Skip to content
Do you have adblock enabled?
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(townhall.com) Hero Democrats' heads asplode as they try to figure out how to stonewall Bush's next nominee for UN ambassador: A Muslim guy who's currently ambassador to Iraq   (townhall.com) divider line
50
    More: Hero  
•       •       •

954 clicks; posted to Politics » on 11 Dec 2006 at 1:45 AM (16 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook



50 Comments     (+0 »)
 
Tabatha Static
2006-12-10 5:45:54 PM  
You mean the PNAC hack & UNOCAL pimp who hosted the Taliban's visit to Texas before 9/11? That guy?
 
clifton
2006-12-10 5:57:51 PM  
OK, so we spent several weeks with republicans getting their panties in a twist over Ellison getting elected to Congress because he's a Muslim...

Ah, forget it.
 
SunOfSam
2006-12-10 6:04:32 PM  
In the article, he (the mighty douchebag of liberty) mentions Card is a dark horse canidate. I would hope, but he might actually be qualified for the job so that makes appointing him impossible.
 
T.M.S.
2006-12-10 6:06:42 PM  
Democrats mentioned in article where?
 
keylock71
2006-12-10 6:07:49 PM  
Sure, they are...
 
mediaho
2006-12-10 6:12:15 PM  
Oh, I see. Hannity told you that Democrats love the enemy and the enemy are Muslims.
 
Tatsuma
2006-12-10 11:23:28 PM  
I hate to say that it's a masterstroke from the republicans

If they vote him down, the Republicans can come out and play the "Democrats don't really trust them darkies, don't they?" card

If they vote him in, they look multicultural and trying to create bridges with the muslim world

It feels like Karl Rove finally got over his depression
 
And-1
2006-12-10 11:54:33 PM  
submitter: Democrats' heads asplode as they try to figure out how to stonewall Bush's next nominee for UN ambassador:

I can't see it would be that hard. Just vote no in the confirmation hearings.

Now, I can understand that to submitter that might be head-assplosion territory. But the rest of us understand the democratic process.
 
SunOfSam
2006-12-11 12:01:25 AM  
Tatsuma

The last minute bill filled with tax cuts for students, corporations involved in green initiatives, and others was even sneakier.
 
oldebayer
2006-12-11 2:02:30 AM  
My own head may assplode if Bush actually nominates this guy. "Leading contender" is not the same as "nominee."
 
Unright
2006-12-11 2:03:16 AM  
What if Democrats only judge him by his [gasps!] qualifications instead of his religion! [faints!]
 
inFARKshun
2006-12-11 2:06:28 AM  
Just what we need, another PNAC fark-up.
 
FarkingStan [OhFark]
2006-12-11 2:06:36 AM  
And the Republicans come out with a forking manuver...
 
Warren G. Harding
2006-12-11 2:17:07 AM  
Bwahahaha, way to alienate your base republicans! Most democrats won't care one bit that he's muslim. Now your supporters, that's a different story.
 
gothelder
2006-12-11 2:31:26 AM  
With any luck he will be judged by his effectiveness in the country in question.


\Graham Martin and Ellsworth Bunker are probibly laughing their asses off
 
bheilig
2006-12-11 2:35:03 AM  
Troll.
 
nexusandroidsix
2006-12-11 2:40:46 AM  
Article By Robert Novak? Ah, a troll posting an article by a troll!
 
jezz
2006-12-11 3:49:51 AM  
FA: President Bush was reported by aides as looking for someone who approximates Bolton's combination of toughness and diplomatic skill.

Diplomatic Skill? Who's moustache has Robert Novak been riding?
 
LincolnLogolas
2006-12-11 5:35:06 AM  
Here's a bit of information for blatant partisans who believe that Democrats are opposed to everything and anything Bush does: They're not.

Recent Defense Secretary Appointee Robert Gates' OVERWHELMING approval vote ring a bell? Democrats are proving that they're not the partisan twats that smitty wants to believe.
 
Descartes
2006-12-11 7:13:03 AM  
LincolnLogolas is right.

For instance, the bill that SunofSam referred to as "The last minute bill filled with tax cuts for students, corporations involved in green initiatives, and others was even sneakier" was passed with overwhelming Democrat support. The final vote was 79-9 in the Senate.
 
moops
2006-12-11 7:16:01 AM  
Khalilzad = neocon trash
 
AntiNerd
2006-12-11 8:21:17 AM  
Here's your FARK unofficial brain twister for the day. What is wrong with this sentence:

FARK has become just as good as Free Republic except that the submitters and posters mis-represent the facts too much.
 
