Beta

Slashdot: News for Nerds

×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Conservative Sarkozy Wins Presidency of France

kdawson posted more than 7 years ago | from the legacy-of-Chirac dept.

Politics 962

Reader reporter tips us to a story just up at the NYTimes reporting that the tough-talking conservative candidate Nicolas Sarkozy has won election as the president of France. His opponent, Socialist Party candidate Ségolène Royal, the first woman to get as far as the runoff in a presidential contest in France, has conceded defeat. The vote went 53% to Sarkozy and the turnout was a remarkable (by American standards) 85% of registered voters. Sarkozy is seen as a divisive figure for his demand that immigrants learn Western values (and the French language).

cancel ×

962 comments

Obl. (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19013041)

Not everyone lives in the USA, you insensitive-- Oh! Nevermind...

Re:Obl. (4, Insightful)

AchiIIe (974900) | more than 7 years ago | (#19013119)

Actually, speaking of the USA, how does "conservative french" relate to "conservative american". Is 'their right' our left? It appears conservatives there are pro-american, whereas conservatives here are anti-french (freedom fries?)

Re:Obl. (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19013215)

I don't know about France, but here in Germany the equivalent to the Republicans is also called Republicans.

Re:Obl. (4, Informative)

WarwickRyan (780794) | more than 7 years ago | (#19013221)

European conservatives generally cut taxes and also government spending compared to the left-sided parties. They also tend to look after business over their own citizens (though I fear that's a cross party issue).

Re:Obl. (5, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19013271)

In terms of current political leaders, Sarkozy is most often compared to Tony Blair. Blair in turn modelled himself on Bill Clinton, so I think it's fair to say that the French right is roughly equivalent to the American left. This ignores the complication of Blair's cosying up to Bush, but that is really restricted to foreign policy.

Sarkozy is also undoubtedly the most pro-American French president ever. One of the opposition's favourite nicknames for him is "Sarkozy the American" (a deadly insult, of course!)

He's a Neocon Puppet (-1, Troll)

Jeremiah Cornelius (137) | more than 7 years ago | (#19013495)

Like Howard in Australia, Blair in UK, Harper in Canada (where they BROKE UP the conservative party, to replace it with Harper's coup), etc. Sarko is like a Burlesconi for the French. God help us - Burlesconi with nukes.

The project of the Bilderbergers/CFR will continue, with a veneer of Democracy pasted over it, to fool the sheep.

Thanks for fixing the vote in Scotland, too!
The biggest poll debacle in the history of British democracy [scotsman.com]

Re:Obl. (2, Insightful)

WED Fan (911325) | more than 7 years ago | (#19013277)

conservatives here are anti-french (freedom fries?)

Well, someone had to use a broad brush stroke. Aren't you glad it was you?

For your info, not all conservatives did that. In fact, I'd say it was only the most publicity seeking ones that tried that little bit of triteness.

Re:Obl. (1, Funny)

Miseph (979059) | more than 7 years ago | (#19013501)

You say publicity seeking, I say dangerously xenophobic and painfully stupid. Potatoes, potahtoes.

Re:Obl. (1)

FlyingSquidStudios (1031284) | more than 7 years ago | (#19013487)

Well for one thing, they love Jerry Lewis.

Re:Obl. (1)

diegocgteleline.es (653730) | more than 7 years ago | (#19013547)

I think it's probably more "your left". I've heard that in France, being called "liberal" is somewhat of a insult.

I can tell you how it compares in my country. In Spain, the left parties think of democrats as a rigth party. Republicans are considered ultra-right.

Are you sure ... (4, Interesting)

WrongSizeGlass (838941) | more than 7 years ago | (#19013053)

... that Royal didn't just surrender the election?

In all seriousness, Royal deserved to lose after she tried her "if you vote for Sarkozy there will be violence in the streets" rhetoric. That kind of crap just won't ever work ... will it?

Re:Are you sure ... (4, Interesting)

RightSaidFred99 (874576) | more than 7 years ago | (#19013065)

Yeah, that would be as silly as "if you vote for the Democrats, the terrorists win!" rhetoric. It would never convince the savvy masses.

Re:Are you sure ... (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19013123)

And it didn't. All the Democrat's other failings in 2000/04 did that just fine.

Re:Are you sure ... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19013151)

Indeed, good thing the Republicans were there to make all the correct decisions.

Re:Are you sure ... (1)

ductonius (705942) | more than 7 years ago | (#19013223)

Absolutly, and with the Democrats forming such an effective opposition it's no wonder we've had nothing but peace and good governence in recent history.

Re:Are you sure ... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19013289)

Good point, I was in a bit of a hurry to post, if they had grown a spine (or at least found the one they're starting to discover) in the first place, we may have avoided the clusterfuck all together.

Re:Are you sure ... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19013505)

All the Democrat's other failings in 2000/04 did that just fine.
In 2004, anyway.

Re:Are you sure ... (0, Offtopic)

furball (2853) | more than 7 years ago | (#19013285)

Well, let's dissect that "terrorists win" rhetoric for a second shall we?

We elected Democrats to the majority in Congress right? And right now the Democrats are pushing for us to leave Iraq. Rightly so. Ending wars is a highly desirable thing. So if we leave Iraq, do the terrorists win or lose?

