[Orion27]

Looks like the French are coming to their senses. They are about to elect the conservative candidate and Bush supporter Sarkozy. Royal, in desperation and in typical liberal socialist fashion, predicts violence if Sarkozy is elected.

"It is my responsibility today to alert people to the risk of (his) candidature with regards to the violence and brutality that would be unleashed in the country (if he won)," she said.

She seems to be following American Democrat talking points. Hand wringing, character assasination and surrender.

Reuters (of course)
http://today.reuters.com/news/articl...src=rss&rpc=22

[Aron Peterson]

Originally Posted by Orion27 

"It is my responsibility today to alert people to the risk of (his) candidature with regards to the violence and brutality that would be unleashed in the country (if he won)," she said.

She has been using fear and twisted facts to demonise Sarkozy as a dictator. Now she's losing badly she is using cryptic messages to call for violence in France. She's a Galloway-style pugilist. A lazy nausating bag of wind. She's the person who went to Hizbullah and said she sympathises with their movement. She's the one who went to China and said they have an upstanding judicial system.

[OreoCookie]

Onion, you're aware that if Sarkozy is elected, he'll succeed his conservative predecessor Chirac, right? (Yes, that's the guy who is responsible for the politics that some people here have been bashing …) Sarkozy has been minister of the interior twice and has thus shaped French politics in recent years as well.
There'd be no shift to the right … so much for your perceived `coming to their senses'

[Aron Peterson]

Originally Posted by OreoCookie 

Onion, you're aware that if Sarkozy is elected, he'll succeed his conservative predecessor Chirac, right? (Yes, that's the guy who is responsible for the politics that some people here have been bashing …)
There'd be no shift to the right … so much for your perceived `coming to their senses'

Politics doesn't work that way. Different parties are responsible for different policies and laws. The shift is to the center because the French left has been taken over by incapable communists and Islamist apologists. The right has been voted out already.

[OreoCookie]

Originally Posted by Aron Peterson 

Politics doesn't work that way. Different parties are responsible for different policies and laws. The shift is to the center because the French left has been taken over by incapable communists and Islamist apologists. The right has been voted out already.

Are you sure you know what you're talking about?
Sarkozy as (former) minister of the interior (he just resigned a few weeks ago for the elections) is largely responsible for the policies towards French immigrants, the very policies you criticize. He's a French patriot like his predecessor, but in many ways more extreme. Which means France comes first. So don't expect any shifts in policies.

[analogika]

Originally Posted by Aron Peterson 

Politics doesn't work that way. Different parties are responsible for different policies and laws. The shift is to the center because the French left has been taken over by incapable communists and Islamist apologists. The right has been voted out already.

I have no idea which politics you are talking about, but OreoCookie just explained to you that this is how FRENCH POLITICS WORK.

You can bullshit your way through the sunset til the dawn; it won't change that the fact that Sarkozy actually has to go through a second round is due to the fact that too many voters did NOT vote for the right, but chose the left or the middle instead.

I'd also suggest it's quite obvious that you have no ****ing clue about communists, Islamist apologists, and most definitely not about Socialists or Sarkozy.

Sarkozy is RIGHT. What got voted out is not the right, but the ULTRA-RIGHT NATIONALISTS (Le Pen's Front National). I guess saying that the fascists have been voted out could be taken to mean that Sarkozy is "center", but that's a hell of a warped perspective.

[Aron Peterson]

Originally Posted by OreoCookie 

Are you sure you know what you're talking about?
Sarkozy as (former) minister of the interior (he just resigned a few weeks ago for the elections) is largely responsible for the policies towards French immigrants, the very policies you criticize. He's a French patriot like his predecessor, but in many ways more extreme. Which means France comes first. So don't expect any shifts in policies.

That's what Royal and the socialists brainwashed you with. Sarkozy has had a relationship with the Muslim community that goes back to the 80s. The socialists would have you believe he is a racist just to get a handful of votes.

