Newt Says He’d Ask John Bolton to Be Secretary of State

The Washington Times reports,

Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich promised conservatives on Tuesday he would ask former U.N. Ambassador John R. Bolton to be his secretary of state if he’s elected president next year, according to several of those who met with him.

Hours later he repeated that vow publicly to the Republican Jewish Coalition, winning a round of applause.

“If he accepts it, I will ask John Bolton to be secretary of state,” said the former House speaker, who national polls show has vaulted to the top of the Republican presidential field and leads in three of the first four states that will vote for the next Republican nominee.

During the closed-door meeting in Arlington, Mr. Gingrich spoke and fielded questions for about two hours from 70 conservatives, and many said afterward that they came away impressed.

 So what do you think? Also, have you seen Newt’s new ad?

44 thoughts on “Newt Says He’d Ask John Bolton to Be Secretary of State

  1. doug December 7, 2011 / 9:04 pm

    There goes his Huntsman endorsement.

    • neocon1 December 7, 2011 / 9:25 pm

      Paging Sarah!!

  2. libertyatstake December 7, 2011 / 9:58 pm

    Excellent. Now all Newt needs to do is tap Kudlow for Treasury, Petraeus for Defense, Sheriff Joe Apaio for INS, and Mark Levin for Justice – and it’s all sewn up. Give DHS to Guiliani if we must have it.

    d(^_^)b
    http://libertyatstake.blogspot.com/
    “Because the Only Good Progressive is a Failed Progressive”

    • patriotdad1 December 7, 2011 / 10:31 pm

      …and Limbaugh as Drug Czar.

      • dvindice December 7, 2011 / 11:05 pm

        P-Daddy’s wonderful wit strikes again… (well, 1/2 anyway)

      • neocon1 December 8, 2011 / 8:56 am

        and bwany fwank as sex tzar for public schools

      • neocon1 December 8, 2011 / 9:01 am

        dvin

        does that make UNpdaddy a HALF wit?
        I always thought of him as a nitWIT, well you never know.

      • Caveat Canum (Cave Cane) December 8, 2011 / 12:05 pm

        neo,

        I think p-daddy is being serious; liberals just love stories about redemption, they make heroes out of every flake, devient and reprobate that screws up their lives, damages everyone around them, requires government intervention and then after being caught realizes the error of their ways, cleans up, sobers up, and then lectures us all about how we should live our lives.

        Rush Limbaugh should be in the Liberal Drug Recovery Hall of Fame!

      • Amazona December 8, 2011 / 2:33 pm

        I’m not a Rush fan. In the remote areas where I have been driving, the past few years, he is often the only show I can pick up on my radio, so I have listened to him quite a bit. I don’t quibble with the content of his show, I just don’t like his personality or his determination to emotionalize what I think should remain objective fact.

        But I was very impressed by the way he handled his drug problem. He made no excuses. He came back on the air, he talked openly about what he did and why and how it affected his life. He took full responsibility for it all, he admitted to his failings and weakness, he blamed no one and he handled it with dignity and grace and maturity.

        After this happened, a brother found himself becoming dependent on prescription drugs, prescribed for chronic back pain. Although he is a Lefty, he took Rush’s experience to heart and started to wean himself off the drugs before it became a bigger problem, and even at that stage of dependence it was extremely hard, emotionally and physically. It killed him to admit it, but he did develop a new respect for Rush in that regard.

        It is creepy to see these PL ghouls, so eager to roll in the rotting carcass of an old scandal, digging it up and carrying it around with such glee. But it does illustrate what impresses them, what matters to them, and what they find important and pleasing. They sure aren’t going to spend any time or energy learning the dogma of their chosen political allegiance, or studying its relentless failures when it has been allowed to govern. They sure aren’t going to start thinking of politics as the blueprint for governance—not when their pathologies are rooted in spite and malice.

        No, they are the carrion eaters of politics, just lurking around waiting for something else they can feast on and celebrate.

  3. Green Mountain Boy December 7, 2011 / 10:11 pm

    I don’t know liberty. Those are all fine folks but do you think they are acceptable to the donkyrats? You think even a repub controlled senate will push for them? You think stooges like mcconnell would risk thier coktail party invitations to get them confirmed?

  4. 6206j December 7, 2011 / 10:58 pm

    Kudlow wouldnt’t subject himself to a confirmation hearing.

  5. Frances December 8, 2011 / 12:35 am

    “Any person….directly or indirectly promises or pledges the appointment…of any person….for the purpose of procuring support in his candidacy shall be fined….or imprisoned not more than one year, or both; and if the violation was willful, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than two years, or both.”
    Source: Title 18, Part 1, Chapter 29, Section 599 of the U.S.Code

    • Amazona December 8, 2011 / 1:23 am

      So the issue is whether or not the comment about appointing Bolton was designed to get his support for Gingrich. To do that I think you would have to prove that before the comment about appointing Bolton, Bolton’s intent was to support Obama.

      In other words, this stupid post is nothing more than an attempt to create a problem where non can possibly exist. There is absolutely nothing wrong with a candidate stating who he or she would appoint to various positions—in fact, it is an excellent way to telegraph the candidate’s commitments to certain agendas and approaches to certain problems.

