Remember how the Iranian elections results made the GOP assume voter fraud and start screaming about election integrity? The world is curiously silent now, isn't it?

In the southern Afghan district of Shorabak, the tribesmen gathered shortly before last month’s presidential election to discuss which candidate they would back. After a debate they chose to endorse Abdullah Abdullah, President Hamid Karzai’s leading opponent.

The tribal leaders prepared to deliver a landslide for Abdullah – but it never happened. They claim Ahmed Wali Karzai, the president’s brother and leader of the Kandahar provincial council, detained the local governor and closed all the district’s 46 polling sites on election day.

The ballot boxes were taken back to the district headquarters where, tribal leaders allege, they were stuffed with ballots by local policemen. A total of 23,900 ballots were finally sent off to Kabul, the capital – every one of them a vote for Karzai.

The alleged fraud, which Ahmed Wali Karzai denies, was the most blatant example among hundreds of incidents that have threatened to make a mockery of the election.

The sheer scale and audacity of the cheating, which includes supposedly “state-sponsored” ballot-stuffing, vote burning, intimidation and the closure of polling stations in antigovernment areas, has overwhelmed the country’s fledgling Electoral Complaints Commission.

Its staff are battling with more than 2,600 reports of vote-rigging, including at least 650 deemed serious enough “materially” to influence the result.

“This is a blatant violation of the procedure and I think it is stealing in daylight,” Abdullah said yesterday.

His aides say privately that if Karzai wins the 50.1% of votes needed for victory in the first round, they won’t accept the result. Abdullah said he intended to use all legal means to challenge any Karzai victory; his supporters talked menacingly of “Iran-style protests with Kalashnikovs”.

So this is the test: do we really care about bringing democracy to Afghanistan?

You can view this video right here by getting the latest version of Flash Player!

DOWNLOADS: 229

PLAYS: 6

(Sen. John Sparkman - D-Alabama - I know what you're thinking!)

Before Blue Dogs arrived on the political scene, we had Dixiecrats. That bunch of Southern Senators who always seemed to break with the rest of their party and go off on tangents, mostly about Civil Rights legislation at the time.

One such Dixiecrat Senator was John_Sparkman who was vehemently opposed to the re-election of Harry Truman during the 1948 election based on his proposed Civil Rights Bills, pending in the Senate.

Here he is, explaining his position, during the Sunday interview program "Chicago University Roundtable" from June 13, 1948 - the subject was "The Southern Democrats and the Convention".

Sen.Sparkman: “In our primary that was held May 4th, with runoff on June 1st, we selected delegates to the Democratic Convention to be held in Philadelphia. All of those delegate, every one without exception, is pledged against Truman. Furthermore, we named our Democratic electors who are to cast Alabama’s vote in the Electoral College in November . . .in December – elected in November. Every one of those electors, there are eleven of them, made a pledge to the people of Alabama prior to that election that, if chosen as an elector, each one of them pledged that he would not, under any condition, vote for President Truman.”

Talk about inspiring Party Unity. The irony to all this, is Sparkman wound up being Adlai Stevenson's Vice-Presidential running mate in 1952.

Somehow, it now makes sense why Stevenson didn't win in 1952.