2005-05-12 01:16:03 UTC
by Ann Coulter
May 11, 2005
It's always important to get liberals to stop complaining long enough
to make a hard prediction. This week we will review liberal predictions on
bringing democracy to Iraq.
When they weren't claiming the Iraq elections would not take place at
all - and, even if they did, the people wouldn't participate - liberals were
telling us that if we let those crazy Arabs vote, the Iraqi people would
elect extremist Islamic mullahs hostile to the United States.
Well, the Iraq National Assembly completed filling out the cabinet this
week, and it can now be said that this was liberals' laughably wrong
prediction No. 9,856. (Or No. 9,857 if you count their predictions of
ruinous global cooling back in the 1970s, which I don't because that could
Iraq's first democratically elected government in half a century has a
Shia prime minister and a Kurdish president and several Sunni cabinet
ministers. In fact, toss in a couple of dowdy lesbians from the Green Party
and it would look a lot like Vermont's state house.
Fat Muqtada al-Sadr saw his radical Shiite movement humiliated in the
January elections. According to a recent poll by the International
Republican Institute, two-thirds of Iraqis say Iraq is on the right track.
The minority Sunnis, who once held sway under Saddam Hussein and were
told by American liberals to expect major payback from the Shiites under a
democracy, were chosen by the majority Shia government for four cabinet
positions - including the not insignificant position of defense minister.
Plus, the Sunnis might get a fifth if they can convince Rep. Ali Abu
Jeffords to switch parties.
One of the Sunnis picked for a cabinet post turned it down on the
grounds that he thought he was chosen simply to fill a Sunni quota. "I don't
believe in sectarianism," he said, "I believe in democracy." So I'll be
moving to Iraq soon to live in a country that forcefully rejects quotas.
Also this week, Prime Minister Ibrahim al-Jaafari said he would like a
woman as his fourth deputy prime minister. It's as if the Taliban has risen
from the dead!
Apparently - like John Kerry and the Democrats - I guess the Muslim
extremists just didn't get their message out. Although "Green Zone Veterans
for Truth" were also a factor.
What we've learned from this is: Talking to liberals is much more fun
now that we have Lexis-Nexis.
In a Nov. 9, 2003, news article, The New York Times raised the prospect
that "democracy in the Middle East might empower the very forces that the
United States opposes, like Islamic fundamentalists in Saudi Arabia and
Democracy in the U.S. might have put John Kerry in the White House,
too, but you'll notice we didn't abandon the idea.
One difference is that the Islamic fundamentalists in Saudi Arabia and
Egypt were not democratically elected. Still, the Times said that "something
similar" happened in Iran when "domestic pressures" installed the Ayatollah
Ruhollah Khomeini. By "domestic pressures" in Iran, I gather the Times meant
"the Carter presidency."
Philadelphia Inquirer columnist Trudy Rubin claimed to be talking about
"grim Iraq realities," explaining to her readers that if elections were
held, the new Iraqi government "will likely be dominated by religious
parties. If the economy stays bad, radical Islamic parties could do well."
So you can see how leaving the tyrannical Hussein dynasty (slogan: "We're
the rape room people!") in place was preferable to that.
Winning the category of Most Wrong Predictions in the Fewest Words, Joe
Conason predicted in the Sept. 27, 2004, New York Observer: "a series of
horrifically violent confrontations in Iraq's cities, a postponement of the
January elections, a wider call-up of National Guard and Reserve units, or
even a renewed military draft." And if Bush won a second term, Conason said:
"Beware the 'November surprise' that will begin to bring home the true costs
of his feckless adventure."
Conason's feeble litany of harebrained predictions reads like a haiku
of bum steers. No increase in "horrific" violence, no postponement of
elections, no draft, no "November surprise." (OK, there was one "November
surprise" - but only for the Democrats. It happened on Nov. 2.)
Winning the category of Most Wrong Predictions, Lifetime Achievement
Award, Katrina vanden Heuvel (Queen of the May at the fun-loving Nation
magazine) said invading Iraq would lead to "more terrorist retaliation,
undermine the fight against al-Qaida and make America less secure and
possibly unleash those very weapons of mass destruction into the hands of
rogue terrorists in Iraq."
What weapons, Katrina? (Katrina lied, kids died!) Hey! Wait a minute!
How can rogue terrorists in Iraq detonate bombs? They're all too busy flying
kites with their children! Hasn't she seen "Fahrenheit 9/11"?
After we invaded Iraq, Katrina predicted the U.S. would stay in Iraq as
a colonial power - as the only nonimperialist superpower in the history of
the world is wont to do. As we paved the way for elections, she said, "You
know, if there are elections in Iraq, it's very likely it will not be
But it's not fair to quote Katrina. She still thinks the Soviet Union's
planned economy failed because the farmers had 70 years of bad weather.
Liberals' current prediction is that Hillary will be able to do a planned