There are no ties in warfare.

Re:Are you sure ... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19013329)

We elected Democrats to the majority in Congress right? And right now the Democrats are pushing for us to leave Iraq. Rightly so. Ending wars is a highly desirable thing. So if we leave Iraq, do the terrorists win or lose?

The terrorists won, but they won in 2003 when we disbanded Iraq's infrastructure and all its existing power structures. Everything since has just been a consequence of that.

Re:Are you sure ... (4, Insightful)

CosmeticLobotamy (155360) | more than 7 years ago | (#19013415)

So if we leave Iraq, do the terrorists win or lose?

There are no ties in warfare.


Of course the terrorists win. That's what you get for agreeing to play a game whose conditions for victory are so horribly skewed in the other guy's favor. We've got to wipe out every single one of them. They just have to wait and shoot into the air every once in a while so everyone knows they didn't forfeit. So of course we're not going to win. We should have tried a lot harder to get them to play a different game.

Re:Are you sure ... (4, Insightful)

rachit (163465) | more than 7 years ago | (#19013313)

"savvy masses"?

Re:Are you sure ... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19013069)

n all seriousness, Royal deserved to lose after she tried her "I'm a a socialist bitch" rhetoric. That kind of crap just won't ever work ... will it?

Re:Are you sure ... (1)

WED Fan (911325) | more than 7 years ago | (#19013315)

I also loved Royal's, "If you vote conservative, their will be riots," method.

Re:Are you sure ... (1)

The Hobo (783784) | more than 7 years ago | (#19013075)

She did surrender. From the CBC story [www.cbc.ca]

Sarkozy defeated his rival, Socialist Party Leader Ségolène Royal, who conceded minutes after polls closed at 8 p.m. local time

Re:Are you sure ... (5, Informative)

Eivind (15695) | more than 7 years ago | (#19013463)

Because, in France it's not allowed to publish voter-polls on election day before all polling-places are closed. Which happens at 8 pm.

In reality, everyone knew since these polls where in, early in the morning, that she'd lose, it's just, they all sorta pretend not to know until it's "official". You see, french law has little influence abroad, so anyone with an internet-connection has been able to read these polls all day. Only in French media are they disallowed.

So, each and every journalist covering the election, and every politician aswell, knew the result (aproximately, but good enough since it wasn't a close race anyway) hours earlier.

In this setting it makes perfect sense to admit defeat at 20:01. It'd have been disrespectful of the law and the voters to do so any earlier, and pointless to wait much longer when the numbers where as obvious as they where.

Times will tell if this was crap... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19013443)

... or not ...

(By the way, I a not even commenting you dummy-crappy french bashing sentense, that shows how well you seem to know about geopolitic and history)

FYI, at this minute, already small riots are beeing reported here by France3 channel (a cluster of regional network chanels) from every conners of France : Lyon, Bastille district in Paris (mostly Anachrists), in Marseille (Vieux Port) mostly young peoples, in Bordeaux (around the TownHall) mostly people that did not vote for Sarkozy.

Ok, nothing to compare with the major riots that were cause after the young boy died and Sarkozy call them "rust" ("racaille" in French which is "rabble" literaly translating).

Personally, I don't thik there will be major riots tonight (appart from anachists or some young people in poor districts burning cars), simply because anti-riots brigades (CRS) have been deployed on potetial hotspots, plus anti-criminality squads (BAC) has already move to the zone to clear them. Nothing important.

What is realy interresting is that there is a massive participation of people : about 85 % of people have voted, which is really amazing for two "classical" candidates, plus adding that the 3rd and 4th of the first round have call to abstention.

Twofo GNAA (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19013057)

University of Warwick file sharing faggots. [twofo.co.uk]

                        GNU GENERAL PUBLIC LICENSE
                              Version 2, June 1991

  Copyright (C) 1989, 1991 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
          59 Temple Place, Suite 330, Boston, MA 02111-1307 USA
  Everyone is permitted to copy and distribute verbatim copies
  of this license document, but changing it is not allowed.

                                Preamble

    The licenses for most software are designed to take away your
freedom to share and change it. By contrast, the GNU General Public
License is intended to guarantee your freedom to share and change free
software--to make sure the software is free for all its users. This
General Public License applies to most of the Free Software
Foundation's software and to any other program whose authors commit to
using it. (Some other Free Software Foundation software is covered by
the GNU Library General Public License instead.) You can apply it to
your programs, too.

    When we speak of free software, we are referring to freedom, not
price. Our General Public Licenses are designed to make sure that you
have the freedom to distribute copies of free software (and charge for
this service if you wish), that you receive source code or can get it
if you want it, that you can change the software or use pieces of it
in new free programs; and that you know you can do these things.

    To protect your rights, we need to make restrictions that forbid
anyone to deny you these rights or to ask you to surrender the rights.
These restrictions translate to certain responsibilities for you if you
distribute copies of the software, or if you modify it.

    For example, if you distribute copies of such a program, whether
gratis or for a fee, you must give the recipients all the rights that
you have. You must make sure that they, too, receive or can get the
source code. And you must show them these terms so they know their
rights.

