Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Michael.SF.
And NO I am not defending their actions. I am just saying the French Government does not represent the true feelings of all the French people, just as Clinton did not reflect the true spirt of all Americans.

Can you back that up in any way? From what I've heard the French media is gushing over him, comparing him to Charles DeGaulle, Charlemagne, and Nelson Mandela. And the polls show his popularity at about 90%. Remember he is the conservative leader in France, and the socialists are even more anti-American, if that's possible. So if you have any facts to support your wishful argument, let's hear them.

53 posted on 03/13/2003 6:08:58 PM PST by Hugin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies ]


To: Hugin
The non-free media of France is behind Chiraq. And, while there are some sober Frenchmen who are deeply worried about his policy, IMHO 90% is probably accurate.

For now.

Chiraq has appealed to base anti-Americanism that exists in France. It's related to their need to feel that they are still a Great Power. When, after the war, and after the new nations of the EU side with Britain, not France & Germany, his policy is revealed as actually harming French influence in the world, he won't be so popular in France. In politics, it's results that count, and when it comes to fighting not talking, they will be out of it.
54 posted on 03/13/2003 6:52:25 PM PST by You Dirty Rats
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies ]

To: Hugin
For the moment lets leave rhetoric and hate aside and think about this logically. I will address your points, individually, but before doing so let us make two assumptions regarding France, in general, as compared to the USA. Those are:

Point One: That the French press, is as reflective of an indicator of the ideology of the French population as the USA press is an indicator of the ideology of the people of the USA.

Point two: Polls in France are as indicative of French politics as the polls of the USA are as indicative of our politics.

If you do not accept the above points, then there is no need to read further. But if you feel they are valid, then, I hope you will continue.

Can you back that up in any way?

Yes, I will give some specifics and with some leg work, you can confirm my stats.

From what I've heard the French media is gushing over him,

Much as the liberal media has gushed over Bill Clinton?

comparing him to Charles DeGaulle, Charlemagne,

Certainly two very strong Frenchmen in history. But hardly what you would consider to be Socialists or liberals by today's standards.

and Nelson Mandela.

Does he really belong in the same comparison as de Gaulle?

And the polls show his popularity at about 90%.

Bush I's numbers were in the same stratosphere after the Gulf War. So much for polls.

Remember he is the conservative leader in France,

Actually he is the middle position, not the right.

and the socialists are even more anti-American, if that's possible.

see stats below.

So if you have any facts to support your wishful argument,

your accusatory tone will be ignored. I speak not in defense of France, but more from a logical perspective. One which allows for differences of opinions. I also fully acknowledge that France is far more leftist, then we are in the states.

let's hear them.

Well since you asked:

In April of 2002 Fance held round one of their elections. Their methodolgy differs from ours in that all candidates run and then only the top two have a run-off. The results were:

Chirac (middle) - 20% (I am rounding off)
Le Pen (right)- 17%
Jospin (left)- 16%
Bayrou (?)- 7%
Laguiller(communist) -6%
Chevenement(?) - 5%
Namere (green)- 5%
Other Leftists - 7%

So in may they had round two and Chirac garnered 80% of the vote. Why?

Because the Communist/socialist press of France did a Blitzkrieg against le Pen.
Suggestion: do a google search on Le Pen and count how many times "facist" is mentioned with him.

If you really believe that Chirac represents the French 100% then you also must believe that that the NY Times and Bill Clinton represented the American people in 1998.

So Le Pen finished a very close second to Chirac, the the leftists mobilized behind Chirac after the press Blitz and Chirac kicked ass. I see Le Pen's strong performance (and when combined with other indicators) that Europe in general is shifting to the right, not the left. This shift is slow, but it is also real ( Netherlands being another example).

Le Pen scared the hell out of the French Liberal Press (much more liberal then ours) and thay did everything they could to defeat him ( as ours would if, it was reversed)

Chirac is between a hard place (The USA Position) and a Rock (Iraq/the leftists). He owes his power to the leftists and thus is pandering to them.

Hugin, this fight, like all fights, is not between the French people and the American people, it is between our governments, which are susceptable to the politics of the moment.

I would no more choose to hate a Frenchman, for the actions of Chirac, then I would expect a Frenchmen to hate me for the actions of Bill Clinton.

56 posted on 03/14/2003 12:42:05 AM PST by Michael.SF. (A nod is as good as a wink, to a blind horse.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson