May 13, 2005
Opinion:
I have not posted on the Bolton nomination to date...
By Jack Grant...because I recognized it for what it is.
Apparently, many others have not.
To make it clear what I view this nomination as, I will quote a comment I left at Cadillac Tight in response to a post by Joe where he wrote, "Oh, it galls me to say it. It really makes me ill. But I'm so sick and tired of these foreign policy 'moderates' and peaceniks longing for a return to the days when Arafat was a respected visitor at the White House and Madeline Albright had tea and crumpets with Kim Il Jong. And I'm sick and tired of the 'moderates' on both sides insisting that a return to Democratic policies wouldn't hurt the war on terror."
I felt that this rather intemperate statement needed a fuller discussion:
Ummm, no... I disagree.It boils down to Bush saying "fuck you" to yet another group that he doesn’t agree with.
Just like all his supposed "compromises" in his first term.
There is a difference between being a "uniter and not a divider" and someone who uses an attitude of "my way or the highway", and the Bolton nomination was distinctly a middle finger upraised at the UN.
Is it needed? I won't debate that here, but let's call a spade a spade.
Bush was saying "fuck you" to the UN.
If that is the message that we want to send to the world, "We don't give a damn about you," then let's send it.
And then let's not bitch when we have NO allies any more.
"Knee-jerk-moderates" see the need to placate the feelings of other nations in the world, because we see that there is MORE THAN ONE PONT OF VIEW, especially when we get to see the views of the US presented to the citizens of other countries.
Until all the OTHER knee-jerkers learn that there is more than one way to look at ANYTHING in this world, then the US will continue down the path of self-destruction through hubris that so many nations have trod before.
While the swaggering that Bush practices on both the domestic and world stage may be rewarding to those who don't think about the long-term consequences on a gut level it is ultimately harmful to both our Constitutional system and to our standing in the world at large.
No one likes a bully, and that is exactly how the rest of the world currently views the US.
Completely ignoring the views of those who don't think exactly as you do may seem rewarding, but it is not.
I won't explicitly spell it out for you, because if you are open-minded, you will do the math on your own.
If you are not open-minded, nothing I say will change your view, and it is you and your ilk I will decry and blame in a decade or two when the US is yet again under attack, and has no other nation to turn to for aid.
If we stay on this path, it will happen. I know this with no doubt and no equivocation.
Technorati Tags: opinion, United States politics, US politics
Posted by Jack Grant at 21:41 on 13 May 2005





