I am happy to report that I finally finished my MCLE hours, which gives me a little more time than I've had the past few days. I feel a bit guilty that I wasn't able to post anything about the Iraq election, but I'm glad the MSM have egg on their face.

I can't wait to see what the local leftist press does with the bad news. Especially the San Francisco Bay Guardian.

Want a sneak peek at their immediate preelection coverage? I didn't think so. Well, their latest issue features a report from Dahr Jamail (a "special correspondent for Flashpoints and reports for the BBC, Democracy Now!, and numerous other stations around the globe."), and it's appropriately titled "Destroying Babylon Forget the elections – Iraq is falling apart:

As I'm preparing for my day this morning and making coffee, the Green Zone is mortared. Just like yesterday. And the day before that. And ... well, you get the idea.

Of course, these are only the highlights of the violence. Stories of the new "freedom" being enjoyed by Iraqis abound in daily life as well.

Abu Talat's wife works in a bank, and she told him many of the banks in Baghdad are paying their employees in advance for the next two weeks for fear of bank robberies during the "elections."

Most of the day has found our cell phones without a signal. Recently the Iraqi "government" announced that in order to provide security for the polls Jan. 30, cell and satellite phones will be cut and the use of cars will be limited the day before, of, and after the "elections."

I say "elections" because the Higher Commission for Elections announced that it won't be releasing the names of the candidates prior to the "elections." With 4 of Iraq's 18 governorates unable to participate in them, an estimated 90 percent of the Sunni population not voting, a sizable amount of the Shiites boycotting, and a very large percentage of Iraqis unwilling to vote because of the horrendous security situation, calling them elections seems a bit of a stretch.

But what will they say? I'm just dying to know. Considering the ominous reports that some 70% of Iraqis voted, it won't be a pretty picture.

How dare these sellout Iraqis vote in such numbers? And right before Bush's State of the Union address?

(Obviously, it's more Bush election fraud.)

UPDATE: While he's not in San Francisco, at least one anti-Bush columnist is asking whether Bush might have been right all along:

What if it turns out Bush was right, and we were wrong?

It's hard to swallow, isn't it?

Americans cross own barrier

If you fit the previously stated profile, I know you're fighting the idea, because I am, too. And if you were with the president from the start, I've already got your blood boiling.

For those who've been in the same boat with me, we don't need to concede the point just yet. There's a long way to go. But I think we have to face the possibility.

I won't say that it had never occurred to me previously, but it's never gone through my mind as strongly as when I watched the television coverage from Iraq that showed long lines of people risking their lives by turning out to vote, honest looks of joy on so many of their faces.

Some CNN guest expert was opining Monday that the Iraqi people crossed a psychological barrier by voting and getting a taste of free choice (setting aside the argument that they only did so under orders from their religious leaders).

I think it's possible that some of the American people will have crossed a psychological barrier as well.