An alternative to the Iraqi election

I know most political columnists around the country will be writing about the historic national election that took place in Iraq on Sunday.  Conservative columnists will be applauding the huge success of the election, while liberals and the rest of the mainstream media will be doing what they do best:  whining, crying and complaining.
 
My original plan was not to write about the Iraqi election.  To tell you the truth, I am tired of reading and hearing commentary about the election.  I know it was historical.  I support the election and Iraqi freedom fully, but enough already.  Four weeks of build up prior to the election and now the constant news coverage are just a little too much to handle. 
 
I am sure there are others who feel the same way.  So I decided to write a column about something far more serious:  Sex Bombs. 
 
Okay, maybe Sex Bombs are not as serious as the Iraqi election, but you must admit the subject does get your attention.
 
I wrote about half of the Sex Bomb column last week, but after watching “Meet the Press” on Sunday, I decided to take another approach to the column at the last minute.
 
Had I finished my Sex Bomb column, it would have contained some of the following:
 
Every former United States president has left behind a legacy.  Most people in the United States know that George Washington is the “Father of our Country” and Abraham Lincoln is credited with “Saving the Union”.
 
But few know that William Jefferson Clinton can now claim the legacy of being the father of the “Sex Bomb”.  What a fitting legacy for Clinton.
 
Newly declassified documents reveal that the Pentagon considered developing non-lethal chemical weapons during the Clinton administration. 
 
One idea developed by scientists at the US Air Force Wright Laboratory in Dayton, Ohio was to develop a chemical weapon that attracts large swarms of wasps or rats to enemy positions to make them uninhabitable.
 
Scientists also thought of developing a Sex Bomb containing an aphrodisiac that would be dropped on enemy locations.  The aphrodisiac in the weapon would make enemy soldiers sexually irresistible to each other.  The theory being that this would cause widespread homosexual behavior among the troops and would cause a distasteful blow to morale.
 
I bet many of you are thinking the same thing:  What is a distasteful blow to morale and did President Clinton come up with the idea of the Sex Bomb while working with Monica Lewinsky in the Oval Office?  I guess we will never know.
 
Like I said, I planned on writing about the Sex Bomb, but I had to change my plans at the last minute and rewrite my column.  
 
Why the change of plans?  Simple, a lamebrain Senator from the state of Massachusetts had to say something idiotic on national television, the day of the Iraqi election. 
 
Thanks for all the extra work, Senator Kerry.
 
Kerry, the big loser in the last presidential election is still proving that he does not have the skill or intelligence to be President of the United States.  I wonder if he should even be a United States Senator.
 
During an interview with “Meet the Press”, and speaking about the historical Iraq election were millions of Iraqis voted for the first time, Kerry said, “No one in the United States should try to over hype this election.”
 
Over hype the election?  How can he think the American people would “over hype” the Iraqi election?  Most of us see the election for what it is:  A victory over terrorism and a victory over liberal naysayer's like John F. Kerry.  Not to mention a big win for President Bush.
 
Since Kerry warns of “over hyping” the election, it is fair to say he considers the election mundane.  And, since he thinks the election was commonplace, I wonder if he would have had the courage to take his three purple hearts and his silver star to Iraq and stand in line with Iraqi women in a polling station on Election Day.
 
I doubt it.  I think he would have been shaking in his expensive Italian shoes.
 
Okay sorry, I guess I am being a little hard on the Senator.  I sometimes forget that liberals look at things differently than most normal people.  In fact, I must now admit that the United States had other options available and should have not invaded Iraq.  President Bush could have freed the Iraqi people from Saddam Hussein without risking the lives of people in our military. He should have explored all the options before the invasion.
 
President Bush should have dropped Bill Clinton's Sex Bomb on Iraq.  At least all the liberals would be happy. 
 
But, I bet most Iraqis would prefer the invasion.
 

Steve Darnell
 
Steve Darnell is a self-syndicated columnist and can be reached at [email protected].