Newsweek: "Could Bolton be good for the U.N.?"

[Bush_Eats_Beef]

NOTE: The "Could Bolton be good for the U.N.?" teaser appears on MSNBC's front page. When you click it, the actual title of the article is:

"The Hyde Factor: At the United Nations, they’re worrying much more about Henry Hyde than John Bolton"

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/8064219/site/newsweek/

June 1 - For all the controversy over John Bolton--President George W. Bush’s fiery nominee to be United Nations ambassador--U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan is more worried about another threat from Washington, says his chief of staff, Mark Malloch Brown. Annan is so worried, in fact, that he believes Bolton and the Bush administration could prove to be his allies in what is shaping up to be another titanic battle over U.N. finances.

In an interview with NEWSWEEK on Wednesday, Malloch Brown said that while Bolton was not the candidate one would “ideally choose,” he may be the right ambassador “to represent the U.N. to Washington.” Why? Because a bill sponsored by House International Relations Committee chairman Henry Hyde, the Illinois Republican, is threatening to withhold U.S. dues to the world body if major reforms do not occur--reforms that most U.N. observers believe it will be impossible for Annan to deliver.

And Bolton, Malloch Brown said, may be the man who can persuade the Republican right wing on Capitol Hill to avoid a “nuclear” confrontation that could bankrupt the U.N. and leave the United States isolated once again on the world stage, with not even the usually loyal British behind Washington. “This is not an endorsement of Bolton,” Malloch Brown said. But given Bolton’s reputation as a harsh critic of the U.N., at least “he would not be pre-empted on the right.”

Malloch Brown noted that the Bush administration has advanced the same Nixon-goes-to-China argument about Bolton and U.N. reform. But he expressed some puzzlement that Bush and other senior administration officials have pressed the need for U.N. reform in recent weeks as the Bolton nomination has bogged down. “The administration was not particularly interested in U.N. reform until Bolton came along,” Malloch Brown said. “It never came up between the administration and the secretary-general.”

BELOW: John "Smell My Fingers" Bolton.

[ProfessorPlum]

1. "my moustache used to be this big. Honest!"

[KansDem]

2. When the going gets tough...

Newsweek retracts!

Really, Newsweek's credibility is shot. Why should we believe anything it prints?

[halobeam]

6. wHAT?

Thats what * wants you to do. Believe their BS that Newsweek was all lies, when it wasn't, so when it does publish REAL news, you won't believe that either! It's a perfect back up, when the media turns around. When it does, no one will believe it, and we'll be spending the rest of our time AGAIN... trying to prove that the media is telling the freakin' truth. Think about. So Rovian.

on edit: I'm pissed too, that they retracted, don't misunderstand me, but I've jumped a step ahead wondering what they REALLY get out of trashing papers that try to print the truth. The theory I just provided, gives them a win-win. ONLY IF WE LET THEM

[aden_nak]

3. Fiery? FIERY? I should go be FIERY in their offices one day.

I'm sure that's the kindly, affectionate term they'd use to describe my behavior.

[Canuckistanian]

4. You'd be arrested acting like John Bolton

Misuse of public documents, criminal harassment, uttering false documents, etc, etc.

[AllegroRondo]

5. My take on the Bolton nomination (and others)

Bush is purposely nominating unacceptable people for these jobs, which forces the Senate to filibuster. Bush WANTS them to be filibustered, so that by the time he gets to nominate a Supreme Court Justice, the public will be sick of filibusters and more inclined to let the 'nuclear option' go through.

[halobeam]

7. They are always up to something

these peckers, aren't they? Dirty little hands in EVERYTHING.