This little charmer from the AP appeared on Fox News’ website today. Although I haven’t done a lot of “fisking” in the past, I’m going to attempt to do so now as this article is pure garbage and deserves to be treated as such and placed in the appropriate receptacle.
MADRID, Spain — The shift that midterm elections brought to Washington’s political landscape was welcomed Wednesday by many across the world who oppose the war in Iraq and methods used by the U.S. in the fight against terrorism.
Here’s the tagline. Pretty amazing stuff, huh? Wow, so people who oppose the war around the world and, as a rule don’t like Americans in general are thrilled by a Democrat victory. Gee, I really needed a professional news service to relay this information to me. Goodness knows I’d never have figured this out on my own.
From Pakistan to Paris, politicians, analysts and ordinary citizens expressed hope that the Democratic takeover of the House of Representatives and strong showing in Senate and gubernatorial races would force President Bush to adopt a more conciliatory approach to global issues.
And might I point out that it’s not really FROM Pakistan to Paris so much as it IS Pakistan and Paris that support the Democrats. The second half of the statement reminds me of how ignorant the rest of the world is to the US governmental system. Say all you want about Americans not knowing where Iraq is on a map, most of the world doesn’t even know the difference between the legislative and executive branches. The President makes foreign policy, not Senators, Representatives, or Governors. The Oval Office certainly is open to advice from Congress, but policy is not made by Congress.
But some also expressed fears that a lame-duck president under a split Congress might weaken much-needed American influence and stall global trade talks.
Yeah, but since all of them live in countries that are not France, Germany, Venezuela, or Syria, they aren’t usually paid attention to very often.
On Iraq, some feared that Democrats will force a too-rapid withdrawal of U.S. forces, leaving that country and the region in chaos. Others said they doubted the turnover in congressional power would have a significant impact on Iraq policy any time soon, largely because the Democrats did not possess a clear course they want to take.
Exactly. Which is something that most American voters appeared unable to figure out while at the local polling station. Other than “don’t do what Bush is doing,” I haven’t seen a plan put forth by the Democratic party on Iraq that has majority support. Oh, they’ve thrown a few things out there that run the gamut from keep doing what we’re doing to defund the war and bring the troops home now, but no one has actually agreed on a formal plan to be put forth in Congress.
Some explanation of the US foreign policy system follows by the US ambassador to Iraq. I mean we have to have a quote from at least one Bush appointee to maintain the image of journalistic objectivity, right?
U.S. foreign policy aside, the fact that Bush was handed a political black eye was also in focus.
Yes. And I wonder who’s doing the focusing?
“Of course, the citizens of the United States are humans with a conscience. It’s a reprisal vote against the war in Iraq, against the corruption” within the Bush administration, Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez said. “All this fills us with optimism.”
I’m surprised that Chavez’s face didn’t melt off when he said the word conscience. I’m pleased to see that someone without one is only too pleased to credit us with one. I guess we’ll call that a backhanded compliment. As for the “corruption” thing, please Hugo, baby, spare me the bull. Hugo filled with optimism is a scary thing. Maybe he’ll say “diablo” again.
In an extraordinary joint statement, more than 200 Socialist members of the European Parliament hailed the American election results as “the beginning of the end of a six-year nightmare for the world” and gloated that they left the Bush administration “seriously weakened.”
Yes, an extraordinary statement like this hasn’t been seen by the world since 1917. Oddly enough, that happened in early November, too.
In Paris, expatriates and French citizens alike packed the city’s main American haunts to watch results, with some standing to cheer or boo as vote tabulations came in.
You know, sadly, I expect that the boos came from tourists, not expat Americans who seem to flock to the city of lights (and $5 Cokes) like the America-hating fireflies they are.
One Frenchman, teacher Jean-Pierre Charpemtrat, 53, said it was about time U.S. voters figured out what much of the rest of the world already knew.
“Americans are realizing that you can’t found the politics of a country on patriotic passion and reflexes,” he said. “You can’t fool everybody all the time — and I think that’s what Bush and his administration are learning today.”
Well, we certainly know that patriotic passion won’t be found in France anytime soon. The only thing US voters should figure out from this guy is that you can’t trust a man with a hyphen in his name.
Democrats swept to power in the House and were threatening to take control of the Senate amid exit polls that showed widespread American discontent over Iraq, nationwide disgust at corruption in politics, and low approval ratings for Bush.
Or so goes the popular wisdom. Nationwide disgust at corruption in politics I’ll buy, but how does widespread discontent over Iraq lead people to vote for a party which hasn’t actually presented a formal plan showing how it will handle Iraq any differently than the one currently in power? Low approval ratings for Bush certainly helped, but since those approval ratings are supposedly tied to the war in Iraq, I’m again forced to ask why voters would choose a party with no plan over a party with a plan. Or is it just the old “anyone but Bush” meme operating again? While we’re at it, why is it exactly that American voters continue to buy into the operating rhetoric behind political memes?
Bush is deeply unpopular in many countries around the globe, with particularly intense opposition to the U.S.-led war in Iraq, the U.S. terror detention center at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, and allegations of Washington sanctioned interrogation methods that some equate with torture.
Yes, Bush is certainly disliked in Cuba, North Korea, Iran, Syria, France, and Germany. Maybe even Canada. I’m not sure how that makes up “many countries around the globe.” As for the torture thing, have you ever sat through a German opera? To borrow a quote, “they go on for days and there is no word in German for cushy.”
