John Bolton Endorses McCain
February 10th, 2008 at 09:02am Mark Noonan
Its coming in pretty fast and furious now - the party uniting behind the presumptive nominee:
ARLINGTON, VA — U.S. Senator John McCain’s presidential campaign today announced that former U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations John Bolton has endorsed John McCain for president. Ambassador Bolton issued the following statement on his endorsement:”John McCain was very active and supportive during my confirmation hearings to be the U.S. Ambassador to the UN. His belief in me at that time was a testament to his courage to fight the liberals in the Senate and vigorously advance American interests at the UN.
“I whole-heartedly endorse John McCain for President because when he takes office in January 2009 he will be prepared immediately to lead us. John will not need on the job training.
“American conservatives will have a President they can be proud of in John McCain.”
John McCain thanked Ambassador Bolton for his support, stating, “I have long admired John Bolton’s lifetime of service to our nation. From his work in the Reagan Administration to his most recent post at the UN, John Bolton has always been a stalwart defender of American national security interests and an effective advocate for advancing democracy and liberty around the world. I am humbled and honored to have his support.”
As an aside, I can’t think of anyone better to be Secretary of State in a McCain Administration than John Bolton.
The only real hold-out now is Mike Huckabee - even Ron Paul seems to be getting ready to stand down. An open piece of advice to Huckabee’s people: talk to the man, get him to exit gracefully before he starts to embarras himself.
Entry Filed under: Campaign 2008, Political Endorsements, Republicans
26 Comments
1. Marty13 | February 10th, 2008 at 12:01 pm
There goes McCain’s moderate vote. Bolton comes across as a beltway Michael Savage.
2. Retired Spook | February 10th, 2008 at 12:06 pm
Marty, either say something intelligent or get lost.
3. Almiranta | February 10th, 2008 at 12:08 pm
Marty, you clearly bought into the Agenda Media onslaught against Bolton. He was targeted, just as so many other conservatives have been, with the knowledge that so many of you radical Libs would gleefully start to sharpen your pitchforks and light your torches, now that another mob was being formed.
His record was great, if you are not a rabid Lefty. In that case, no one without strong Socialist creds could ever be acceptable to you.
4. Almiranta | February 10th, 2008 at 12:11 pm
Spook, look who you’re talking to. Might as well ask the Liberal “Mind” to make sense and stop spewing regurgitated hate-filled radical rhetoric.
5. Barak | February 10th, 2008 at 12:17 pm
Keep up the good work Huckster! It’s not going to hurt the principled out there to know you gave your best!
6. sleepygene | February 10th, 2008 at 12:19 pm
Mark-
You and K-Lo think alike. Hinting that he would select Bolton as Sec of State would help with hard the core pro-Bush wing of the party. A part of the party that John need help with but I think in the general this endrosement like most endorsements doesn’t do much and may hurt a little bit. Generally speaking the american public is tired of the bombastic approach to foreign policy that Bolton is a prime actor in said approach.
7. Marty13 | February 10th, 2008 at 12:29 pm
“Marty, either say something intelligent or get lost.”
OK Spook how bout I just quote mustache-boy.
“There’s no such thing as the United Nations. If the U.N. secretary building in New York lost 10 stories, it wouldn’t make a bit of difference.”
Sorry, you did demand I say something intelligent. Do you think this kind of screw you diplomacy is play in November? Do you really think moderate / independents who may find the Dems offerings distasteful are going to flock to the McCain banner because of this endorsement. Bolton and maybe Wolfie epitomize everything that’s gone wrong with this country’s foreign policy these past 7 years.
As far as the man goes personally I always found this quote rather telling…..
“He is a quintessential kiss-up, kick-down sort of guy. There are a lot of them around. I’m sure you’ve met them. But the fact is that he stands out, that he’s got a bigger kick and it gets bigger and stronger the further down the bureaucracy he’s kicking.” — Carl Ford, Assistant Secretary of State for Intelligence and Research
8. Almiranta | February 10th, 2008 at 12:45 pm
Marty, anyone can pull up quotes from people who don’t like a given person. It is, again, typical of the radical Left to think (to use much too strong a term) that sniping like this from someone who has obviously been on the wrong end of a Bolton kick means anything other than sour grapes.
So WHAT if Bolton rubs some people the wrong way? When did the radical Left adopt the belief that “diplomacy” means being sugary-sweet, compliant, and lovey-dovey? You are getting the day to day usage of the word “diplomacy” confused with the political and international reality. In the office, “diplomacy” might mean being extra nice to Darlene because her canary just died. In the real world, it means arm-twisting, negotiations, and making it clear that if solutions are not reached through diplomatic means there will be sterner approaches to follow.
As for Bolton’s comment on the UN—good for him. The UN is a farce. It should be disbanded, or at the very least modified to provide nothing but humanitarian aid—-and that only if it can get some decent leadership so it does not define “humanitarian” as sending in armed thugs who trade food to starving children in exchange for sex, or hijacking food supplies (mostly from the US) intended for famine relief, to be sold on the black market.
