What exactly is it about democracy that you don't like?

Update 1: Corrected description of RBB article
Update 2: Added link to IT article

Most people see the Iraqi insurgents' complete failure to either win representation, manipulate the ballots or indeed prevent the recent elections as a sign of their defeat and unpopularity. Another marginal figure, also familiar with repeated electoral defeat, Socialist Workers Party hard-nut Richard Boiled-Carrott (fine proletarian name there, Rick) wrote to an op-ed in the Irish Times decrying the Iraqi elections. Me ould mucker Joel wrote to the Times in response:

Madam, - The article by Richard Boyd Barrett in your edition of February 7th is a prime example of facts being distorted and conflated to fit a prior ideological position, in which the blackening of American intentions and actions is the overriding rule.

The anti-war left is understandably annoyed and discomfited at the apparent failure of the Iraqi people to follow the script set for them by the likes of Mr Boyd Barrett. Objective reports suggest that for the first time it looks possible that US attempts to put a representative government in place could succeed.
The election indicated that the insurgents are not supported by the Iraqi population at large. Indeed it made the insurgents appear the isolated and brutal terrorists they are.

Mr Boyd Barrett's assertion that the insurgency in Iraq is a response to the brutality of the occupation reveals a disturbing level of moral blindness in excusing the actions of these thugs merely because they share the anti-war left's extreme anti-Americanism. He would seem to prefer any regime, no matter how terrible, so long as America is seen to fail in its stated commitment to bring democracy to Iraq.
Following the success of the election, I suspect that Mr Boyd Barrett could well find himself on the wrong side of history, along with the insurgents.

His tone suggests he already knows this and is fearful of it. - Yours, etc.