Ambassador - again (and again!)
So Bush once again nominated Hoagland for Ambassador to Armenia, and Senator Menendez once again put a hold on the nomination of this man who (no doubt following State Department instructions) refuses to use the "g" word.
Read the Menendez announcement and send him a quick thank you for taking a principled stand here.
Read the Menendez announcement and send him a quick thank you for taking a principled stand here.
posted by Raffi K. at 9:31 PM
5 Comments:
I really can't make sense of this decision. Does the Bush Administration really think eventually we'll just get tired of arguing? They are facing a new Congress these days as Armenians are only picking up momentum. At least while you're admitting mistakes about Iraq, you might as well try another name since Hoagland may be the most unpopular nomination for Ambassador in U.S. history.
Meanwhile, it seems as though there will be a push to pass an Armenian Genocide Resolution in the House before April 24 this year with the new leadership in place. For once I have faith that the US will take the first step towards truth.
I just wonder in all of this, did nothing ever come of an investigation into the FBI and former Speaker Hastert (oh that feels good) for the Sibel Edmonds' case? That story came and went without so much as a whisper in the news... other than Vanity Fair of course.
This post has been removed by a blog administrator.
Off-topic, but, logistically, what's happened with comments lately ? How come the option is often unavailable ?
How many times can Hoagland (or any other nominee) be nominated and put on hold? How long can Armenia stay without an Ambassador???
Hayk - it can go on as long as Bush is pres, since he has demonstrated his stubbornness very well. Who cares if Armenia has an appointed Ambassador or an acting one?
Nareg, I had switched a commenting option or two - they should show up by default again...
Post a Comment
<< Home