2008 Woodie Awards
January 30th: A Day that Definitely Will NOT Live in Infamy!!!
Christian E. Savage
Issue date: 2/9/05 Section: Perspectives
- Page 1 of 1
January 30th, 1984: Ten days after President Ronald W. Reagan was sworn in to his 2nd term as the 40th President of the United States, also the day when I was born to two pro-Kerry Democrats. Now, 21 years later the world had a glorious opportunity to witness Freedom, Democracy, and a new interim government elected solely by the people of Iraq as a direct result of Operation: Iraqi Freedom. The program was launched at the urgent request of George W. Bush, Commander-In-Chief of the Armed Services of the United States of America.
Yes, indeed!!! Our valiant troops who paid, irrefutably, the "Ultimate Sacrifice" in toppling a ruthless tyrant, and those who are still over there fighting for freedom, should definitely be commemorated because the first-fruits of their mission have been achieved. Despite the ongoing brutal slaughter that those brave men and women encountered from the terrorists and insurgents, they stayed and ensured that the U.S.'s seed of democracy was planted in order to mature as a firmly rooted "Tree of Liberty." As Thomas Jefferson once said, "The 'Tree of Liberty' must be at times refreshed with the blood tyrants" and we all can irrevocably agree that our troops kept that principle by any means necessary.
Even more interesting, according to the Reuters' News Wire, is the fact that the Iraqis walked that "Road to Democracy" courageously in defiance of Osama Bin Laden's plea to boycott the elections essentially better than we do here in the States. For example, just in the recent 2004 Election between Kerry and our Commander-In-Chief, voters stood in extremely long lines for hours, despite any setbacks that came their way. Yet, the overall voter turnout was only a miniscule 50% of registered voters. However, in Iraq despite the threat of intimidation by the terrorists and Saddam loyalists, the Iraqis proudly resisted those barriers and marched gallantly to those polling sites with an astronomical range of 75% voter turnout.
Of course, fundamentally agreeing with this momentous event that has occurred in world history, there are still some problems with the overall process of that democratization. First of all, the concept that the U.S. promoted where the Iraqis would vote and whatever percentage of the popular vote a given political party received, that proportion would be delegated to the number of seats in the 275-member National Assembly. That is a modeling of the European-style parliamentary democracies of which gives an unfair balance of power to the legislative branch of the government. For example, that would be like the American people never electing an independent President; instead, they would cast a ballot for either the Democratic Party or the Republican Party in which the seats in the Congress would be established not by distinct congressional districts but rather on the proportion of a national popular vote. Then the Congress would elect the President, essentially making him/her a puppet of the Congress.
Moreover, the elections being counted based on a "national popular vote" would enable one mass-populated region of the country to unilaterally control the entire Federal government. That is exactly why our Founding Fathers insisted on the Electoral College system to elect the President because they had that very same fear. In fact James Madison called such an attempt in the Federalist Paper #10, straight up-and-down "Mobocracy," or in other words, majority tyranny. In terms of the newly-elected government in Iraq, there opens the possibility that a single region of the nation, such as the Shiite dominated South, could be controlling the entire National Assembly which is responsible for drafting their new constitution. Remember, the Shiite Muslims believe in a fanatical Islamic theocracy; in other words, this means that a majority vote could result which would be an abomination in the War on Terror.
All in all, though, history has placed its enduring legacy on our President: (1) On May 1st, 2003 the U.S. and coalition forces around the world defeat the regime of Saddam Hussein BY ANY MEAN NECESSARY; (2) Freedom, Democracy, and a newly-elected Iraqi Republic was born this day on January 30th, 2005 BY ANY MEAN NECESSARY; (3) Finally, freedom, democracy, and this new Iraqi Republic elected by the people of Iraq will be preserved, protected, and defended by the United States and allies BY ANY MEAN NECESSARY!
-Christian E. Savage
Send Rebuttal to Csavage472 (IM) or Csavage472@netzero.net
Christian Savage is an independent writer and his views and statements to do not reflect those of the Quadrangle.
Yes, indeed!!! Our valiant troops who paid, irrefutably, the "Ultimate Sacrifice" in toppling a ruthless tyrant, and those who are still over there fighting for freedom, should definitely be commemorated because the first-fruits of their mission have been achieved. Despite the ongoing brutal slaughter that those brave men and women encountered from the terrorists and insurgents, they stayed and ensured that the U.S.'s seed of democracy was planted in order to mature as a firmly rooted "Tree of Liberty." As Thomas Jefferson once said, "The 'Tree of Liberty' must be at times refreshed with the blood tyrants" and we all can irrevocably agree that our troops kept that principle by any means necessary.
Even more interesting, according to the Reuters' News Wire, is the fact that the Iraqis walked that "Road to Democracy" courageously in defiance of Osama Bin Laden's plea to boycott the elections essentially better than we do here in the States. For example, just in the recent 2004 Election between Kerry and our Commander-In-Chief, voters stood in extremely long lines for hours, despite any setbacks that came their way. Yet, the overall voter turnout was only a miniscule 50% of registered voters. However, in Iraq despite the threat of intimidation by the terrorists and Saddam loyalists, the Iraqis proudly resisted those barriers and marched gallantly to those polling sites with an astronomical range of 75% voter turnout.
Of course, fundamentally agreeing with this momentous event that has occurred in world history, there are still some problems with the overall process of that democratization. First of all, the concept that the U.S. promoted where the Iraqis would vote and whatever percentage of the popular vote a given political party received, that proportion would be delegated to the number of seats in the 275-member National Assembly. That is a modeling of the European-style parliamentary democracies of which gives an unfair balance of power to the legislative branch of the government. For example, that would be like the American people never electing an independent President; instead, they would cast a ballot for either the Democratic Party or the Republican Party in which the seats in the Congress would be established not by distinct congressional districts but rather on the proportion of a national popular vote. Then the Congress would elect the President, essentially making him/her a puppet of the Congress.
Moreover, the elections being counted based on a "national popular vote" would enable one mass-populated region of the country to unilaterally control the entire Federal government. That is exactly why our Founding Fathers insisted on the Electoral College system to elect the President because they had that very same fear. In fact James Madison called such an attempt in the Federalist Paper #10, straight up-and-down "Mobocracy," or in other words, majority tyranny. In terms of the newly-elected government in Iraq, there opens the possibility that a single region of the nation, such as the Shiite dominated South, could be controlling the entire National Assembly which is responsible for drafting their new constitution. Remember, the Shiite Muslims believe in a fanatical Islamic theocracy; in other words, this means that a majority vote could result which would be an abomination in the War on Terror.
All in all, though, history has placed its enduring legacy on our President: (1) On May 1st, 2003 the U.S. and coalition forces around the world defeat the regime of Saddam Hussein BY ANY MEAN NECESSARY; (2) Freedom, Democracy, and a newly-elected Iraqi Republic was born this day on January 30th, 2005 BY ANY MEAN NECESSARY; (3) Finally, freedom, democracy, and this new Iraqi Republic elected by the people of Iraq will be preserved, protected, and defended by the United States and allies BY ANY MEAN NECESSARY!
-Christian E. Savage
Send Rebuttal to Csavage472 (IM) or Csavage472@netzero.net
Christian Savage is an independent writer and his views and statements to do not reflect those of the Quadrangle.