The Times does Bolton

Cognitive dissonance

Nothing displays the incompatibility betwixt my, and I dare say millions of other's, cognition, and  those fellows who would mourn the renaming of  The New York  Times address to 229 Timothy McVeigh Square, than yesterday's Times editorial celebrating John Bolton's UN demise.  Two snips will do it. Attempts to get the lame duck Senate to confirm Mr. Bolton ran aground when Lincoln Chafee, the Republican senator from Rhode Island, refused to support the nomination in the Foreign Relations Committee, leaving Mr. Bolton’s fate hung up on a tie vote. Mr. Chafee is the prime example of a moderate Republican who was popular with his constituents but who lost his seat because of Mr. Bush’s hard-edge partisanship and insistence on having his own way in Iraq <snip> The United Nations doesn’t need any further proof of how little the Bush administration thinks of it. And the Bush administration doesn’t need to insult the world at a time when it is becoming increasingly clear how much help the United States needs to stabilize Afghanistan, extricate itself from Iraq, and curb the nuclear appetites of North Korea and Iran. Mr. Bolton’s withdrawal gives the president a chance to improve his relationship with both the U.N. and Congress. - Mr. Bolton Resigns So there you have it.  Yup, we are in the ''phony war" period of an American Civil War. I'll be with the USA.