Name one thing the UN has done right in the last decade or so. True, they did acknowledge that Sadaam was hiding WMD and working on a nuke program, but as you Lefties have decided to ignore that, what have they accomplished?
9. Retired Spook | February 10th, 2008 at 1:08 pm
Marty, just go away — you’re an annoying little creep.
In the real world, it means arm-twisting, negotiations, and making it clear that if solutions are not reached through diplomatic means there will be sterner approaches to follow.
Well, Almiranta, either the Left doesn’t occupy the “real” world (a distinct possibility), or they don’t subscribe to your (and my) definition of diplomacy. The Left’s approach to diplomacy is, “please Mr. Jihadist, don’t kill me — how about if you just cut off my arm instead.” Or, “if you don’t play nice, we’ll arrest you, give you an ACLU lawyer and see you in court — so there!!”
The UN is a farce. It should be disbanded, or at the very least modified to provide nothing but humanitarian aid—-and that only if it can get some decent leadership so it does not define “humanitarian” as sending in armed thugs who trade food to starving children in exchange for sex, or hijacking food supplies (mostly from the US) intended for famine relief, to be sold on the black market.
SPOT ON!!
10. neocon | February 10th, 2008 at 1:10 pm
Marty, marty, marty,
It’s often times best to engage the brain for spewing baseless assertions. Consider what Almiranta has asked, “Name one thing the UN has done right in the last decade or so.”. Just one.
In addition to that, consider that Cuba and China are current members of the “Human Rights” Council and the corruption that was the Kofi Annan era and you should begin to see the irrelevance of that political body. Of course that would require some critical thought on your part, which is obviously not your strong suit.
11. keefer | February 10th, 2008 at 1:49 pm
Spook, neocon, you’re asking too much when you request intelligent discourse with Farty13.
Maybe when he’s 14, he’ll grow up a little. Don’t bank on it…
12. Mark Noonan | February 10th, 2008 at 1:53 pm
gene,
Please define bombast, and then bring us a Bolton quote which is bombastic, even by your definition.
13. sleepygene | February 10th, 2008 at 2:08 pm
I don’t have the quote but Bolton like you has denegrated the recent NIE as possibly being a product of BDS not the true intelligence gathered by 16 intelligence agencies. He in denigrating these agencies who have access to info. he no longer has access to is pretentious and shows he has an inflated sense of himself and his opinions. He doesn’t like the opinion so it must be wrong and must have been produced with alterior motives in mind. That is bombastic and a**holish.
14. Retired Spook | February 10th, 2008 at 2:26 pm
He doesn’t like the opinion so it must be wrong and must have been produced with alterior (sic) motives in mind.
Only someone who is asleep (pun intended) would not be aware of just what a piece of garbage the NIE is, Gene. I’ve still got some active contacts in the spook world, and Bolton’s view is shared by many. In fact, it’s been widely discussed on this blog; you must have been asleep. Is that how you came up with your screen name — you just sleep through all the important stuff?
That is bombastic and a**holish
Excellent traits for a Secretary of State in this age of global Jihad.
15. Mark Noonan | February 10th, 2008 at 2:34 pm
Gene,
Can’t find one, can you?
16. Jonathan | February 10th, 2008 at 2:49 pm
Exactly, how is being arrogant and stubborn considered excellent traits for Secretary of State? Isn’t that how we got into this mess in Iraq in the first place?
Being arrogant and right is one thing. Being arrogant and dead wrong, and closing yourself off against your critics who are telling you that your arrogance is making a poorly-executed plan even worse, is something else altogether.
17. sleepygene | February 10th, 2008 at 3:02 pm
Spook-
Do you honestly believe there are factions in the intelligence community who would endanger this country by producing an NIE with incorrect conclusions just because they do not like Bush? There may be some who hate Bush, but not enough to bring about the conspiracy that you and Mark contemplate. I don’t doubt you have friends who agree with Bolton, but is that agreement based upon actual intelligence or suppostion combined with political opinion?
18. FmrMarine | February 10th, 2008 at 3:38 pm
>>>>>Do you honestly believe there are factions in the intelligence community who would endanger this country by producing an NIE with incorrect conclusions just because they do not like Bush?<<<<
Sure they are called democRATS and they hide in cracks everywhere. They perpetrate the spread the disease of, lying, cheating, and death. Marxism / liberalism has murdered approx 300,000,000 people in the 20 th century, islam is surely following as fast as they can.
19. sleepygene | February 10th, 2008 at 3:47 pm
calm down fmrmarine, why don’t you cc us with an email from one of your friends with some made up statistics that shows all liberals are the spawn of satan.
20. Retired Spook | February 10th, 2008 at 4:16 pm
Do you honestly believe there are factions in the intelligence community who would endanger this country by producing an NIE with incorrect conclusions just because they do not like Bush?
