Wow…..you hear about this Lebanon thing going on? Seems as if Bush may have been right huh?
The Lebanese government abruptly resigned Monday during a stormy parliamentary debate, prompting a tremendous roar from tens of thousands of anti-government protesters in central Beirut.
The demonstrators, awash in a sea of red, white and green Lebanese flags, had demanded the pro-Syrian government’s resignation — and the withdrawal of Syrian troops from Lebanon — since this month’s assassination of former Prime Minister Rafik Hariri.
Demonstrators in Beirut’s Martyrs Square chanted, “Syria out! Syria out!” after Prime Minister Omar Karami announced his resignation in a speech aired by the Lebanese Broadcasting Corporation.
Hmmm, let me see…first there was Afghanistan, then Iraq, then Ukraine, now Lebanon. Yeah, but Bush was wrong because because because…well, he just was.
I can hear it now, the left will now say “yeah, well watch them fall back to something worse then what it used to be, you’ll see….its all Bush’s fault”
The Captain has a great post out today (as usual, he really should be writing for a newspaper, just a wonderful writer) about this:
In the past two months, we have seen an explosion of momentum in Southwest Asia for political reform and democratization. Despite European warnings that democracy cannot be imposed at gunpoint, two longtime tyrannies (Afghanistan and Iraq) successfully held popular multiparty elections for the first time in their histories, freeing almost 50 million people from two of the most oppressive governments in modern history. Just before that, Ukrainians took to the streets to bring down a puppet government and a sham election that would have perpetuated it, and now we see popular demonstrations for liberty where we would least have expected it — on the streets of Beirut and Cairo. The pro-Syrian puppet Lebanese government has fallen today as a result, while Hosni Mubarak has managed to stay one step ahead by promising multiparty elections later this year for the executive.
After watching nothing but stagnation for decades and an Arab populace that appeared resigned to oppression all along, one has to ask: what changed? Why now? The answer, history will show, will be two men: George Bush and Tony Blair, with John Howard of Australia playing the unsung hero.
…
Make no mistake. This transformation didn’t just happen to coincide with the terms of Bush, Blair, and Howard. Expect the mainstream media to sell that meme in the next few weeks — how George Bush, especially, got lucky to just happen to be President when all of this happened. Don’t buy it for a second. He saw how to change the world and eliminate terrorism over the long haul and more importantly had the political courage to act in that regard.
Speaking of the MSM, it’s kinda funny how they are downplaying this: (hat tip The Dread Pundit Bluto)
What explains the Eason Jordan-like near blackout of an event as newsworthy as the resignation of a country’s entire ruling government? Two things. First, and always foremost in the minds of mainstream media newsmakers is to avoid giving too much credit to Republicans in general and George W. Bush in particular. It’s getting too easy now for people to start noticing the falling dominoes in the middle east and concluding that the Bush Doctrine seems to be working. To that end, NBC made sure to load up the front end of their newscast with negative middle east stories before mentioning Lebanon. The second reason for downplaying the story is that the MSM missed the significance of the Rafiq Hariri assassination, the catalyst for today’s events. They covered it as a one-day event and failed to realize or report that it was consuming not only the Lebanese people, but the entire middle east. Having blown a story this big, giving play to the consequences of the story only emphasizes the magnitude of the MSM’s mistakes.
Hans Brick has a good post about how the MSM, specifically my home town liberal rag The LA Times, is already starting its “yeah, freedom is spreading but give it time, they will regret it” crapola:
Last year, they were boasting that the insurgency would grow into a nation-wide popular revolt? That didn?t happen. Next, they were bemoaning the ?security? situation, predicting that the elections were doomed.. It didn?t happen. Next, they were selling civil war. It hasn?t happened . Now the desperate buzz is about Sharia. Dov S. Zakheim writing for the LA Times Sunday Opinion sheet warns us:
?Careful What You Wish For?:
After all, these elections were not the first in Iraq?s history, and the previous ones were followed by a series of nasty dictatorships, of which Saddam Hussein?s was the most recent and nastiest.
The leading candidate for prime minister, Ibrahim Jafari, is a member of the US-backed interim government and head of the Shiite-based Islamic Dawa Party. He is a staunch advocate of Islamic values and has ties to Iran. It?s anyone?s guess what his policies might be if he does become prime minister.
And what would be your guess Mr. Zakheim? Come on out and say it you piss yellow shit-sayer ? Iraq is headed for Sharia law ?You, The LA times, and your Hollywood readership have been lamenting the inevitable onset of Sharia for weeks now.
Sorry to bust up this nancy-boy, gay-lord, LA circle toss, but Sharia is not coming to Iraq.. Ask Chrenkoff:
?Eighty-six women will be appointed to the 275 member New Iraqi Assembly to be formed following the first free democratic elections that were held in Iraq on January 30th.
?The female candidates will make up 31 percent of parliament, according to a quota system outlined in the Iraqi temporary constitution stipulating that one in four candidates must be a woman.
Over at the Austin Bay Blog they have a few thoughts on the MSM and Bush’s “failure”:
Jackson Diehl posits that the naysayers were wrong about Iraq, especially since Lebanon is demonstrating for freedom. The Washington Post deserves some credit? it tried to carve out a middle ground between its kneejerk ?Iraq?s a disaster? liberal tendencies and some recognition of the facts on the ground. The NY Times? editorial page certainly went with the ?it?s a disaster? crowd, and Tom Friedman earned himself no kudos. Friedman is now trying to write his way out of a corner ? writing columns about Iraq?s ?success.? They are very late in coming. (See this post relating some of what I saw in Iraq in July 2004.)
Diehl compares the current Middle East situation to 1989. No, it?s not 1989? the war on terror is something very different, and we?re not in the endgame? but Diehl does recognize change is in the air:
…
The Times certainly dismissed the possibility of ever reaching such ?tipping points,? especially with Bush in charge? and when the possibility was occasionally raised (by Friedman) that something good was going on in Iraq, that success might be a teensy-weensy slender Vegas long-shot of a possibility, it was generally undercut with ?appropriate? disdain for Bush and his policies. (This was especially true during the 2004 presidential campaign. Talk about politics as blindfolds to reality.) For the record, Friedman?s three tipping points: Iraqi election, Lebanese reaction to the Syrian-backed assassination, and the Israel-Palestine situation post-Arafat.
Does this kinda crap from the left surprise me, no. Nor does it from the MSM. I’ve learned that they will always hate America being right and doing good. Only if they can stomp on this country will they ever be truly happy. May they be unhappy all their miserable lives.
Check out Heavy Handed Politics, Hero’s From The Past, and Political Musings for more. Also check out Free Iraq who has a great picture of the toppling of a statue in Lebanon
See author page