Attention Bush: Please Look Up "Democracy"

Phaedrus · Dec 26, 2004

We're building a democracy in Iraq.

What is a democracy?

According to The American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition:

de·moc·ra·cy
n. pl. de·moc·ra·cies

Government by the people, exercised either directly or through elected representatives.
A political or social unit that has such a government.
The common people, considered as the primary source of political power.
Majority rule.
The principles of social equality and respect for the individual within a community.

<HR align=left width="25%">[French<TT> démocratie</TT>, from Late Latin<TT> d

mocratia</TT>, from Greek<TT> d

mokrati

</TT> :<TT> d

mos</TT>, people; see<TT> d

- </TT>in Indo-European Roots +<TT> -krati

</TT>, -cracy.]

According to the Merriam-Webster Dictionary of Law:

de·moc·ra·cy
Pronunciation: <TT>di-'mä-kr&-sE</TT>
Function: noun
Inflected Form: plural -cies
1 a : government by the people; especially : rule of the majority b : a government in which the supreme power is vested in the people and exercised by them directly or indirectly through a system of representation usually involving periodically held free elections
2 : a political unit that has a democratic government —dem·o·crat·ic <TT>/"de-m&-'kra-tik/</TT> adjective —dem·o·crat·i·cal·ly adverb

According to the Princeton University Dictionary:


democracy

n 1: the political orientation of those who favor government by the people or by their elected representatives 2: a political system in which the supreme power lies in a body of citizens who can elect people to represent them [syn: republic, commonwealth] [ant: autocracy] 3: the doctrine that the numerical majority of an organized group can make decisions binding on the whole group [syn: majority rule]

According to the White House:

A political system which guarantees legislative jobs to candidates based on the candidates' religious beliefs, even if said candidates lose an election.

Phaedrus

bblight · Dec 26, 2004

according to pahdreus and his ilk, democracy is however they decide to define it.

why don't you try defining "realsitic" - as in let's be realistic about doing whatever it takes and getting whatever support is needed to get this fledgeling democracy up and running.

docmercer--banned · Dec 26, 2004

Bush should be called Tatu as he is living in fantasy Island ...

Democracy starts from within and not by Bush dropping 150,000 soldiers into Iraq and telling folks you will love it!

Bush will shove the elections down the throats of the Iraqis .. yeah, like they have much of a say in it ??? he will then brush his hands and shrug his shoulders as Civil War erupts in Iraq and do what he has done his entire life: blame everyone else but himself for his blunder

The insurgents are no different than bblight or gameface ... trust me, they would be the first in line packing heat if N Korean tanks were in Washington, DC due to time for a "regime change"

Bush is out of touch ... Bush could no more care for the welfare of the Iraqi folks than I do about losing every bet today ... this was a war planned well in advance before 9-11 and a piss poor planned war ...

Ike wrote a letter taking full blame if D-Day backfired ... Ike had concern for his soliders ... Ike was a great Military Leader ....

Bush has no concern for American soldiers ... Bush is one of the worse Commander-in-Chiefs this country has ever had and time for Junior to face the music that he is in over his head and has made a major mistake with his Cowboy attitude and do it alone plan that includes no exit strategy from Iraq

bblight · Dec 26, 2004

Ike was the Supreme Commander of the Allied Forces in Europe when he made that statement. Roosevelt was President and Henry Stimpson was the secretary of Defense (Secretary of War at that time).

So how does Ike making a statement of responsibilty as a General equate to either Bush or Rumsfeld. By your Ike quote, you're stating the Commanding General in Iraq is ultimately responsible for that theater of operations rather than Bush or Rumsfeld. I agree!

You're doing a contortion act here to make a comparison betrween Ike and Bush. Please try to be more accurate when making historical comparison's

docmercer--banned · Dec 26, 2004

The pt is very simple:

One man was honorable .. ready to take the entire blame if D-Day was a disaster ...

The other man refuses to take blame for any failures but the first in line to jump into military garb and go on a carrier and proclaim "Mission Accomplished"

I've heard many Bushie getting pissed off when someone speaks against their "Commander in Chief" .. well, time for the "Commander in Chief" to look at the big picture and start showing some concern for American troops ... and these phony ass PR shoots by Bush & Rumsfeld dont count

Bblight, you are a carbon copy of Bush ... you have no concern for American kids dying in Iraq ... NONE!

Marco · Dec 26, 2004

So, how are they going to run this election.....tally up the votes for each candidate and then cut and paste the results to suit our own ratio of how an election should turn out....

.....or be brutally honest and list who actually had the most votes and which of these winning candidates had to sit on the sideline because so many of group X needed to be installed?