Sakozy's parents were immigrants. The socialists took one comment from Sarzoky, that the gangs who terrify the suburbs are scum, and tried to make it look like Sarkozy thinks of all immigrants that way. In fact, Sarzoky called them scum because they are. Because he was repeating not only what most French think but also what many immigrants have been saying.

[analogika]

Is this what Fox News told you?

[OreoCookie]

Originally Posted by Aron Peterson 

That's what Royal and the socialists brainwashed you with. Sarkozy has had a relationship with the Muslim community that goes back to the 80s. The socialists would have you believe he is a racist just to get a handful of votes.

Sakozy's parents were immigrants. The socialists took one comment from Sarzoky, that the gangs who terrify the suburbs are scum, and tried to make it look like Sarkozy thinks of all immigrants that way. In fact, Sarzoky called them scum because they are. Because he was repeating not only what most French think but also what many immigrants have been saying.

I'm not really sure you've read my post properly. I'm aware of Sarkozy's ancestry, but that has nothing to do with what I've said. Nor have I been brain washed, I'm not French and I follow the debate from the outside, not the inside. So please reread what I have written and put it into proper perspective. If he gets elected, it won't mark a significant change in attitude neither towards French immigrants (`the muslims') nor to the US. He will continue French politics in a world where France comes first.

[Aron Peterson]

Originally Posted by analogika 

Is this what Fox News told you?

Sorry, that won't rub. I'm a Beeb man.

[Aron Peterson]

Originally Posted by OreoCookie 

He will continue French politics in a world where France comes first.

That's fine. Why shouldn't he look after French interests first? Their economy needs urgent repair and reform. France's economic model will still change more under him than with anyone else. It's about bloody time.

[OreoCookie]

Originally Posted by Aron Peterson 

That's fine. Why shouldn't he look after French interests first? Their economy needs urgent repair and reform. France's economic model will still change more under him than with anyone else. It's about bloody time.

Actually the `France first' attitude is what pissed of Americans the most, because America's interests weren't France's first priority. And because -- like Americans -- French are very proud of their nation. You hate what resembles you the most, I guess (that goes both ways).

[Aron Peterson]

Originally Posted by OreoCookie 

Actually the `France first' attitude is what pissed of Americans the most, because America's interests weren't France's first priority. And because -- like Americans -- French are very proud of their nation. You hate what resembles you the most, I guess (that goes both ways).

Everyone enjoys how proud the French are of their culture. Americans love visiting France. It isn't French pride that vexes other people (it's not just Americans). It's the anti-Americanism and arrogance that is firmly rooted in their socialist parties.

There was a good series of articles and radio shows/podcasts about this last month.

BBC NEWS | Americas | 'Death to US': Anti-Americanism examined

he US is perceived by many as an international bully, a modern day imperial power. At this critical moment in history, Washington correspondent Justin Webb challenges that idea.
He argues anti-Americanism is often a cover for hatreds with little justification in fact. His three part series takes him to Cairo, Caracas and Washington but it begins where anti-Americanism began - in Paris.

Anti-Americanism was born in France. And here's a fascinating fact: it was born well before the United States existed. It was not caused by Coca-Cola, or McDonald's, or Hollywood or George W Bush.

Voters want Sarzoky because the best way to put France first is to be more accepting of the rest of the world instead of just having pride and being loathsome at the same time.

[Powerbook]

What's the fastest way to have an average American make a fool out of himself? Let him explain Yurrupean politics...

PB.

[OreoCookie]

Originally Posted by Aron Peterson 

Everyone enjoys how proud the French are of their culture. Americans love visiting France. It isn't French pride that vexes other people (it's not just Americans). It's the anti-Americanism and arrogance that is firmly rooted in their socialist parties.

I guess it's pointless. If you want to continue with your simple mantra `it's the socialists' fault', please do. Regardless of actual facts. Arrogance? Check! Anti-Americanism (whatever that is)? Check!

Originally Posted by Aron Peterson 

Voters want Sarzoky because the best way to put France first is to be more accepting of the rest of the world instead of just having pride and being loathsome at the same time.

