OK, I'm confuzled

Which is it? Is unilateralism bad, or is unilateralism good?

After ridiculing George Bush as a unilateralist cowboy for most of his term in office, the New York Times demands more unilateralism from the White House in its editorial today. The Gray Lady wants Bush to start bypassing the United Nations on a range of issues, a rather startling 180-degree turn:

So, the coalition of over 60 countries that dealt with Iraq was "Unilateral Cowboy Diplomacy", and that was bad, but now we must deal with a runty communist Elvis impersonator unilateraly because that's good.

Actually, wait, I think I see a common thread between all the Left's demands. Whatever is worse for America is good. That's the only logic behind their "Up is Down, Port is Starboard, Black is White, Good is Bad" mindset.