    We protect your rights with two steps: (1) copyright the software, and
(2) offer you this license which gives you legal permission to copy,
distribute and/or modify the software.

    Also, for each author's protection and ours, we want to make certain
that everyone understands that there is no warranty for this free
software. If the software is modified by someone else and passed on, we
want its recipients to know that what they have is not the original, so
that any problems introduced by others will not reflect on the original
authors' reputations.

    Finally, any free program is threatened constantly by software
patents. We wish to avoid the danger that redistributors of a free
program will individually obtain patent licenses, in effect making the
program proprietary. To prevent this, we have made it clear that any
patent must be licensed for everyone's free use or not licensed at all.

    The precise terms and conditions for copying, distribution and
modification follow.

                        GNU GENERAL PUBLIC LICENSE
      TERMS AND CONDITIONS FOR COPYING, DISTRIBUTION AND MODIFICATION

    0. This License applies to any program or other work which contains
a notice placed by the copyright holder saying it may be distributed
under the terms of this General Public License. The "Program", below,
refers to any such program or work, and a "work based on the Program"
means either the Program or any derivative work under copyright law:
that is to say, a work containing the Program or a portion of it,
either verbatim or with modifications and/or translated into another
language. (Hereinafter, translation is included without limitation in
the term "modification".) Each licensee is addressed as "you".

Activities other than copying, distribution and modification are not
covered by this License; they are outside its scope. The act of
running the Program is not restricted, and the output from the Program
is covered only if its contents constitute a work based on the
Program (independent of having been made by running the Program).
Whether that is true depends on what the Program does.

    1. You may copy and distribute verbatim copies of the Program's
source code as you receive it, in any medium, provided that you
conspicuously and appropriately publish on each copy an appropriate
copyright notice and disclaimer of warranty; keep intact all the
notices that refer to this License and to the absence of any warranty;
and give any other recipients of the Program a copy of this License
along with the Program.

You may charge a fee for the physical act of transferring a copy, and
you may at your option offer warranty protection in exchange for a fee.

    2. You may modify your copy or copies of the Program or any portion
of it, thus forming a work based on the Program, and copy and
distribute such modifications or work under the terms of Section 1
above, provided that you also meet all of these conditions:

        a) You must cause the modified files to carry prominent notices
        stating that you changed the files and the date of any change.

        b) You must cause any work that you distribute or publish, that in
        whole or in part contains or is derived from the Program or any
        part thereof, to be licensed as a whole at no charge to all third
        parties under the terms of this License.

        c) If the modified program normally reads commands interactively
        when run, you must cause it, when started running for such
        interactive use in the most ordinary way, to print or display an
        announcement including an appropriate copyright notice and a
        notice that there is no warranty (or else, saying that you provide
        a warranty) and that users may redistribute the program under
        these conditions, and telling the user how to view a copy of this
        License. (Exception: if the Program itself is interactive but
        does not normally print such an announcement, your work based on
        the Program is not required to print an announcement.)

These requirements apply to the modified work as a whole. If
identifiable sections of that work are not derived from the Program,
and can be reasonably considered independent and separate works in
themselves, then this License, and its terms, do not apply to those
sections when you distribute them as separate works. But when you
distribute the same sections as part of a whole which is a work based
on the Program, the distribution of the whole must be on the terms of
this License, whose permissions for other licensees extend to the
entire whole, and thus to each and every part regardless of who wrote it.

Thus, it is not the intent of this section to claim rights or contest
your rights to work written entirely by you; rather, the intent is to
exercise the right to control the distribution of derivative or
collective works based on the Program.

In addition, mere aggregation of another work not based on the Program
with the Program (or with a work based on the Program) on a volume of
a storage or distribution medium does not bring the other work under
the scope of this License.

    3. You may copy and distribute the Program (or a work based on it,
under Section 2) in object code or executable form under the terms of
Sections 1 and 2 above provided that you also do one of the following:

        a) Accompany it with the complete corresponding machine-readable
        source code, which must be distributed under the terms of Sections
        1 and 2 above on a medium customarily used for software interchange; or,

        b) Accompany it with a written offer, valid for at least three
        years, to give any third party, for a charge no more than your
        cost of physically performing source distribution, a complete
        machine-readable copy of the corresponding source code, to be
        distributed under the terms of Sections 1 and 2 above on a medium
        customarily used for software interchange; or,

        c) Accompany it with the information you received as to the offer
        to distribute corresponding source code. (This alternative is
        allowed only for noncommercial distribution and only if you
        received the program in object code or executable form with such
        an offer, in accord with Subsection b above.)

The source code for a work means the preferred form of the work for
making modifications to it. For an executable work, complete source
code means all the source code for all modules it contains, plus any
associated interface definition files, plus the scripts used to
control compilation and installation of the executable. However, as a
special exception, the source code distributed need not include
anything that is normally distributed (in either source or binary
form) with the major components (compiler, kernel, and so on) of the
operating system on which the executable runs, unless that component
itself accompanies the executable.

If distribution of executable or object code is made by offering
access to copy from a designated place, then offering equivalent
access to copy the source code from the same place counts as
distribution of the source code, even though third parties are not
compelled to copy the source along with the object code.

