Jim,

>News reports today announce that the votes have been counted and that the people of Iraq have approved their new constitution.

Good news.

>But why is it that, since the day of the vote, there has been virtually no mention of the Iraqi constitutional vote on either network or cable news?????? It seemed to me that this was much more newsworthy than the first vote in Iraq earlier this year.

The major mostly-liberal media in the US has been collectively holding its breath, hoping for a defeat. (Good news in Iraq is bad news for Bush's opponents.) You're right that this is very newsworthy, but just watch how the liberal media paint it in some kind of negative light. (For example, you might see something like this: Despite overwhelming opposition by Sunnis, Iraqi voters narrowly approved the constitution, but Sunni leaders immediately questioned the validity of the vote-counting. Insert quote from mad Sunni leader here. Experts on Iraqi culture say that this vote is likely to lead to all-out civil war. Insert another negative quote here. Civil war or continued unrest would be a major blow to the Bush administration, which is increasingly on the defensive about its lack of planning for countering an amazingly-successful insurgency. Another negative quote from anti-Bush spokesperson. Blah, blah, blah.

See how easy it is to turn a very positive development into something that sounds very bad? Another useful tactic is to report the news, but downplay it or bury it behind other, more negative, news.

>Did I hear correctly that slightly more than 50% voted against but it took a 2/3 vote against to have rejection? If so, that may be a reason I suppose.

According to the BBC, 78% of the nation's voters approved it. It got at least two-thirds opposition in two mostly-Sunni provinces, but failed to get 2/3 against in a third province, which was necessary to defeat it. In strongly-Sunni Ninevah, 45% voted FOR it, assuring its passage.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/4374822.stm