Why is "Republican Senate Leadership" an oxymoron? Frist stages a cloture vote on the Bolton when Republican Senators are going to be absent (cloture failed) and the Republicans still can't get together enough to get the nomination through. Then the White House essentially has to tell Frist to cut the cloture nonsense and no present another vote until and unless it will be for real: a vote for or against confirmation.
This is pathetic. There is no basis other than politics for Bolton to be rejected and he is an Executive branch appointee: therefore the filibuster is unconstitutional. The Senate has two options, confirm or reject, and by majority vote only. If Frist cannot deliver the vote, he needs to step down as Republican Leader.
And he should take that same action if he cannot coral the Republican morons in the Senate who are ready to vote for greenhouse gas emission limits in the energy bill (a Kyoto-lite from the same body that rejected the Kyoto treaty in a Senate resolution by 95-0 in 1997). The man-made global warming argument is a crock: not one of the vaunted computer models that the environmentalists rely upon can recreate actual conditions when given known inputs (e.g., 1970 inputs, recreate the situation in 1990), therefore they are inherently unreliable. This is no way to make policy.
UPDATED: OK, I honked on this post a bit. Frist decided to NOT hold another vote before the White House called him in and said get Bolton confirmed. So I misread something from prior reports. The analysis in paragraph 2 (see above) still applies: the GOP Senate is pathetic.