By Paul Kengor on 12.19.05 @ 12:06AM
Thanks to the New York Times, the Iraq elections never happened.
We all remember Hillary Rodham Clinton's charge of a "vast
right-wing conspiracy": the allegation that there were a bunch of
right-wingers out to get her husband, hoping to impeach him and
dance on his grave. Admittedly, there were many such individuals.
Mrs. Clinton also correctly identified certain sources in the food
chain. Where she was wrong was her allegation of an organized
conspiracy.
Now, however, there is a vast left-wing movement to get George
W. Bush, an effort never more apparent than on Friday, December 16,
2005, the day after the incredible Iraqi elections.
As someone who has been cautiously optimistic over whether the
Middle East could democratize, I was thrilled with the results. It
was a huge vindication for Bush, who is now a proven visionary, one
that history will not be able to deny.
As for the left, which should be ecstatic over this triumph of
Wilsonian idealism, there is a seething rage over George W. Bush's
renewed success. "Progressives" were hoping for his ignominy, a
crash and burn in Saddam's former Republic of Fear, now en route to
an actual republic, a Republic of Promise.
On Friday, I watched anxiously to see how liberal reporters
would swallow what was, for them, a terrible political loss. How
would they cover this achievement? I hurried to the web to check
the reaction of the New York Times, the Grand Central
Station for liberal enmity toward the president.
I got my answer: The Times rolled out a gem examining
whether the Nixonian George W. Bush has been spying on innocent
Americans with the sinister assistance of dark forces at the
National Security Agency.
For liberals, it was beautiful. The liberal media nurses at the
breast of the New York Times. In this period of ugly,
white-hot hatred of the so-called Religious Zealot in Chief,
liberals each morning look in eager expectation to the
Times for fodder for their cannons, something to satiate
their hunger.
Well, on Friday, the Times came through in spades. The
rest of the collective media had its ticket to ride-off to the
races, so excited and effective that even Rush Limbaugh was forced
to devote his broadcast not to the success in Iraq but to
responding to the latest Times salvo. The Times's
desperate gasp to knock the Iraq triumph from the front pages would
be comical if it were not so sad.
The entire spectacle was captured nicely for posterity in a
Friday exchange between George W. Bush and Jim Lehrer: Asked about
his alleged cabal with the super-secret NSA, which Lehrer duly
acknowledged was the headline of the day, a befuddled Bush
protested, "It's not the main story of the day. The main story of
the day is the Iraqi elections."
Bush was right: There was no bigger news item than the Iraqi
vote. But Lehrer was right, too; the template for the American
press had been handed down from the mountaintop in Manhattan. The
vast left-wing conspiracy ensured this was so.
To be sure, it is not that the legions of left-wing journalists
are sheep who bah-bah in sycophancy to the Times's lead.
Rather, they are like modern-day shepherds following the guidance
of the Divine Star hovering above Manhattan, where the King lay to
offer them political redemption.
This is not a bad analogy, since politics provides the secular
left with a means of salvation -- liberals' Daily Bread. On Friday,
December 16, the New York Times, the Source and Summit of
liberal life, rained manna from heaven. 'Tis the season for giving.
Never underestimate the left's reverence for the Times,
especially among journalists, for whom getting chosen by the
Times is the spiritual equivalent of being selected to the
College of Cardinals.
Overall, 2005 might be dubbed the Year of Freedom. In the most
unlikely place -- one-time Saddam's Iraq -- the year began with a
historic vote in January and ended with another seminal election in
December, both of which saw voter turnouts of 60 to 80%, numbers
that put American voters to shame, and thereby stunningly affirmed
George W. Bush's insistence that Middle East Muslims are capable of
democracy.
And yet, last week that great story was cast aside by a
politically motivated news article that utterly paled in
significance. As adults, it was our job to place the petulance of
the Times's editors in proper perspective. The partisan
press, however, could not ignore the temper tantrum, and in fact
joined in, overwhelmed by an emotionally driven ideology that
short-circuits its ability to assimilate reality. The whole mess
requires a psychological explanation, really, for which I'm not
trained.
Alas, then, therein is how the vast left-wing conspiracy
operates.
Way to go, New York Times! On a day when humanity took
an astonishing step forward, you did not let down your soldiers in
the war against George W. Bush. Consider it another notch in the
belt for the vast left-wing conspiracy.
topics:
Iraq