The inestimable James Walcott

Another person who's scribblings I one day hope to approach in terms of "word stylishness":

In or out of mating season, John Bolton in full swollen umbrage is never an edifying spectacle... We Americans are now accustomed to the likes of Bolton in full coconut-heaving mode but the Brits have been less exposed to neoconservatism in the malignant raw, and Matthew Carr's review of Bolton's recent perf[ormance] on the Today show read like a report filed from behind a one-way mirror at a psychiatric clinic:

He almost approaches the literary level of a Russell Brand!

Aside from the quotes James ('James' is how I prefer to refer to him, in my own mind. It sounds classy!) provides, here is an exemplary zinger from the article he was writing about:

Only last week Bolton was interviewed by John Humphrys on the Today programme.
Listening to that conversation was a grim experience that was not unlike being trapped with the Kevin Spacey serial killer character from Seven.

I fail to understand how anyone can take these clowns seriously



From this morning's Guardian:

The deputy secretary-general of the United Nations was last night accused of making "a very, very grave mistake" after calling the Bush administration hypocrites who were feeding a right-wing anti-UN frenzy in middle America.

Washington's ambassador to the UN responded with undisguised fury to a speech by Mark Malloch Brown, the deputy secretary-general, in which he accused Washington of using the international body "almost by stealth as a diplomatic tool" while failing to defend it at home.

What I find really funny is wondering just what "Washington's ambassador to the UN" (John Bolton, pictured above) plans to do, bleed on him or something?