      A candidate can do this if he has nothing to hide. For example, Obama could not be candid about who he proposed to appoint to certain positions, knowing that advance knowledge of how heavily he would depend on hard-core Marxists, Maoists and Communists in his administration would alarm many Americans.

      • watsonredux December 8, 2011 / 3:09 am

        Oh. I thought Newt was a Marxist. That’s what George Will said in his column the other day. Those crazy Republicans…

      • RetiredSpook December 8, 2011 / 11:48 am

        Watson,

        Here’s what George Will said in his column:

        Gingrich, who would have made a marvelous Marxist, believes everything is related to everything else and only he understands how.

        Do you have any idea why Will would say such a thing? Because nowhere in the article does he expand on the accusation. BTW, I actually agree with much of what he says about Gingrich, and I tend to agree with GMB that Newt is just the latest GOP flavor of the month. In the same article, Will has great things to say about Huntsman, many things, in fact, that I’ve not even heard Huntsman himself say. Perhaps if Huntsman had come out of the blocks with the ideas that Will attributes to him instead of ridiculing Republicans for being anti-science, he’d be leading the pack.

      • Amazona December 8, 2011 / 11:53 am

        Leave it to the wattle to change “would have made” into “IS”.

        No wonder these Pseudo-Lefty lemmings are so easy to fool and confuse. Between their inability to process simple information and their slavering eagerness to find or invent something hateful about a political movement they don’t even understand, they do make ideal dupes.

      • J. R. Babcock December 8, 2011 / 12:06 pm

        Here’s what George Will says about Huntsman:

        Jon Huntsman inexplicably chose to debut as the Republican for people who rather dislike Republicans, but his program is the most conservative. He endorses Paul Ryan’s budget and entitlement reforms. (Gingrich denounced Ryan’s Medicare reform as “right-wing social engineering.”) Huntsman would privatize Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac (Gingrich’s benefactor). Huntsman would end double taxation on investment by eliminating taxes on capital gains and dividends. (Romney would eliminate them only for people earning less than $200,000, who currently pay just 9.3 percent of them.) Huntsman’s thorough opposition to corporate welfare includes farm subsidies. (Romney has justified them as national security measures — food security, somehow threatened. Gingrich says opponents of ethanol subsidies are “big-city” people hostile to farmers.) Huntsman considers No Child Left Behind, the semi-nationalization of primary and secondary education, “an unmitigated disaster.” (Romney and Gingrich support it. Gingrich has endorsed a national curriculum.) Between Ron Paul’s isolationism and the faintly variant bellicosities of the other six candidates stands Huntsman’s conservative foreign policy, skeptically nuanced about America’s need or ability to control many distant developments.

        Anyone here know any of these things about Huntsman? Anyone disagree with them? I have to admit, I got turned off after the first 3 or 4 debates, so Huntsman could very well have articulated this ideas in subsequent debates.

      • Amazona December 8, 2011 / 12:18 pm

        I like the ideas here attributed to Huntsman. But the best ideas in the world are useless if you can’t execute, and Huntsman hasn’t even been able to articulate or explain those ideas, leaving serious doubts about whether he could be effective in implementing any of them.

        Huntsman stood, as a Republican, in a field of Republican potential candidates, in a forum created to let them explain what they could bring to the table as President, and he couldn’t even get his ideas presented. It took a blatantly anti-Newt partisan to say it FOR him.

        And the snotty aside about Fannie and Freddie being Newt’s “benefactors” casts a long shadow of suspicion on the entire article, as it is not only a lie, it is quite petty and nasty along with being deceptive.

    • doug December 8, 2011 / 3:10 am

      I saw the statement, nothing in their that promises or pledges or remotely does either of those requirements. Sounds like there is nothing to stand on……of course the Senate will hold hearings about this at just the right time.

    • neocon1 December 8, 2011 / 8:58 am

      francisthetalkingmue

      look up eligibility stooge then get back with the violation of oath info.

      • neocon1 December 8, 2011 / 9:13 am

        MF CORZINE: ‘I simply do not know where the money is’…

        Expected to plead the Fifth…

        Third congressional panel to subpoena…

        surprise surprise

      • neocon1 December 8, 2011 / 9:27 am

        ROTFL

        ‘Why the Hell Did I Call on You?‘ Fiery Christie Responds to Accusation of ’Planting Questions’

        “If you give it, you’re going to get it back”

      • neocon1 December 8, 2011 / 9:32 am

        kenya or nyc?

        4 more years?

        Marauding Mob of 50 Teen-Aged Girls Beats Down 2 NYC Cops

        As for the victim, the young female student narrowly escaped an increasingly vicious situation. She told reporters that ”They were waiting for me since Thursday. They wanted to get me for a he-said, she-said. They kept on calling.”

        When the group arrived at her doorstep, they were carrying “guns, blades and knives,” according to the victim.

        Relatives said the young girl has a heart condition, which was part of the mob’s campaign of terror as they gathered outside her door.

        “We’re gonna punch you in the chest. We’re gonna fix your heart condition,” the mob yelled.

