I don't think the U.N. is in any way perfect in its current form, btw.

I doubt it's fixable. That's why I wouldn't have minded -- other things equal -- someone with Bolton's outlook. The envelope could use a push, even in these pushy trying times.

But others things are not equal. And I just about hate serial people abusers such as he.

I was ok with Bolton until that. I've seen that kind of abuse, and I won't countenance it.

Period.

Did that go for Clinton and "suck it"?

What?

http://dailykos.com/story/2004/1/6/18553/98892

Just as an aside, it it possible for the GOP to screw Arlen out of the chairmanship if he does win the primary and get re-elected. The chairmanship doesn't have to go to the Senator with the most seniority (Strom Thurmond wasn't chair of any of the committees of which he was a member his last 8 years). It would depend on just how ideologically pure they want to be (and be seen as).

One thing to remember, Specter is not popular with his fellow Senators on either side of the aisle. He's seen as arrogant, and a camera hog who tries to take credit for things on which others did the work and he signed on to at the last minute. He treats his staff horribly, and some people have left his employ to work for other less abusive Senators. Some people might be happy to vote him out of the post solely for personal reasons. No predictions here, just idle speculation.

Hic Rhodus, hic Salta!

Just want to know if "abusive" counts in other cases.

Does Clinton alledgedly raping Juanita Broaderick count?

I think the ambassador should represent the US.

I loved that one guy's testimony, the one who heard the story from someone who heard the story from someone who wasn't there. Then, as far as I know, they never did track down whoever it was that was there, suffering from Bolton abuse. It's the NYT and the Washington Post who are going after these nominees, and the dems and a few "moderate" repugs are just along for the ride, it appears.

Christian Westerman. I posted the .pdf file of his testimony/deposition.

Clinton's abusive behavior doesn't earn a pass for anyone else.

Perhaps the President really needs Bolton at the UN.

I’m open to that.

Maybe the President intends do a lot of very confrontational lying to the UN, so he needs someone who can do it with a straight face and still respect himself in the morning.

Either way, at least Bolton’s gone from State.

So ethics start now?

I figured as much.



Maybe you Dems will all get blue helmets so we know whose side you're on.

I could be that Bushie is just using Bolton's chewing-out skills where they'll do the most good.

You'll have to talk to Davis about that.

Anyone who opposes Bolton is an un-American U.N.-lover.

Also sprach A.V.

Artie doesn't give a rat's asss. He is for Bush. He is for Republicans. He is for all of these Iran/Contra style goons.

He likes ... no, he loves them.

Please don't. Situational ethics suck and Republicans chucking all ethics out the window on 9/11 doesn't cut it.

Buuuut, when all else fails, Clinton, Clinton, Clinton, Clinton, Clinton, Clinton, Clinton, Clinton, Clinton, Clinton, Clinton, Clinton, Clinton, Clinton, Clinton, Clinton, Clinton, Clinton, Clinton, Clinton, Clinton, Clinton, Clinton, Clinton, Clinton, Clinton, Clinton, Clinton, Clinton, Clinton, Clinton, Clinton, Clinton, Clinton, Clinton, Clinton, Clinton, Clinton, Clinton, Clinton, Clinton, Clinton, Clinton, Clinton, Clinton, Clinton, Clinton, Clinton, Clinton, Clinton, Clinton, Clinton, Clinton, Clinton, Clinton, Clinton, Clinton, Clinton, Clinton, Clinton, Clinton, Clinton, Clinton, Clinton, Clinton, Clinton, Clinton, Clinton, Clinton, Clinton, Clinton, Clinton, Clinton, Clinton, Clinton, Clinton, Clinton, Clinton, Clinton, Clinton, Clinton, Clinton, Clinton, Clinton, Clinton, Clinton, Clinton, Clinton, Clinton, Clinton, Clinton, Clinton, Clinton, Clinton, Clinton, Clinton, Clinton, Clinton, Clinton, Clinton, Clinton, Clinton, Clinton, Clinton, Clinton, Clinton, Clinton, Clinton, Clinton, Clinton, Clinton, Clinton, Clinton, Clinton, Clinton, Clinton, Clinton, Clinton, Clinton, Clinton, Clinton, Clinton, Clinton, Clinton, Clinton, Clinton, Clinton, Clinton, Clinton, Clinton, Clinton, Clinton, Clinton, Clinton, Clinton.

Boot this lying bastard out. Now. Morals and values? lol



DeLay Airfare Was Charged To Lobbyist's Credit Card

By R. Jeffrey Smith
Washington Post Staff Writer
Sunday, April 24, 2005; Page A01

The airfare to London and Scotland in 2000 for then-House Majority Whip Tom DeLay (R-Tex.) was charged to an American Express card issued to Jack Abramoff, a Washington lobbyist at the center of a federal criminal and tax probe, according to two sources who know Abramoff's credit card account number and to a copy of a travel invoice displaying that number.

