I've heard it said that the Democrats are "Borking" John Bolton. That was just the first step. Step two, as I see it, is closer to the Clarence Thomas hearing, when they got the extension to bring in Anita Hill. Bolton's accuser of misconduct in a Moscow hotel 10 years ago is in the M.O.B. (Mothers Opposed to Bush - a group who put out commercials featuring Edie Falco, who plays Carmella on the Sopranos) leadership. I heard a report that she is "negotiating" (why would she have to do that?) to appear before the Senate comittee.
I'm going to go out on a limb here, and predict he gets confirmation, as Justice Thomas did. I say this because there is one thing I haven't seen in the media: poll numbers on Bolton's popularity. I think the worse they make Bolton look, the more people want him as our UN ambassador. (Luckily, these aren't sexual allegations, or the Dems would bring up the UN sex scandals that they never seem to mention otherwise.) It may be that people dislike Bolton personally, but they probably dislike the UN a whole lot more. The high-minded talk of "our ambassador to the world" wears thin when facing Sudan on the UN Human Rights Comission, and other UN insults to the ideals of freedom.
We may want someone who bangs on doors and throws things at people! - even if that is a total fabrication about Mr. Bolton. I hope the Dems keep stepping in the deep doo-doo, and waste a bunch of political capital on this one. You heard it here first, and I promise an analysis of where I was wrong, if that is the case.
I support John Bolton, because all of his statements about the UN over the years have been proven right. It is time for us to get real when it comes to dealing with this massive, screwed up organization. He is the man to do it. Now is the time.
Tip of the hat to Mona Charen's piece about why the Dems hate Mr. Bolton. She sees the Republicans at fault, which they very well may be, at least in part. It's linked in the title.