MNpublius.com

When President Bush made the recess appointment of John Bolton to be Ambassador to the UN, it was classic W logic - who better to run the UN relationship on the American side than an outspoken, unabashed critic of the UN?

Bush’s tough love approach to the UN was as condescending as it was wrong. For one to believe that Bolton would be an effective reformer at the UN because he was so critical of it relied on a huge leap of faith - that John Bolton had the diplomatic skill, happy inflexibility, and depth of personality to own the role as a positive, effective, consensus-building change agent (especially on the Security Council). Many Senators were unwilling to make that leap, and who can blame them? Except, of course, President Bush:

“They chose to obstruct his confirmation, even though he enjoys majority support in the Senate, and even though their tactics will disrupt our diplomatic work at a sensitive and important time. This stubborn obstructionism ill serves our country, and discourages men and women of talent from serving their nation.”

Diplomatic success always has been totally lost on President Bush. The Dam of the Senate has ensured, for the time being, that an unqualified, indeed dangerous appointment has died on the vine that is the Foreign Relations Committee.

Thank you very much, Constitution.

Reuters has a nice roundup of key Bolton facts…