Bolton will simply veto the resolution. Or declare that it has no merit. Or insult the people who passed it. Or say it shows what's wrong with the U.N.

All of which will prove its merit.

What's amazing (and disgusting) is the right-wing trolls™ that frequent here, as well as -most- Americans, will say "we're American.. we don't have to follow international laws (that we help draft).. and we can do what ever we want to anyone we want.. we have the biggest guns!".

Just wait till a U.N. Security Force of 150,000 - 200,000 is "deployed" to various U.S. interests around the world, and the U.N., and thereby many industrialized nations, desice it's time to stop feeding the beast (the U.S. consumes near 45% of the -world's- resources, yet we're only 5% of the population.. and now that our industrial base is 'off shore', they can just seize the means of production and cut the U.S. off completely.. so much for "it's my ball and I'll make the rules! otherwise I'm taking my ball and going home!", eh?)

Congrats! U.S.A!.. you are now considered to be in the company of some of the WORST nations in the world, and -falling-. There's your Manifest Destiny, right there.

Savantster #2

You point out how important international diplomacy (playing nice in the sand box) is to nations.

When the republican dictatorship stole power the US was so well liked and respected, due to decades of good international diplomacy.

They have ruined all of that, and have done the greatest of disservice to America. They are traitors to the American cause.

Just a while back they were lying about how great the elections in Iraq and the killing of a terrorist (name begins with "Z" it think) was going to change everything.

Now Iraqi protestors and government officials are marching in Baghdad:

Hundreds of thousands of Shiites chanting "Death to Israel" and "Death to America" marched through the streets of Baghdad's biggest Shiite district Friday in a show of support for Hezbollah militants battling Israeli troops in Lebanon.

(link here, bold added). So, the military industrial complex, the power behind the republican dictatorship, is really making you feel safer in the world?

Now even the 9/11 Commission, (most naive commission in decades), is saying they probably should have considered criminal prosecutions against the Pentagon because the Pentagon lied during the 9/11 hearings (link here).

Who are the 30%-35% who support these criminals? Are there that many thugs around?

If you mock the French as wine-sipping wimps, dismiss Germany as part of the "old Europe," proclaim an axis of evil that includes whomever you dislike at a given moment for whatever reason, if you support Israel 100% no matter what, say that without us, Canada "...would be Honduras," support crooked elections overseas if our guy wins but protest them sanctimoniously if the other guy does, invade sovereign countries on false pretenses, judge the motivations of terrorists according to your own designs and prejudices, use economic leverage to bribe poor countries, all the while trivializing domestic objections to your policies as unpatriotic...well, you've finally done all that the rest of the world abhors.

Right, Savantster. We've become our own axis of evil.

It just makes me sad (and mad) that our country, once poised to be able to do the most good in the world, has descended into one of the most hated nations in the world.. and is well on track to be sanctioned/invaded by the global community.. all because some rich arrogant fucks want more money and power.

We need to take our country back.. soon! I just don't know how we do that, in this day and age. People are uninformed and disconcerened (outwardly, at least). The Media has failed us and lies and faith are the order of the day. Honest reasoned people are left standing dazed and bewildered by all the psychosis around us, and in -real- danger from the fanatics on the right-wing fringe. Today they beat and kill gays, tomorrow Ann Coulter will have her desire and "liberals" will be on the hit-list too.

And no one (internationally) wants to approach the psycho with blood on his hands who's swinging a huge axe. This is a mess, indeed..

An ambassador is saying that the preznit did not even know that Islam had two branches:

Galbraith reports that the three of them spent some time explaining to Bush that there are two different sects in Islam--to which the President allegedly responded, “I thought the Iraqis were Muslims!”

(link here).

But we can rest assured that the preznit knew how many barrels of oil were under their feet!

I don't know exactly why, except possibly for the upcoming election, a prominent republican is calling for a John Kerry type withdrawal from Iraq:

With Iraq exploding in sectarian violence and “moving closer and closer to a straight-out civil war,” Hagel said, the Bush administration’s decision to transfer nearly 5,000 additional U.S. troops into Baghdad is “only going to make it worse for us.”

In the end, he said, “feed(ing) more American troop fodder into the fight” could result in “even a worse defeat.”

(link here). Yet when Cynthia McKinney is accused of being controlled by the "turrists" for no reason (link here), and Kerry was swiftboated.

WP,
Thank you for posting this important story.
I read it while I was (I still am) in the process of writing a letter to Barney Frank in response to a speech he gave recently. I'm including a link to this report in my letter, since it relates directly to some of his comments.
His speech was mostly excellent, but several of his statements really got to me:

Early on he says this:
"...Some of the words that get thrown around, authoritarianism and worse should not be used lightly. This remains today, in the sixth year of the Bush Presidency, a very free country. People are free to speak out, to dissent. People are free to be critical..."

He seems SOMEWHAT concerned about elections, but twice says:
"...we need to reassure the country that elections are fully, fairly conducted..."

I don't know about the rest of you guys, but being reassured will not quite do it for me.
People do not need to be "reassured", Mr. Frank! People need to be ARRESTED.
(although not necessarily the same people)

And this:
"...What we have is an administration that is radically trying to change the nature of our democracy. They want to simplify it, they want to neaten it..."

Right. They want to "neaten it".

It's gonna be a pretty long letter.

Yipes, Joan, I hope you've called in support troops for while you're writing your letter. You're going to need food, water, reinforcements, rest stops, laundry and maid services... I heard that having something delivered Fed Ex usually gets it seen. Don't forget that part too. ITMFA!

Robert Lockwood Mills #1

The last I heard, the Democrats have really softened up on Bolton, and won't oppose him.

I hate this!

Joan:

I usually like Barney Frank's unusual take on things and usually agree, but he's stretching things a bit in that speech. I'd like to see his proof that the elections are fair.

#9 Agent99,
LOL, you seem to know (and you're right) how absurdly l-o-o-o-n-g I take to write my letters to these guys!!
I forgot to post a link to Barney Frank's speech. I'll add one at the end of this comment.

#10 Larry,
I usually like him, too, that's why I'm dismayed by some of what he has to say.
Like I said it's mostly good...but does that REALLY mean (as a friend suggested the other day) that he just knows how to talk the talk? Because his conclusions are MADDENINGLY tepid.

Oops...here's that speech:

link

Joan:

I almost got a chance to ask Barney Frank directly what he thought about the voting machines on a local radio station. I wrote a message about it here on Bradblog. At least now I know what he would have said. I was mad at the time that they wouldn't let me ask him and later heard the program and found out it was mostly focused on homosexuality. Now I wonder if he saw a monitor with my question, and told them to drop me.

I saw a press conference by the American Bar Association with members speaking out and very annoyed that they have to be the ones to hold the executive branch accountable for Bush's unbelievable use of signing statements to avoid brushes with congress over vetos.

When Frank says that we are free to be critical, do we really know that nobody in congress wanted to dissent when Bush ignored their laws. If congress isn't allowed that courtesy, how can Frank make a statement like that?