Posted on 9/18/2005, 9:27:33 AM by Cincinatus' Wife
UNITED NATIONS - When President Bush greeted Secretary-General Kofi Annan on Wednesday, he gestured toward John Bolton, the U.S. ambassador, and asked, "Has the place blown up since he's been here?"
The internal U.N. television sound boom that picked up the jest did not record any response from the secretary-general, who simply smiled.
But the same question, in less explosive form, has been posed repeatedly around the United Nations since the Aug. 1 arrival of Bolton, who once said that the headquarters building was filled with such sloth and incompetence that it would not matter if 10 of its 38 floors were lopped off.
Bolton's fellow ambassadors say they are impressed with his work ethic, his knowledge and his toughness as a negotiator.
In the three weeks of intensive negotiations on the document approved Friday night by the 153 world leaders at the summit conference on global poverty and U.N. reform, he was in his chair at 8 a.m. and often still there when the meetings adjourned at 1 a.m.
Much of the positive reaction to Bolton has come from him not living up to his negative reviews.
"People were very cautious, to say the least, because of his reputation as a tough guy who didn't like the U.N.," said Abdallah Baali, the ambassador of Algeria, who said he knew Bolton from working with him in Africa. "In fact, I was the only one who said that Bolton was an intelligent man who could be creative and constructive and wouldn't go around bullying delegations."
Instead of strong-arming delegations, Bolton won points for glad-handing them, making it a point to make contact with all 32 envoys in the talks.
"I was struck by this almost hysterical notion of what having Bolton in the room would mean and how that would work out," said a European ambassador, who said he could comment on a colleague only anonymously.
"Quite frankly," he said, "not even one-third of what was feared about John Bolton, his style, his approach, the way he would work, actually came through in the room. All I saw was an ambassador who did his work and did it well."
Some delegates, however, faulted Bolton for emphasizing what the United States would never accept, saying it ended up encouraging more active opposition to American positions.
They complained that he devoted too much time to talking about the American "red lines" and about the red pen he had in his pocket.
Those diplomats who feared that Bolton came with devil's horns thought they saw them spring forth three weeks ago when he submitted more than 400 substantive amendments and deletions and ordered up a line-by-line renegotiation of the summit document.
One of the recommendations was to eliminate all mention of a series of anti-poverty measures called the millennium development goals.
The surprise attack on a cherished standard sent shock waves across the United Nations where officials had grown hopeful that the Bush administration's hostility to the United Nations had significantly lessened, particularly after supportive comments from Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and State Department opposition to calls for the United States to withhold its U.N. dues.
A week later, the phrase was restored at Rice's direction, and Wednesday, President Bush declared in his speech to the General Assembly, "We are committed to the millennium development goals."
So a question arose about whether Bolton had been carrying out the traditional mission of executing State Department policy or originating his own more assertive view.
R. Nicholas Burns, undersecretary of state for political affairs, denied in an interview that there was any disconnect with Washington, and he noted that he had been in touch with Bolton every day.
"We set out from the month of April a very well-defined set of objectives as to what we wanted to achieve by the September summit," Burns said.
This is the Democrats position toward the Republicans.
Yes. Anything that makes the U.S. stronger is a rallying point of opposition for Democrats.
MSM job is to attack anyone that Bush nominates to any position with no regard to his/her qualifications. MSM
shows their true agenda -- antiBush and antiAmerican.
Judge Roberts showed more skill and job knowledge than all those senators put together on the committee. The sight of
Kennedy, Leahy, Durbin asking questions concerning rights; one leaves a person in the water, one leaks classified materials that may have caused some agent deauths and one categorizes our service people as Nazis... sure makes you wonder who should be judging whom...
Just my humble opinion....
***......Democrats torn
The meeting will come in the midst of Democrats' deliberations on Roberts. Schumer and some of his Democratic colleagues on the judiciary committee, including Dianne Feinstein of California and Biden, have said they are genuinely torn about whether to vote for confirmation, and expect to meet Tuesday to discuss it. The judiciary panel is expected to vote on the nomination on Thursday.
From a strategic standpoint, Democrats are of two minds about how to vote. Some say a strong vote against Roberts would prod the White House into nominating a moderate for the O'Connor seat. But others say Democrats should hold their fire for the next nominee. Senators who do support Roberts can easily argue that they are giving great weight to his impressive qualifications, despite their uneasiness with his refusal to answer many of their questions. But the next nominee might not get that same consideration.
"Someone who comes in and says exactly what Roberts said for the O'Connor seat is not going to be given the benefit of the doubt," said Jeff Peck, a Democratic lobbyist. He added, "They're going to lay down very clear markers with dissatisfaction about Roberts not answering things they think he could have."***
http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/ssistory.mpl/politics/3358501
..and all the LibDem Senators say "Damn!" in unison, and will NEVER be heard to say, "Bush was right in picking Bolton".
Bump!
Let us all remember that compliments coming from a fellow UN Ambassador is useless. These are people who praised Idi Amin, Hugo Chavez and Fidel Castro each time they give a speech.
Bad source if you are looking for affirmation.
Bush doesn't really hate midgets as claimed by Chris rock.
Actually, now I'm disappointed. I was hoping he would blow the place up....
Pity. Hope he'll get tougher.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.