Confirmation hearing starts tomorrow! Gitcher last licks in! 
This one is circling the drain, folks. Chafee has all but said he’s going to vote No, and that combined with unanimous Dem opposition would kill the nomination. Frist is not in a strong position to coerce Chafee, not at the moment.
If so, that would be the first really important vote in either house of Congress that Bush has yet lost. Am I wrong?
Are you saying it’s up to the press to stop the nomination? 
Is it permitted under the UN Charter for the delegates to refuse to seat a representative, because of his personal conduct?
Congress can.
No I’m saying the press might be quiet because Bolton rampaging in the UN would make for nice newspaper selling material.
Strike the Chafee story above - they got to him.
I don’t pay attn to the UN Ambassador, but this must be a big story if Google searches put John R. Bolton above the real John Bolton.
People really hate this guy, huh?
While the promotion of hateful persons to positions of authority to get hem out someone’s way might be called “The Peter Principal” by those who neither have read Peter’s book nor know how to spell “principle”; the Peter Principle is, in fact, the promotion of someone who is quite good at a lower-level job to higher levels until he reaches his level of incompetence.
Just so you use it right.
Yahoo News on Bolton…
Seems his nomination will be battled over unless some kind of political reason not to do so appears… I certainly think his nomination to the UN sends all sorts of wrong signals to the world.
Looks like he’ll be the sort who’ll dish out constructive critism of the UN when it needs it most. Just because he has the opinion that the UN is the League Of Nations redux, doesn’t mean he should be barred from being posted there.
Yes, as a matter of fact, it does, if he’s so untactful as to spread that opinion around like his kids’ class photos.
John Bolton’s stated opinion is that the US needs to go in and show the UN how it’s done, that the UN needs to follow the US lead.
Now, you may agree with this, and you may agree with him that the UN has made many wrong decisions and become largely ineffective – I may agree with some of those points myself – but that’s not the issue.
The point is, Bolton will get no results because he’s confrontational, undiplomatic, and chauvanistic. If you want someone to go in there and act like cock of the walk, great, he’s your man. But some of us here, including myself, want results.
It’s just more Bush administration ideology-first, America-only hubris that’s going to come back around and bite us in the butt when the chickens come home to roost and we discover that, while we may be the biggest kid on the block at the moment, our day in the sun won’t last if we lose all our friends.
(Now put that wad of mixed metaphor in yer pipe and smoke it! 
)
If he thinks the UN is so useless… why should he want to deal with the UN ? I think his “constructive” criticism doesn’t work when its done on their face and so undiplomatically.
Too bad his boss doesn’t feel the same way.
Or are you simply asking that the UN should be more tolerant than the President of the United States?
Thats right Rjung, Bush = Devil on every issue.
Ever thought his boss might not like him?
Because sometimes instead of destroying something because you believe it not being valid is inheirently more stupid, however even though Bolton has expressed his views on how he hates the UN, shouldn’t stop him from doing his job effectively.
How about waiting until he gets his job, then fucks up and then critizise him.
I don’t see a problem with this, America is the worlds greatest and most powerful force for freedom in the world, why shouldn’t it tell the kleptocracies and authoritarian regimes to shove it?
How about waiting until he’s posted there and then critising him.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/7294263/
read.
First comment is silly and childish…
As for the second… Bolton is going to represent the USA in the UN… its not a “on the job” learning possibility. If Bush is really sincere about dialogue and wanting the world to help… then sending Bolton sends the wrong message. An important position like this is hardly one for something like “wait until he gets his job, then fucks up”. If anyone is capable of screwing things up badly just because of his past… its Bolton… can the US afford this risk ?
Its one thing to be fair to Bolton… its another to give US interests a fair chance of being well represented and defended in the UN. Most of us have criticized his past…
Which was my intent
Yep
Plenty of people critisize everyones past, yet surpass their expectations when presented with something like this. I think we should give Bolton the same chance.
If you believe that, then you have no concept of what the job is.
No one who ran a business with that philosophy would stay open very long.
Oh, right, I forgot, freedom is on the march. :rolleyes:
And for your information, not all members of the UN are kleptocracies and authoritarian regimes.
Thats right
No, but alot of them are, and one of the biggest is on the security council.
Tell Pollyanna I said hi.
The US may be feeling like the king of the hill, but it’s a damn big hill, and there are a lot of other kids out there.
We’re already spread thin logistically, and everyone knows it. We don’t have much muscle left to throw around to back up our big talk.
China is poised to eat our lunch. Wake up and smell the cat food, brother.