    • Chrissy Ann December 8, 2011 / 11:38 am

      and yet Biden’s wife went on national tv aka Oprah and stated publically that Obama had offered him either the VP or Sec of State spot before the election was even held.

      Just how much water does your post hold?

      • Amazona December 8, 2011 / 11:58 am

        Chrissy, any ‘water’ in that snotty effort to discredit Newt was recently recycled water, expelled along with the rest of the mental excrement we have come to expect from these types.

        Note that none of them has discussed Newt’s policies, or why those policies are not the best way to govern the country.

        I have a feeling that Ralph Maddow or one of “her” ilk came up with this bizarre effort to make a simple comment into a crime, and the drooling lemming dupes like “Frances” got so excited to be handed what they thought was some raw meat they could chew on, it made the rounds of the RRL talking points.

  6. Canadian Observer December 8, 2011 / 7:19 am

    Way to go, Newt! Time to stop all this silly diplomacy and kowtowing that we see Hillary Clinton engage in and show the world just who is the big boss. Bolton is sure to kick some International a** and will restore America’s reputation as the globe’s ballyrag. Excellent choice, Newt!

    • Cluster December 8, 2011 / 7:59 am

      Well there’s no question that Hillary’s “recharge” diplomacy with Russia has been a huge success. And Obama’s Cairo speech and world apology tour, complete with bowing to world leaders, resulting in Egyptians burning Obama in effigy, and the rise of the Muslim Brotherhood has also been a resounding success, so I can understand your trepidation Canadian.

      • Amazona December 8, 2011 / 12:07 pm

        One thing I do know—–Bolton would never try some dumb, smirky, ain’t-I-just-the-cutest-thing-ever stunt like that stupid RESET button—an infantile effort at a petty gotcha even if there had been someone in the White House smart enough to check the spelling.

        Of course Bolton, an adult, would be working for an adult, so the playground antics of the Obama group would never even be considered.

      • Count d'Haricots December 8, 2011 / 12:21 pm

        Can you just picture Dr. Condi Rice sitting in her office at Stanford when she saw that button? Serious Face-Palm moment.

      • Amazona December 8, 2011 / 2:40 pm

        I have a feeling the entire Bush administration left the White House with the same feeling of disappointment and sad resignation that anyone would feel at having worked hard for years to build and develop a business only to see it sold off to someone who would dismantle it, or in creating a lovely home only to see it sold to a motorcycle gang.

        I doubt that Dr. Rice was surprised to see the clunky, amateurish, and clownish efforts of the new administration to try to drag their Bush Accusation Disorder into international diplomacy. I don’t think there is much this group could do that WOULD surprise, unless of course they were to veer wildly off-course and start to govern the nation according to sound Constitutional and economic principles.

      • cory December 8, 2011 / 2:58 pm

        “I have a feeling the entire Bush administration left the White House with the same feeling of disappointment and sad resignation that anyone would feel at having worked hard for years to build and develop a business only to see it sold off to someone who would dismantle it”

        Maybe they wouldn’t have had to sell the business if they didn’t make it into a catastrophic financial failure.

      • Caveat Canum (cave cane) December 8, 2011 / 3:09 pm

        The Bush Administration didn’t “sell” the Whitehouse, remember? Sunny said Obama “inherited it”.

        Nope, selling government jobs is strickly a Dimocrat Business.

        Just like Blago tried to sell Obama’s Senate seat; the “Chicago Family Business”

      • Amazona December 8, 2011 / 9:30 pm

        Oh, yeah, I forgot—-Bush et al could have stayed in the White House if only the economy was better.

        Thanks for the reminder.

      • Ryan Murphy December 9, 2011 / 10:05 am

        Obama came in and starterd placing C4 everywhere and has blown it up.

    • neocon1 December 8, 2011 / 8:55 am

      cO

      yeah no more marxist/alinsky ites what a shame for the world.

      GET REAL drone.

    • Amazona December 8, 2011 / 12:04 pm

      CO just gets sillier and sillier, doesn’t he? Perhaps this kind of failed effort at sarcasm meets with approval in the obviously less discerning far North, but here, it is just infantile and unsubtle silliness.

      We get this kind of ham-handed clueless try at wit, or we get his oily sanctimonious hand-wringing smarm, but you know what we never DO get? We never get an analysis of Leftist dogma and policies, and a defense of such political philosophy.

      Just smarm and snot.

    • neocon1 December 10, 2011 / 8:24 am

      cO

      see arguing with idiots pgs 13-69

  7. Chrissy Ann December 8, 2011 / 11:39 am

    Watch the Democrats’ heads spin on that announcement!

  8. Chrissy Ann December 8, 2011 / 12:17 pm

    ……It is about time the GOP does away with milquetoast candidates. And that is the reason I wanted Christie to run. Be tough, be straight, and don’t take any prisoners!

    • Amazona December 10, 2011 / 10:08 am

      Chrissy, any explanation for Christie folding and implementing a ban on hydraulic fracturing? After all, there is not a shred of evidence that it is harmful or dangerous, just a lot of shrill eco-nazi hysteria similar to the AGW claims.

Comments are closed.