    4. You may not copy, modify, sublicense, or distribute the Program
except as expressly provided under this License. Any attempt
otherwise to copy, modify, sublicense or distribute the Program is
void, and will automatically terminate your rights under this License.
However, parties who have received copies, or rights, from you under
this License will not have their licenses terminated so long as such
parties remain in full compliance.

    5. You are not required to accept this License, since you have not
signed it. However, nothing else grants you permission to modify or
distribute the Program or its derivative works. These actions are
prohibited by law if you do not accept this License. Therefore, by
modifying or distributing the Program (or any work based on the
Program), you indicate your acceptance of this License to do so, and
all its terms and conditions for copying, distributing or modifying
the Program or works based on it.

    6. Each time you redistribute the Program (or any work based on the
Program), the recipient automatically receives a license from the
original licensor to copy, distribute or modify the Program subject to
these terms and conditions. You may not impose any further
restrictions on the recipients' exercise of the rights granted herein.
You are not responsible for enforcing compliance by third parties to
this License.

    7. If, as a consequence of a court judgment or allegation of patent
infringement or for any other reason (not limited to patent issues),
conditions are imposed on you (whether by court order, agreement or
otherwise) that contradict the conditions of this License, they do not
excuse you from the conditions of this License. If you cannot
distribute so as to satisfy simultaneously your obligations under this
License and any other pertinent obligations, then as a consequence you
may not distribute the Program at all. For example, if a patent
license would not permit royalty-free redistribution of the Program by
all those who receive copies directly or indirectly through you, then
the only way you could satisfy both it and this License would be to
refrain entirely from distribution of the Program.

If any portion of this section is held invalid or unenforceable under
any particular circumstance, the balance of the section is intended to
apply and the section as a whole is intended to apply in other
circumstances.

It is not the purpose of this section to induce you to infringe any
patents or other property right claims or to contest validity of any
such claims; this section has the sole purpose of protecting the
integrity of the free software distribution system, which is
implemented by public license practices. Many people have made
generous contributions to the wide range of software distributed
through that system in reliance on consistent application of that
system; it is up to the author/donor to decide if he or she is willing
to distribute software through any other system and a licensee cannot
impose that choice.

This section is intended to make thoroughly clear what is believed to
be a consequence of the rest of this License.

    8. If the distribution and/or use of the Program is restricted in
certain countries either by patents or by copyrighted interfaces, the
original copyright holder who places the Program under this License
may add an explicit geographical distribution limitation excluding
those countries, so that distribution is permitted only in or among
countries not thus excluded. In such case, this License incorporates
the limitation as if written in the body of this License.

    9. The Free Software Foundation may publish revised and/or new versions
of the General Public License from time to time. Such new versions will
be similar in spirit to the present version, but may differ in detail to
address new problems or concerns.

Each version is given a distinguishing version number. If the Program
specifies a version number of this License which applies to it and "any
later version", you have the option of following the terms and conditions
either of that version or of any later version published by the Free
Software Foundation. If the Program does not specify a version number of
this License, you may choose any version ever published by the Free Software
Foundation.

    10. If you wish to incorporate parts of the Program into other free
programs whose distribution conditions are different, write to the author
to ask for permission. For software which is copyrighted by the Free
Software Foundation, write to the Free Software Foundation; we sometimes
make exceptions for this. Our decision will be guided by the two goals
of preserving the free status of all derivatives of our free software and
of promoting the sharing and reuse of software generally.

                                NO WARRANTY

    11. BECAUSE THE PROGRAM IS LICENSED FREE OF CHARGE, THERE IS NO WARRANTY
FOR THE PROGRAM, TO THE EXTENT PERMITTED BY APPLICABLE LAW. EXCEPT WHEN
OTHERWISE STATED IN WRITING THE COPYRIGHT HOLDERS AND/OR OTHER PARTIES
PROVIDE THE PROGRAM "AS IS" WITHOUT WARRANTY OF ANY KIND, EITHER EXPRESSED
OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, THE IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF
MERCHANTABILITY AND FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. THE ENTIRE RISK AS
TO THE QUALITY AND PERFORMANCE OF THE PROGRAM IS WITH YOU. SHOULD THE
PROGRAM PROVE DEFECTIVE, YOU ASSUME THE COST OF ALL NECESSARY SERVICING,
REPAIR OR CORRECTION.

    12. IN NO EVENT UNLESS REQUIRED BY APPLICABLE LAW OR AGREED TO IN WRITING
WILL ANY COPYRIGHT HOLDER, OR ANY OTHER PARTY WHO MAY MODIFY AND/OR
REDISTRIBUTE THE PROGRAM AS PERMITTED ABOVE, BE LIABLE TO YOU FOR DAMAGES,
INCLUDING ANY GENERAL, SPECIAL, INCIDENTAL OR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES ARISING
OUT OF THE USE OR INABILITY TO USE THE PROGRAM (INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED
TO LOSS OF DATA OR DATA BEING RENDERED INACCURATE OR LOSSES SUSTAINED BY
YOU OR THIRD PARTIES OR A FAILURE OF THE PROGRAM TO OPERATE WITH ANY OTHER
PROGRAMS), EVEN IF SUCH HOLDER OR OTHER PARTY HAS BEEN ADVISED OF THE
POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGES.

