Posted on 07/09/2007 9:16:46 PM PDT by Kitten Festival
Nicolas Sarkozy was a divisive figure during his campaign for the French presidency, but he's governing as a uniter, not a divider.
George W. Bush ran for president in 2000 promising to ease partisan divisions. He has left our politics a wreck of recrimination, anger and polarization.
This weekend, the contrast between Sarkozy and Bush could not have been more conspicuous.
From France came word that the center-right president was urging the International Monetary Fund to name Dominique Strauss-Kahn as its managing director.
(Excerpt) Read more at realclearpolitics.com ...
This guy is never worth reading. Zero on objective scale make him a standout urinalist.
I could read this, or I could go clean up after the dog got sick—see ya.
Yep. Democrats and MSM have absolutely nothin to do with the division, anger, and polarization. Nothing at all.
What world does this guy live in? All Bush does is pander to the left in this country.
Sarkozy was divisive? That tells but half the story, he was controversial and voiced some opinions that some were afraid to express previously, but Serge Royal was just as or more “divisive” in her statements during the campaign. That is politics. Apparently only conservative candidates are divisive. And speaking some long suppressed truths can cause controversy and some discomfort. John Conyers is not divisive, but George Bush is? This article imparts less insight than my pet racoon.
Oh, to add onto my last post:
It takes only one to make war and two to make peace.
In 2000, the Democrats re-declared war on Bush and Republicans, and that has been the state of affairs for the past 7.5 years. Following 9/11, Democrat solidarity (patriotism) was a shallow attempt to avoid censure while they bided their time before beginning their campaign to undermine the President and the War on Terror.
I don`t understand why, but some people still support the Rats. Wonder what world they really live in.
Good point!
There are no lessons to be learned from Democrat stooge EJ Dionne.
Sarko has brilliantly taken his greatest potential rival and neutralized him, turning him into an ally. Dominique Strauss-Kahn (DSK) the most able and capable candidate to oppose Sarko for the Presidency 5 years, and a leading contender for leadership of the Socialist Party, willbe neutralized if he heads the IMF.
DSK is perfect for the job, as well. He is a brilliant economist, more in the mold of Tony Blair, than Hollande/Royal/Fabius, who are true dogmatic Socialists.
It is obvious that one of Sarko’s prime goals is to neutralize and destroy the Left in France. So far, he is doing a great job.
"Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached." - Manuel II Palelologus
The liberal definition of divisive is anytime a conservative doesn’t agree with a liberal screwball idea . The obverse is not true in lib land.
Did he change, or is it the environment that he lives in?
E.J. Dionne is a twerp.
The same was true for Reagan. Reagan had the same problem with idiots in media who complained that he was dividing the country. Yes he did do that. He divided the country or sharply drew the line between conservatives and liberal idiots. In fact politicians who act on principle probably create more division and dissension than milksop pols who only want to be loved. That doesn't bother me a bit. Politicians who don't do what I consider to be the best course of action for the country bother me immensely.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.