Do we really want Bolton in the UN? President Bush's "How to Destroy a Country in Two Administrations or Less" drama continues.

Saturday, April 23, 2005
By Dr. John W. Luton

George Bush has done it again! To prove that he's completely out of sync with reality, Bush has tapped one of the most anti-UN people in the United States for the position of -- gasp!-- ambassador to the very organization he detests.

In selecting John Bolton for U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, President Bush continues to effectively demonstrate his total lack of understanding about -- well, just about everything. Not only has he almost singlehandedly mired our country in a war from which we may never extricate ourselves, he's added fat to the fire by nominating Bolton as UN ambassador. Yes, this is the same Bolton who, in opposition to sounder thinkers and better intelligence, helped orchestrate one of the most egregious and far-reaching notions of our time: the administration's weapons of mass destruction fantasy, which "justified" the present war with Iraq.

Is this the kind of person we want representing the U. S. in the United Nations? Never in a million years. So, what prompted Bush to settle in on this particular nominee?

My theory is that our president, in a consistent demonstration of his penchant for gathering "like thinkers" around him -- in order to perpetuate his rubber-stamping, group-thinking approach to running the country -- must have decided long ago that Bolton was a man he could not afford to be without. Unlike former Secretary of State Colin Powell, who continually registered strong disagreement with many of the president's policies -- I can't wait to read that book --, Bolton has consistently demonstrated the "yes man" mentality that Bush thrives on. Hence, Bolton's nomination for this key spot before the rest of the world.

Is Bolton's dour demeanor the image of America that we need to project? A thousand times no! He just happens to agree with George Bush's overriding desire to flaunt American jingoism -- the "us four and no more" theory of statesmanship -- and to flout the pesky encumbrances of collegial peer pressure. Bush, while in office as well as when he flunked his test on world leaders a few years ago, has done everything in his power to demonstrate his belief that the UN is, at best, a body of powerless resolution-makers whose rules and regulations don't faze him in the least. And with Bolton, the chief respondent in Bush's amen corner, the president has found a kindred spirit -- one with mean streak that he's all too willing to unleash on anyone who thinks otherwise.

So, as congress continues to open Bolton's baggage and air his dirty laundry en route to what many pundits are predicting to be an ultimate confirmation, we continue to observe, with few exceptions, partisan party politics at its best -- notwithstanding Assistant Secretary of State Ford's on-the-record remarks and Powell's behind-the-scenes suggestions to the contrary.

If John Bolton is confirmed in his nomination to this high post, we're in for a rough For someone who doesn't believe that cloning is moral and ethical, Bush seems to be doing a good job of it when it comes to reproducing cronies who share his less than stellar grasp on what's right and good for our country. Bolton's nomination is just the latest chapter in George Bush's serialized version of how to destroy a country in two adminstrations or less.

As always, I welcome your opinions. All views are welcome.