The people of Iraq voted this weekend. This election, trumpeted as a triumph of democracy and freedom and the Ameri--I mean Iraqi--way for the past year, is supposed to mark a change in Iraq. A change from killing and bombing and raids and helicopters going down and intimidation and insurgents and occupiers?

It doesn't really matter if the outcome means anything, right? It's just that everyone (well some of them) gets to vote. Like the exercise itself means more than what the exercise decides. It's an interesting perspective. It's kind of like telling people you can have anything you want to eat for dinner, but it has to be a turkey. And it's not really a turkey, it's a form to get put into a lottery for a real turkey. And it turns out, there aren't any turkeys.

But the act of going to a place, filling out a form for the lottery and then waiting by the TV to find out if you won a turkey (which you won't, because there aren't any) is worth the effort. Because you never had the freedom to fill out a form for a turkey you'll never get before. Isn't that great?

Don't you feel better about the killing and bombing and raids and helicopters going down and intimidation and insurgents and occupiers now?

It's sort of like what Iraqis had during the years under Saddam. Of course back then there was only one turkey. And you were gonna get that turkey no matter what. Is it better to get the turkey you don't want or to be able to vote for a turkey you're never going to get?

I've been amazed in the run up to the Iraqi election that the Bush administration is so hot on voting. As if this act of "choice" is the most important right you can have as a citizen of Planet Earth.

In 2000, our national elections showed massive amounts of voter fraud and disenfranchisement. The Supreme Court invalidated the popular vote in Florida and gave Bush the presidency. They said, basically, recounts did not count. Only the "official" but flawed initial vote count could be used in determining where Florida's electoral votes went. But, y'know, "vote or die" as Puffy liked to say this year.

Why didn't they use that slogan in Iraq? Oh yeah, the insurgents scored first dibs on the "vote and die" slogan. Probably would've mixed up an already confused electorate.

In 2000, we had the messiest election in a long time. 1960 might have been a little more contentious, but that was a whole different era. After the 2000 elections, the uproar over not knowing who won the Presidential Election sent shock waves through the nation. We had to fix these problems. We had to make sure everyone who wanted to vote could vote. We had to get voting machines that weren't so hard to verify votes with. We had four years to fix these problems and assure people their votes would count. We had the full economic power of the United States to pay for a reliable and secure voting system.

Instead, we went to war. Provoked into one; consciously chose the next one. We spent 200 billion and counting. They want 80 billion more for this year. We went to war to fight a guy who had no capacity to wage war with our nation. I guess it was his fault we had so much trouble counting our votes.

We spent 200 billion plus to get to where we are now. Which is to let the people in Iraq vote for people most of them know nothing about (many, if not most, did not know the names of the people on the ballot until they got to the ballot box)--for security reasons. Most candidates had a good chance of getting knocked off if they publicized their candidacy. Many people in Iraq were not allowed to vote. Many places are not safe. Many people do not want to vote for fear of getting killed.

And here in the U.S. 2004 elections, we still had evidence of voter fraud and exclusion. Many of the places we had problems with in 2000 still used the same machines. In some precincts, Bush got more votes than there were eligible voters. Were they dead people? Pets? Was it God who cast those phantom votes? Did He really want Bush to win? Maybe they were from Iraqis who wanted to vote for something with a tangible result.

Imagine if we were not told who was running for President until the day of the election. Would you call that a legitimate vote? Would you, when you were voting, feel you were properly informed about the men who wanted to run your country?

We've been drilled with this message: Freedom = Voting = Democracy = Freedom. This is what we've been told about the Iraqi elections. This is (now) the reason we went into Iraq. This is why we've spent 200 billion plus dollars. To let them vote. Because voting equals democracy which will spread freedom across the globe. Like magic fairy dust.

I've voted in every national election since I was 18. I've voted in many city, county and state elections as well. I can't say voting makes me feel free (hiking in nature makes me feel much more free). I can't say it gives me faith in government (the tone of this screed confirms that). While the notion of democracy is based on giving people their personal say (voting), it's hard to believe the Presidential Election of 2000 was actually an election for war.

If that was on the ballot back then, would you have voted for war?

Matt Worley tried to vote for Peace in 2004, but it was nowhere to be found on the ballot