MindStalker
2006-12-11 8:24:21 AM  
moops: Khalilzad = neocon trash

You're just saying that to make me like him arn't you! ;)
 
pvd021
2006-12-11 8:34:34 AM  
Its weird how the President is doing things that makes logical sense once the Democrats took control of congress.
 
moops
2006-12-11 9:09:46 AM  
if only the we could see the names of the submitters, we would be rid of the conservative trolling in the headlines too. the only reason we get these ridiculous freeper-like headlines is because the morans that write them can hide behind anonimity.
 
This Is Bold Text [TotalFark]
2006-12-11 9:12:18 AM  
yea pvd021 they must be rubbing off or something, idiot
 
Rakkim Epps
2006-12-11 9:41:48 AM  
Will he use the qur'an when they swear him into the office?
 
Bored Horde
2006-12-11 10:13:33 AM  
You assume someone can't be both a Muslim and a complete neoconservative blowhard.
 
Gosling
2006-12-11 10:37:46 AM  
If they vote him down, the Republicans can come out and play the "Democrats don't really trust them darkies, don't they?" card
Friend, the GOP base has already squandered any hope of being able to say these things with a straight face. Look at the reaction to Keith Ellison getting elected, for Pete's sake.
 
Karma Curmudgeon
2006-12-11 10:45:00 AM  
This month's example that the surest way to get promoted in the Bush Administration is to be a royal fark up.
 
Bonk_Thud
2006-12-11 11:10:27 AM  
Bored Horde: You assume someone can't be both a Muslim and a complete neoconservative blowhard.

Well to a freeper (and apparently to subby), all muslims look alike.
 
Bonk_Thud
2006-12-11 11:17:40 AM  
Gosling: Friend, the GOP base has already squandered any hope of being able to say these things with a straight face. Look at the reaction to Keith Ellison getting elected, for Pete's sake.

"I have to tell you, I have been nervous about this interview with you, because what I feel like saying is, "Sir, prove to me that you are not working with our enemies. And I know you're not. I'm not accusing you of being an enemy, but that's the way I feel, and I think a lot of Americans will feel that way."

What a farking coward. Asks the question and then pretends he didn't even ask it a second ago. He makes Chris Wallace look like a respectable journalist.
 
Bf+
2006-12-11 11:28:17 AM  
[image from i.cnn.net too old to be available]
"Sir, prove to me that you are not working with our enemies."
 
INeedAName
2006-12-11 11:33:01 AM  
Can we just be done with American politics, I'm so tired of this same old song and dance.
 
zerkalo
2006-12-11 12:31:15 PM  
Building bridges to the Muslim world, indeed. Building them then blowing the ever-loving shiat out of them, literally and figuratively.
 
Chris Barr
2006-12-11 12:35:48 PM  
Well the Dems did block John Bolton on purely anti-Bush political reasons. Face it, the guy did well in his tenure as ambassador to the UN.

Don't kid yourself, Gates was put in as fast as possible with bipartsan support because he is not Rumsfeld. If you were replacing someone who was less of lightning rod for controversy, it would have taken a little longer.

Politics aside, no one should ever screw with appointments for foriegn ministers on pure partisanship. I find the practice disgusting. We should have the most able person in that job, simply because our foreign policy outlook isn't so great right now.

/DNRTFA
 
TwelveSpongeCakes
2006-12-11 12:56:02 PM  
Chris Barr: Well the Dems did block John Bolton on purely anti-Bush political reasons.

That's funny. I could have sworn that the Democrats had been the minority party in Congress for the past 12 years. And that more than a few Republicans weren't willing to confirm him (hence his recess appointment).
 
SunOfSam
2006-12-11 1:06:17 PM  
Descartes

It was very sneaky. You see, the GOP crafted a bill for issues that would make the Democratic base happy, but since these were all tax breaks the Democrats now have less money to balance the budget in two years. It's a marvelous play, because they can't vote against it but if the vote yay it could trip up politics later.

Chris Barr

Face it, the guy did well in his tenure as ambassador to the UN.

