The latest fallout from the 2006 mid-terms:

Unable to win Senate confirmation, U.N. Ambassador John Bolton will step down when his temporary appointment expires within weeks, the White House said Monday.

[...]

President Bush, in a statement, said he was “deeply disappointed that a handful of United States senators prevented Ambassador Bolton from receiving the up or down vote he deserved in the Senate.”

“They chose to obstruct his confirmation, even though he enjoys majority support in the Senate, and even though their tactics will disrupt our diplomatic work at a sensitive and important time,” Bush said. “This stubborn obstructionism ill serves our country, and discourages men and women of talent from serving their nation.”

I agree with Gaius at Blue Crab Boulevard who said,

This is a genuine loss for the US. Bolton was one of the few people standing up against the worst excesses of that corrupt UN bureaucracy that has become almost completely useless in recent years.

That is so very true.

Then there is the usual garbage from the usual suspects:

Sen. John Kerry, D-Mass, said Bolton’s departure could be a turning point for the administration.

“With the Middle East on the verge of chaos and the nuclear threats from Iran and North Korea increasing, we need a United Nations ambassador who has the full support of Congress and can help rally the international community to tackle the serious threats we face,” Kerry said. He said it was an opportunity for Bush to nominate an ambassador “who enjoys the support necessary to unite our country and the world and who can put results ahead of ideology.”

Which is, of course, a typical Kerry load of crapolla, as Chad Evans noticed as well.

Bolton had results. He nailed the face of the UN every time he spoke of it. It’s Kerry and his team who were putting ideology ahead of results, something he accuses Bolton of doing. Name one time he did so during his tenure in the UN, Mr. Kerry.

The President had a more accurate assessment of Ambassador Bolton’s too short tenure.

“During his tenure, he articulately advocated the positions and values of the United States and advanced the expansion of democracy and liberty.

“Ambassador Bolton led the successful negotiations that resulted in unanimous Security Council resolutions regarding North Korea’s military and nuclear activities. He built consensus among our allies on the need for Iran to suspend the enrichment and reprocessing of uranium,” Bush added. “His efforts to promote the cause of peace in Darfur resulted in a peacekeeping commitment by the United Nations. He made the case for United Nations reform because he cares about the institution, and wants it to become more credible and effective.”

Sister Toldjah’s reaction is also dead on:

He will be missed, not by the people who think we should play nice with evil, but by the people who believe evil should be called for what it is.

Other commentary of note:

Blogs for Bush (Matt Margolis)

Bolton served honorably, and Democrats were so unwilling to admit they were wrong about him that they blocked his nomination without just cause…again.. What did Republicans do? Did they force Democrats into a real filibuster? Nope. They let Bolton go without a fight. Well, until they are ready to fight, we should just leave the post vacant.

Democrats have killed bipartisanship in the new Congress before officially taking control as the majority.

Michelle Malkin

We are losing a staunch, devoted defender of America’s interests at the U.N.

Hugh Hewitt (Dean Barnett)

Bolton was a voice of moral clarity at a time and place where there haven’t been many. It is a sad day when such a voice has been silenced.

SoCalPundit (Kevin Korenthal)

John Bolton was an effective advocate for reform in the U.N. and he stood up for the U.S. in a time when many want America’s power ceded to a corrupt and ineffective United Nations Security Council.

Still More:
Iowa Voice (Brian)
Right Truth (Debbie)
Wizbang (Jay Tea)
Stop The ACLU (Jay) A tremendous number of links to others commenting can be found at Jay’s post.

If it wasn’t for coffee, I’d have no discernible personality at all. ~ David Letterman

Captain’s Quarters (Ed Morrissey) Herding Cats, Or Blue Dogs — “Now that the Democrats have won control of both chambers of Congress, their real challenge has begun — big-tent governing. The Democrats took control by nominating center-right candidates to replace Republicans, and now they will have to find ways in which to unify their caucus to get their issues advanced. As the departing Republican leadership can tell them, it’s not as easy as it looks:”

Don Surber Voters return the crooks to power — “In punishing Republicans for profligate spending, voters kicked out the amateur crooks and replaced them with the pros.

