Zimbabwe election offends Bush and Powell's sense of justice
Sara DeHart (page 24)
March 15, 2002
Bush said Wednesday that flaws in the Zimbabwe's election might prevent
the United States from recognizing that incumbent, Robert Mugabe,
was "the winner," according to an Associated Press news article dated
March 14. Powell's statement with his pointed use of the term, Mr.
rather than President, is further evidence of how deeply offended
both bush and Powell are about voting irregularities in Zimbabwe.
Colin Powell quietly raged and exuded his displeasure with his statement,
"Mr. Mugabe may claim victory but not democratic legitimacy." Why
is that? Does Zimbabwe not have a Supreme Court to provide pResident
Mugabe with the same legitimacy as pResident bush? Are the Zimbabwe
"irregularities" any different than jebbush's irregularities in Florida?
Did Mugabe's operatives not hire the finest firm in Texas to scrub
names from the Zimbabwe voter list? What did Mugabe do wrong? Or phrased
another way, did Mugabe do anything different than the bushboys in
the November 2000 "election" held in the United States?
I suggest that editors across the country tell both bush and Powell
to "move on and get over it." An election took place and Mugabe, like
bush,, will be installed into office. Meanwhile, Democracy Activists
will keep soldiering on, looking for the light at the end of the tunnel.
Let us hope that in the United States we have a real election and
we see that first glimmer of light in November 2002.
Sara S. DeHart, Concerned Citizen
Democracy Activist
