Letter to Senator Feingold opposing the nomination of Ambassador Bolton
I wanted to express my hope that you will oppose the nomination of John Bolton for US Ambassador to the UN. The words you used when Sec. Rice was nominated express the reasons.
"But I am deeply troubled by the signal that this nomination appears to send -- a signal suggesting that the modest moderating influence of the State Department over the last four years will disappear, and that the next four years will be guided even more closely by the voices that shouted loudest in the first term, and that led our country into seriously flawed foreign policies. Our country cannot afford to continue down the foreign policy path that was forged during the first term of the Bush Administration. Over the past four years, we have witnessed the greatest loss of a very valuable type of American power in our history: our power to lead, to persuade, and to inspire."
We now see that the effects of American foreign policy has resulted in far too many deaths because we have a "war President" who encourages war when peace could work if America engaged in real Diplomacy and not a return to "Gunboat Diplomacy".
Janis Joplin said it well many years ago "freedoms nothing more than nothing left to loose." When we don't engage in Diplomacy in a timely manner then we conclude that war is the only answer. If our Ambassador to the Un is not able to feel Peace is ever a real option how can this be called Diplomacy? Ambassador Bolton is not qualified because he does not understand how to engage in real Diplomacy.
One line of reasoning that is used during confirmation hearings says the President needs his own "team" well "We the people" also needs a team that represents real American values of Diplomacy that is able to also consider Peace as an option.
Ambassador Bolton has demonstrated in his government positions and over the last year that he does not have the ability to engage in real American Diplomacy.
Thank you for your consideration of my thoughts as you vote.