The Rich Bore

Power Line links to superb a piece by William Kristol titled, aptly, Disgraceful. Hindrocket cites and comments on Kristol's take-down of Kerry for his rude, and potentially damaging, comments about Prime Minister Allawi's visit, so I'll note Kristol's hit on Kofi Annan's own disgraceful performance:

Kristol: "On Tuesday, President Bush spoke to the United Nations General Assembly. Senator Kerry decided not to say anything supportive of the president as he made the American case to the 'international community.' Nor did he simply campaign that day on other issues. No. Less than an hour after President Bush finished speaking in New York, Kerry was criticizing his remarks in Jacksonville, Florida: 'At the United Nations today, the president failed to level with the world's leaders. Moments after Kofi Annan, the secretary general, talked about the difficulties in Iraq, the president of the United States stood before a stony-faced body and barely talked about the realities at all of Iraq. . . . He does not have the credibility to lead the world.'"

More: "Then Kerry was asked about Kofi Annan's description of the war in Iraq as an 'illegal' invasion. Kerry answered: 'I don't know what the law, the legalities are that he's referring to. I don't know.' So the U.S. government is accused of breaking international law, and Kerry chooses not to defend his country against the charge, or to label it ridiculous or offensive. He is agnostic.

"Then Kerry continued: 'Well, let me say this to all of you: That underscores what I am saying. If the leader of the United Nations is at odds with the legality, and we're not working at getting over that hurdle and bringing people to the table, as I said in my speech yesterday, it's imperative to be able to build international cooperation.' It's our fault that the U.N. is doing almost nothing to help in Iraq. After all, according to Kerry, 'Kofi Annan offered the help of the United Nations months ago. This president chose to go the other way.'

"Leave aside the rewriting of history going on here. The president of the United States had just appealed for help from the United Nations and its member states to ensure that elections go forward in Iraq. Kerry could have reinforced that appeal for help with his own, thereby making it a bipartisan request. He chose instead to give the U.N., France, Germany, and everyone else an excuse to do nothing over these next crucial five weeks, with voter registration scheduled to begin November 1. If other nations prefer not to help the United States, the Democratic presidential candidate has given them his blessing."

And John Kerry expects us to take seriously his pledge that the U.N., France, and Germany wouldn't run American foreign policy under his administration? After all, this is the same Kofi Annan who turned a blind eye -- or worse, actively covered up -- the well-documented corruption of the oil-for-food program in Saddam's Iraq.

If you haven't already read it, don't miss Claudia Rosett's latest on Kofi's corruption, this time with a simple formula: baby food. As in stealing money meant for feeding babies in order to line the pockets of cronies -- and of course Kofi's buddy Saddam. What does Kofi's other buddy, Kerry, think of that?

Then again, and Victor Hanson wrote the other day, who really cares about the U.N. any more? It's a multilateral disaster, as David Brooks writes this morning. I guess only an elite could see its purpose, beyond providing jobs and cover for elites.