Wow, that's why the French want Sarkozy? I should really talk to my friends again and double-check And at that opportunity I shall ask them whether Sarkozy actually fits your description

[Aron Peterson]

Originally Posted by OreoCookie 

I guess it's pointless. If you want to continue with your simple mantra `it's the socialists' fault', please do. Regardless of actual facts. Arrogance? Check! Anti-Americanism (whatever that is)? Check!

Wow, that's why the French want Sarkozy? I should really talk to my friends again and double-check And at that opportunity I shall ask them whether Sarkozy actually fits your description

I only touched the surface. You haven't said anything about anything, Mr. Expert. Your response to me is rule number 1 from How To Win An Argument On The Internet:

How to Win Any Argument On the Internet || kuro5hin.org

1) NEVER DEFEND YOUR OWN POINTS. Don't forget this monumental Internet argument cornerstone even if you fall down a well and get amnesia and learn you're pregnant with your mother's son's evil twin. Never, under any circumstance, attempt to defend what you've said; just attack the other person's argument over and over and over until one of you dies of old age or some legislative branch agrees to shut down the Internet forever. Defending yourself or your argument is a weak act of desperation which informs your enemy that you're completely open to attack. The grizzled Internet debater will never address the validity of their previous claims, instead opting to forge ahead and stay on the offensive despite any erroneous or outright false statements they said in the past, effectively keeping the enemy on their toes. You should view Internet arguments as a really crummy fighting game: only the utter idiots bother pressing the "block / defend" button. While your enemy cowers in a corner with their arms raised above their face to futilely protect them, real men pull off complex 408-move combos that involve transforming into a fiery phoenix of doom and releasing unrelenting waves of liquid napalm Satan clown death upon them.

EXAMPLE ARGUMENT:

FLAME: hey fag i read ur article abotu ford cars and I just wanna let u know ur stupid and dont know nothing about cars cuz CHEVY IS THE BEST CAR MAKER IN THE WORLD!!!!

In the meantime...

Anger expected in suburbs if Sarkozy wins French election - International Herald Tribune

Sarkozy himself has struggled as an outsider, describing himself as a "little French man of mixed blood" who rose to the top of French politics without going through the normal channels of the elite universities as Royal did.

His record, meanwhile, shows a clear commitment to improving the status of the country's minorities, most of whom are Muslim. He encouraged the creation of the French Council of the Muslim Faith, which gave Islam a voice in France. He appointed the first prefect in France who is both foreign-born and Muslim.

He has even argued for relaxing rules that restrict government support for building mosques.

And he believes in affirmative action, which the Socialists steadfastly oppose.

Sarkozy the racist? Nope. I wonder who came up with that.

Does France want affirmative action and change, which the Socialists oppose? They'll answer that this weekend.

[BRussell]

Originally Posted by Aron Peterson 

Everyone enjoys how proud the French are of their culture. Americans love visiting France. It isn't French pride that vexes other people (it's not just Americans). It's the anti-Americanism and arrogance that is firmly rooted in their socialist parties.

Here's what I don't get: Who cares? Let's assume everything you say is true, France is anti-American. Maybe countries like France dislike the cultural influence of the US because they see culture as their purview. Whatever. But who cares? What does it matter? Do we judge countries by how nice or mean they are when they talk about the US?

This is the problem with our current government's approach to world affairs: If you say you like us, you're good guys. If you say mean things, you're bad guys. But look, there are many countries who are superficially pro-American but are, in fact, bad guys (e.g., Pakistan). Likewise, there are many countries who are superficially anti-American (e.g., all of Europe, according to you guys) but are, in fact, good guys.

Yeah France and Europe in general believes the war in Iraq was ill-advised, and they don't like Bush. Well that includes about 3/4 of Americans too. Are the only people on the entire planet who are not "anti-American" the 25% of the population who are still Bush supporters? It's just an absurd way to view the world.

[Moderator]

wait....wasn't France right about Iraq being a mistake..and weren't we wrong?

[Aron Peterson]

Originally Posted by BRussell 

Here's what I don't get: Who cares? Let's assume everything you say is true, France is anti-American. Maybe countries like France dislike the cultural influence of the US because they see culture as their purview.