How do you qualify this statement? Because he didn't remove 10 floors?
 
Bugs_Bunny_Practiced_Psychological_Warfare
2006-12-11 1:13:45 PM  

If they vote him down, the Republicans can come out and play the "Democrats don't really trust them darkies, don't they?" card



In which case they've inflamed their Christian base.

/By the way, you really should work more on your grammar. /We speak English here.
 
Fakk
2006-12-11 1:17:25 PM  
Chris Barr: Well the Dems did block John Bolton on purely anti-Bush political reasons. Face it, the guy did well in his tenure as ambassador to the UN.

Actually, I think the Dems (and most rational people) might have had a problem with Bolton's rhetoric about hating the UN so much. Not very diplomatic for a diplomat candidate.

And as far as this guy goes, I doubt that the religion of this guy is going to weigh heavily on the minds of the Democrats saying yea or nay. His affiliation with the PNAC certainly will.

An Afghani native being hired to be our UN ambassador...I don't know...I think I'd prefer someone who has been an American citizen all of their lives for that job. On the other hand, if the guy is a good diplomat and has a great grasp of world politics...eh, sure, why not.
 
ad0gg
2006-12-11 2:26:43 PM  
I love when republicans try to revise history even though it was there own party members who didn't confirm bolton. Just like it was only repubs who voted against Gates's confirmation.
 
Bonk_Thud
2006-12-11 2:48:27 PM  
Chris Barr: Well the Dems did block John Bolton on purely anti-Bush political reasons. Face it, the guy did well in his tenure as ambassador to the UN.

Now come on, Karl. We know it's you.
 
Poolio
2006-12-11 2:53:18 PM  
self-hating Muslims are okay.
 
machoprogrammer
2006-12-11 3:16:49 PM  
Fakk

So someone who wants the UN changed to be less corrupt (Bolton) is bad? I liked Bolton as an appointee. UN needs change, they don't need ass-kissing ambassadors.
 
IPOOPONU
2006-12-11 3:29:18 PM  
Republican sheep grasping at straws again.
Democrats aren't even mentioned in the article.
Democrats have voted for several Bush nominees. Most recently Gates, the replacement for Rumsfield.

We know Republicans want Democrats to be as spiteful, hatefilled and partisan as the Republican controlled majority was. But it aint gunna happen.
 
blahpers
2006-12-11 4:25:10 PM  
Tatsuma: If they vote him down, the Republicans can come out and play the "Democrats don't really trust them darkies, don't they?" card

Come again? I don't recall the message from the Harriet Miers debacle being that "Democrats don't really trust them broads, don't they?"
 
blahpers
2006-12-11 4:26:00 PM  
machoprogrammer: So someone who wants the UN changed to be less corrupt (Bolton) is bad?

He wanted it dismantled entirely.
 
SunOfSam
2006-12-11 5:12:54 PM  
Bolton shows off his diplomatic skills

I don't understand how anyone could support Bolton as ambassador.

Rule #1 to diplomacy: Appearances are everything, and this guy can't get his mustache and hair color coordinated. Regardless of his political views or interpersonal manner, he looks like a gigantic douchebag and refuses to fix it. This suggests that he really doesn't understand the nature of being an ambassador.
 
Fakk
2006-12-11 6:14:51 PM  
machoprogrammer: So someone who wants the UN changed to be less corrupt (Bolton) is bad? I liked Bolton as an appointee. UN needs change, they don't need ass-kissing ambassadors.

Well, there's two ways to say things. Nice and not-so-nice.

The nice way to say something would be like, "I think that the UN is a great idea, but lately the UN's effectiveness has been bogged down by red tape and endless committees, among other things. I'd like to help change that."

The not-so-nice way to say something would be like, "If the UN secretary building in New York lost ten stories, it wouldn't make a difference."

That kind of nasty speaking might get you points in the business world, but in the diplomat world? No.

I really don't think I'm asking too much for our diplomats to be diplomatic about things.

Nice doesn't necessarily equate to "ass-kissing."
 
BigWoodenSpoon
2006-12-11 6:52:16 PM  
But what if he wants to take his oath on a Koran?
 
Displayed 50 of 50 comments


Redisplay/refresh comments
This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking

If you like these links, you'll love

TotalFark

The next best thing to UltraFark

learn more | sign up
On Twitter

  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.