Even though we don't like it and a lot of Senators don't like it, Bolton was appointed Ambassador to the U.N. by Bush. This man that needs to be sent to anger management classes rather than the U.N. is now a representing the U.S. in diplomatic relations.
Will the Republicans speak out against George Bush's use of a recess appointment? I doubt it.
But they certainly had to criticize Bill Clinton for his recess appointments.
Burns, Inhofe and McConnell Among Group Threatening to Block Nominees If Clinton Went Ahead With Recess Appointments. In 1999, 13 Republican senators threatened to block all of Clinton's judicial nominees for a full year after he used his recess privilege. The Republican group, which was led by Sen. Jim Inhofe, also included Sens. Burns, McConnell, Thomas and Voinovich. [Washington Times, 12/23/99]
Kyl Said Clinton's Recess Appointment Was a "Significant Breach of...Comity." When asked about President Clinton's recess appointment of Judge Roger Gregory, Kyl said it was a "a significant breach of the comity between the president and the Senate for President Clinton to have done this." [Fox News Sunday, 12/31/00]
Inhofe Was Willing to Block All Clinton Nominees Over a "Highly Inappropriate" Recess Appointment. Sen James Inhofe called Clinton's recess appointment of James Hormel "highly inappropriate." Inhofe said, "President Clinton has shown contempt for the Congress and the Constitution," and that Clinton had "forfeited the presumption of cooperation on any remaining appointments he wants to make while in office." [AP, 6/8/99]
Hatch Called Clinton's Use Of Use Recess Appointments "Unfortunate." In 2000, Sen. Orrin Hatch said of President Clinton's recess appointment of Bill Lan Lee, "While he is well within his legal rights to make recess appointments, it is unfortunate that the president has chosen to ignore the historically bipartisan opposition to [Lee's nomination]." [Federal Human Resources Week, 8/21/00]
Lott Said Clinton's Use of Recess Appointment Would "Poison the Well" For Upcoming Nominees. In 1997, then-Senate Majority Leader Trent Loss told reporters that GOP leaders has an agreement with President Clinton that he would not make any recess appointments without their clearance. "It's important we have that trusting relationship," Lott said. "They'll have a lot of nominations they want confirmed next year." Of the potential for upcoming recess appointments that year, Lott said, "That would really poison the well for next year." [AP, 11/14/97]
http://www.dscc.org/news/News_Archives?&global.now=08-01-2005&main.id=321160&main.ctrl=n
ewsmgr.detail&main.view=news.detail
Here is another Inhofe quote:
Earlier this month, on the final day of a congressional recess, President Clinton appointed James Hormel ambassador to Luxembourg without Senate confirmation. The move prompted Sen. James Inhofe, R-Okla., to remark, "[Clinton] has shown contempt for Congress and the Constitution." Is Inhofe right?
Clinton's act was certainly constitutional. A recess appointment is one of the executive powers enumerated in the Constitution: "The President shall have Power to fill up all Vacancies that may happen during the Recess of the Senate, by granting Commissions which shall expire at the end of their next Session" (II, 2, 3). The provision was originally created to fill vacancies that actually occurred during a recess, but it has since morphed into an all-purpose executive tool to counter Senate intransigence. President Kennedy, for instance, appointed Thurgood Marshall to the bench during a recess because he feared opposition from Southern senators. By the time Marshall's nomination came before the Senate, that resistance had been beaten back.
http://slate.msn.com/id/1002994/
Contempt for Congress? Well, where are the outraged Republican Senators this time? Time and time again Republican Senators spoke out against President Clinton regarding the use of recess appointments. Can we say hypocrite?