RECENT POSTS
- Oprah, Health Care Lobbyists, Among Recent Visitors to White House
- An Obama Thanksgiving Menu, with an Extra Serving of Pie
- White House Thanksgiving Traditions: Broken and Observed
- Obama, GOP Air Differences Over Jobs, Economy In Thanksgiving Addresses
- White House State Dinner Party Crashers
- Obama to Lay Out Emissions Goals in Copenhagen
- Free Bird
- The "Good" War
- The Presidential Planner
- Under the Stars, Obama Toasts India’s Prime Minister
MONTHLY ARCHIVES
« Previous | Main | Next »
The quick Sam Fox
March 28, 2007 11:52 AM
The Senate Foreign Relations Committee was today scheduled to vote on the nomination of Sam Fox of Missouri to be Ambassador to Belgium. Democrats have opposed Fox's nomination because he was a major financial backer ($50,000) of the Swift Boat Veterans for the Truth, which attacked Sen. John Kerry, D-Mass., in his 2004 presidential bid.
"U.S. ambassadors need to be both responsible and credible, and Mr. Fox's support for an organization known to have spread falsehoods illustrates neither," said Sen. Chris Dodd, D-Conn. "The fact that Mr. Fox refused to apologize for his behavior during his nomination hearing reinforces my belief that he would not be an acceptable representative for the position of U.S. ambassador."
Minutes ago, the White House withdrew Fox's nomination. This announcement was followed by an email from Dodd's presidential committee urging subscribers to email the Senate Foreign Relations Committee to oppose Fox's nomination.
-- jpt
March 28, 2007 | Permalink | Share | User Comments (3)
You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.
Presidents nominate friends and political supporters to be ambassadors all the time. Usually, though, the supporters are directly supportive of the president. In this case, the supporter was indirectly supporting Bush, vis a vis the "Swift Boat Veterans." The Supreme Court held that, under present law, Swift Boat can publish whatever they want as long as there isn't collusion between them and some political entity. This seems to be that sort of collusion. On the other hand, I don't support those campaign laws because they are violations of the First Amendment.
Posted by: Andrew | Apr 7, 2007 9:04:36 PM
Sam Fox lost clarity in his hunger for an ambassadorship. I feel that it is obsene of him to have given such large sums to the Bush campaign but it was STUPID of him for his Foundation to have given to an organization whose mission was to subvert the truth/to smear/ to "Karl Rove" facts to their own end. But, didn't Mr. Fox think he needed to give the money to get Bush elected, at all costs, if he wanted a chance at an ambassadorship?
Perhaps, this is the case of the GREEDY billionaire. Perhaps, the lesson is to give anonymously if you believe in a cause. Mr. Fox liked being associated with the Bush administration.
As my daddy always said "if you fly with ducks, you get shot at..."
Mr. Fox might be an honest guy who made an honest mistake. He should fire whomever he is paying to run his Foundation. Clearly, they are not doing their job, if you believe him.
Posted by: liz | Mar 29, 2007 1:05:26 AM
Sen. Dodd couldn't have said it any better. It seems that the most cushy positions in this admininstration are, to quote from "The Price Is Right," "now up for bids" from the most morally dubious characters since Mark Foley.
Posted by: chuck | Mar 28, 2007 1:24:18 PM
Post a comment
