On The Bolton Thing. He Admitted In The NYT. . .

[ProfessorGAC]

. . .that he's failed!

On Washington Journal this morning, Rob was reading a piece from NYT.

Bolton says that he was failed to initiate reforms, because "entrenched bureaucrats fear change" because it would impinge on their "privileges". Now, that may be an excuse (more on that in a second), but he's admitting that his "confrontational style" isn't getting results. And, since the argument was that we needed a tough guy to foment change at the U.N., and that was why he was "the man for the job", then it means we have the wrong guy and he's failed.

Now, on the "reason". First of all, his reasoning is prima facie false. The people at the U.N. at are not just "entrenched bureaucrats". They are highly placed gov't official within their own governments, and no change at the U.N. is going to alter any privilege under which they operate. They are, just like Silverspoon's cronies, big shots, and their privileges are not dependent upon the way Bolton wants the U.N. to function. They'll be privileged under ANY operating system.

So, here's what i would suggest are 3 different possibilities as to why Bolton has failed to foment change.
1) There are many who want to retain the status quo, because they like the way things are working. This is similar to Bolton's statement, except it has nothing to do with their privileges. It has everything to do with whether or not the best interests of their countries are being served by the current system. And, that's exactly what Bolton is trying to do for the interests of the United States. So, he may be eating the sauce for the goose.

2) The educated and experienced people who populate the U.N. for the other countries maybe, just maybe, have through reasonsed analysis and thoughtfulness, simply disagree that what Bolton wants to are good ideas. In other words, they just think he's wrong.

3) The "entrenched bureaucrats" have realized that Bolton is simply a bully and a punk and have called his bluff by ignoring him and not letting him have his way. His petulance is being ignored and his tantrums are not working.

I have a feeling one of my three is far closer to reality than Bolton's flimsy reasoning.
The Professor

[Wonk]

1. 2 & 3

[peacetalksforall]

2. I don't call that an admittance. He's whining and politicking. I have no

expectation that he will act honorably for humanity in any way.

They placed a PNACer at the World Bank.
They placed a PNACer at the Pentagon.
They placed a PNACer to handle diplomacy (another whiner and liar who nudges humans over the cliff, then whines and lies some more).
They placed a PNACer (obviously) as Atty General.
They placed a PNACer in the WH (who is actually the Pres).
They placed PNACers on the Supreme Court.
They placed PNACers in Congress.
They placed a PNACer at the UN.

[ProfessorGAC]

3. No Argument About Honor, From Me

But, he did, in fact, admit that he's failed in reform efforts, which is the primary reason he was picked.

So, he's a failure.
The Professor

[bdamomma]

4. they have them all in place

I wonder if they fall down like a stack of cards if something happens to one.

[ProfessorGAC]

5. Yes

I think we tend to overestimate these thugs here on DU. They are in power, so they're getting away with some things now, but they're really not as deviously clever as some here worry they are.

The whole house of cards will collapse under its own weight anyhow.
The Professor

[bdamomma]

6. I truly hope they will all get screwed.