UN-Fund

Thaddeus G. McCotter represents the 11th District of Michigan in the U.S. House. I was never great with geography but I think Michigan is kinda somewhere in the middle of America. If so, that means Mr. McCotter's constituents are . . . uh, Middle Americans? Some of the folks United Nations Deputy Secretary-General Mark Malloch Brown thinks of as idiots.

That would explain why Mr. McCotter is, to put it diplomatically, perturbed by Mr. Brown's remarks about Middle America, which resulted in Mr. McCotter analyzing the situation as follows:

• First, one can sense he disdains the "stereotyping over too many years" of anything, except Middle America.


• Second, one can tell he is no fan of Middle America's unsophisticated attachment to "unchecked" freedom of speech.


• Third, one can admire his compassionate dedication to defending a "victim," so long as they are whining and dining UN bureaucrats and not, one fears, an African.


• Fourth, from his tone, one can discern UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan is standing firmly in his Gucci shoes behind his man, despite pressure from America's Ambassador to the UN, John Bolton, whose unbecoming, Middle American vice of moral clarity has made even senators weep.


• Fifth, one can be sure Ambassador Bolton and the U.S. House Republicans demands U.S. funding be tied to UN reform is being put at the top of his and Secretary-General Annan's long list of U.S. crimes against bureaucracy.


• Sixth, one can hope he doesn't visit Middle America.


• And, finally, one can wretch at the UN's sense of entitlement to Americans' money.

That's only part of what Mr. McCotter had to say. You can read the rest here.

The editorial writers at the Washington Times weren't quite as -- I think Kofi Annan might use the word "cheeky" -- as Mr. McCotter. Instead, they gently pointed out that it's not the UN that's misunderstood by Middle America. It's Mr. Brown and the UN who truly don't understand:

The Bush administration has "fail[ed] to stand up for [the United Nations] against its domestic critics," [Mr. Brown] said. The message: If the government would only silence the media, then the United Nations could get along with its business as it has grown accustomed to. -- Washington Times

Instead of receiving its usual two-year budget, six months ago the UN was advised by a group of countries led by the United States, Japan and the European Union that only six months worth of funding would be made available. Additional funding would be contingent on progress made by the United Nations in reforming its practices. The funds run out June 30, and after Mr. Brown's comments the other day, a bill has been introduced in the House of Representatives that would accomplish that.

Mr. Annan and Mr. Brown explain that they've done the bestest job they could accomplishing the agency reforms they touted last year. Other than changing the name of the Human Rights Council, none of them have been done. The fault, of course, is not theirs. It's the undeveloped countries that are blocking their efforts, they say.

The same countries, I'm sure, that Mr. Brown was thinking of when he mentioned that unlike "Middle America" others have a favorable opinion of the UN and its operations.

I'm sure they do.

During his remarks Mr. Brown also reminded his audience that the UN is suffering daily as it's forced to operate out of a real dump.

Rather than giving any further consideration to the renovation project with its latest cost estimate of $2 billion, once again I suggest Kelo v New London to encourage the UN's relocation to another city.

I've heard Mogadishu's lovely this time of year.