I don't think I'll ever be able to use the phrase, "I've seen it all" again. I thought I had, until a United States Senator burst into tears at the mere thought that mean ol' John Bolton might be somewhat blunt when speaking to the dictators' representatives at the United Nations. "I'm afraid that when we go to the [Senate] well, that too many of my colleagues -- [voice breaking] -- that too many of my colleagues are not going to understand that this appointment is very, very important to our country," Ohio Republican George Voinovich sobbed. Give that man a handkerchief and a spinal replacement, please.
Sure, the last thing we need is an ambassador that actually represents American interests and intentions at the UN. We don't want an ambassador who agrees with Kofi Annan that public confidence in the UN is fading and reform is needed. It's perfect just as it is -- corruption, sex scandals, inaction on genocide and all. We need an ambassador that will coddle terrorist-supporting nations, sympathise with dictators and congratulate countries that make lucrative deals with international criminals -- the way France, Russia and China did with Saddam. We need to be gentle with those who represent repressive autocratic regimes, because they're really very sensitive inside. That's what we need!
More to the point, we need to let the Democrats dictate who our ambassador should be, even though they're in the minority. We should have an ambassador whose main concern is being nice to everyone, someone who prefers talking about problems to solving them. That's the only way to gain the love and respect of despots, which is America's most important goal. If we're just really nice to dictators, tyrants and warlords all the time, no matter how they treat us or their own people, then they'll truly love us -- you'll see.
Sorry, Liberals, that was all sarcasm. However, it does describe the thought processes of people who worship at the altar of the UN. We don't need any of those things. Frankly, we don't need the UN -- but there are people around the world who do. What the UN needs is John Bolton -- a man who will honestly represent the President, a man who will not fear to speak the truth as he sees it, a man who can be as blunt or (as his record shows) as diplomatic as the situation requires. A man, in short, who can get the job done. The United Nations needs reform, not appeasement. You don't reward bad behavior; it must be curbed.
Voinovich's breakdown came hard on the heels of assurances that John Bolton's nomination was going to be "smooth sailing" after the betrayal of yet another Ohio Senator, Mark DeWine. DeWine was a Republican member of the group that made the so-called "compromise" -- the deal that was supposed to restore order and cooperation in the US Senate. Those who made the deal said they were trying to achieve "comity" -- an "atmosphere of social harmony." What they actually got was comedy -- and the joke is on us, the American people. Despite the fact that we voted for a Republican President as well as a Republican majority in the House and Senate, a group of latter-day Neville Chamberlains (including DeWine) decided to hand the Democrats veto power over Presidential nominations. They lost no time in exercising this power, filibustering John Bolton before the ink on the deal was even dry. Ohio, what have the rest of us done to you that you send not one, but TWO spineless faux-Republicans to represent you in the Senate?
Of course, Bolton will end up being confirmed as UN ambassador. The filibuster was just a test of power by the obstructionist Democrats. (Yes, it was a filibuster, despite the "mainstream" media scurrying to find alternate terms for it like "delaying the vote." Why else would a cloture vote need to be taken?) Once again, the character assassination was nothing more than the de rigueur Democrat attempt to cast a member of the Bush administration in the worst possible light, to undermine both his and Bush's credibility. Haven't we seen enough of this sort of thing, during the "debates" on every single person Bush has nominated to any position?
Politicians like Senator Voinovich, siding with the Democrats, claim to be concerned with the message America is sending to the world. What kind of message does it send when he appears more concerned for the sensibilities of dictators than how to best represent American interests? Those who kowtow to the United Nations often repeat idiotic slogans like "speak truth to power," but when a man like John Bolton is put in a position to do just that, they cry foul. And some just cry.
UPDATE: Check out the website ConsoleGeorge.com!
