Let Me Backtrack Just In Case Anybody Was Wondering

This is a completely bizarre editorial coming at a completely bizarre time. George Voinovich strongly opposed the John Bolton nomination to the UN, leading the fight that led to the President having to give Sir Moustache a recess appointment. That appointment doesn't expire for another six months. But to set the record straight, Voinovich is going to totally backtrack NOW, for good measure. First he explains how horrendous the Bush foreign policy has been:

Since Sept. 11, 2001, and our nation's initial response in Afghanistan, the global war on terrorism has taken many twists and turns.

First, Iraq became the primary focus of our troops and our public attention. Then, the nuclear ambitions of Iran and North Korea reached critical mass, followed by the quickly changing and deteriorating situation with Israel, Hezbollah and Hamas.

THEN, he decides that the people most repsonsible for this mess are sufficiently reining in Bolton.

My observations are that while Bolton is not perfect, he has demonstrated his ability, especially in recent months, to work with others and follow the president's lead by working multilaterally. In recent weeks I have watched him react to the challenges involving North Korea, Iran and now the Middle East, speaking on behalf of the United States.

I believe Bolton has been tempered and focused on speaking for the administration. He has referred regularly to "my instructions" from Washington, while also displaying his own clear and strong grasp of the issues and the way forward within the Security Council.

Finally, he throws in a "support our President or you hate America" for good measure:

Ambassador Bolton's appointment expires this fall when the Senate officially recesses. Should the president choose to renominate him, I cannot imagine a worse message to send to the terrorists -- and to other nations deciding whether to engage in this effort -- than to drag out a possible renomination process or even replace the person our president has entrusted to lead our nation at the United Nations at a time when we are working on these historic objectives.

For me or my colleagues in the Senate to now question a possible renomination would jeopardize our influence in the United Nations and encourage those who oppose the United States to make Bolton the issue, thereby undermining our policies and agenda.

What a worm. But why even write this now? Like I said, the nomination doesn't come up for six months. And with the world in utter chaos, why push a point that in any way approves of this Administration's foreign policy, which has become increasingly incoherent?

However, the President could re-nominate Bolton at any time, and if they wait until after November, they might not have the majority in the Senate they'd need to pass him. Could it be that Voinovich was sending a very public signal to the White House that they should put up Bolton now before it's too late?