Maybe I’m the only one who finds my title to this entry funny, but man…talk about deciding between the frying pan and the fire!
Bush went ahead, as expected, and appointed John Bolton as ambassador to the UN. I had what I think was an epiphany today. I’ve been wondering why in the world Bush would pick someone like Bolton in the first place. There’s got to be other people who could do what Bush wants at the UN, without being so overwhelmingly divisive. But then, it hit me: if Bolton is the man slugging it out about UN reform, Bush can actually come out sounding like a moderate in the discussion. He can get changes at the UN that he wants, without looking like the thug.
I think Bolton might be the bad cop to Bush’s good cop. Not that I’m happy about any of this, but at least I feel better having a reason for it. I may not agree with Bush, but I don’t think he’s stupid, and this one hadn’t made sense to me until today.
(PS. I’m doing better, personally, but just don’t feel up to blogging about my internal churnings. So, why not go to safe topics, like politics?) :^)