Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

why did Senator Boxer remove the hold on Bolton?

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU
 
still_one Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-26-05 09:52 AM
Original message
why did Senator Boxer remove the hold on Bolton?
She said she would keep the hold until the state department released all requested documents. They haven't

What is going on!!!

Is there anything thing we stand for?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Frances Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-26-05 09:54 AM
Response to Original message
1. Please give a link to the info
that Boxer released the hold on Bolton. I had not heard that.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
still_one Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-26-05 10:12 AM
Response to Reply #1
3. call her office
(202) 224-3553

I just got off the phone with them

I heard it on the radio, then called, and got it confirmed

No reason given
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
babylonsister Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-26-05 10:08 AM
Response to Original message
2. This was on a thread yesterday:
Embedded in an article Steve Clemons wrote yesterday at "The Washington Note" about Voinovich's letter to senators opposting Bolton. The whole article is a good read but I especially honed in on this line:

<snip>

Senator Boxer has agreed to remove her "hold" on Bolton as Frist can remove the hold with a "motion to proceed" which requires only a simple majority to win.

<snip>

http://www.thewashingtonnote.com/archives/000653.html
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
still_one Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-26-05 10:14 AM
Response to Reply #2
4. to me we should fight for everything
requesting complete information from the state department was NOT unreasonable

let frist call for an immediate vote, let the country see how reasonable this thugs are

"full of sound and fury, signifying nothing"
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
babylonsister Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-26-05 10:20 AM
Response to Reply #4
5. I heard Boxer this a.m., and she and the rest of the Dems
are fighting (well, except for Liebermann:eyes:)! I hope they hang tough, and if they have to filibuster, so be it. This guy would be poison in the UN and further diminish the opinion of the US in other nations' eyes. We really cannot afford it...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
still_one Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-26-05 10:35 AM
Response to Reply #5
8. If we have to filibuster, we should
win, lose, or draw, it is time we stand up to bullies, they only know one language

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lights_Out Donating Member (49 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-26-05 10:25 AM
Response to Original message
6. Welcome to the world of the Democrats
Hailing from Caleeforneea, Boxer is my senator. However great she may be, she still walks the party line.

The truth is, democrats in the senate just aren't as liberal as they should be. Barbara Boxer stands alone in a world of moderates. It really does not surprise me that she has released the hold on Bolton. Perhaps it's because he may not have a chance to win the popular vote in the senate, but that's mere speculation.

Anyway, Boxer and Lantos are my homies. Peace to them and what they stand for.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Frances Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-26-05 10:31 AM
Response to Reply #6
7. I don't understand what you mean
when you say that Boxer walks the party line.

It seems to me that Boxer is simply playing chess.

Right now the public perceives that the Dems won on the filibuster compromise.

If Boxer kept the hold, there would be a vote and the Dems would lose, which would be more evidence that the Dems are "losers."

Better to make a good speech and hope that the speech is the news, not the losing vote.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lights_Out Donating Member (49 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-26-05 10:36 AM
Response to Reply #7
9. Sorry for the misunderstanding
I meant that Boxer seems to back down when her party is not behind her. I wish that she was as driven as she wants us to believe.

I also hope that you are right about her chess game; she may be backing down, but she is one tough cookie.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Sat May 04th 2024, 12:07 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC