"Oh, what a pity. I'm sure McCain would be devastated to hear this. I have to say, reading this kind of risible crap gets me in the mood to say let's all get behind John Bolton, shall we, and send him to USUN soonest. Particularly the comments of the German Ambassador to Washington, Wolfgang Ischinger, so dripping with condescension, disingenuousness and hypocrisy: "we tend to think of ourselves as more experienced in the way societies evolve," "(t)his is very complicated, "(c)hanging the way people think often has to do with religious and cultural issues...Americans think, Let's solve the problem in the next four years!" I mean, how many silly, tired, protest-placard stereotypes can the good Ambassador mutter on about in one short interview with the New Yorker? Or does he seriously believe Washington policymakers aren't aware that democratization of Iraq isn't a long, multi-year (perhaps generational) task? Or that people in the Beltway are unawares that, er, religious and cultural factors play a role in the Iraq effort? Has he followed the roiling debates about a Sistani or a Sadr amidst U.S elites and commentariat (whether in think-tanks, in newspapers, in the blogosphere, even, on occasion, on television)? Does he appreciate the complex nature of the American effort currently underway to cobble together national governance structures in Iraq--with all the attendant balancing of ethnicities and assurances of minority rights? Or would the Germans (always so delicate when dealing with such things)--would they be so much more nuanced and refined? Are we such primitives toiling away in Manhattan and NW Washington? Are Zal Khalilzad, John Negroponte, Paul Wolfowitz, Condi Rice, Bob Zoellick--are they all this effing dumb? C'mon, let's get serious, OK? Look, this might play well in the streets of Hamburg or Cologne, but it shouldn't be uttered by a German Ambassador to the United States. Not one that wishes to be taken seriously in his host country, that is."
http://www.belgraviadispatch.com/archives/004583.html
[Linked from instapundit]
Yes, it getting a bit old with all this condescension crap.
Let's put Bolton in there as quickly as possible; he might wake up these lazy bigots these nations are sending as excuses for ambassadors.
If all Bolton could do was to throughly piss them off, it would be worth the ticket.
Support John Bolton
The whole thread (81 posts)
- Support John Bolton
- It's about Bush, continued...
- Bolton is a really bad choice
- A list of former U.N. ambassadors
- re: Bolton is a really bad choice
- It is not about the UN, it is about Bolton (n/t)
- Actually, no, it's about Bush.
- Someone who would manufacture a bioweapons case against Cuba...
- re: Actually, no, it's about Bolton.
- Not according to the Democrats
- Yeah, the UN members have been real diplomatic with Bush! (n/t)
- Just as it was just about Condi Rice, the judges who have been waiting 4+ years for the "advise and consent" up/down vote thing...
- "Advise and consent" does not mean "rubber stamp".
- Of course it doesn't mean rubber stamp.
- You really have swallowed the whole line, haven't you?
- I disagree with Joan Lefkow 100%
- Of course you do. Don't work with the public much, do you?
- I feel sorry for Judge Lefcow. But she is completely wrong.
- As gently as I can, for fear of stirring up SamF again...
- I'm shaken, not stirred. ;-) (n/t)
- Yes. Apparently you took something differently from it than I did.
- On a related note: It shows how poor the Congress is that no congressmen were willing to challenge her.
- As gently as I can, for fear of stirring up SamF again...
- I feel sorry for Judge Lefcow. But she is completely wrong.
- Of course you do. Don't work with the public much, do you?
- I disagree with Joan Lefkow 100%
- You really have swallowed the whole line, haven't you?
- Bolton
- OK, and it Certainly does not mean FILIBUSTER (n/t)
- Of course it doesn't mean rubber stamp.
- "Advise and consent" does not mean "rubber stamp".
- Actually, no, it's about Bush.
- It is not about the UN, it is about Bolton (n/t)
- No way
- The CURRENT governments want us to stay.
- re: To bad so sad. Bush won't leave the White House until 2009