My guess is the first scenario....they wouldn't have the balls to be brutally honest like the second scenario....

And this is supposed to be a fair election, decided by individual voters?:ughhh:

docmercer--banned · Dec 26, 2004

Bush no more cares for this being an honest election than his concern for American soliders on the ground or the Iraqi folks ..

Bush will then brag that the Civil War in Iraq is not his problem as he did the "honorable thing" and freed the Iraqi people from a brutal dictator

Bush takes disgusting to a new low

bblight · Dec 26, 2004

Marco - they'll develop a coalition government.

In order to do that, they'll want to make sure that the leaders of the various factions have a stake in the success of that government.

Giving these leaders positions of power or authority, or an economic stake in the new government will help ensure the success of that government.

It's a pragmatic approach and but it's worked well in other post war countries such as post WWII Japan and Germany.

Doc - get a life - if Bush had a hand in it, you'll do eveything you can to paint it black! It doesn't matter to you what's good or bad, or even what's evil - if it casts an aspersion on the Bush administration, you're for it. That's the only agenda that you have - an anti-Bush agenda.

Phaedrus · Dec 26, 2004

bblight

Just out of mildest curoisity, who are my "ilk?"

Guaranteeing jobs to the Sunni minority even if the Iraqi people vote against them is absolutely not democracy; nor is it pragmatic. How you can even ascribe such spin to the idea is beyond me.

What's your position on affirmative action?

What if affirmative action were extended to, say, seats in the Senate?

Phaedrus

Phaedrus · Dec 26, 2004

Seems I'm not alone in this sentiment ...

 [font=Arial,Sans-serif]Iraq Rejects U.S. Talk of Bolstering Sunni Vote[/font]

(Reuters)



[font=Verdana,Sans-serif]BAGHDAD -- Iraq's Electoral Commission on Sunday dismissed suggestions from Washington that minority Sunni Arabs could get extra seats in parliament after next month's election to avoid Shi'ite domination if Sunnis fail to vote.[/font]

[font=Verdana,Sans-serif]The New York Times said the U.S. government was exploring such a possibility to avoid the marginalisation of Sunni Arabs, who make up about 20 percent of Iraq's population and were dominant under Saddam Hussein.[/font]

[font=Verdana,Sans-serif]Violence and disaffection in Sunni areas could mean many there do not vote in the Jan. 30 poll.[/font]


[font=Verdana,Sans-serif]"This is the first time I am hearing of this. It hasn't been discussed before at all," said Farid Ayar, a member of the Electoral Commission and its spokesman. "It's not realistic."[/font]

[font=Verdana,Sans-serif]"There is nothing like that in our rules and regulations. It would be in complete contravention of the electoral rules to do such a thing," Ayar told Reuters, saying any U.S. or other interference in the running of the election was unacceptable.[/font]


[font=Verdana,Sans-serif]The New York Times cited a Western diplomat -- apparently a U.S. official -- as saying the possibility of granting some top Sunni vote-getters places in the 275-member legislature even if they did not secure seats through the ballot, had been raised with Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani, the leading Shi'ite cleric.[/font]

[font=Verdana,Sans-serif]The theory is that even some Shi'ite politicians are concerned that an exaggerated victory could backfire if it locks Sunni Arabs out of power, exacerbating violence in the country, where the insurgency is largely Sunni Arab-led.[/font]

[font=Verdana,Sans-serif]Shi'ites make up about 60 percent of the population and are widely expected to come out on top. A coalition Sistani approves of is seen as a very strong contender, although there are over 100 other lists, including other Shi'ites, in the running.[/font]

[font=Verdana,Sans-serif]Seats will be allocated by proportional representation[/font]

 <TD valign="top" width="100%">
[font=Verdana,Sans-serif]"WHO WINS, WINS"[/font]

[font=Verdana,Sans-serif]The idea of adding Sunnis to the legislature after the election was acknowledged by U.S. officials as likely to be difficult to carry out, but they said it might be necessary to avoid Sunni estrangement, the Times said.[/font]

[font=Verdana,Sans-serif]A spokesman at the U.S. embassy in Baghdad declined to comment and referred calls to the Electoral Commission.[/font]

[font=Verdana,Sans-serif]Ayar was emphatic in dismissing such a possibility, and suggested U.S. officials were trying to interfere.[/font]

[font=Verdana,Sans-serif]"Maybe they didn't read the rules and regulations of the commission ... The Americans are expressing their views and those aren't always the same as the commission's. But the commission is absolutely independent.[/font]

