This is something members of the “echo machine” do as a matter of course. A given individual makes statements, in varying degrees away from reality, and just lets it run out there, usually knowing that he won’t be called on it if what he says is complete bullshit–and who cares if someone does establish the truth of the statement later on, because they’re closing the barn door with the horse way down the road and the damage is already done.
This interview was a classic example. I knew Bolton was wrong about Lincoln (or to be more accurate, was wrong about Stewart being wrong about Lincoln) the moment he said it. But the verification that he was wrong only came a day later–long after many people heard the erroneous statement, which some subset of those people probably believed (and never heard the rebuttal).
So it often goes with the likes of Bolton and other “Bushies”. The m.o. boils down to arguments based on appeals to authority, with the person stating the argument usually standing themselves as the authority (“He worked in the Justice Dept., he was ambassador to the UN–he must know what he’s talking about.”). It doesn’t fool the sharpest folks, but most don’t have the smarts or the gumption to follow through and find out the truth. Frightening if so indeed.
I got the impression that what Bolton meant by democratic theory was that when the people elected the President, they were endorsing his policies and so that, by pushing his policies as far as he can, he is doing the will of the majority.
With this point of view, opposing the will of the President is opposing the will of the people.
Not that I believe this, but am I wrong in thinking this is what he was getting at?
I think that accurately sums up the Bolton/Bush Administration talking point. That point assumes that members of Congress obtained their positions and authority by wandering in off the street.