Never Miss An Opportunity to Divide, Not Unite

The prevailing opinion is that Bush is going to put Bolton into the UN Ambassador position while the senate's on break. So...does John Bolton have pictures of Bush's homosexual affair with Jeff Gannon? (and before you accuse me of being a looney liberal, that would of course be a joke)

This liberal is trying, through the use of common sense, to understand why Bush, who has driven such a huge wedge between those of us on the left and the right, would toss yet another gallon of gas on that fire instead of nominating someone who isn't the most divisive candidate possible. John Bolton's exactly that.

Maybe the President could nominate someone whose work record doesn't include chasing a woman down a hallway screaming and throwing things after her. I know Republicans can be an intense and incendiary lot...but don't you think he could find someone whose work record doesn't include that episode of craziness?

Some conservatives have asked about Clinton's liason with Lewinsky--"what would happen to you if you were caught doing that?" The insinuation is that we might be fired, and that may in actuality be true (though it's important to note that Lewinsky was an intern, not an employee). I can tell you that if I'd been caught doing what Bolton's documented as having done, I would have some major 'splainin' to do. I think it's also safe to say that kind of behavior wouldn't cause me to be elevated to a very high position. More than likely I would have been fired, but in lieu of that, I'd surely have been reprimanded and made to undergo anger management counseling.

So I ask: this is the one-n-only guy who can try to make peace in America's name?

Has John Bolton been given a unique set of genes which allow him and ONLY him the combination of brain cells and assholiness required to slap that UN around and make it a subservient body that will bend to our every will? Can Bush truly find no one who could combine extreme intelligence, knowledge of human nature, a worldwide sense of confidence, and sheer will to mend, rather than yank out by the roots our country's attempts at diplomacy? Is our diplomatic bench so non-existent that there's truly NO ONE who could be the UN Ambassador but John Bolton?

Or is this instead about EGO? Is this about saying "I'M in the driver's seat and DAMNIT, I'll appoint the man I want to appoint, and I don't care a lick what anyone else thinks!"

This attitude doesn't just show a disrespect for the idea of professionalism, nor just the Democratic opposition to Bolton. This shows a disrespect for the American people, which deserve to look with pride toward our UN representation. Why would Bush want us to wince when we think about what Bolton will do there? If Bolton's appointed without Senate confirmation, it'll be yet another notch in the wall of shame of this presidency, which by now is a pock-marked moonscape of stupid moves powered by ego instead of the American peoples' best interest.