Before you can say, “Neocon,” it will be time for the Iraqis to conduct their first George W. Bush, Jr.-sanctioned “free election!” Isn’t American-styled democracy wonderful? We’re talking January, 2005! Iraq has had elections in the past, but that egomaniac Saddam Hussein spoiled them by insisting on winning by dictator-sized margins.
For example, in the last Iraqi election, on Oct. 16, 2002, Saddam received “100 percent” of the votes cast in a referendum. Now, that was silly. He did, however, have a big American-city-styled political machine going for him. The late Mayor Richard J. Daley of Chicago, Illinois, would have been jealous of his electoral success. I mean even the Soviet Union’s despot, Joseph Stalin, only used to pull in 95.5 percent of the vote during his reign of terror. (The other 4.5 percent of the potential voters were, unfortunately, languishing in the Gulag.)
Nevertheless, this will be Iraq’s first election under joint British-U.S. occupation. The Brits have had a lot of experience in rigging, excuse me, “running” elections in colonies under their iron heel. The U.S., however, is catching up fast with their “Big Oil” addicted partner. Well, it’s not really going to be an “election!” It’s more like a propaganda show. Candidates will be put up for 275-National Assembly seats, with little opposition. (In America, It now costs, on average, one million dollars to win a contest for the House of Representatives. That says a lot about the sad state of our democracy). As the Coalition Forces continue to bomb away, the Iraqi people will be expected to vote for the “approved” slate of candidates. (USA Today, 09/24/03, “Doubts Raised About the Iraqi Election”).
Then, someone will have to certify the winners of this dubious Iraqi election, which is costing U.S. taxpayers about $500 million (“Stillborn Democracy in Iraq,” Patrick Basham, 09/30/04, cato.org). Katherine Harris, Supervisor of Elections Extraordinaire, who counted (some, but not all) the votes in Florida, in the disputed 2000 presidential battle, would have been a logical choice, but, alas, she’s not available. She’s now a Republican congresswoman from Florida’s 13th district.
This bring up a key question: Who’s going to supervise the voting in Iraq? I think it has to be an individual that “fair and balanced” Fox News’ blowhards, Bill O’Reilly and Sean Hannity, have confidence in. America’s Iago, Henry Kissinger is just too old and too cranky for the post. Paul Bremer, the ex-Iraqi Viceroy, won’t dare go back to Baghdad. Who can blame him? So, I nominate that “Windbag for Democracy” – Richard Perle – the Mother of all Neocons and rabid Israeli and Ariel Sharon cheerleader (“The Armchair General,” Eric Boehlert, 09/05/02, salon.com).
Okay, I concede that some folks think Perle is a bit of a stinker (“Richard Perle Libel Watch, Week 20,” Jack Shafer, slate.msn.com, 08/05/03), and that even Lord Conrad Black has now fallen out with him over that ugly Hollinger Co. mess (“The Curse of Black’s Perle,” Daniel Gross, slate.msn.com). But, Perle is still a popular Talking Head on the news shows. He was also one of the main instigators of the Iraqi war. And, I suspect that the people of Iraq will be “dying” to meet “The Neocon” who had so significantly helped to bring this living hell of an invasion and occupation on them. The American troops in Iraq will also enjoy confronting Perle, a man who insisted, with other chicken hawks, like William Kristol, that the Iraqi conflict was going to be a cakewalk. Let’s hope our soldiers take Perle with them on their next patrol of downtown Samarra!
President Bush has a duty to “draft” Perle for the post of Supervisor of Elections for Iraq. If Perle refuses, then the president should threaten to immediately cut off Israel’s $3 billion-plus annual freebee (wrmea.com). That will absolutely change Perle’s Israeli-loving mind. All’s fair in love and war, as the bard Will Shakespeare said.
What does a Supervisor of Elections do? Using just about any American city as a model, his or her duties generally include some of the following responsibilities: He conducts voter registration and issues voter I.D. cards, updates voter registration lists, and provides for absentee voting. The Supervisor also is responsible for qualifying candidates for office. Since the candidates in Iraq will all be hand picked by Bush’s Interim Puppet, Iyad Allawi, that particular requirement can be ignored. Other duties include training poll workers, equipping polling places and maintaining financial disclosure reports. And most important of all, the Supervisor certifies the winner or winners of the election to the appropriate governing agency.
Cutting to the chase, all the new Supervisor of Elections in Iraq has to really do is pick up the phone after all the polls are closed and get the results from each precinct official. Then, he has to call Bush’s stooge Allawi and tell him that all of “his” candidates for the Assembly have won! How could it be otherwise? There is no genuine opposition. As long as the margin of victory for Allawi’s cronies is around a 70 percent approval level, no one will be any wiser. How hard is that? It’s right down Perle’s alley. Fox News will be ecstatic, too, about reporting that kind of electoral result. “Democracy,” they will claim, “is on the march in Iraq.”
Finally, destiny is calling Perle. Iraq is going to have a “democratic” election in January, 2005, whether it wants to hold one or not. He’s the ideologue, in the tradition of the Jacobins, that insisted the U.S. could could export democracy, without the consent of the Iraqi people, to that country – and, at gun point! Ready or not Iraq, here comes your first Supervisor of Elections, the one, the only – Richard “The Neocon” Perle. Please give him the welcome that he so rightfully deserves.