People across the Mideast also reacted swiftly, saying it appeared the U.S. president had paid the price for what many view as failed policy in Iraq.
Those with regular access to satellite televison, you mean. Which makes them fairly wealthy. Which, with the exception of the Saudi royal family, makes them fairly predisposed against the US. Unless, of course, we’re talking about the “Arab street.” Don’t get me started on that utter claptrap.
Most governments across the region had no official comment, but some citizens voiced hope for change. “We hope American foreign policy will change and that living conditions in Iraq will improve,” said 48-year-old engineer Suheil Jabar, a Shiite Muslim in Baghdad.
Right on, Suheil. Keep on hoping living conditions will improve when the troops are pulled out and you are left in Baathist Sunni central holding your protractor and slide rule.
In Copenhagen, Denmark, 35-year-old Jens Langfeldt said he did not know much about the midterm elections but was opposed to some of Bush’s policies. He referred to the president as “that cowboy.”
Yeah, ok Jens. Have you ever actually seen a cowboy? And I don’t mean the Brokeback Mountain kind.
In Sri Lanka, some said they hoped the rebuke would force Bush to abandon a unilateral approach to global issues.
We all know how much the Tigers would love the idea of the US interfering in their little rebellion. Yeah, I suspect we can definitely count on Sri Lanka preferring that the US becomes the capital of isolationist thought.
The Democratic win means “there will be more control and restraint” over U.S. foreign policy. said Jehan Perera, a political analyst.
Yes, indeed. See Kosovo, Haiti, Somalia.
Passions were even higher in Pakistan, where Bush is deeply unpopular despite billions in aid and support for President Gen. Pervez Musharraf.
And why exactly are we supporting this guy again? Oh, that’s right. The James Baker realists of Cold War fame are back in style at the White House.
One opposition lawmaker, Hafiz Hussain Ahmed, said he welcomed the election result but hoped for more. Bush “deserves to be removed,” he said.
Yes, and in Pakistani “removed” has a somewhat more permanent meaning. Thanks Hafiz, but no thanks. I think we’ll stick with American style democracy rather than the banana republic, military dictatorship stuff favored in your neck of the woods.
But while the result produced jubilation, there were also deep concerns.
Most of those deeply concerned are Libertarians or Republicans, however.
Danish Prime Minister Anders Fogh Rasmussen told broadcaster TV2 he hoped that the president and the new Congress would find “common ground on questions about Iraq and Afghanistan.”
“The world needs a vigorous U.S.A.,” Fogh Rasmussen said.
Thanks for the optimism Mr. Prime Minister, but I suspect we are in for two years of mafia hit style politics in Washington. As for “the world,” they seem to disagree with you regarding a “vigorous U.S.A.”
Some also worried that Democrats, who have a reputation for being more protective of U.S. jobs going overseas, will make it harder to achieve a global free trade accord.
At least someone recognizes the Democrats’ lackluster commitment to free trade and capitalism.
The accord, said European Commission President Jose Manuel Barroso, “is very important for the future of trans-Atlantic relations.”
Ah, Europe is only socialist as long as American money isn’t involved. Once we start talking about trade agreements, it’s off with the Marx masks and on with the cigars and martinis.
And in China, some feared the resurgence of the Democrats would increase tension over human rights and trade and labor issues. China’s surging economy has a massive trade surplus with the United States.
Again, Marxism or Maoism appears to stop at the border.
“The Democratic Party … will protect the interests of small and medium American enterprises and labor and that could produce an impact on China-U.S. trade relations,” Zhang Guoqing of the state-run Chinese Academy of Social Sciences said in a report on Sina.com, a popular Chinese Internet portal.
Not so sure about that one, Comrade Zhang. Despite the tired old rhetoric of Republicans being in bed with big business, Democrats are not exactly champions of entrepreneurship and the small businessman. Their only strong stance to date has been against Walmart.
The prospect of a sudden change in American foreign policy could be troubling to U.S. allies such as Britain, Japan and Australia, which have thrown their support behind the March 2003 invasion of Iraq.
Yep, nothing like selling out allies who have staked their political futures on your determination to succeed. Oh, well, Tony Blair was due to step down anyway, right?
Democrats campaigned on a platform that demanded a change of direction in Iraq, and the war has lost the support of the majority of American voters.
All true, but what exactly is the Democrat plan for change in the direction of the war?
“The problem for Arabs now is, an American withdrawal (from Iraq) could be a security disaster for the entire region,” said Mustafa Alani, an Iraqi analyst for the Gulf Research Center in Dubai.
But don’t lets let that stop us from voting for Charlie Rangel and Rahm Emanuel.
So, at the end what exactly have we learned? What made the article worth writing and worth publishing? Well it appears that the world (which means in this case, France, Germany, Venezuela, Cuba, Syria, Pakistan and Iran) is just thrilled about the Democrats taking Congress. Hmmm… big surprise. It also appears that “the world” doesn’t really know much about how the US government works or how US foreign policy is made. For some reason, “the world” actually appears to have a solid take on Democrats’ approach to free trade and capitalism, which is that they’re not too big on either. Other than that, we appear to have what amounts to a “filler” article. Just something to take up space so that the newspaper isn’t empty or the website barren. Either educate me or entertain me. If you can’t do either, then don’t run with an article. So much for the high standards of the world of journalism.