Louis, by the grace of God, King of France and Navarre, to all present and to come, greeting from the year 1708:

One of the most useful tools of an absolute monarch like me are lettres de cachet, which may be translated as “seal letters”. You might not be familiar with this term. In my time, a seal letter (in its narrow sense) is a direct order from the king by which a subject is sentenced without trial and without an opportunity of defense to imprisonment in a state prison or an ordinary jail, confinement in a convent or a hospital, transportation to the colonies, or expulsion to another part of the realm. It’s a common practice – not a practice I’m particularly proud of, but sometimes necessary to lock away potentially dangerous individuals and maintain the power of the crown. In other terms, it’s the standard procedure to dungeon political prisoners. This is how absolute monarchy works.

However, most of you are living in a democracy, and your time considers seal letters symbols of the abuses of what you call “absolutism”. That’s why the founders of your democracies invented the writ of habeas corpus, which is basically a legal procedure through which a person can seek relief from unlawful detention of himself or another person. It has been praised as being one of the cornerstones of individual freedom and democracy. Leaders have now to justify themselves when they dungeon someone. This is how democracy works.

However, the habeas corpus can be somewhat unhandy when dealing with politically motivated arrests, for example, of supposed terrorists. That’s why the U.S. Government had this really great idea: build a prison outside the U.S. borders such that they can imprison people without any trial. I’m the last one who could condemn political imprisonment - but, as far as I understand, this is not how democracy works.

Now it seems that democracy strikes back. In the case Boumediene vs. Bush, the U.S. Supreme Court affirmed on June 12 the habeas corpus rights of detainees in Guantanamo:

The full text as PDF

Whereas I feel with King George W., Rex Christianissimus Americae, that he can no more sign lettres de cachet, I have to admit that this court decision is a victory for democracy. As you might have guessed, I’m not a big fan of democracy - but, if you do it, you should do it correctly. If you give the power to the people, you can’t take it away with the other hand. And, luckily for you, democracy has mechanisms like the Supreme Court to prevent political leaders to undermine its very basic principles.

This is how democracy works.

Given at Versailles in the month of June, in the year of grace 1708, and of our reign the sixty sixth.

Let me start by saying George W. Bush is an amazing idiot. Now that I got that out of the way I can discuss the budding Democracies in the Middle East for which George has taken the credit: Iraq and Palestine.

Iraq.

Well, this one is pretty obvious to anyone who has been alive the past four years. First we attacked Iraq because it was a threat and Saddam had weapons of mass destruction everywhere. Then when it turned out that was a lie, Bush claimed we invaded to bring freedom and democracy to Iraq. Man, did they take the whole “freedom” thing to heart. Iraq is now in the middle of a religious civil war. The democracy Bush wanted didn’t jive with the democracy Iraqis wanted. Bush was thinking secular, but Iraqis will still do whatever Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani tells them to do. He is the ultimate authority.

Currently Sistani is calling for calm but even he can't make the government function. “Democracy” in Iraq is hanging by a thread. Parliament cannot agree on four important pieces of legislation; splitting up the country’s oil wealth, allowing local elections, reinstating junior members of the Baath party and constitutional amendments demanded by Sunnis.

In August, the parliament will take a much-needed vacation from not getting anything done. Lawmakers are already known for their poor attendance records and now Shiite leader Muqtada al-Sadr has pulled his 30 lawmakers due to the recent bombing of the Askariya shrine. Before Sadr pulled his members, parliament was failing to pass legislation due to a lack of lawmakers showing up. Now subtract 30 from nothing.

On June 11 lawmakers actually did manage to get something done: They voted to remove the Sunni Speaker of the House. Unfortunately for them, he refused to go. The Speaker will only resign if parliament replaces him with a lawmaker from his small political party – which will never happen. Sounds like they are really getting the whole idea of Democracy, huh?

This weeks bombing of the Askariya shrine could be the last straw.

Ayatollah Al-Sistani made things worse by blaming the government for not protecting the shrine.

What a surprise. Usually when you apply Democracy at the barrel of a gun it works out.

Palestine.

Bush really seemed to think Democracy in the Middle East would create a bunch of new countries that were pals with the US. What Bush seemed to neglect to understand was that just as religious, right wing extremists elected him, they would also elect the leaders of these new Democracies. Palestine is a terrific example.