Hang on to your wallet. This is going to be a bumpy ride”

Right Wing News (John Hawkins) Don’t Throw John Bolton Under The Bus — “Why shouldn’t Bush come out and say that Bolton has done a fine job of fighting corruption, standing up for American interests, and making a real effort to try to reform an almost completely dysfunctional institution? Then, let the Democrats explain why we need to go along to get along at the UN. The truth is that the Democrats didn’t have any substantial reasons to oppose Bolton in the first place, it was all just knee jerk “oppositionalism”. Now that Bolton has proven himself at the UN for a while, they have absolutely no reason to vote against him other than to stick it to Bush.”

Blue Crab Boulevard Schools Of Thought — “There is the usual and expected – heck, it’s inevitable – soul searching and finger pointing going on in the Republican party and among those who lean to the right. Two major schools of thought are becoming evident early. In one, people are arguing that the Republican loss was a result of moving away from the center and becoming too conservative. The other is the mirror image of course; the Republicans abandoned too much of their conservative principles and tried to pander too much to the middle.”

Over a year ago, following the recess apointment of John Bolton to be ambasador to the United Nations, I wrote a post that described how our legislative left were having a collective hisse fit. I quoted Harry Reid, Edward M. Kennedy, Barbara Mikulski, and Barack Obama. John Kerry’s words were also examined:

And finally, John (why let the truth get in the way) Kerry (who served in Viet Nam, by the way) – “The president has the right to make this recess appointment, but it’s the wrong decision. It only diminishes John Bolton’s validity and leverage to secure America’s goals at the U.N. John Bolton has been rejected twice by the Senate to serve as our Ambassador to the United Nations. This is not the way to fill our most important diplomatic jobs.”
Funny thing is, he’s got a real BS sandwich here. Totally wrong analysis sandwiched between two true statements. Do I think that last statement is true? I sure do. An up or down vote would have been the better way, but if you can’t beat ‘em, obstruct ‘em is the new way of the left.

As you probably know, Ambassador Bolton’s appointment will expire in just a few months. In spite of the outstanding job he has done so far, the possibility that those on the left will make another attempt to obstuct his appointment remains a very real prospect.

Senator Bill Frist’s VOLPAC has created Blogging For Bolton.

This month Senate Republicans will do everything they can to break Democrat obstruction and give John Bolton the fair up-or-down vote that he was denied last year. But we need your help to turn up the heat on the Democrats by flooding their offices with your calls in support of Ambassador Bolton and the President’s agenda for reforming the waste and incompetence of the United Nations.

Go to the site, make your phone calls, and help get John Bolton confirmed and back doing the job he is doing so well.

It’s happened again. Somehow these three stories got mixed together. How does this keep happening?

U.N. officials said Hezbollah militants had been operating in the area of the post near the eastern end of the border with Israel, a routine tactic to prevent Israel from attacking them.

Speaking from prepared testimony, Bolton called for a “durable solution” to the violence in the Middle East and the need to “defang” Hezbollah.

“For China and for others, we condemn this because I think any attack on the United Nations positions and the United Nations personnel is inexcusable and unacceptable,” China’s U.N. Ambassador Wang Guangya said.

The panel of 18 independent experts, which reviews the practices of the 156 countries who have ratified the 1966 International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, said it was concerned about information that blacks and poor people “were disadvantaged by the rescue and evacuation plans implemented when Hurricane Katrina hit.”

Several Democrats said during the nomination hearing Thursday that their views had not changed, citing reports that Bolton has alienated other ambassadors and failed to make progress on U.N. reform efforts.

“We did repeatedly in recent days say (to Israel) that this was an exposed position, that Hezbollah militants were 500 meters (yards) away shielding themselves near U.N. workers and civilians,” U.N. humanitarian chief Jan Egeland said. “That’s why it is so inexplicable that what happened.”

