Lessons of the Bolton Fight

Let our journalists help you make sense of the noise: Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily newsletter and get a recap of news that matters.

I’ll come right out and say it: John Bolton’s nomination to UN ambassador may not actually mean the end of the world. He’s a terrible candidate, his antagonism to multilateral institutions is ill-founded, and he’ll probably only further damage our already-trampled credibility abroad, but I don’t think he’s going to bring us to the brink of apocalypse. If anything, his brash insistence on taking the most confrontational stance possible against rogue nations with budding nuclear weapons programs—Iran and North Korea come to mind—might well inspire the few sane officials left in the Bush administration to redouble their efforts at charting a moderate and effective foreign policy. Who knows?

Nevertheless, as Mark Goldberg reports in the American Prospect this month, a lot of good may come of the actual Bolton fight in Congress, which has taught both Democrats and liberal advocacy groups a lot about growing a spine and putting some heft into their punches:

“One of the great things about the Bolton fight is that it reminds the Democrats that political struggle is not always about the win,” a Senate Democratic aide told me, “but about fighting the good fight.” To their credit, the Democrats on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee tried as best they could to fight this nomination on its merits and keep the partisan rancor to a minimum; for each interview conducted by the minority staff, Biden requested the presence of a Lugar staffer. It was the White House, from a defensive posture, that sought to turn this nomination into a referendum on raw presidential power, spending enormous political capital on a fight that may end up as technically successful but that has come at a high price.

Now if we could just see this sort of fighting spirit take place when Republicans try to screw consumers with draconian bankruptcy bills, or gut Medicaid, or push through an Attorney General who endorses torture, well, we might really get somewhere.


Headshot of Editor in Chief of Mother Jones, Clara Jeffery

It sure feels that way to me, and here at Mother Jones, we’ve been thinking a lot about what journalism needs to do differently, and how we can have the biggest impact.

We kept coming back to one word: corruption. Democracy and the rule of law being undermined by those with wealth and power for their own gain. So we're launching an ambitious Mother Jones Corruption Project to do deep, time-intensive reporting on systemic corruption, and asking the MoJo community to help crowdfund it.

We aim to hire, build a team, and give them the time and space needed to understand how we got here and how we might get out. We want to dig into the forces and decisions that have allowed massive conflicts of interest, influence peddling, and win-at-all-costs politics to flourish.

It's unlike anything we've done, and we have seed funding to get started, but we're looking to raise $500,000 from readers by July when we'll be making key budgeting decisions—and the more resources we have by then, the deeper we can dig. If our plan sounds good to you, please help kickstart it with a tax-deductible donation today.

Thanks for reading—whether or not you can pitch in today, or ever, I'm glad you're with us.

Signed by Clara Jeffery

Clara Jeffery, Editor-in-Chief

payment methods

We Recommend