                          END OF TERMS AND CONDITIONS

                How to Apply These Terms to Your New Programs

    If you develop a new program, and you want it to be of the greatest
possible use to the public, the best way to achieve this is to make it
free software which everyone can redistribute and change under these terms.

    To do so, attach the following notices to the program. It is safest
to attach them to the start of each source file to most effectively
convey the exclusion of warranty; and each file should have at least
the "copyright" line and a pointer to where the full notice is found.

        Copyright (C)

        This program is free software; you can redistribute it and/or modify
        it under the terms of the GNU General Public License as published by
        the Free Software Foundation; either version 2 of the License, or
        (at your option) any later version.

        This program is distributed in the hope that it will be useful,
        but WITHOUT ANY WARRANTY; without even the implied warranty of
        MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. See the
        GNU General Public License for more details.

        You should have received a copy of the GNU General Public License
        along with this program; if not, write to the Free Software
        Foundation, Inc., 59 Temple Place, Suite 330, Boston, MA 02111-1307 USA

Also add information on how to contact you by electronic and paper mail.

If the program is interactive, make it output a short notice like this
when it starts in an interactive mode:

        Gnomovision version 69, Copyright (C) year name of author
        Gnomovision comes with ABSOLUTELY NO WARRANTY; for details type `show w'.
        This is free software, and you are welcome to redistribute it
        under certain conditions; type `show c' for details.

The hypothetical commands `show w' and `show c' should show the appropriate
parts of the General Public License. Of course, the commands you use may
be called something other than `show w' and `show c'; they could even be
mouse-clicks or menu items--whatever suits your program.

You should also get your employer (if you work as a programmer) or your
school, if any, to sign a "copyright disclaimer" for the program, if
necessary. Here is a sample; alter the names:

    Yoyodyne, Inc., hereby disclaims all copyright interest in the program
    `Gnomovision' (which makes passes at compilers) written by James Hacker.

    , 1 April 1989
    Ty Coon, President of Vice

This General Public License does not permit incorporating your program into
proprietary programs. If your program is a subroutine library, you may
consider it more useful to permit linking proprietary applications with the
library. If this is what you want to do, use the GNU Library General
Public License instead of this License.

Neufs pour les Nerdes! (4, Funny)

Black Parrot (19622) | more than 7 years ago | (#19013067)

Thank all the gods, the Frentch elected a radical instead of a radical.

And one of the first statements he made: (0, Troll)

smchris (464899) | more than 7 years ago | (#19013077)

"France will always come to the aid of the U.S. when it seeks it from us." Why he's called America's New Poodle.

Something to think about though. You have a country with a female Minister of Defense and an active Communist Party and they won't elect a female? So Hillary's chances rank somewhere below slim and none?

Re:And one of the first statements he made: (4, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19013135)

The issue was not the popularity of their respective genders, but of policy - that's why she lost.

Re:And one of the first statements he made: (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19013193)

Yeah, because only communists vote for women leaders [wikipedia.org] .

Troll.

Re:And one of the first statements he made: (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19013257)

Only Nixon could go to China. Only a conservative woman can get elected at that level.

Re:And one of the first statements he made: (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19013599)

O ya?

Heh. [wikipedia.org]

If socialism is the deciding issue, and it can happen in Finland, then it could surely happen in France. As many others have said, Royal lost because she ran a silly campaign, and overplayed her 'radical socialist' image (which was of course mostly an act - whether the French saw through it or not, it didn't work).

Re:And one of the first statements he made: (1)

GnuDiff (705847) | more than 7 years ago | (#19013399)

Rather the opposite, as far as we are talking about presidents rather than prime-ministers, at least: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vaira-Vike_Freiberga [wikipedia.org]

Re:And one of the first statements he made: (3, Insightful)

Eivind (15695) | more than 7 years ago | (#19013393)

There's no indication whatsoever that sex was important, or even relevant, in this election.

Unlike the two major parties in the US, the various parties in France actually have significantly different political ideas, like you said there's even an active communist party.

Re:And one of the first statements he made: (2, Insightful)

anti-pop-frustration (814358) | more than 7 years ago | (#19013645)

You have a country with a female Minister of Defense and an active Communist Party
Active communist party ? They've got 1.93% [wikipedia.org] of the votes in this presidential election, they're about as big as the libertarians or greens in the US. That would hardly qualify as "active" or influential.

Yes, there are other left-wing parties in france, but the communist party is just a ghost of the past now.

Can we be next? (0, Troll)

ptbob (737777) | more than 7 years ago | (#19013089)

When Sarkozy is done with France do you think he could come over here for a few years? I like his ideas on immigrants, it would be nice if our "President" had the balls!

Re: Can we be next? (3, Insightful)

Black Parrot (19622) | more than 7 years ago | (#19013199)

When Sarkozy is done with France do you think he could come over here for a few years? I like his ideas on immigrants, it would be nice if our "President" had the balls!
A hard line on immigrants won't happen in the USA. The Democrats wouldn't think it's nice, and the Republicans are split between the social conservatives who want it and the monied folk who don't think it's in their best interest.

The election year attempt to push immigration reform through the Republican Congress was one of several factors leading to that party's recent implosion.

