This is a good thing. After all, why in the world would we want anyone at the UN who would speak strongly on behalf of the U.S. or its one ally in the Middle East, Israel, and who called the U.N. what it was? Let's get someone in there who will be a better representative for the U.S., like John Kerry or James Baker. What the hell, why not go with Cindy Sheehan, or maybe Ward Churchill would want the job?
This is a dark day for the U.S.............................
While I understand support for Bolton's steadfast position with respect to Israel, where are his achievements? Moynihan, who some bloggers compare him to, was not merely strong rheotically: he was able to build consesus; he was emotionally steady, personally charming, and a true intellectual, blessed with an amazing mind. Most importantly, his record speaks for itself. Sadly, so does Bolton's.
I say this with a certain degree of sadness because I don't intend this comment to be a provocation. I respect the work that this blog does, enjoy the format and agree most of the time. But I really would like to have a bullet list of Bolton's record at the U.N. What did he accomplish? How has he furthered the interests of the U.S., peace, or democracy? I would like to hear from Bolton supporters what acheivements they point to.
I realize that Israel and her allies cannot afford to routinely second-guess supporters. We have too few as it is. But with friends like Bolton...
Excuse me, but I would like to see the bullet points of his failures. What sort of consensus do you expect him to achieve at the UN? What exactly has he done wrong or poorly over the past year? I see an able and aggressive advocate for American positions, and have not heard any serious complaints about his actual job performance. The Senators that are now standing against him are the same as when the only thing they had to oppose him with with rumors of his being a bit of a curmudgeon.
It's not in the nature of the beast of diplomacy to be able to run down a laundry list -- who knows what was his backroom ability, and what was his steadfastness that simply makes other coalesce to him (I think that's sufficient, BTW). Was the recent alignment of the US and France on Syria Bolton's doing in any way? http://www.solomonia.com/blog/archives/009624.shtml
How can we know?
I don't expect much from the UN, other than to try to control the damage. I don't see any evidence that Bolton hasn't performed as I'd want a UN Ambassador to perform. This is partisan political scalp-hunting as far as I'm concerned.
I'm not really into the political crossfire approach. If Bolton did a good job, lets give him his due by stating his record clearly.
By the way, this isn't a black and white issue. It IS possible to be strongly pro-U.S., pro-Israel, pro-democracy, etc. and either support or oppose Bolton. I just want a clear look at his record, which I find lacking.
Also, the Moynihan comparisons are very clearly overkill, no?
First, here's one source reflecting upon Bolton's positive achievements.. It's not an unreasonable request, the positive record. On the other hand, there's a curious omission here: what of the obverse side of this same coin? Why not a request of the Senators and others who have failed to support Bolton's nomination, a request that they support their claim with a well grounded critique, especially so in light of Bolton's positive achievements?
I just want a clear look at their rationales, which I find lacking.
This is a good thing. After all, why in the world would we want anyone at the UN who would speak strongly on behalf of the U.S. or its one ally in the Middle East, Israel, and who called the U.N. what it was? Let's get someone in there who will be a better representative for the U.S., like John Kerry or James Baker. What the hell, why not go with Cindy Sheehan, or maybe Ward Churchill would want the job?
This is a dark day for the U.S.............................
While I understand support for Bolton's steadfast position with respect to Israel, where are his achievements? Moynihan, who some bloggers compare him to, was not merely strong rheotically: he was able to build consesus; he was emotionally steady, personally charming, and a true intellectual, blessed with an amazing mind. Most importantly, his record speaks for itself. Sadly, so does Bolton's.
I say this with a certain degree of sadness because I don't intend this comment to be a provocation. I respect the work that this blog does, enjoy the format and agree most of the time. But I really would like to have a bullet list of Bolton's record at the U.N. What did he accomplish? How has he furthered the interests of the U.S., peace, or democracy? I would like to hear from Bolton supporters what acheivements they point to.
I realize that Israel and her allies cannot afford to routinely second-guess supporters. We have too few as it is. But with friends like Bolton...
Excuse me, but I would like to see the bullet points of his failures. What sort of consensus do you expect him to achieve at the UN? What exactly has he done wrong or poorly over the past year? I see an able and aggressive advocate for American positions, and have not heard any serious complaints about his actual job performance. The Senators that are now standing against him are the same as when the only thing they had to oppose him with with rumors of his being a bit of a curmudgeon.
It's not in the nature of the beast of diplomacy to be able to run down a laundry list -- who knows what was his backroom ability, and what was his steadfastness that simply makes other coalesce to him (I think that's sufficient, BTW). Was the recent alignment of the US and France on Syria Bolton's doing in any way?
http://www.solomonia.com/blog/archives/009624.shtml
How can we know?
I don't expect much from the UN, other than to try to control the damage. I don't see any evidence that Bolton hasn't performed as I'd want a UN Ambassador to perform. This is partisan political scalp-hunting as far as I'm concerned.
OK, but the list of achievements?
I'm not really into the political crossfire approach. If Bolton did a good job, lets give him his due by stating his record clearly.
By the way, this isn't a black and white issue. It IS possible to be strongly pro-U.S., pro-Israel, pro-democracy, etc. and either support or oppose Bolton. I just want a clear look at his record, which I find lacking.
Also, the Moynihan comparisons are very clearly overkill, no?
File under "curious omission".
First, here's one source reflecting upon Bolton's positive achievements.. It's not an unreasonable request, the positive record. On the other hand, there's a curious omission here: what of the obverse side of this same coin? Why not a request of the Senators and others who have failed to support Bolton's nomination, a request that they support their claim with a well grounded critique, especially so in light of Bolton's positive achievements?
I just want a clear look at their rationales, which I find lacking.
Before trying to list Bolton's achievements why not list the opposition he had, especially from Foggy Bottom?
Just came across this by way of Mediacrity.blogspot
http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=MGY0MmU5N2FhMzgyMzU3YmRmMWE1NjA3ZWZhNjRkMjA=
where Anne Bayefsky lists Bolton's achievements.