Like “good burghers” of the Mainstream Media, the Washington Post buries what is surely the most important story (other than the inaugural) of January 21, 2005–”Most Iraqis Remain Committed to Elections, Poll Finds“–on page thirteen of their newspaper. You can’t even find it on the front page of their website where such “important” matters as “Homeless Man Poses as Student” are linked. You have to do a full search to locate it, but it’s there — although it is more than a little bit understated, because you’d think, when the WaPo’s headline reads “Most Iraqis Remain Committed…” they were talking about fifty-two or three percent of the vote, maybe even sixty, but they’re actually talking about 80%! The actual writer of the article is far less circumspect.
An overwhelming majority of Iraqis continue to say they intend to vote on Jan. 30 even as insurgents [sic] press attacks aimed at rendering the elections a failure, according to a new public opinion survey.
The poll, conducted in late December and early January for the International Republican Institute, found 80 percent of respondents saying they were likely to vote, a rate that has held roughly steady for months.
Well, gag me with a spoon. Maybe Omar and Mohammed were right when they assured the group that had come to meet them at my house that most Iraqis were actually interested in democracy, some of them even grateful that they had been liberated from a homicidal dictator. Maybe the nay-sayers, the various Boxers and Moores, were on the wrong side of history all along, were indeed reactionaries wearing the “false flag” of progressives like wolves in trendy sheep’s clothes. But I don’t want to gloat… especially not now… Victory in this war is a long way off and actually I’m glad the WaPo buried the story on page thirteen. We don’t need to hear about it now. The expectation game is going to be played to a fare-the-well with the Iraqi election and you can bet that if only 70% percent of eligible Iraqis vote, some self-righteous schmuck will take the 80% percent figure and declare the election a disaster, when we all know that it’s been a long time since more than 70% of the population came out to vote in Brooklyn or even Brentwood.
CORRECTION: The link to this article is now on the front page of the WaPo website with the headline: IRAQIS COMMITTED TO ELECTIONS. The “MOST” is gone.
UPDATE: The Belmont Club comments on an article in The Nation that takes a different view of the elections.
Things look very good in Iraq. The secular Baathists are probably close to throwing in the towel. It is a terrible mistake to conflate these villains with the Islamic nihilists. Baathists want to live the good life in the here and now. They have no interest in dying for Allah. Just about now the Baathists are realizing that Iraq ia not going back to the days of Saddam Hussein. It therefore behooves them to compromise with those outside of their immediate Sunni community.
There are around 25 million Iraqi citizens. The highly publicized murders (and I know this sounds cold) arenít that high of a number to really mean that much. Letís say that they total some 300 a week. Thatís still less than 16,000 murdered per year. How many infants survive today because of improving medical conditions? How many victims died annually under Saddam?
What are the greatest threats confronting the Iraqis? They are the Islamic thugs—and the national Democratic Party of the United States. The most charitable thing that I can say about the latter is that these Democrats may have the best intentions. Itís simply a matter of their intellects being warped.
Let’s not forget the percentage of people who vote in U.S. elections– this time around, with our “heavy” turnout, it was about 60%. 70 or 80 percent in Iraq sounds pretty good.
The final print edition of the Wash Post kept the article on page thirteen.
I think it is really said when the socalled progressives of the left [both here and abroad] can not bring themselves to support an election that people are willing to risk death to vote in.
I heard Lieberman this morning on Fox and he is one of the few Democrats that really seems to get it. I wish he could convince the rest of his party and as well as the average Democrat voter.
Maybe, just maybe the Iraqis want to join the 21st century, maybe they do not want to stay in the totalitarian past just to appease the anti Bush people of the world.
I don’t know if it was a nefarious neocon plan, jihadist bungling, or just serendipity — but the anti-democratic forces hanging so much of their credibility on being able to prevent the Iraqi elections was a tactical mistake on their part. The mere holding of the elections becomes a defeat for them. They’ll try to paper over that fact, but damage will be done to them.
An even worse stroke of luck for the jihadists was Arafat keeling over and PA elections being held. The dynamics of the situation require that the PA elections be declared a victory while the Iraqi elections are painted a failure. Many rhetorical contortions will be executed, but the comparison will be there for all to see regardless of the rationalizing.
A blog I like is Big Pharoh’s blog. His last post shows a picture from an Iraqi newspaper of two ballot boxes. The PA ballot box has a check mark of approval by it, the Iraqi ballot box is crossed out. He goes on to say “The author of the article asks the question: Why do Arabs and their media treat the Palestinian elections very positively, while they are passive and negative with the Iraqi elections?”
At first blush the propoganda of his graphic is frustrating, but — then again — the questions unleashed by the elections are the ball game in the end, aren’t they?
Two Arab elections within a month of each other… I can’t imagine the oriental despots are pleased by that development.