Re: Can we be next? (1)

furball (2853) | more than 7 years ago | (#19013359)

Just adding to the parent, Republicans see Hispanics as the new Black. Some members of the leadership strongly believe that embracing this emerging voting block is essential to the party. Other members disagree very strongly. I'd almost say violently but they haven't reached that degree yet.

Democrats are Democrats and are always too afraid to go hard-line on anyone that might be perceived as a protected class.

If you're looking for immigration reformed in the USA, you are shit out of luck.

sweet (0, Troll)

koan (80826) | more than 7 years ago | (#19013091)

I guess the USA isn't the only country with a broken voting system.

It's called a democracy (5, Insightful)

DaveAtFraud (460127) | more than 7 years ago | (#19013465)

Just because the person you disagree with wins doesn't mean that the system is broken. I don't recall hearing a single complaint about the French electoral system. Maybe the conservative's ideas actually appealed to more voters.

Cheers,
Dave

Re:sweet (1)

Beretta Vexe (535187) | more than 7 years ago | (#19013665)

53% of French vote are for Sarkozy, it's a direct voting system. Even if you don't like him he win with popular vote and with on of the larger turnout for a French election.

Sarkozy on free software (5, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19013095)

Too bad (5, Interesting)

i_should_be_working (720372) | more than 7 years ago | (#19013097)

He was the only candidate who doesn't support, or even have a clear stance on free software. [linux.com]

Not that that's the most important quality in a president, but it would have been nice.

Re:Too bad (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19013165)

I think it's pretty clear he's a US/corporate puppet. So his real stance on free software will be "no".

But I think (or at least hope) he'll have a bullet put in his brain for unrelated-to-free-software reasons, long before his stance on free software could ever really matter.

Re:Too bad (1)

oever (233119) | more than 7 years ago | (#19013471)

That is a very sick comment!

Free Software (3, Insightful)

Nymz (905908) | more than 7 years ago | (#19013413)

He was the only candidate who doesn't support, or even have a clear stance on free software.
Not that that's the most important quality in a president, but it would have been nice.

As a fellow Slashdotter, I also care about technology issues. But at the same time realize they will have to take a back seat while there are active special intrest groups that believe the end (one world Muslim, or one world Communism) justifies the means (violence).

M$/Corporate Lapdog. (5, Informative)

twitter (104583) | more than 7 years ago | (#19013615)

From the link you gave, he's the worst of the lot:

Except for Sarkozy, the candidates also agreed that consumers should have the right to buy a computer without any preloaded software, ... Sarkozy was also the only candidate who responded with obvious hostility, remarking when talking about DADVSI that "I am opposed to the orientations implied by your questions."

He expresses his support for patent law on the grounds that it "encourages enterprises to innovate, it attracts investments, [and] encourages individuals to ... develop new inventions." In addition, Sarkozy supported the concept of intellectual property, and suggested that it was premature to talk about revising DADVSI before the end of 2007, when a review is scheduled. In answer to the question about open standards and free software, he replied that "it is not the purpose of the State, in my concept of freedom, to impose a model on anyone." Other replies were so general as to suggest that he either had not considered the matter or was avoiding stating his position. As Frédéric Couchet, a director of APRIL commented, Sarkozy's "was the worst response received."

You can read his response yourself [candidats.fr] , but the above is bad news.

Not that that's the most important quality in a president, but it would have been nice.

If standing up for French companies and citizens by supporting their software freedom is not important, I'm not sure what is. Your computer is your press, your store of important information and your telcom all rolled into one. No modern state can live without them and their security and ownership are tantamount to independence. Does he want CIA planted backdoors in his office?

Re:Too bad (2, Interesting)

jalet (36114) | more than 7 years ago | (#19013617)

He is also G.W. Bush's puppet.

Really a great great day for us !

And now (4, Funny)

El Lobo (994537) | more than 7 years ago | (#19013115)

2 hours later, he need to deal with the first big riot.

http://www.aftonbladet.se/vss/nyheter/story/0,2789 ,1062291,00.html(in swedish)

One word (4, Insightful)

pieterh (196118) | more than 7 years ago | (#19013121)

Thatcher.

Re:One word (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19013217)

Quite frankly, we need her in the UK again.

Re:One word (1)

powerpants (1030280) | more than 7 years ago | (#19013261)

ding!

Diabold? (1)

k1e0x (1040314) | more than 7 years ago | (#19013131)

Do they use electronic voting machines? Will Jimmy Carter certify the election for us?

blackbox voting (1)

rzr (898397) | more than 7 years ago | (#19013575)

guess yourself ??

Do you think French are stupid enough to elect a such man ?

some hints :
http://www.ordinateurs-de-vote.org/ [ordinateurs-de-vote.org]

French bashing? (5, Insightful)

i_want_you_to_throw_ (559379) | more than 7 years ago | (#19013155)

I'm not entirely sure why the France bashing continues. Frankly it appeared that they were right regarding Iraq. France is certainly one of the greatest allies this country has had, in fact we wouldn't be this large had Napolean not sold us the Louisiana Purchase to pay for his war with England. If anything we owe them quite a bit and their only crime is that they are just as patriotic to their country as we are to ours.

