Death of an American Monster
December 4th, 2006There will be no more fear and loathing at the United Nations directed toward John Bolton as he has announced his impending resignation, and America is better off for it. The man is a known liar who manipulates intelligence in all the wrong ways for all the wrong reasons, who screams at his aides and chases his wife from their home, as well as forcing her to engage in group sex, according to their divorce papers.
If only Bill Clinton had done such a thing then the whole world would’ve looked into it. But I am aware of John Bolton’s character (that mustach gave it away) and I am more than happy to see him go. I know that Bolton didn’t set the UN on fire as he was expected to, but he was the wrong man for the job for a variety of reasons, mainly: he’s a firebrand, a liar, a bully, baboon and a pervert, and that is not what America should send to the UN. I’ll be one of the first to criticize the UN, but I won’t tear down their walls, which is what Bolton would do and what an ideal candidate, wouldn’t. He stalled progress at the United Nations and makes big deals over nothing. (Each boxquote will correspond with the respective link behind these parenthesis.)
[1]“If Bolton left tomorrow, progress would be possible on almost every front where it is now stalled,” one senior Western diplomat fumed. “He has succeeded in putting almost everyone’s backs up, even among some of America’s closest allies. His main achievement has been to break the unified coalition of the North and unify the previously fragmented South.” Hitherto seen as weak and divided, the UN camp known as G-77—in fact, a loose grouping of 131 developing or “southern” nations plus China—has begun flexing its muscles and speaking with one voice.
[2]Less than two weeks before the White House announced his resignation, Ambassador John Bolton’s U.N. mission blocked an effort to celebrate the end of slavery in our hemisphere. Next year marks the 200th anniversary of the abolition of the trans-Atlantic slave trade. As far as anniversaries go, it seems like a good one to recognize, doesn’t it? It should not be a real bone of contention to say that one is against slavery; and, upon hearing of the anniversary of its abolition in one region, to acknowledge that as a good thing; to recognize the cost of the practice in the millions of lives uprooted and forced into extreme suffering; and to celebrate the efforts which ended the horrific practice.
To do so, a number of Caribbean countries got together to propose a commemorative resolution before the United Nations. Guess who refused to sign? That’s right: Ambassador John Bolton’s United States. In a letter, the Bolton-led U.S. mission to the UN explained their objection to two words (the U.S. preferred “the emphasis” to “emphasizing”) in the document. (You can read the document here.) After a couple dozen U.S. congresspeople kicked up a fuss — most of them members of the Congressional Black Caucus — the U.S. mission reportedly backed down, and consented to sign the document without their preferred language, according to sources close to the process.
Thank God.