DeLay's expenses during the same trip for food, phone calls and other items at a golf course hotel in Scotland were billed to a different credit card also used on the trip by a second registered Washington lobbyist, Edwin A. Buckham, according to receipts documenting that portion of the trip.

House Majority Leader Tom DeLay R-Texas, left, is greeted by protestors at the dedication of the International Space Station Monumen on Saturday in Houston.


House ethics rules bar lawmakers from accepting travel and related expenses from registered lobbyists. DeLay, who is now House majority leader, has said that his expenses on this trip were paid by a nonprofit organization and that the financial arrangements for it were proper. He has also said he had no way of knowing that any lobbyist might have financially supported the trip, either directly or through reimbursements to the nonprofit organization.

The documents obtained by The Washington Post, including receipts for his hotel stays in Scotland and London and billings for his golfing during the trip at the famed St. Andrews course in Scotland, substantiate for the first time that some of DeLay's expenses on the trip were billed to charge cards used by the two lobbyists. The invoice for DeLay's plane fare lists the name of what was then Abramoff's lobbying firm, Preston Gates & Ellis.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/artic...-2005Apr23.html

It's all a Democrat leftwing conspiracy. Yeah, right.

Nomarchy, et al,

At such a remark, your namesake might be not be so amazed.



(COMMENT)

Some 400 years, before the common era, the ancient Greeks laid the ground work for more than 14 dozen member states to come under the administration and imperial rule of the Athens. These separate member states of the Aegean, now under the control of a central power of imperial Greece, were dealt harshly by Pericles for non-compliance. Pericles was considered (like John Bolton ) a great statesman of his time.

To be an “Ambassador” is to be a person of knowledge, wisdom, and temperament. While I have no reservations about his ability to serve the President faithfully, or in his considerably knowledge base, I have concerns that his behaviour does not rise to the standards we normally associate with the senior members of the diplomatic corps. His wisdom is not sufficient to control his temper or his abilty to enteract with opposing viewpoints.

If the US wants to establish an Imperial like control of the UN, then the choice might be correct. After all, many of the members of the Project for a New American Century (PNAC), are key personalities in the current Administration.

Elliott AbramsGary Bauer William J. Bennett Jeb Bush

Dick Cheney Eliot A. Cohen Midge Decter Paula Dobriansky Steve Forbes
Aaron Friedberg Francis Fukuyama Frank Gaffney Fred C. Ikle

Donald Kagan Zalmay Khalilzad I. Lewis Libby Norman Podhoretz

Dan Quayle Peter W. Rodman Stephen P. Rosen Henry S. Rowen

Donald Rumsfeld Vin Weber George Weigel Paul Wolfowitz

As I type this, two years later, I am reminded just how different the security of Baghdad turned-out. The 8 mile stretch of road between the IZ (Green Zone) and the liberated International Airport is so dangerous that the Armored Rhino's, escorted by 4 Armored HMMVs, with an AIRCAP have been suspended, and an "air bridge established" to reduce the possibility that the free and greatful people of Iraq do not attack Americans on thier peaceful mission. As the radio crackles and the report comes in that another Protective Service Detachment has been attacked, I see just how inspiring the dream of American power can be.

Is John Bolton the right man for the job. Well it depends on whether or not you believe in their performance to date, their productive capabilities to date. Clearly, in an asymmetric battlefield, these guys don't play the chess game well.

But clearly - to oppose - John Bolton - does not mean that you are "un-American" or a "U.N.-lover." It might mean that we would prefer a better statesman.

Very Respectfully,
Rocco

But that goes against the narrow, simplistic black and white thinking that is the hallmark of the neocons.



I forsee some tantrums....

But it sounds so good for the black-white lefty thinkers to put words in my mouth.

The UN has sat on it's hands and let civilians die by the thousands while it played "diplomacy" and collected kickbacks as well.

Rocco

Nomarchy was being sarcastic

Better statesmanship we've needed for lo these many years.

You keep safe and come back often.

Your point? I got Space's.

That nobody put words in your mouth.

You asked Dems who oppose Bolton to wear blue helmets (reference to being U.N. soldiers) so that you/we could tell whose side (i.e. the U.N. vs the U.S.A) they're on.

Ergo, anyone who opposes Bolton is an un-American U.N.-lover.

I made an over the top answer to Space's. You probably think hu really wears a helmet 24/7.

Stop the presses! A.V. has admitted a mistake. Amazing, but true!

Shirley you jest.

With zest.

That's best.

Are you a U.N.-lover, Space?

Do you oppose Bolton's nomination?

Perhaps you can start wearing a blue, U.N., helmet so that we can tell whose side you're on.

Thank you very much, umh huh!

Ain't got no UN-Lovers hereabouts!

Get your own jokes.

Sorry, Mister, I reckon I likes yours.