It's odd that the author of that article completely ignored the circumstances under which the US decided to drop out of the race for HRC seats. It was not a flat "boycott" as suggested.

Also kind of odd that there is no mention of the other 42 seats on the council, just 5 countries that typical US sentiment doesn't view favorably, some of which are actually US allies. Is it an attempt to paint the HRC as something modeled on the Security Council, where permanent members can bulldoze actions based on their own interests? Either it must be that, or he just didn't bother to find out before writing the story.

Please! It is what it is. The council is stacked with the worst of the worst human rights abusers on the planet. They routinely bash western countries and give these Islamic states a pass. They have been giving Burma a pass for years.