It’s a lot more complicated than that, Gene. From what I understand, much of what was published in the unclassified portion was either qualified or contradicted by what was in the unpublished, classified portion.
but is that agreement based upon actual intelligence or suppostion (sic) combined with political opinion?
Primarily on actual intelligence, but if I spelled it out for you, then, as the old spook saying goes, I’d have to kill you. Sorry, you’ll just have to remain in the dark, which shouldn’t be too hard. Go back to sleep.
21. Ricorun | February 10th, 2008 at 4:36 pm
Spook: Only someone who is asleep (pun intended) would not be aware of just what a piece of garbage the NIE is, Gene. I’ve still got some active contacts in the spook world, and Bolton’s view is shared by many.
In his WSJ op-ed, Bolton specifically placed the blame for the NIE directly at the feet of DNI Director McConnell. He accused him of committing either an error of comission or omission. In other words, McConnel either (a) participated in some kind of self-serving conspiracy (he called it “a quasi-coup by the intelligence services” in one interview), or (b) incompetence. In the op-ed Bolton phrased it thusly: “Was the NIE’s opening salvo intended to produce policy consequences congenial to Mr. McConnell’s own sentiments? If not, how did he miss the obvious consequences that flowed from the NIE within minutes of its public release?” (emphasis mine).
In another WSJ article, published just after the NIE was released, they noted: In his press conference yesterday, President Bush went out of his way to praise the “good work” of the intelligence community, whose latest National Intelligence Estimate claims the mullahs of Iran abandoned their nuclear weapons program in 2003. “This is heartening news,” Mr. Bush said. “To me, it’s a way for us to rally our partners.” So if it was a “quasi-coup”, apparently Bush was in on it.
And frankly, I don’t find it so terribly improbable that the wording of the NIE was intended to achieve a particular purpose — namely, to cool down the rhetoric a bit. You may recall that it was released around the same time of the Anapolis talks on the Palestinian issue. Syria attended that meeting, with the blessing of their ally Iran, even though it occurred just a week or two after Israel’s bombing raid on Syria. Around the same time embassy level talks between the US and Iran were getting set up in Baghdad. Maliki had visited Tehran, and Amadenijad was invited to the Arab Summit meeting in Dubai. His rhetoric has cooled of late as well. Also, Petraeus announced around the same time that it appeared shipments of EFPs had dwindled. In short, there is a lot of pieces of evidence to suggest that some sort of rapproachement was afoot.
The only thing that is difficult to fit into that argument was the reaction from countries like France, Germany, and Israel. But what the hell do we care about them, right? I’m kidding, of course. But I suspect that their reactions weren’t expected. And since then Bush has backed off his praise of the NIE somewhat. And just last week, the day after Bolton’s op-ed was published, McConnell appeared in front of the Senate InIntelligence Committee, McConnell did too. He indicated that the NIE (the declassified version anyway) could have been better written. But he also went on to aver that Mr. Bolton’s article “is a gross misrepresentation of the professionalism of this community”.
Quite a little cat-fight those two seem to have going. But that’s par for the course when Bolton’s around.
22. Mark Noonan | February 10th, 2008 at 4:41 pm
Ricorun,
Indeed - but we’re siding with Bolton because we know full well the long history of State and Intel people (especially) subverting GOP executive authority. We’ve been putting up with this since the Reagan Administration.
23. Christian Wright | February 10th, 2008 at 5:03 pm
Bolton has such a bad reputation. I believe one of his superiors said he was a “kiss up, kick down” kind of guy.
I would not want his endorsement for dog catcher.
24. Retired Spook | February 10th, 2008 at 5:54 pm
So if it was a “quasi-coup”, apparently Bush was in on it.
I think that’s not at all unlikely.
And frankly, I don’t find it so terribly improbable that the wording of the NIE was intended to achieve a particular purpose — namely, to cool down the rhetoric a bit.
Excellent analysis. You would have made a good spook, Rico. I suspect that the people who “need to know”, know what the truth is, and the people who don’t need to know, don’t need to know. And the reaction of countries like France, Germany and Israel went off the average person’s radar within a 24 hours news cycle, if, indeed, it ever registered in the first place.
CW, the only kind of person who would call John Bolton a “kiss up kind of guy” is someone whom he had “kicked down”. Bolton is not the kind of person who suffers fools lightly — a real rarity in diplomatic circles.
I would not want his endorsement for dog catcher.
I’m guessing his assessment of you would be considerably less flattering than that.
25. plainjane | February 10th, 2008 at 8:13 pm
Yeah, get all the neocon wack jobs on the wagon before it goes over the cliff in November. But damn, this might bring Ann Coulter back into the Republican fold. Only Bolton could be considered nuttier than the Republican spokesman.
26. Christian Wright | February 11th, 2008 at 7:39 am
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RuqNWG9sbuE
Watch Bolton get owned by a Brit on national TV.