Part of the culture of the US is French. The US is everything to all people because it is a culmination of the world's cultures. This myth of US culture and imperialism is a sorry excuse to cover up the inadequacies and failures of others. It's jealousy and insecurity. Royal ended all her speeches saying Sarkozy was going to be a poodle of the US (which isn't true because he deviates on a number of points). That tactic didn't work, a clear example of how the French want to leave anti-Americanism behind.

See the links above. It's all there.

[Aron Peterson]

Originally Posted by Moderator 

wait....wasn't France right about Iraq being a mistake..and weren't we wrong?

Wrong about WMD doesn't mean intervention was wrong. Saddam wasn't going to last long. Once his regime ended the country would have imploded and it would have turned the rivers red with blood. Iran and Turkey would have gone in right away. Shia and Sunni clashes would be 100 fold more than what they are today. The anti-war protestors we see today would instead have been cursing Bush for not preventing the blood bath. Everything would have been the opposite of what you are seeing now. We live with the lesser of two evils and so many are blind to what was going to happen.

[OreoCookie]

Aron, have you actually read the stuff you're trying to support your own stances? A little snippet from the first article about French Anti-Americanism reads (not that I would subscribe to that point of view), emphasis is mine:

Originally Posted by Justin Webb

America became the nightmare that French right-wing intellectuals long feared, a nation built not on respectable ties of blood and tradition but on the self-conscious desire to create something new.

This is tiring: I make an argument and you start to talk about something different. You post op ed pieces that don't back up your arguments either and then accusing me of not backing up my points.

[BRussell]

Originally Posted by Aron Peterson 

Part of the culture of the US is French. The US is everything to all people because it is a culmination of the world's cultures. This myth of US culture and imperialism is a sorry excuse to cover up the inadequacies and failures of others. It's jealousy and insecurity. Royal ended all her speeches saying Sarkozy was going to be a poodle of the US (which isn't true because he deviates on a number of points). That tactic didn't work, a clear example of how the French want to leave anti-Americanism behind.

See the links above. It's all there.

It's all there, and none of it matters a whit except to people so insecure as to base their judgments of a country and a people on the most superficial kinds of "anti-Americanism." They don't eat at McDonald's or go to Euro-Disney! They are the enemy of America! Unfortunately, that's apparently how the grown-ups in our current government judge the world too.

[Millennium]

I don't know which is sadder: the fact that Sarkozy makes Bush look positively liberal on a number of issues, or the fact that even Sarkozy is not the scariest candidate in these elections.

[Aron Peterson]

Originally Posted by OreoCookie 

Aron, have you actually read the stuff you're trying to support your own stances? A little snippet from the first article about French Anti-Americanism reads (not that I would subscribe to that point of view), emphasis is mine: This is tiring: I make an argument and you start to talk about something different. You post op ed pieces that don't back up your arguments either and then accusing me of not backing up my points.

Oh great, Cookie. How about applying the same to yourself by reading the article and listening to the radio cast on Radio 4? To correct you the rightwing intellectuals mentioned are 18th century characters not modern people. Furthermore the article then moves closer to the present and clearly gives examples of leftwing French anti-Americanism.

Can't believe I had to tell you that.

[Aron Peterson]

Originally Posted by Millennium 

I don't know which is sadder: the fact that Sarkozy makes Bush look positively liberal on a number of issues

Which issues would they be? Allowing people to work as long as they want to? Respecting the results of the referendum on the European Constitution? Getting youth to work? Rejecting Turkey's entry to the EU on the basis it is not a European country? Keeping jobs in France? Making the economy competitive and freer so more jobs can be created? Cutting the nation's debt?

If that's scary what isn't?

The contempt for democracy is what's scary on this forum.

[OreoCookie]

Originally Posted by Millennium 

I don't know which is sadder: the fact that Sarkozy makes Bush look positively liberal on a number of issues, or the fact that even Sarkozy is not the scariest candidate in these elections.

