The last man with facial hair to be elected president was William Howard Taft, in 1908. That in itself should disqualify John Bolton and his enormous, walruslike mustache from even thinking about running in 2012. (Theoretically he could shave it off, but then he would be completely unrecognizable.) Also, that he is a major neocon warhawk from the Bush administration. And yet Bolton insists that, because everyone is focused on the economy even though he really, really wants us to go to war with Iran, he may have to run for president, according to an interview with the Daily Caller:
Not shy about his position on a wide range of issues, would this critic-in-chief consider a run for commander-in-chief in 2012? Bolton didn’t reject the idea out of hand.
“[I]t is a very great honor that anybody would even think of asking. I’m obviously not a politician. I’ve never run for any federal elective office at all and, you know, it is something that would obviously require a great deal of effort,” he said. “What I do think, though, and what concerns me, is the lack of focus generally in the national debate about national security issues. Now, I understand the economy is in a ditch and people are concerned about it, but our adversaries overseas are not going to wait for us to get our economic house in order.”
But does Bolton really believe that national-security issues will actually be ignored during the 2012 campaign, for the first time ever? Or is it just that nobody appreciates that for the past two years we've needed to bomb Iran right away, as Bolton keeps telling everybody?
When pressed as to whether that means he would consider a run, Bolton seemed to suggest that he might do it, at the very least to help put national-security issues at the top of the debate agenda.
“In the sense that I want to make sure that not only in the Republican Party, but in the body politic as a whole, people are aware of threats that remain to the United States. You know, as somebody who writes op-eds and appears on the television, I appreciate as well as anybody that there is a limit to what that accomplishes,” he said. “Whereas, some governor from some state in the middle of the country announces for president they get enormous coverage even if their views are utterly uninformed on major issues.”
Right, because these governors "from some state in the middle of the country" (Arkansas? Texas?) could actually become president. Whereas John Bolton, well ... it's not 1908, and walruses can't vote.
John Bolton, Criticizer-in-Chief [Daily Caller]