Democrats Criticize Bolton as Ineffective--Wa Po

[Demeter]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/07/27/AR2006072700224_pf.html

Democrats Criticize Bolton as Ineffective
At Hearing on Extending His Term, Republicans Defend U.N. Ambassador

By Charles Babington
Washington Post Staff Writer
Friday, July 28, 2006; A05



Senate Democrats unleashed a sharp volley of criticism of President Bush's foreign policy yesterday, arguing that John R. Bolton has done more harm than good as U.S. ambassador to the United Nations and does not deserve an extended term. If Bolton's style were less divisive, they said, he might have achieved more reforms at the United Nations and tougher sanctions against Hezbollah and North Korea.

But Republicans defended Bolton and the administration and said it would be unwise to change ambassadors when the Middle East is in crisis and Iran and North Korea are threatening nuclear advances. Democrats said it was unclear whether they would try to filibuster Bolton's nomination this fall, as they successfully did last year.


"My objection isn't that he's a bully, but that he's been an ineffective bully and can't win the day when it comes, when it really counts," said Sen. Christopher J. Dodd (D-Conn.), who led last year's opposition...Committee members differed on Bolton's role in helping shape the U.N. Security Council's demand that North Korea suspend its recent missile tests. "Mr. Bolton publicly assured anyone who would listen that he could get support for a resolution with teeth, with so-called Chapter 7 obligations," Dodd said, referring to sanctions that could include military action. "Turns out, of course, he couldn't."

After China threatened a veto, the Security Council adopted a milder resolution.

Dodd renewed a complaint that was central to last year's opposition, demanding to know more about Bolton's delving into the identities of U.S. officials who were mentioned in conversations that were monitored by the National Security Agency. Dodd said Congress has the right to know such information, and Bolton said he did not object. But the Bush administration repeatedly has refused Dodd's request....Bolton told the committee that the past year in New York has not changed his views of the United Nations, which he often has portrayed as ineffective and corrupt. That did not sit well with Dodd, who said the ambassador "clearly has an aversion, in my view, to being diplomatic or to building consensus for U.S. positions. And that is deeply troubling to me."


SIC HIM, DODD! IS "INEFFECTIVE" THE BEST WORD THE WASHINGTON POST COULD COME UP WITH? HOW ABOUT INCOMPETENT BULLY AND DESTROYER?

[fearthem]

1. Both he and Rice are ineffective, can't help wonder if it's by design....

or just more of the ineptness that plagues the Bush administration which, to date, has destroyed everything it's touched. Are they waiting for everything to fall apart so they can pick up the pieces -- idiotic strategy, but we know they are all idiots -- nothing would surprise me They are moving very, very slow -- what's the reason?