Undiplomatic Words on the Bolton Nomination

Re “Divided Panel Passes Bolton to Full Senate,” May 13: After GOP senators expressed serious doubts about John Bolton’s selection as ambassador to the U.N. and then passed his nomination to the full Senate anyway, I have found something worse than spineless Democrats

Evan Puziss

Mar Vista

Re “One Slim Win After Another for Bush,” news analysis, May 13: Ronald Brownstein writes that the Bolton nomination “energized conservatives, outraged Democrats and squeezed moderates in both parties.” It would be nice if President Bush would realize that his job is to govern all Americans, not energize some and outrage others. Instead, outraging Democrats seems to be a primary goal of each and every one of his policies, his proposals and his nominees. This is not a sustainable state of affairs.

This Democrat is getting tired of his tax dollars being used for the express purpose of outraging Democrats. Governing the nation -- not goading almost half its citizens -- is your job, Mr. Bush. After almost five years, some of us would like to know when you plan to start doing it.

Kurt Weldon

Winnetka

OK, so Bolton is a lout and bully who wants to represent the U.S. at the U.N. Those two qualities will, in the end, make him and the U.S. ineffective and the laughingstock of the international community, but so what? Why not let the Republicans have their way. Unfortunately, with Bolton as ambassador, we get a representative who believes any means justifies the end as long as it supports “his vision” of the world, and that includes falsifying intelligence reports to make it appear that the U.S. was in imminent danger from Iraq when it wasn’t.

Coupled with his explosive temper and his propensity to lie, if he is approved by the Senate we will be sending the classic sociopath to the U.N., and that scares me as well as the rest of the world. They must truly wonder what kind of people are we.

Tony Scirocco

San Pedro