Now with that being said, do you know why there are trees on the Champs D'Elysees? So the Germans can march in the shade!

Re: French bashing? (1)

Black Parrot (19622) | more than 7 years ago | (#19013245)

I'm not entirely sure why the France bashing continues.
Some of it may be heartfelt politics, but a lot of it is just jest resulting from their easy stereotype as a nation of mood-swingers.

Re: French bashing? (1)

ystar (898731) | more than 7 years ago | (#19013343)

I've always found the 'easiest' stereotypes to be the farthest off-base (your sentence structure is just ambiguous enough that I'm not sure if you agree with the stereotype or not). French political sentiments are as diverse as their political system is, I really doubt it's mood swinging as much as it is just a shift in who has say at what time (and who's listening). And I'd argue it's better than Dubya's "stay the course, ignore everything else" mentality.

Re:French bashing? (2, Interesting)

CrimsonAvenger (580665) | more than 7 years ago | (#19013279)

France is certainly one of the greatest allies this country has had, in fact we wouldn't be this large had Napolean not sold us the Louisiana Purchase to pay for his war with England.

Perhaps you meant to say "we wouldn't be this large had Napolean not stolen Louisiana from the Spanish and sold it to us to pay for his war with the Allies."?

Re:French bashing? (1)

GnuDiff (705847) | more than 7 years ago | (#19013371)

Louisiana Purchase to pay for his war with England.

Perhaps you meant to say "we wouldn't be this large had Napolean not stolen Louisiana from the Spanish and sold it to us to pay for his war with the Allies."?

Erm, not that I've ever been particularly interested in the US history, but wasn't England sort of in war with the US over independence or something? Or who are the Allies of the US during Napoleon's time you refer to?

Re:French bashing? (1)

Bloke down the pub (861787) | more than 7 years ago | (#19013569)

War of independence was in 1776. Napoleon was a kid at the time. Maybe you're getting confused with the war of 1812, in which case Allies probably refers to Britain, Austria, Prussia - pretty much every European power other than France.

Re:French bashing? (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19013427)

Because ever since WWII, France has been trying to maintain the illusion of grandeur that they are of equal stature in the world geopolitics as the US, and doing it by ribbing the US every chance it gets. Cheese-sucking surrender monkeys.

Re:French bashing? (1)

DrDitto (962751) | more than 7 years ago | (#19013489)

My wife and I were in Paris 3 weeks ago...we are both American. A local grocery store posted a sign saying they were closing at 1pm that day (due to a holiday). That day my wife and I were taking a train ride to Germany. We made a concerted effort to walk to the grocery store in order to get a couple sandwiches for the train ride. We got there at 12:40. The grocer wouldn't let us in saying they were closed. Fine...but in the next couple minutes as we stood outside trying to figure out where to go next, he let in several French men and women!! No, they didn't live there...we watched through the window as they grabbed their stuff and checked out!

Yes, only one person treated us like that, but its hard not to form a lasting impression!

Re:French bashing? (1)

Hadlock (143607) | more than 7 years ago | (#19013635)

Yeah? And how were you dressed? Amazing that they could tell you were americans based on which type of english accent you had. I was in Europe for three weeks, wore khakis and oxford shirts with leather shoes and was treated supurbly. The story I always tell is how we ate at a restuant down the street from the Paris opera house, were seated, got excellent service, and left (after leaving a giant tip for such great service)... on our way out we saw the same american girls waiting for a table that had been there since before we arrived (They were part of our travel group). They were also dressed in bright colors, speghetti straps and whatnot.
 
Appearance matters.
 
I hate to say it, but a muslim couple dressed in a durka and a turban might get the same (or worse) treatment in the deep south here in the US. Or an African American dressed to the nines in his rap-pimp outfit at an exclusive resturant.

Re:French bashing? (1)

DrDitto (962751) | more than 7 years ago | (#19013669)

Yup...a huge difference between France and America. Apparently if you dress wrong, you get rude service. We were dressed for a 5-hour train ride that day which included loose, comfortable jeans. I wore slacks the other days.

Don't get me wrong...I really liked Paris and most people we interacted with were just fine. But all the other European countries I've visited, the locals don't get snotty and rude if we happen to dress in bright colors, or god-forbid, wear blue jeans. Maybe this is why there is so much "French bashing"???

Re:French bashing? (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19013493)

You're right to be fair, it's not like America didn't have a surrender like stance when it came to the Suez situation in refusing to give support, much like the French refused to give support to the US over Iraq. France really hasn't shat on America anymore than America has shat on France.

From a British point of view, I'm not entirely sure why we give so much support to the US when they treat us with an awful lot of disrespect also. It's not like they didn't screw us in the Suez crisis as well. There's plenty of other examples of US disrespect towards us as one of it's strongest allies such as always entirely downplaying the years of fighting we were doing in World War II before they even decided to join in (most American's probably don't even know what the Battle of Britain was). Even now where we support them in Iraq the US goverment is essentially blanking us when it comes to request for support into the inquiry of friendly fire incidents instigated by US personnel - when a US A10 pilot kills our troops even an apology would be nice, refusing to even cooperate in the slightest is outright insulting.

