...is not to be found in, say, the Terry Schiavo controversy, where there was plenty of line-crossing. Instead, a better litmus test is the case of the U.N. specifically and 'collective' government generally. The reason the Europeans objected to our Iraqi approach was not, in the end, a hatred of George W. Bush and the 'neocons', nor their eternal jealousy over our cultural, economic, and military dominance, so much as a result of their belief that vital decisions can be made collectively, exemplified by the chaotic, hysterically inept European Union. The exception that proves the rule is England, never a fan of the E.U. and our strongest ally on our Iraqi approach.
To see this dichotomy in action, you need look no further than, on the one hand, this denunciation of the 'neocon' crusade against poor, saintly Kofi from the extremely leftist Guardian, and this editorial by Austin Bay stating that the U.N. is a very sick organization that requires reforms far deeper and more transformative than the weak, 'cure is worse than the disease', reform offered up by Kofi and his supporters. Fans of this blog will have no doubt which case I find more persuasive (hat tips to Real Clear Politics and the Instapundit).