The NYT has the write-up here: Nominee for U.N. Moves to Senate; No Endorsement and notes the political pressure being brought to bear on GOP moderates here: Republican Moderates in Senate Sense Intensifying Pressures. Certainly the amount of political pressure being exerted on both sides is fairly remarkable insofar as I am not convinced that the UN Ambassassdor’s role is as significant at both sides are making it out to be. Let’s face facts: Bolton is neither going to single-handedly reform the UN nor is he going to wreck the institution or the US’s role in that institution.

After a while, it seems as if the process is about scoring/keeping the other side from scoring.

In regards to the actual process, I would note that I am pleased that it is working as it is in the following sense: clearly there were enough votes to get the man out of committee, but the lack of a recommendation from the committee reflects the controversy over nominee. The candidate now goes to the floor with the real potential for him to lose the confirmation vote. Before we know what the outcome will be, there will be intense debate on the qualifications of the gentleman in question. And while many conservatives may find Voinovich’s position annoying, the bottom line is that he has the right to oppose the nomination as a member of the US Senate, and even the right to try and convince his colleagues not to vote for Bolton.

This is the way that the process is supposed to work, whether it be for ambassadorships, cabinet officials or judges. The President does not automatically get what he wants, and members of his own party can opppose his choices.

One thing is for certain, while many conservatives may want Bolton to win, the bigger picutre is that this how the nomination process works–and underscores how it is not working in the case of judicial nominees, where vigorous debate is not taking place. Certainly in this case will know what the will of the majority of the chamber is when the process is done.