Durbin's and Bolton - Two Very Different Messages to the World
The effect of Dick Durbin's words was felt globally. It was widely perceived in America as a Senator trying to make himself relevant and to slander the military. A minority viewpoint to be sure. Durbin then apologized to us for our own ignorance, as we failed to see whatever more innocuous meaning his words were meant to convey, which even he has not yet had the kindness to reveal.
Al Jazeera picked it up but interestingly did not report on the apology. Instead, we get this. Go figure.
We have a right to free speech in this nation, but not a right from the social consequences of it. And that freedom does carry with it very real responsibilities. Dick Durbin still doesn't get that, as I'm certain that he views himself as the victim of persecution from the "right-wing media" who have taken away his right to free speech.
But ask the average person who gets their news from Al Jazeera, the anti-American Arab news outlet, and you'll probably hear that Durbin is trying to expose mistreatment and is being stifled by the oppressive Bush Administration. Remember, they report what they want to convey, not necessarily what really happened.
Then we take John Bolton whom the Democrats in the Senate have chosen to filibuster, despite Harry Reid's false promise to Bill Frist that he would not do so. So much for the value of the Senate Minority Leader's word. Bolton is certainly a hardnose. He reflects the Administration's view that the UN has reached the point of irrelevance and needs drastic reform if it is to survive. Bush sending Bolton to the UN sends the message that we are no longer ignoring the corruption and mismanagement there. His tenure will be quite the no-nonsense one and will upset a good deal of the UN hierarchy. And that's the point. He isn't going to make many friends, but he will earn respect, because such an approach will get attention and force action from the UN's worthless and already anti-American "diplocracy".
Conversely, Durbin uttered words that were like candy for Americas enemies. He gave them something to use for recruitment fodder. Because a strong presence does not encourage recruitment, but a perception of divisibility does. And when a high-ranking member of the U.S. government makes such outrageous statements, observers will likely not take it as an irresponsible partisan Senator displaying his ignorance and unfitness for office, but rather someone who speaks for a good deal of Americans, who can be peeled away from Bush's policy towards terrorists.
Durbin gave them hope. Bolton won't. So who are the Senate Democrats backing?