Sticking it to Kerry
On Wednesday, President Bush made a recess appointment to make Sam Fox the U.S. ambassador to Belgium. Democrats had blocked Fox because he had the audacity to donate money to the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth.
For those into media criticism, I encourage you to compare the aforelinked AP story to this story from ABC News. National Review Online's media blog has a cheat sheet on the bias here -- the headline has changed from when NRO first noted it, but it's still not exactly indicative of a neutral news story.
Also somewhat humorous is the reaction of the junior senator from Massachusetts.
"It's sad but not surprising that this White House would abuse the power of the presidency to reward a donor over the objections of the Senate.
"This nomination was withdrawn because the Administration realized it would lose in the Foreign Relations Committee. Unfortunately, when this White House can't win the game, they just change the rules, and America loses.
"Our country would be stronger if this Administration spent more time getting body armor for our soldiers in Iraq than it did helping their powerful friends."
Seriously, back to the old body armor canard? And John Kerry has the gall to say this as the supplemental war funding bill which would be used to pay for body armor is languishing as Congress is in recess? Kerry certainly is French, because the only thing I can think of in response to this is: "DeGaulle of this man."
0 comments on “Sticking it to Kerry”
Tags
“It’s sad but not surprising that this White House would abuse the power of the presidency to reward a donor over the objections of the Senate."
So nominating an ambassador, a role which is the sole responsibility of the President, is now abusing presidential power? Unbelievable. This Congress has systematically undermined the office of the President at every turn. I hope the Republicans remember this precedent next time their is a Dem president.
I hope the Republicans remember that this is our country, and not stoop to such levels. It would be more appropriate to simply say, "while the president has nominated a left wing loon with only political connections as qualification for the job, absent a felony conviction, we recognize his right to do so."
"It would be more appropriate to simply say, “while the president has nominated a left wing loon..."
You know that you are dealing with a moron when he thinks President Bush would nominate a "left wing loon."
We leave that to Democrats to do.
Some people evidently don't understand hypothetical situations, so let me clarify it for you:
kalel666 says: "I hope the Republicans remember this precedent next time their is a Dem president."
I say: I disagree.
Evidently hypothetical situations need to be spelled out a little more clearly for some readers.
"their" should be spelled out "there" for those who seek clarity.
[...] Last week I made a brief mention of ABC News’ Web coverage of the recess appointment of Sam Fox to be ambassador to Belgium. The headline was anything but unbiased: “Bush Swift Boats Belgium, Congress.” The subhed wasn’t any better: “President Slips Swift Boat Ambassador Past Congress.” [...]