In one of the grandest events in the history of the world, millions of Iraqis risked death on Sunday to vote in a free, democratic election. There were more than 100 attacks on polling stations by the “insurgents” (or “Islamic Fascists,” as authentic Americans call them). But the Iraqis voted–Shia, Sunnis, women, and an estimated 2,000 dead felons in Washington State. Democrats haven’t been this depressed since we captured Saddam Hussein. On “Meet the Press,” the Democrats’ erstwhile presidential candidate, Sen. John Kerry, questioned the legitimacy of the election, saying, “[I]t’s hard to say that something is legitimate when a whole portion of the country can’t vote and doesn’t vote.” Kerry warned Americans not to “overhype this election”–and if there’s one guy who’s good at calming down excited voters, it’s John Kerry. Apparently, word didn’t get out to the Iraqis, who were dancing and singing in the streets. (Isn’t it great to see Muslims celebrating something other than the slaughter of Americans?) Kerry’s main advice to Bush was to reach out to the French. Curiously, this is also the Democrats’ plan for fixing Social Security, dealing with North Korea, and controlling the budget deficit: Reach out to the French! Most amusingly, Kerry repeatedly quoted himself, as if he had called this one ball, shot, and pocket: “You may recall that back in–well, there’s no reason you would–but back in Fulton, Mo., during the campaign, I laid out four steps . . .” (at that point the cameraman nodded off and NBC abruptly cut to color bars). I remember what Kerry said during the campaign! What he and his fellow Democratic towel-biters said was that this election wasn’t going to happen. Kerry specifically addressed the scheduled Iraqi elections in his closing statement at the first presidential debate, saying: “They can’t have an election right now. The President’s not getting the job done.” (Kerry’s a genius! He won the debate!) A few weeks later, his campaign manager, Mary Beth Cahill, said: “It’s not safe enough to have elections, which are scheduled in January. There is no way that people could go to the polls in that country right now.” In order to have free elections, apparently we would have to … reach out to the French! “The Kerry plan,” Cahill said, “would be to have an international consensus, not to go it alone, to get other countries into Iraq with us, so that we could carry out elections and we could move Iraq to be a free nation.” And yet we somehow managed to have a free election in Iraq without the French. In September, former President and Nobel Peace Prize-winner Jimmy Carter said on NBC’s “Today”: “I personally do not believe they’re going to be ready for the election in January . . . because there’s no security there.” Democrat moneyman George Soros said in a speech to the National Press Club last fall: “All my experience . . . has taught me that democracy cannot be imposed by military means.” (But see: Germany, Japan, Nicaragua, Afghanistan, and El Salvador.) Of course Soros’s “experience” consists mostly of liberating billions of dollars from the captivity of other people’s bank accounts. He’s a regular Douglas MacArthur, that Soros guy. Expressing his faith in the Iraqi people, Soros continued: “Iraq would be the last place I would choose for an experiment in introducing democracy.” All those blue-inked fingers were the Iraqi people giving Soros the finger. Also taking his cue on world politics from Janeane Garofalo, last September UN Secretary General Kofi Annan said he doubted there would be elections in January, saying, “You cannot have credible elections if the security conditions continue as they are now”–although he may have been referring here to a possible vote of the UN Security Council. Robert Fisk of The Independent (UK) told an audience in October 2004: “The chances of [January] elections are fading faster than water running into the desert.” He said it was a “lie” that the allies were creating “an oasis of democracy with its center in Iraq.” Remind me not to ask Fisk who he likes in the Super Bowl. The Economist magazine said that until security in Iraq improves, “reconstruction will stall–and the hopes of Messrs. Allawi and Bush for a decent election, enabling a strong and legitimate government to take over, will continue to look uncertain to be fulfilled.” In October, Nicholas Lemann was a whirlwind of bad news about Iraq, writing in The New Yorker: “The U.S. military in Iraq has started trying to take back areas of the country now controlled by insurgents, and it may not be safe enough there for the scheduled elections to be held in January.” Somehow he failed to add, “Also, by mid-March live rhesus monkeys may be flying out of my butt.” Amid his litany of bad news, Lemann said: “It is difficult to find anybody in Washington, in either party, who will seriously defend Bush’s management of Iraq.” Fortunately, last Sunday, President Bush found eight million people–outside of Washington–to seriously defend his management of Iraq.