Bolton resigns as U.N. ambassador

[ag]

BAD move.  If I were Bush, I'd say, "Appoint him, or no UN ambassador."

Do you really think that Dems in Congress need an active UN ambassador more than Bush?  Wow!

A vacancy at a crucial diplomatic post doesn't really hurt the legislative branch directly, but makes life very difficult for the administration.  Leaving the UN post vacant indefinitely would, primarily, hurt the State Department, making its work that much harder and pretty much guaranteeing diplompatic failures to come.  On the other hand, since the Congress has no responsibility for the day-to-day conduct of foreign policy, such a vacancy creates little inconvenience for the legislators. As far as they are concerned, if the president wants to conduct his foreign policy without a UN ambassador - good for him.  If he (almost inevitably) manages to screw up as a result - even better for the congressional opposition: they will be sure to conduct hearings to try to figure out the causes of the administration's incompetence.  

To sum up, the threat of keeping the UN position vacant could be effective in the hands of the Congress, but would be entirely ineffective when wielded by the executive: it's not really a threat at all.

[ag]

A terrible shame, this is a bigger loss than most things I can think of, the one thing we need at this point with an new weak Congress is a strong arm at the UN, disagree with me if you like, but our failure to input someone headstrong into this job will cost us plenty.

Headstrong is not commonly applied as a positive description of a diplomat.  The UN ambassador is, first and foremost, a diplomatic job.  In any case, what does the composition of the Congress have to do with it?  What is it exactly that the Congress is going to do/ can do vis a vis the UN job that you wouldn't want it to do? 

[ag]

A terrible shame, this is a bigger loss than most things I can think of, the one thing we need at this point with an new weak Congress is a strong arm at the UN, disagree with me if you like, but our failure to input someone headstrong into this job will cost us plenty.

Headstrong is not commonly applied as a positive description of a diplomat.  The UN ambassador is, first and foremost, a diplomatic job.  In any case, what does the composition of the Congress have to do with it?  What is it exactly that the Congress is going to do/ can do vis a vis the UN job that you wouldn't want it to do? 

You're right, my bad, our ambassadors usually waer those short shorts that instead of saying "pink" or something they say "rape me, i'm from america and weak"

have it your way

What?  I don't understand anything here.  Do you speak English?