Again, again. I want to elaborate that I'm all for free elections in Iraq. I am happy for Iraqis.
It is utterly ridiculous to hear FagPatriot, McCock and Kurzetard to say that I'm against the idea of a free election. And that I should crawl back into wherever the sun does not shine. Please. Get. A. Clue.
First it was 72%. Second, it was 60%. Now, it is 57% for the turnout of voters. Which is why I said to be cautious and skeptical. It does not matter how much percentage it gets to have a free election because after all, it is the first time ever in more than fifty years, the people of Iraq gets to vote. By itself, it is a celebration.
Did Bush promote for the free elections? Initially, no. He did not. In fact, he resisted until Grand Ayatollah Ali Sistani organized the protests and demanded the free elections. Check the Informed Comment for further lesson in recent history. In other words, Bush was forced to concede this to Ali Sistani.
If not for Grand Ayatollah Ali Sistani, Bush would push for Chalabi, now a figure of obscurity in Iraq.
It is interesting to note that some Iraqis claimed to be forced to vote in order to get the food rations. If that is the case, then the whole thing is simply a farce to start with.
Either way, as of this moment, I'm happy for Iraqis. I'm sure Lambykins and I agreed on one thing, the elections *must* occur. It simply must.
Of course, I am irritated with Conservatives, Republicans and X-ians' lies and bashes that we are against the free elections. And I continue to be skeptical and wary of Bush's Agenda, like it or not.