The United States must better protect poor people and African-Americans in natural disasters to avoid problems like those after Hurricane Katrina, a U.N. human rights panel said Friday.

Bolton said he had established “good working relationships” with other U.N. members and was making progress, telling the senators, “I have done my best to work with others to advance our national interests.”

I’ve gotta get this obvious computer glitch looked in to.

John Bolton’s recess appointment by President Bush looks better each time we hear what the ambassador has to say. In a phrase, the man gets it. Yesterday’s example:

The U.S. ambassador to the United Nations on Sunday told an influential pro-Israel lobbying group there is an urgent need to confront Iran’s “clear and unrelenting drive” for a nuclear weapons program.

John Bolton, speaking before a crowd of 4,500 gathered for an American Israel Public Affairs Committee conference, said that a failure by the U.N. Security Council to address Iran would “do lasting damage to the credibility of the council.”

“The longer we wait to confront the threat Iran poses, the harder and more intractable it will become to solve,” Bolton said.

It would be foolish to wait until Iran has the ability to produce a nuclear weapon aimed at Israel to confront them on the issue. It would be just as foolish to ignore their current posture.

But he [Bolton] said Iran has been engaging in “doublespeak” during these negotiations by saying with one voice it welcomes discussion, but with the other “flatly refusing” to give up access to technology and material to eventually develop nuclear weapons.

Iran “must be made aware that if it continues down the path of international isolation, there will be tangible and painful consequences,” Bolton said.

It is refreshing to hear a diplomat who makes his arguments from core principles instead of speaking out of both sides of their mouth meaning nothing to no one.

Linked with basil’s blog picnic.

I just watched the cloture vote on the nomination of John Bolton. The result is 54-38 against cutting off debate. The most recent spin out of the left is that they’re not filibustering him, they are merely demanding to see more documents. The Mobile (Al) Register had this opinion piece today.

Negotiations supposedly were ongoing during the weekend to find a way out of the impasse — but it’s hard for Mr. Bolton’s supporters to negotiate with a moving target.

As of now, the Democrats are demanding to see a list of names that Mr. Bolton perused, while at the State Department, that showed up on intelligence intercepts. Apparently the Democrats want to show that Mr. Bolton was targeting people with whom he was having bureaucratic and/or policy disputes — as if he were using the intelligence not for legitimate purposes, but to bully his enemies.

The Democrats’ demand is outlandish for several reasons. First, they have no evidence that Mr. Bolton used the intelligence intercepts in such a manner; instead, they in effect are on a fishing expedition.

Second, those names themselves are classified for a reason: to protect the people named.

Third, the administration and Senate Republicans repeatedly have offered to screen the list for specific names that Democrats fear may have been targeted, and have given assurances that none of Mr. Bolton’s supposed enemies are on the list.

Nevertheless, Democratic Sen. Chris Dodd of Connecticut had the gall to describe the latest Republican counter-offer as “highly unorthodox and presumptuous.” Presumptuous?!? The Democrats are asking for classified names to be shared with them, while using the unorthodox tactic of filibustering a president’s foreign policy nominee — and yet they say the Republicans, not they, are acting out of line?

Now that is well put. Too bad the left can’t see it.

QUICK UPDATE: Kevin at SoCalPundit says if it, “Quacks like a filibuster“

Senate Pat Roberts (R-KS), chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, tried to compromise with Democrats by checking to see if seven names were on the National Security Agency intercepts requested by UN Ambasador nominee John Bolton. They weren’t, so naturally the Democrats response was “that’s not enough.” Well, hells bells, what did he expect? Sure a reasonable person might think that they were after information. They’re not. They only want to delay the confirmation, and hopefully derail it. As part of that process they want to embarass, or at least obstruct, the President and his agenda. This is another example of why the President’s tough stance in calling the left on their obstuctionist ways resonates so well with conservatives. Let’s continue to hold their feet to the fire. Who’s with me?