Vote Early, Vote Often…

Clearly the citizens of Iraq extended the wrong digit at the insurgents terrorists on Election Day…

So…the Iraqi elections happened Sunday. This was a significant event in the world as Iraq had the first democratic elections in that part of the world…and do you know I can’t find a single mention of it anywhere on the news sites today?
Why do you suppose that is?
Perhaps it’s because voter turnout was much higher than expected–approximately 72%. Maybe it’s because the insurgents terrorist attacks against polling places were nowhere near as grand as the press predicted.
Or, maybe it’s because the Bush Administration was right and the Iraqi people really wanted to be free.
The elections in Iraq are not only a vindication of democracy, but they are also a a clear win for the Iraqi people. Almost three quarters of Iraq’s 14 million registered voters came out in Sunday’s election, but today there’s hardly a mention of it from the MSM. Perhaps that sound of silence is actually one of them digesting their plentiful helping of crow.
Alas, not everyone is keeping their mouth shut. There were the nay-sayers, like former Soviet President Mikhail Gorbachev:

“I don’t think these elections will be of any use. They may even have a negative impact on the country. Democracy cannot be imposed or strengthened with guns and tanks.”

Wow…that’s a pretty good assessment coming from a guy who was never elected and was overthrown in a coup in 1991. Many Russians blame him for the current state of their country, politically and economically. Yeah…I think he’s a great source for comment on the Iraqi elections. (He was quoted by al Jazeera, incidentally.)
The elections in Iraq were real and they were of great use. Voters chose 275 members of a Transitional National Assembly, whose job it will be to select a government and draw up a constitution by August 15th of this year. They will also select a President and two deputies to succeed the interim government. They will also select a Prime Minister, who will hold control of the military. Later this year, the Transitional National Assembly will be dissolved and a Parliament elected according to the new Iraqi constitution.
Not of any use? Negative impact? How is the governing of Iraq by Iraqis a negative impact?
Still, the press corps had a different view of things…

Reuters reported, “Iraqis trickled to polls amid insurgent attacks,” saying later, “Iraqi vote bloodied by attacks.” The Australian newspaper The Age said, “Iraqi attacks deterred voters.” The Pakistani newspaper The Dawn said, “Violence rages on as Iraqis go to polls today.” And Al-Jazeera reported, “Attacks plague Iraqi election day,” adding later, “Iraqis show mixed response to polls.”
(Source: http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,145900,00.html)

Deterred voters? Raging violence? It sounds to me like the foreign media correspondents wanted to keep people from voting in the Iraqi elections.
No one’s naive enough to think that the terrorist attacks will stop. There will be violence and attacks carried out against people, Iraqi and American, because terrorists fear freedom. They’d rather deal in the politics of fear and murder. Iraq showed the terrorists in their country that they will not bow down to bloodshed and that, ultimately, the terrorists will not win.
Perhaps the lingering symbol of the Iraqi elections is not the purple finger evidenced to the right. Instead it should be the faces of the Iraqi people, greeting freedom for the first time. While we know that freedom isn’t free, we also know that when people taste freedom they’ll do anything they can to stay that way.
The election of Iraq’s National Assembly is historic. It’s the latest step in Iraqis choosing their own direction, but it’s also the first step in freeing themselves from oppression.
Freedom isn’t negative impact. Not now, not ever.
William Smith
ConservativeBlogger.com