I agree. Although this time Le Pen didn't make it far (unlike last time).
It's a delayed effect of 9/11, somehow many European politicians were inspired by the wrong examples the US has set: first and foremost the infringement of personal liberties in exchange for `more security.'

Fortunately, the French have a long democratic tradition and some of the laws had to be repealed due to pressure from the street.

[Millennium]

Originally Posted by Aron Peterson 

Which issues would they be? Allowing people to work as long as they want to? Respecting the results of the referendum on the European Constitution? Getting youth to work? Rejecting Turkey's entry to the EU? Keeping jobs in France before they go to China? Making the economy competitive and freer so more jobs can be created? Cutting the nation's debt?

Actually, I was talking more about his proposal to register minorities with the government. Either that, or the time when he said that he'd make minorities wear identifying badges if only he could get away with it.

The contempt for democracy is what's scary on this forum.

When have I ever showed contempt for democracy? I was only pointing out that this particular candidate is friggin frightening.

[Aron Peterson]

Originally Posted by Millennium 

Actually, I was talking more about his proposal to register minorities with the government.

That's not a left or rightwing issue. Immigrants have to be registered otherwise how do they become legal residents?

Either that, or the time when he said that he'd make minorities wear identifying badges if only he could get away with it.

I'd like to see a verifiable source for that because I just Googled and came up with nothing.

[OreoCookie]

Originally Posted by Aron Peterson 

That's not a left or rightwing issue. Immigrants have to be registered otherwise how do they become legal residents?

Many of these `immigrants' (Millenium said minorities instead of the incorrect term `immigrant') are French and have French citizenship already (e. g. those from the Maghreb and other former French colonies). To give you an idea: it's as if the US decides to force all the Puerto Rican's to register along with the `Mexicans'. Legal residents are registered anyway, but that's not what Sarkozy was referring to.

[Aron Peterson]

You said 'many' not 'all', therefore is this an hypothesis, socialist propaganda, or is it on a verifiable manifesto set forth by Sarkozy?

And this visible identity badge thing. I'd like to see verifiable proof of that quote and agenda too. Nevertheless what is the point, if this is true, when Europeans are going to have to carry a biometric ID card soon? Something doesn't add up here.

It is also telling that the Socialists have branded Sarkozy as over-aggressive on crime when it is Royal who has said she will put a permanent heavy police presence in immigrant suburbs.

[OreoCookie]

Originally Posted by Aron Peterson 

You said 'many' not 'all', therefore is this an hypothesis, socialist propaganda, or is it on a verifiable manifesto set forth by Sarkozy?

Huh? Why would a French citizen need to register? It's neither hypothesis nor propaganda that many people from former French colonies have become French citizens a while ago. I was just pointing out that you erroneously equated `minority' with `immigrant'.

Originally Posted by Aron Peterson 

Nevertheless what is the point, if this is true, when Europeans are going to have to carry a biometric ID card soon?

We have biometric passports already. It's been added to the list of requirements to get a US visa in 2002 … 

[Aron Peterson]

Originally Posted by OreoCookie 

Huh? Why would a French citizen need to register?

I asked for a source, a verifiable quote or online manifesto. I can't see why Sarkozy would come up with that idea alone when he has done so much for immigrants.

Again:

His record, meanwhile, shows a clear commitment to improving the status of the country's minorities, most of whom are Muslim. He encouraged the creation of the French Council of the Muslim Faith, which gave Islam a voice in France. He appointed the first prefect in France who is both foreign-born and Muslim.

Originally Posted by OreoCookie 

We have biometric passports already. It's been added to the list of requirements to get a US visa in 2002 … 

ID cards are different. They have to be carried on a person at all times irrespective of ethnic origin, religion or nationality. Most French (and the rest of the Europe) are not in favor of this so I really doubt Sarkozy said he would like to badge immigrants otherwise he would be looked down upon by people from all over the political spectrum. Sarkozy has also said Turkey's human rights problems are one of the reasons it shouldn't be allowed in Europe. I can't see him being in favor of very anti-human rights ideas if that's the case.

There's too much misinformation being dolled out about the guy.