Renown infidel legal scholar Tung Yin writes in response to my post about the Afghan elections: "Wait, I'm confused. I thought Iraq *was* a democracy under your reign. Here in the Infidel States, we read about how you won elections with 101% of the vote."

And that is entirely accurate, Mr. Yin. I think where you are becoming confused is in the subtle differences between "American Style Democracy" and "Iraqi Style Democracy." You see, under American Style rules you start off with several candidates, and then through a series of small scale votes (primaries or conventions) you whittle the field down to two principle contenders, plus the occasional third party gadfly who can't take a f*cking hint.

The citizenry as a whole then votes in a national election, and the person with the most votes wins.... Unless, of course, the Supreme Court becomes involved because senior citizens who are too old to even remember where they parked the damn car screwed up their ballots.

Under Iraqi Style rules, on the other hand, you start off with several candidates in addition to myself. Then I shoot my opposition, torture their families, and date their daughters.

Then, and only then, do we actually hold the election.