Most Read
Image 01 Image 02 Image 03

Newt: I’ll appoint John Bolton as Secretary of State

Newt: I’ll appoint John Bolton as Secretary of State

At the Republican Jewish Coalition conference a few minutes ago Newt Gingrich announced

“If he will accept it, I will appoint John Bolton as Secretary of State.”

I’ll post the video when available, it was a great speech with lots of applause.

Update: The video –

DONATE

Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.

Comments

good choice. bolton actually cares, or at least seems to, about whats best for USA first.

Leftist heads exploding!

A promise to appoint Bolton would get my vote.

Yeah, seems a good choice to me

DINORightMarie | December 7, 2011 at 3:07 pm

Better work HARD to ensure the Senate flips – Dems will NEVER approve him!!

Focus on those local elections, folks! Newt, Romney, any of the current panel will be ABO (I prefer Newt because he can and WILL take it to Teh Won with gusto!).

Bolton would be a fabulous choice! Flip the Senate, friends – preferably with a 60+ “veto-proof” majority!!!

    BurkeanBadger in reply to DINORightMarie. | December 7, 2011 at 8:08 pm

    Agreed. This is, yet again, one of Newt’s big ideas which has little chance of going anywhere. The Democrats would filibuster Bolton without compromise. So, barring a 13 seat GOP gain or a “nuclear option”, Newt could only sneak Bolton in through a recess appointment (as was his stint as UN Ambassador).

    But, it’s a good soundbite, a great way to get some quick applause and ingratiate himself with neocons. That’s about all.

Outstanding choice

Now we’re talkin’………

Excellent!!!!!!…
As DINORightMarie wrote above and as I mentioned somewhere yesterday… we must not lose sight of the other elections so that this and other similar and good appointments will (being optimistic here) happen, and also for checks and balances.

“If he will accept it, I will appoint John Bolton as Secretary of State.”

—Now that deserves a self-pat on the back.

    sarcasm noted. 🙂

    IF Newt is the GOP nominee and then wins in November 2012, I have no doubt Bolton would promptly accept.

    BTW- I believe Bolton was brought in as a recess appointment under Bush so the idea Dems are going to block him is just one more Christmas present for conservatives as libs will be reduced to sniveling bystanders as they were before when the GOP ran Congress. It was only in a sense of fair play that the GOP gave them any say at all, this time around I believe no one is in the mood to put up with their antics in the next Congress. MERRY CHRISTMAS!

Fighters!! That’s what we need. Newt is a fighter; Bolton is a fighter. Get some more like them on board.

Newt will fight Obama and the Dems tooth and nail, like they have never been fought since 1994 when Newt led a takeover of Congress. Confront their lies. Call their distortions. Show clearly they don’t know what they’re talking about. Whip the base into a frenzy. Win really big in 2012. 55% or more in the popular vote for President; 60 seats in the Senate. And add some more House seats just to rub it in. Turn this country around. Relegate Obama to the ash heap of American Presidents where he belongs.

    Aarradin in reply to dmacleo. | December 7, 2011 at 4:57 pm

    Don’t think so. There’s a pretty big qualifier in there.

    You’d have to prove he was naming John Bolton for the purpose of gaining Bolton’s support in his Presidential campaign.

    The point of the law is to make it illegal to trade such favors – between the candidate and the person offered the appointment.

that was my take too, and I don’t think there is any way to prove otherwise.
that had just started to get some traction so I was curious.

    Darkstar58 in reply to dmacleo. | December 7, 2011 at 5:47 pm

    Yeah, its purely an anti-collusion law and doesn’t seem to apply here at all.

    And the simple fact that its been a couple hours since the speech and Bachmann has yet to hit all the news stations with a statement/attack indicates that it likely isn’t an issue at all.

    The Democrats foaming at the mouth to somehow try and make this an issue are probably going to find out that attacking Newt over it is likely going to do nothing but add more voters to the Newt camp though. That will be the interesting thing to watch…

DING, DING, DING, DING.

” WE have a winna!”

Well, I’ll give Newt this much; he’s SAYING the right things for me.