The US pressured Palestine to hold elections. The result was a victory for the militant fundamentalist Hamas Party. Bush failed to realize that his own military actions and policies in the region were undermining moderate and secular leaders. Oops.

Democracy relies on the rule of law, stable institutions and economic security. Neither Palestine nor Iraq has any of those things. If you hold elections in these environments you are asking for extremists to take control – legally. They did just that in Palestine, as Hamas took control of everything but the presidency. The US was obviously unhappy with the results. The Palestinians didn’t get the memo to choose leaders whom they didn’t want to represent them. They were supposed to choose leaders other countries would like. Jesus, how hard is it Palestine?

The US decided the best idea would be to withhold funding from the new government. So, we starve the population because they elected fundamentalists, meanwhile fundamentalists thrive when a population is starving. Good idea. The result was predictable. Hamas and their rivals Fatah are now fighting a civil war and Hamas already seems the victor. Hamas has seized Gaza, the Palestinian president’s government has been dismantled as Hamas militants pillage government institutions. Basically, it’s a fucking disaster.

Oh, but wait, there is good news!

Awesome!

Oh.

Yay! Democracy!

Sean Hannity, the Fox News blowhard who seems to believe that a "fair and balanced" political analysis consists of occasionally acknowledging cohost Alan Colmes's fellating him while he spouts out conservative ideology, seems to have something of a consistency problem. His latest tirade against the liberal media concluded that the media is actively working to discourage Republican voters from going to the polls by downplaying the faults of Democratic candidates (like the Harry Reid "scandal" that has hung around the AP wire for two weeks despite the lack of anything scandalous occurring?) while highlighting the problems of Republicans. Unfortunately for Hannity, Media Matters has discovered that rather than illuminating the problem for the world to see, Hannity is actually part of the problem, as he had only two days earlier come out and said that Democrats are the ones who shouldn't vote.

So Sean Hannity, himself a part of the media, has taken to explicitly suggesting that Democrats not exercise their right to vote "for the sake of the nation" but it's the media that is suppressing Republican voters? How does that work exactly?

Remember when Iraq had their first "elections," and Republicans walked around with purple thumbs all day, taunting Democrats with the "victory" in Iraq? Well apparently that elected government hasn't worked quite as well as folks may have hopes. So perhaps it's time to just install a new government? Well, according to David Brooks, in an interview with Chris Matthews, this is an option on the table.

So... replace the current government? Aside from Schwarzenegger-style recall elections (which don't seem to be included in the Iraqi constitution) it's hard to imagine any way that the government could be "replaced" in anything resembling a democratic fashion.

On the eve of this weekend’s G-8 summit, Russian President Vladimir Putin hit back at formidable monster, Dick Cheney. In May while on a trip in Lithuania, Cheney gave a speech criticizing Putin for moving away from democracy and cracking down on religious and political rights. Cheney, who drinks eight glasses of oil a day, also accused Russian of using their vast energy reserves as “tools of intimidation or blackmail.” Putin was not amused.

Today in an interview with hardball questioner Matt Lauer, Putin took a personal jab at Cheney.

Ouch. Last year, when Cheney was not drunk, he shot a friend in the face while on a hunting trip in Texas. Did I mention that Cheney was not drunk? Not at all. He was just hunting with a friend and shot him in the face. His friend later made a public apology for getting shot in the face. Cheney could not be reached for comment about Putin’s remark because he was somewhere in the Pacific fighting Mothra.

Other g-8 members are expected to put pressure on Putin over the issue of democracy in his country. Besides Russia, the other G-8 countries are: The United States, Britain, Canada, France, Germany, Italy and Japan. Putin attempted to reframe the discussion over democracy in his country by claiming the West’s criticism of Russia is good, old-fashioned Cold War thinking, which is so 20th century.

Putin said Russian was developing democracy at its own pace, like a turtle or a sloth. Since his victory in the 2000 election, Putin has been getting rid of the democratic gains made in the 1990’s. He has shut down media outlets, attacked and jailed independent businessmen tamed the judiciary and shackled opposition parties and politicians.

President Bush left today for the summit in St. Petersburg. He will stop first for a visit in Germany, where he is greatly loved.