Bolton at the U.N.

As had been reported in recent days, President Bush appointed John Bolton to the position of U.N. ambassador after he had failed to win confirmation from the U.S. Senate.

Of course, President Bush and his administration blamed Democrats for failing to confirm his nomination (never mind that the Senate, including Democrats, have confirmed every single other major cabinet or administration appointment that Bush has made). Jesse Berney at the DNC blog nicely summarizes the reasons why Democrats (as well as Republican Senator George Voinovich) have refused to confirm Bolton.

The fact is, the man is a walking disaster.

The worst part of this is, that in America when Bush takes his 'my way or the highway' approach, we understand that it is just the rigid and inflexible tantrums of an immature knave who happens to be the President.

But by appointing John Bolton as U.N. ambassador, a man who has questioned even the very existence of the institution he has been appointed to (can you imagine our appointing an ambassador to any country in the world who had publically talked about dismembering the country?) we send the message that anti-American zealots around the world have been longing to hear us say: that we expect others in the world to fall in and march behind us, and that the only use of 'diplomacy' is to give them a chance to come around and agree with us. This is an arrogant, condescending attitude, and it only helps and strengthens our enemies.

George W. Bush will be gone in January 2009. John Bolton will be gone even sooner, in January 2007. But that is plenty of time for more damage to be done to our own national reputation, and in an age where we need global cooperation in fighting an enemy who reaches across international borders, we can't afford to continue to insult the rest of the world.