A defeat for Bolton could undercut US policy: Difference between revisions

From Discourse DB
Jump to navigation Jump to search
No edit summary
(Undoing testing)
 
(One intermediate revision by one other user not shown)
Line 10: Line 10:
{{Reference|Why I'll Vote for Bolton}}
{{Reference|Why I'll Vote for Bolton}}
{{Reference|A public advocate for the United States}}
{{Reference|A public advocate for the United States}}
{{Reference|The Genocide Test}}
{{Reference|testing}}

Latest revision as of 19:36, November 26, 2008

This is an opinion item.

Author(s) Thomas M. Boyd
Source The Boston Globe
Date August 1, 2006
URL http://www.boston.com/news/globe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2006/08/01/a_defeat_for_bolton_could_undercut_us_policy/
Quote
Quotes-start.png "Indeed, most of the criticism aimed at Bolton has nothing to do with him. More than anything else, it represents an effort to set the political stage for the upcoming midterm congressional elections in November." Quotes-end.png


Add or change this opinion item's references


This item argues for the position Bolton should be confirmed on the topic Confirmation of John Bolton as U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations, 2006.


This item argues against the position Confirmation should be filibustered on the topic Confirmation of John Bolton as U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations, 2006.


This item refers to the previous opinion item Why I'll Vote for Bolton.

This item refers to the previous opinion item A public advocate for the United States.