Well, if the Nation mag is saying the elections are going to go in a bad way, that might be the best piece of evidence that things are not as bad as advertised. Another way to read the article is as a pre-emptive move to declare any results “illegitimate.” It is possible that its “predictions” will not come to pass, but the writer (and Katrina et al) will smugly suggest that the elected government is illegitimate and bad and blah blah blah because of (fill in the reactionary blank).
I suggest a new motto for the Nation: Making the perfect the enemy of the good on into the 21st century!
80%. Feh. Call that a mandate? Now 46%, THAT’s a mandate. Ask any Democrat.
Ambisinistral ó Never mind the Oriental Despots. The ones in Paris, Berlin, Boston, Manhattan and Moscow aren’t too happy, either.
Obviously I meant “sad” not said. Inever catch these things att eh time.
And who cares what the Nation thinks? The Iraqis have other things on their minds.
at the time.
I need coffee.
I also think it is ridiculous to call for troop withdrawal while at the same time saying we give more money..to whom? The Nation makes plain that whatver mayhem follows a withdrawal is our fault because we should not have invaded in the first place, but we shoud leave anyway and give money to the people the Nation just said were illegitimate because we supported them.
I am glad these people do not have any real power, they would get God only knows how many people killed.
Perhaps Iraqis know the history of another Muslim country, Algeria, that faced Islamist murderers down and voted anyway. It’s a non-bloody way for the silent majority to control the agenda, and they’re going to take it. They are my heroes. A’ash al Iraq!
Reynolds provides a good link to an article in lefty LA Weekly saying the same thing as you, Roger: how can any decent person be against these elections? Perhaps the left is waking up.
BTW I think the WaPo’s change in headline is a direct result of blog notice. Who sez they’re not scared?
http://www.laweekly.com/ink/05/09/on-powers.php
Quick. What’s the Voting Age Population of Iraq? What’s the Voting Eligible Population of Iraq? Hell, what’s the population of Iraq? Don’t know and can’t Google it up? Neither can anyone else. There hasn’t been a census since ’97 and that census didn’t include the 3 Kurdish governates. The UN under the auspices of the OFF program counted 27.5 million eligible for food coupons in ’03. The US government estimates the Iraqi population at 25.4 million. Who do you trust?
Whatever the vote total turns out to be, I can generate a set of statistics that will make it look either glowing or dismal. Any reporting on this election that focuses on “turnout percentage” and doesn’t provide a clear extrapolation will be crap. This is going to be one of the clearest examples of GIGO reporting that you will ever see.
PJ:
Yes, the Algerians have been going through this for years and we never hear about it. 150,000 killed by terrorists since 1992.
I read about a terrorist assault that left 800 people with their throats slit, in just one night.
Can you imagine the reaction if 800 Iraqis were killed that way in one day?
The media is a sad joke.
I forget where in the Web I saw it, but someone was asking where the ‘human shields’ were for Iraq. They were willing to be shields for Saddam so why aren’t they willing to be shields for the Iraqi election places?
I’d like to see that question put to the blowhards who acted so tough and tried to protect Saddam.
I think the quote pulled from the WaPo article needs a little more editing than the “[sic]” after “insurgents.” I’m pretty sure that what the author meant to write was:
“An overwhelming majority of Iraqis continue to say they intend to vote on Jan. 30 even as press attacks aimed at rendering the elections a failure ‘continue unabated’, according to a new public opinion survey.”
Man this would be easier if TypeKey allowed strikethrough and italics!
Terrye:
The only people who care what “The Nation” prints are the readers of “Mother Jones”.
Kevin:
I think this is true. I was just telling someone about the Nation and I noticed a lack of interest..he said “I don’t give a damn what those idiots say. Who the hell are they to me?”
I think that kind of says it all.
The new meme that should dominate MSM coverage, but surely won’t, is Iraqi democrats vs Iraqi fascists.
The first phase of the war against Islamo-fascism– the US military overthrowing entrenched fascist oppressors in Afghanistan and Iraq and putting others in neighboring states on notice– is finished. It lasted a little over two years.
The next phase of the war has already begun and will last for many years to come. It will see a de-emphasis of the US military role and a bitter, very bloody internal conflict between new, increasingly confident democratic forces indigenous to the region and old fascist rearguard elements (ba’athists, wahabbists, Iranian proxies, AQ, pan-arabists, talibanist know-nothings). Our role? Aid the democratic forces in every way possible.
Above all, use hte US bully pulpit and the blogosphere to change the way the western public sees this conflict. It’s not a battle of two fundamentalisms, as the Euro-MSM and the US left would have it. It’s now the muslims’ own struggle for freedom. Bravo Bush for firing the first rhetorical salvo yesterday.
Oops, first phase lasted little over three years. The point is that this next phase will be far harder, bloodier and more difficult. It could take decades.