It sure seems like it. Every few weeks they've voting on something monumental and triumphantly exercising their democratic rights.

Freedom is on the march!

12/7/2005 12:52:57 AM

I wish we could have a national election right about now.

12/7/2005 1:05:24 AM

somebody keeps losing ballots

[Edited on December 7, 2005 at 1:09 AM. Reason : -]

12/7/2005 1:07:59 AM

YAH! YOU SHOOD AHV A REECAAHL AHLECTION! BAHT NAHT FOR BOOSH YOU EECONOMIC GURLEY MAHN!

12/7/2005 1:09:10 AM

But seriously... I get confused by all of it. What have they and have they not voted on yet? It seems like every time they have an election, they're voting on a constitution in addition to whatever else is getting voted on. What's left to vote on in next month's election?

12/7/2005 1:32:32 AM

They voted on a delegation to write a constitution in the start of the year

They voted on the constitution that the delegation put together last month

Next week they vote for a President and some other shit I think.

[Edited on December 7, 2005 at 1:42 AM. Reason : 1]

12/7/2005 1:42:06 AM

Didn't they already vote for a President at least once?

I also love how the first elections came and went a long time ago, but you never heard anything about the results. Just pictures of people with ink on their fingers.

12/7/2005 3:16:55 AM

when they vote for a government, let's send our people home

12/7/2005 7:11:51 AM

I think part of the problem is that you're confusing Afghanistan and Iraq.

Quote :

" also love how the first elections came and went a long time ago, but you never heard anything about the results."

The people winning these elections aren't exactly well-known in the United States, so I'm not sure why'd the report who was winning. The political parties, if they exist (and generally they don't) are also not well-known.

12/7/2005 10:13:52 AM

Quote :

"Shadowrunner: I also love how the first elections came and went a long time ago, but you never heard anything about the results. Just pictures of people with ink on their fingers."

It must be a British thing, b/c after the election the results were all over the AP.

You had detailed analyses of the "lists" that won, who was going to be in the interim parliament, the alliance that was going to have to be made between Shiites and Kurds, etc.

12/7/2005 10:18:34 AM

There's no way the American press is going to do some sort of in-depth analysis of the elections in Iraq. Not sound-biteable enough. Flash some purple thumbs every once in awhile and we're placated.


Listen to the BBC sometime and compare it to damn near any US media. Much more detailed analysis, much less jerk-off soundbiting.

12/7/2005 10:38:35 AM

I guess I'm the only one that still reads newspapers instead of watching the TV

12/7/2005 10:39:38 AM

TV-free since '99.

Newspaper junkie though.

12/7/2005 10:44:13 AM

^
I'll challenge you on your last post then, the AP is on par with anything they publish over in the UK.

Not in the car long enough to listen to much radio though

12/7/2005 10:45:23 AM

How much of the AP gets picked up though? I agree that they usually do good work but the outlets rarely get much past the tagline.

Just been on a british press kick though. Those fuckers are in your face when you try and bullshit them. I'd like to see more of that her in the states.

12/7/2005 10:49:14 AM

why don't they have an election on how much longer we stay there?

12/7/2005 11:12:55 AM

Need to have a commitee look into that.

12/7/2005 11:19:31 AM

an elected commitee?

12/7/2005 11:21:19 AM

depends if they make quorum or not. Maybe a task force or something.

12/7/2005 11:36:05 AM

this thread is a result of relying on the daily show for one's news

[Edited on December 7, 2005 at 11:50 AM. Reason : s]

12/7/2005 11:50:27 AM

hmmm, yes, interesting assessment.

i was unaware they broadcasted the daily show in the UK

12/7/2005 12:00:56 PM

whatever the equivalent show/website is over there

guardian? i forget



[Edited on December 7, 2005 at 12:14 PM. Reason : s]

12/7/2005 12:14:00 PM

Quote :

"It must be a British thing, b/c after the election the results were all over the AP. You had detailed analyses of the "lists" that won, who was going to be in the interim parliament, the alliance that was going to have to be made between Shiites and Kurds, etc."

OK, must have been. Seriously, you didn't see follow-up on shit about this over there.

Quote :

"I think part of the problem is that you're confusing Afghanistan and Iraq."

Afghanistan? What's that?

Quote :

"this thread is a result of relying on the daily show for one's news"

I get most of my news from a combination of drudgereport, NY Times website, and CNN's website. Even when I was in England, I would occasionally read the British papers, but still usually checked those three.

12/7/2005 2:13:08 PM

Quote :

"It sure seems like it. Every few weeks they've voting on something monumental and triumphantly exercising their democratic rights. Freedom is on the march!"

It's like with al-Zarqawi. How many times have they "almost captured" him or "almost killed" him. I guess they need to keep harping on this stuff to make us think they are actually making some kind of progress in this insane war.

12/9/2005 3:31:38 PM

OK, so today they're supposed to be voting on a new parliament.

I'll try and make a note each time they have elections.

12/15/2005 3:38:34 AM

I think Saudi Arabia needs freedom, too.

12/15/2005 3:39:16 AM

Well lets all think about how many positions we hold elections for. Now they are voting for a lot of positions in different sectors as well but since they are just forming the govt, their elections appear to come on the heels of the previous elections. Is it really that difficult to understand?

12/15/2005 12:30:54 PM