Confirm Bolton; revamp U.N.

it has been interesting to watch the dems and leftists attack John Bolton. I would say that these usual suspects are all bent out of shape over having a nominee before them that is a no nonsense fellow. Of course, these apologists for the increasingly ineffective UN, want to keep the status quo. Forget that the UN has become a cesspool of scandal, the one worlders do not want to hurt the feelings of the despots, socialists and communists at the UN. Halle Dale has a few comments on this.

""This is just about the most inexplicable appointment the president could make to represent the United States to the world community," said Sen. Ted Kennedy after Mr. Bolton's nomination. Sen. Joseph Biden accused Mr. Bolton of lacking "diplomatic temperament." They don't get the point. Mr. Bolton is indeed not known for diplomatic diction. He speaks his mind plainly and clearly, and his is a sharp mind to boot. During the 1990s, he said some harsh things about the United Nations — which are now being quoted back at him — but there was much to criticize, particularly as the Clinton administration was about to farm out U.S. foreign police to the United Nations.

It is no wonder that fans of the U.N. status quo, be they diplomats or Democrats on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, have been having fainting spells over his nomination. Mr. Bolton's hearings were off to a bumpy start as Democrats lined up against him firing off tough rounds of questioning. Few have any doubt that Mr. Bolton will get the confirmation; after all, he was confirmed for the sensitive post of undersecretary of state for arms control. But critics of the war in Iraq want their pound of flesh. Mr. Bolton is in good company, though. Senate Democrats likewise held up the confirmation of Mr. Bolton's boss, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, in order to make points about the president's policy in Iraq."

How soon these dems forget some of the best UN Ambassadors this country has ever had. Namely Daniel Patrick Moynahan and Jeanne Kirkpatrick. Both had what some would consider some highly undiplomatic things to say at the UN. The UN does not need some one that goes along with the status quo. What is needed here is some one that will challenge the UN to reform itself. The UN is heading down that slippery slope to irrelavence.

" In his opening statement, Mr. Bolton stressed problems with anti-corruption efforts, the bloated U.N. bureaucracy and organizational structures, abuses by U.N. peacekeepers and a paltry human-rights record. Tellingly, however, his immediate focus was the international security challenges facing the world of the 21st century. This issue was also the focus of the report of the secretary-general's high-level panel, published in November.

"If the U.N. is to play a role in fulfilling [its] mission, however, it is not enough to reform its internal structures. It must also clearly and forcefully address the new challenges we face. Rogue states, which do not necessarily subscribe to the theories and deterrence, now threaten the global community as both possessors and proliferators of weapons of mass destruction," Mr. Bolton said. He further stressed the nightmare scenario of a nexus between rogue proliferator states and terrorist organizations.

Rather than bicker, the Senate Foreign Relations Committee ought to seize the opportunity and confirm this tough-minded civil servant. If the United Nations can be redeemed, it will need someone like Mr. Bolton to take charge."

It would seem that the Senate dems and their leftist allies would prefer the UN as the cesspool of corruption and anti-Americanism that it has become. Then there is the politics of it all. Ler's face it, the dems have nothing to offer in terms of ideas, so they will stay in obstructionist mode. It would appear that they have learned nothing from Tommy Daschle's defeat in 2004. - Sailor