Now if he’ll personally attack (politely of course) OBAMA about being absent without leave for the majority of his presidency and being a “suspect” non -christian, contrary to the losing proposition recently promulgated by the NRC about not attacking Obama personally, then He’s MY GUY!

DINORightMarie | December 7, 2011 at 5:17 pm

More of that video, please! If you find it, please post it. That was fabulous.

I noticed some people in the audience NOT clapping after the standing O…….why would they not like Bolton? Hmmmm……

(Totally OT, but it’s bugging me……does anyone else find that Obama Clown advertisement for spreadthewealthgame.com disturbing? Too much like Stephen King’s It for me.)

I like Bolton but… I don’t think that he would stand a chance of Senate appointment confirmation unless the Republicans have a bullet proof majority.

    Milhouse in reply to GrumpyOne. | December 8, 2011 at 3:16 am

    If his appointment was announced before the election, and the candidate wins, then he has a mandate for it, and any D who filibusters it should be regarded as fair game for any possible tactic no matter how underhanded. Demonstrations outside his home. Leafleting his neighbours. Or use the same weapon Obama used on the GM bondholders: threaten to order the IRS to audit him, every member of his staff and campaign staff, and every major donor. If they didn’t complain about Obama doing this, they have no grounds to complain about the next president doing it to them.

Like him or not, Newt is showing himself strong by doing this. Have any other candidates begun listing their preferences to staff their Cabinets? Newt is looking past the primary. Arrogance or smart politics? Either way, citing Bolton will go a long way toward winning conservatives over.

Joan Of Argghh | December 7, 2011 at 5:59 pm

NPR played some of Newt’s speech and then trotted out some Pro-Obama Jewish Guy(TM) to refute Gingrich by repeating Obama’s assertions (made in front of a fundraiser audience)that “his administration had done more for the security of Israel than previous admins.”

Oh Yeah? Huh. Your mileage may vary . . .

Kinda like folks who like to quote Scripture to prove the veracity of Scripture. Circular citations make for dizzy diplomacy.

He definitely caught the brass ring with his choice of John Bolton but the most important thing that caught my attention was his intent to have a complete transformation of the State Dept. to let the intelligence gatherers do their job the right way.

[…] alone is reason enough to vote for him. Thanks to Legal Insurrection (hat tip Atlas […]

Why not have him for Vice President? No, he would have more power at State.

Okay. I’m sold. Go Newt! Go Newt!

In that Newt singled out Bolton is a position that he can be most effective signifies one thing-

His Judgement.

Effective government.

-Hillary was chosen why, again?

Off topic but related.

Romney Versus Gingrich on Jihad and Sharia: A Yawning, if Unappreciated Gap by Andrew Bostom.

The two segments included here do not do the article justice but show the sharp differences.

“During an interview with US News reporter Dan Gligoff published June 3, 2009, Mitt Romney offered the following bizarre observation about the living Islamic institution of jihad, ostensibly to “clarify” remarks made during an earlier speech at the Heritage Foundation:

I spoke about three major threats America faces on a long term basis. Jihadism is one of them, and that is not Islam.”

“Former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich, in stark contrast to the muddled and craven nonsense uttered by Romney on jihad during his US News interview, delivered an astute and courageous address at The American Enterprise Institute, July 29, 2010, which provided an irrefragably accurate, if blunt characterization of the existential threat posed by Islam’s living, self-professed mission: to impose Sharia, its totalitarian religio-political “law,” globally.”

http://www.andrewbostom.org/blog/2011/11/23/romney-versus-gingrich-on-jihad-and-sharia-a-yawning-if-unappreciated-gap/

Why yes Mr. Gingrich, those *are* the magic words! Few things would make me happier than John Bolton having a prominent position in the next administration.

[…] alone is reason enough to vote for him. Thanks to Legal Insurrection (hat tip Atlas readers) blog comments powered by Disqus /* */ /* */ /* […]

[…] of State”– sounds good to me. This alone is reason enough to vote for him. Thanks to Legal Insurrection Gingrich: “Palestinians” an “invented people”– “Palestinians […]

Font Resize
Contrast Mode
Send this to a friend