How will Changes at the United Nations Impact American Sovereignty?What did Senator Patrick Leahy (D-VT) mean when he recently stated that “things are different now” in the new Congress for President Bush? For conservatives, “different” certainly doesn’t translate to “better.”
Certainly, Bush has shown a more conciliatory approach toward the Democratic Congress, evidenced by the replacement of Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld and the withdrawal of the nominations of five judges.
Perhaps the most unfortunate consequence of the president’s retreat is the dropped effort to see confirmation of John Bolton as permanent United Nations ambassador, a position Bolton held from August 2005 to December 2006. In December, Mr. Bolton resigned, bowing to the reality that his nomination was doomed to fail in the Senate.
The question now is how American sovereignty will fare without Bolton’s presence at the U.N. and with the World Body being led by its new Secretary General, Ban Ki-Moon of South Korea.
Recently, Thomas Kilgannon, author of Diplomatic Divorce: Why America Should End Its Love Affair with the United Nations and a leading authority on the United Nations, joined CFIF Corporate Counsel & Senior Vice President Renee Giachino to discuss changes at the United Nations and their impact on American sovereignty.
What follows is the interview originally heard on "Your Turn - Meeting Nonsense With Commonsense" on WEBY 1330 AM, Northwest Florida's talk radio. [Listen]