Finally, a compelling reason to reject John Bolton

He’s a cyborg:

I was an early bird when I worked at the American Enterprise Institute. So was John Bolton. It seemed that no matter how early I arrived -- I could be at my desk as early as 5:00 a.m. -- John's office, which was at the end of the corridor from mine, was already open, ready for business. This reminds me of a conversation between two young AEI staffers. One said she wondered whether John Bolton ever slept. The other claimed no one had ever seen him eat. I did see him order an English muffin once at a breakfast at the Mayflower Hotel, but I can't say he ate it.

And he was always asking if you knew Sarah Connor. But despite three additional weeks of intense investigation, critics have come up empty. Here’s David Brooks in “A turning tide for Bolton”:

The momentum has shifted on the Bolton nomination because John Bolton turns out to be a more complicated figure than earlier portrayed. It's become clear that earlier tales of him chasing women down hallways are unreliable. It's become clear that while he's abrasive, he is professional. If Senator George Voinovich reads these transcripts before he votes, I'm sure Bolton will be confirmed.

And today’s Washington Post comes out, tentatively, for Bolton:

On April 19th the Senate Foreign Relations Committee unexpectedly postponed a vote on the nomination of John R. Bolton as ambassador to the United Nations, citing concerns that he had engaged in a pattern of abuse of subordinates and manipulation of intelligence. Three weeks of further digging, mostly by Democratic committee staff members, have not produced evidence of such a pattern. The committee ought to give Mr. Bolton a vote today. Ours would be an unenthusiastic, deference-to-the-president yes.

Get ready for a lot of sound and fury by committee Democrats today, signifying nothing.