WaPo: Bush Is Losing Credibility On Democracy, Activists Say

[babylonsister]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/06/09/AR2007060901469.html?hpid=topnews

Bush Is Losing Credibility On Democracy, Activists Say
Governments Appear Quicker to Challenge U.S. Rebukes

By Robin Wright
Washington Post Staff Writer
Sunday, June 10, 2007; Page A19

President Bush waxed eloquent about democracy in Prague's majestic Czernin Palace last week, pledging to the assembled dissidents from 17 countries that the United States "will never excuse your oppressors" and, "We will always stand for your freedom." It was the centerpiece speech of his European tour.

But the scorecard for the Bush administration, four years after it began promoting democracy as the key to the United States' long-term security, shows it striking out, according to analysts and activists who originally endorsed the president's efforts. Democracy regression is visible from Hugo Chavez's Venezuela, a country that was the first democracy in Latin America, to Vladimir Putin's Russia, where the Soviet demise triggered political changes worldwide 15 years ago.

The Middle East, which first spurred the Bush democracy push, is witnessing the biggest setbacks. Lebanon, whose "Cedar Revolution" was heralded by the White House in 2005 as a model for orderly political change in the region, is the latest flash point. In 2007, the United States is sending planeloads of ammunition and war materiel to Beirut to prop up the troops of a beleaguered government.

The audience willing to listen has also dwindled. Among the participants at Prague's International Conference on Democracy and Security were Reza Pahlavi, a son of Iran's autocratic shah who was listed as an "opposition leader to the clerical regime of Iran," and Farid Ghadry, often referred to as Syria's Ahmed Chalabi. Many other invitees, including Richard N. Perle, were leading U.S. neoconservatives and Iraq war advocates.

"It was a very good speech, in fact, but Bush now lacks credibility," said Amr Hamzawy of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. "Governments and opposition movements alike, no one is listening -- governments because they were very quick to understand U.S. policy shifts devaluing democracy promotion, and opposition movements because the U.S. has done very little to act on its promises."

more...

[porphyrian]

1. Losing? Where the fuck have they been for the last six years? - n/t

[malaise]

2. The emperor has been naked for

ages.

[ixion]

3. bush was never elected, he was installed in a coup de tat, so IMO, he has never

has any credibility on democracy.

[flyarm]

4. losing?? how can you lose something you never had????????

come on Robin Wright..you can do better than this pile of do do!!

fly

[Hubert Flottz]

5. Everybody understands one thing about Bush now...

If he's talking, he's lying.

Edit...The only people W's still fooling, are the hopelessly foolish and himself.

[Toots]

6. The hopelessly foolish happens to be about thirty percent of America

Sure says a lot about America doesn't it?

[90-percent]

7. it is now improper grammer

it is now improper grammer to use the words "Bush"' "democracy", and "credibility" in the same sentence!

-85% jimmy

[gordianot]

9. I wonder about that.

I know several who fit the 30% profile and they are starting to complain, but when pressed are reluctant to admit it. I also notice these types are rabidly paranoid and are actually afraid to speak out in case someone is listening. I wonder if the 30% is not actually 10% or even lower.

[Bjorn Against]

8. The Washington Post is certainly losing credibility as well

I mean honestly when did the man who got into office through a stolen election EVER have credibility on Democracy?

And just read this statement from the article again:

But the scorecard for the Bush administration, four years after it began promoting democracy as the key to the United States' long-term security, shows it striking out, according to analysts and activists who originally endorsed the president's efforts. Democracy regression is visible from Hugo Chavez's Venezuela

So first they say Bush was promoting democracy, a stupid statement in itself unless you believe every word a lying politician says to you. Then they use as evidence that democracy is failing a country who's leader was democratically elected. When they tried to recall him he won the recall he won the recall by a huge margin. No matter what any person thinks of Chavez, he is far more popular among his people than Bush is here. To use him as an example of "Democracy regression" shows that the media is more concerned about who THEY want in office than they are about who the people of another country want leading them.

[struggle4progress]

10. The ruling elite want freedom for the ruling elite and don't much care about anyone else's freedom

If the ruling elite can do what they want to do -- that is, if they can move their money freely around and extract resources easily -- then the country looks like a "democracy" to them. Otherwise, they think the place is a "dictatorship."

As a result, the ruling elite use "democracy" exactly as if it were a codeword for "free market economics." And since the elite control the media, the media reproduce this peculiar usage of the term.

[fujiyama]

11. "Bush" and "eloquent"

are two words that should never belong together. Neither should "democracy" and "credibility" be used along with Bush either.

Bush never had credibility. The WA POST has pretty much lost all it had over the last few years.

[bamacrat]

12. When did he have it?

When has any neocon, hate mongerer had it?