John Bolton is the logical emissary to the UN.

[immoderate]

Why are we wringing our hands hoping for a more rational choice for UN ambassador, when Bolton is the perfect person to represent the Bush administration depravity to the rest of the world? Why don't we just show them what we have to put up with here?

What would be the advantage for us to send someone with some claim on being human, like a Colin Powell? They would have to debase themselves anyway. If there is any decency left in them, they wouldn't be able to use it.

Every person in this administration is a piece of shit, and why should their representative to the UN belie that? I think that they should send someone to the UN that deserves to be treated like a real member of the Bush administration. Who cares if Bolton is ignored or spat upon? He will have deserved it. Forget the mixed messages.

I think we should put our energy into blocking fascist judges. Let the Bush administration have the ambassador that most represent their particular, uh, sensibilities. Give the people what they want!

--IMM

[whistle]

1. Bush will appoint Bolton regardless of how congress votes....

...Bolton's next assignment will be to ride roughshod over the U.N. for the next four years regardless of what congress wants.

[immoderate]

4. Anybody decent could not do the job for Bush.

Let's give them a taste of real asshole.

--IMM

[salinen]

2. Colin Powell?

When did he become human? Otherwise, I like what you're saying.

[immoderate]

5. Maybe I didn't hedge enough.

Colin Powell has some claim on maybe appearing human sometimes, to a few people, who don't really know him very well.

With John Bolton, there's no question you're getting the asshole of the western world.

--IMM

[BurtWorm]

3. As a New Yorker, I have to say

feh! You can keep the bastid, Washington. :puke:

[LondonReign2]

6. Yup, since Jeff Dammer is no longer available...

...Bolton is the next best choice!

[rucky]

7. um, because we hate to see what's happening to America

we have to fight these facists every step of the way.

but i see your point. since re-selection, it seems that it's gotta get worse before it can get better.

[ewagner]

8. You have to ask

a question before you give Bolton a "pass" to become UN Ambassador. The question is:

How much damage could Bolton do to the rest of the world and is that damage irreparable?

My belief is that he could cause irreparable harm......

[Bridget Burke]

9. Everything must get worse before it can get better?

Sounds like Naderista thinking, circa 2000. (So long ago.)

It looks as though the Democrats have a chance of blocking this one. We've let enough fools & murderers be appointed--why should be give up now?

The ambassador will represent US to the world--a world that already knows about Bush.

(Why is there an identical thread every day?)

[immoderate]

10. Not everything.

But who would make this right working for Bush?

I think we should try to save the judgeships. They are lifetime appointments. Bolton would appropriately be an object of disdain.

(Somebody does this every day? I didn't see'em. :shrug:)

--IMM

[ktowntennesseedem]

11. Send 'em Jeff Gannon!

or whatever his name really is. Let the UN really know how much we want to screw them!!!