[font=Verdana,Sans-serif]"It is not acceptable for anyone to interfere in our business. That will not be allowed to happen," he said.[/font]

[font=Verdana,Sans-serif]"Who wins, wins. That is the way it is. That is the way it will be in the election."[/font]

[font=Verdana,Sans-serif]Leading Sunni Arab politicians have called for a delay of up to six months in the poll, arguing that violence concentrated mostly in Sunni areas means voters will not be able to go to the polls and the vote will not be free or fair.[/font]

[font=Verdana,Sans-serif]While they are calling for a delay, dozens of Sunni religious and secular parties and coalitions have registered to stand in the election, now just five weeks away.[/font]

[font=Verdana,Sans-serif]Ayar said he expected many of those parties to do well and said it was wrong to think Sunnis would be unable or too intimidated to go to the polls in many areas of the country.[/font]

[font=Verdana,Sans-serif]"Who says they can't vote in Sunni areas? Many of them are not dangerous," he said. "I think Sunnis will have many seats in the parliament. They have many popular politicians. There's no reason to think they won't win seats.[/font]

[font=Verdana,Sans-serif]"We can't have a system where we just say 70 seats for Sunnis and 80 seats for Shi'ites, or whatever. That is not in the regulations."[/font]

[font=Verdana,Sans-serif]The Times said the White House was also talking to Iraqi leaders about guaranteeing Sunni Arabs a certain number of ministries or high-level jobs in the next Iraqi government if Sunni candidates fail to do well in the election.[/font]

[font=Verdana,Sans-serif]There is, in theory, nothing to stop the next prime minister, who will be selected via the 275-seat assembly, from choosing a government that has more Sunni Arab members than is reflected in the popularity in the polls.[/font]

[font=Verdana,Sans-serif]Iraq's current interim government, under Prime Minister Iyad Allawi, has several Sunni Arab as well as Kurdish, Turkmen and Christian members. The president is also Sunni Arab. [/font]

</TD><TD>

</TD>

eek. · Dec 26, 2004

Holy crap P, that browser of yours is smoking some serious shít.

Marco · Dec 26, 2004

"Giving these leaders positions of power or authority, or an economic stake in the new government will help insure the success of that government."

Phaedrus beat me to the punchline this time.

"Giving".......would clearly be just a tad different than "voting in" a candidate....voting would be a process that is the bedrock of democracy.....democracy is that process that some idiots actually think will work in the middle east.....middle east is that place that has been in turmoil since more than one person has lived there....

There is still time to cut our losses and leave Iraq and let the reality of civil war and infighting take place.

Phaedrus · Dec 26, 2004

I know. Frickin bizarre stuff; as I mentioned before the WYSIWYG thing is playing hell with my system. Not sure why.

Phaedrus

xpanda · Dec 26, 2004

I've been having trouble with cut 'n paste on my home PC. I use a Mac at work, and I've never had even a stitch of problems with the internet. No popups, even.

On topic:

I wonder if Moqtada al Sadr will be allowed on the ballot? He seemed a popular fella in a constituency or two ... (does anyone know who, besides Allawi, will be on the ballot? I'm feeling too lazy to look it up.)

I find it positively hysterical that there are still some who think that Bush et al give a crap about democracy in Iraq or any other nation for that matter. That would require at least some semblance of humility, and I daresay there's little of that in Washington these days.

docmercer--banned · Dec 26, 2004

Bush caring about Democracy in Iraq???

Good one, Xpanda!

That would be equivalant to the following:

A) Jennifer Lopez caring about trying to hold a marriage together for over 6 months
B) Sean Hannity actually going one day without telling lies
on his radio show
C) Rush Limbaugh cutting back on his illegal drug intake to only 50 pills per day
D) Anne Coulter trying to sound intelligent just once in 2005

Bush caring about Democracy in Iraq ... you go girl as that is Funny!

WHALE · Dec 27, 2004

Good one. l.o.l

bblight · Dec 27, 2004

Jennifer Lopez and Ann Coulter, now there are a couple of babes.

Let's see - what feminine icon can we find from the left? How about Maxine Waters - nah, too old! How about Barbara Streisand? Nah, too elitist. How about Cameron Diaz - yeah, there we go - Cameron Diaz can be the new feminine icon for the left.

Now there's a debate I'd love to see - Ann Coulter vs Cameron Diaz! LOL

docmercer--banned · Dec 27, 2004

Actually ...

Coulter took on Chris Matthews one evening ....

and was exposed for what she truely is: a complete airhead with lack of knowledge regarding any topic

Coulter is truely an embarrassement every time she does not have Hannity next to her to rescue her