Dealing with the changes

No, not in the United States, but in Afghanistan. It seems like a football game, you can win by default if the other team doesn't show up. We further know that Karzai is the legitimate leader, because Press Secretary Robert Gibbs has stated:

Karzai is “the legitimate leader of the country,” Gibbs said in response to reporters’ questions. The administration will “continue conversations about governance, civil society and corruption going forward to ensure that we have a credible partner in our efforts to help secure the country.”

source

Mr. Gibbs has been very reliable in the past, so I will take his word for it. But really, can you claim the incumbent is the legitimate leader? All Karzai had to do is fail to budge on negotiations. The fact that his opponent withdrew does not legitimize Karzai as the chosen leader. To me it shows that democracy has failed once again in a foreign country. I don't claim to be a expert on anything in Afghanistan. The very concept of trying to understand the conflict in many of the Mideast countries is just more than I can fathom. But let's look at this on the surface.

What has happened is the challenger Abdullah Abdullah has dropped out. He was meeting with Karzai to insure that the election would be fair and the voice of the citizens would be heard. Apparently an agreement on that was not reached so Abdullah decided to not be a candidate. Of course the first election was not clean as a whistle:

But with reports of fraud at several thousand polling stations, the final result will depend on an extensive investigation being conducted by the U.N.-sponsored Electoral Complaints Commission, as well as a recount of about 10 percent of the ballots that it has ordered Afghanistan's Independent Election Commission to carry out.

source
Voter fraud? Why does that sound familiar? Now before we jump to conclusions, it was probably not ACORN. It would have to be ACORN international involved. But unlike in our own country, voter fraud in Afghanistan was actually reviewed by the U.N. Interesting how that works. I wonder if we would have had massive riots like Afghanistan did had President Obama lost the election? Keep in mind that Abdullah is the opposition party, the people opposing Karzai had started a grass roots movement to have him removed from office. Again, comparisons to America are unavoidable.

Then of course we have the war and the troop level. Remember General McCrystal? August 30th was when his assessment was sent to Defense Secretary Gates. In this request McChrystal recommended more troops. Check your calendar, and the White House has still not made a decision. The now canceled election is not a factor is what they are claiming. But why the delay? At some point our Commander in Chief needs to make a decision. House minority leader Rep. Boehner stresses the importance of this:

The longer this decision hangs, the more jeopardy and the more danger our troops on the ground there are in the middle of," Mr. Boehner (R., Ohio) said. "We've had the highest casualty totals in years over the last month or two. Why? Because all of the uncertainty around what the president's going to decide.

As I said, I am no expert in these matters. A general stated more troops are needed. The White House has delayed the decision. Casualties in Afghanistan are at a record level. There is a cause and effect relation here. Mr. President, please make a decision soon. This life of this nation's soldiers are depending on it.