Malloch-Brown, under-secretary of the United Nations, has come under fire for what U.S. ambassador John Bolton called "illegitimate" comments made in a "condescending, patronizing tone." Among other things, Malloch-Brown asserted, "Much of the public discourse that reaches the U.S. heartland has been largely abandoned to its loudest detractors, such as Rush Limbaugh and FOX news." But were the comments illegitimate? Malloch-Brown claims that U.S. citizens are being kept in the dark about positive things done by the U.N. Can anybody argue with that?

Additionally, Malloch-Brown claims that the U.S. undermines the U.N. by not supporting it enough. While this FOX report is quick to note that American citizens pay more than any other country in taxes to the United Nations--about $3 billion a year--maybe what Malloch-Brown has in mind is the largely unilateral stance the U.S. generally takes in world affairs. Can anyone say Iraq?

Finally, what Malloch-Brown is doing is not "an attack on Americans" as this FOX broadcast claims. What he is doing is making a criticism on the American media system for not covering the United Nations in a positive light.

Maybe Malloch-Brown was out of line by making comments against a member-state. However, just because he's out of line doesn't mean he isn't right.