The New York Times' resident conservative, David Brooks, points out one of President Bush's "flip-flops." Bowing to calls from the Democrat Party and American "allies" around the world, in at least one instance the President has eschewed his unilateral foreign policy -- to the delight of liberal elites.

Confronted with the murder of 50,000 in Sudan, we eschewed all that nasty old unilateralism, all that hegemonic, imperialist, go-it-alone, neocon, empire, coalition-of-the-coerced stuff. Our response to this crisis would be so exquisitely multilateral, meticulously consultative, collegially cooperative and ally-friendly that it would make John Kerry swoon and a million editorialists nod in sage approval.

And so we Americans mustered our outrage at the massacres in Darfur and went to the United Nations. And calls were issued and exhortations were made and platitudes spread like b�arnaise. The great hum of diplomacy signaled that the global community was whirring into action.

Meanwhile helicopter gunships were strafing children in Darfur.

So what if people are being massacred? So what if "never again" really means "never again will we let Germans massacre Jews in Europe in the 1930s and 40s"? So what if the Russians and Chinese are putting their economic goals above simple humanity?

The "international community" has taken note -- and still people are dying.

The United Nations that the liberal elite put so much faith in is a teeming cesspool of dictators -- with a quite a few democracies content to wallow in the muck with them.

Good riddance to the lot of them.