America would do well to learn to respect other countries, realise that it does sometimes need allies in this world and that when nations do support it that that support should perhaps be remembered and respected, not ignored.

Re:French bashing? (5, Insightful)

ScrewMaster (602015) | more than 7 years ago | (#19013573)

They helped finance the Revolution ... without France the United States would have been stillborn. They gave us the Statue of Liberty in recognition of the friendship and mutual respect between the two nations. Remember when Jane Fonda commented to Johnny Carson, "What did the French ever do for us?" That earned her Carson's famous wide-eyed "what the fuck?" look.

Of course, people would have to have some awareness of history to know any of this. There's a reason why we teach history in schools. It has numerous benefits: among other things, it helps you to remember who your friends are.

Tant mieux pour la France! (1, Insightful)

Rytis (907427) | more than 7 years ago | (#19013171)

Sarkozy had been forecasted to win this election since maybe 2002 and everyone knew he would be the next President. Gladly, this happened to be true. Besides, he is less conservative than a liberal, at least that's what his ideas represents especially concerning economic issues (and France has lots of them).

If someone of you has seen the debates between the two a few days ago (you can watch it on YouTube now), you wouldn't have any doubts. I just can't understand those 47% who had. Mrs Royal didn't have a program. She didn't have any ideas of how to rebuild France. Everything I can remember from the debate from her words is "I will do it / I would be able to do it" or even "You're not credible Mr Sarkozy / You're politically immoral".

Think of Royal as George W. Bush being a socialist woman. Damn scary.

Re:Tant mieux pour la France! (1, Troll)

sanman2 (928866) | more than 7 years ago | (#19013319)

As an Asian, I'm absolutely glad that Sarkozy won. May I point out that he himself is a son of immigrants, and not the anti-immigrant caricature that the story blurb would have us believe.

Vive la France! By voting against the socialist and fundamentalist-sponsored hoodlums and other opponents of assimilation, the French people have chosen a path for future progress and prosperity.

Re:Tant mieux pour la France! (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19013337)

you mister are a dickhead

Re:Tant mieux pour la France! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19013513)

Well, we all know that N. Sarkozy is a brilliant speaker, so it's not such a good idea to use this debate as the main basis to compare the merit of programs.

I remember hearing an economist on radio telling, a few weeks ago, that Sarkozy program was just a sum of ideas that were already tried and failed, and that Royale's programs were more interesting from the point of view of an economist. Disturbing, at the very least.

And then, compare Royale to G.W. Bush, now that's funny. One needs less imagination to compare N. Sarkozy to G.W. Bush. He shares the same technofascist ways of handling power... Well, at France's scale at least...
 

Re:Tant mieux pour la France! (1)

vishbar (862440) | more than 7 years ago | (#19013515)

Think of Royal as George W. Bush being a socialist woman. Damn scary.

Wh....wh....what the fuck???

That's a little like saying "Think of Hitler as a Jewish philanthropist."

Re:Tant mieux pour la France! (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19013567)

Gee, you're quick! [wikipedia.org]

Re:Tant mieux pour la France! (5, Insightful)

anti-pop-frustration (814358) | more than 7 years ago | (#19013555)

Think of Royal as George W. Bush being a socialist woman. Damn scary.

Actually, if someone has to be compared to George W. Bush it really is Nicolas Sarkozy. France is now as polarized as the US was after the Bush 2004 victory.

Many liberals in France were not conviced by Segolene Royal at all, just like many liberals in the US weren't conviced by John Kerry. They did not vote for a candidate but against someone else. The "lesser of two evil" syndrome that is so familiar in US politics.

Sarkozy won, but just like George W. Bush in 2004, the people that did not vote for him (half of the population) really hate him and what he stands for (pro big corporation, anti-immigration etc.).

He now is president of a deeply divided country... we all saw how well that worked out for the US.

A single president ? (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19013173)

The strange thing was that his wife was not visible. She has already left him the past and it seems it happened again...
The rumour was running recently.

Not one french journalist dared mentionning it (are they all scared ?)...

It is not a problem by itself (it happens) but the strange thing is that french journalist don't talk about it : self-censoship or privacy protection ?

Re:A single president ? (1)

Beretta Vexe (535187) | more than 7 years ago | (#19013561)

It's a part of the French political culture. Journalist don't speak about politician private life, if they don't use if for political propose. Sarkozy is a an exception because he use is wife and his family for his campaign, a mistake that he don't make twice. For example, nobody openly speak about the situation of the couple Ségolène Royal and François Hollande.

Re:A single president ? (1)

snilloc (470200) | more than 7 years ago | (#19013593)

It might have something to do with the fact that Royal never married her long-time partner and (as far as I know) father of her children.

Which is worse politically in France, having a difficult/broken marriage or ignoring the institution of marriage? (I ask this honestly, as an "ugly American". In the US, Royal's situation would be considered worse.)

Voting on Tuesday!!! (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19013197)

It is sad when the French out do the USA because they are smart enough to have voting on a weekend, not Tuesday. The USA constitution got many things correct, but not that.

Perhaps now the French will be with us in trying to defeat/kill all the terrorists everywhere in the civilized world? Probably not, but I can dream.

Western values... (1)

VoidCrow (836595) | more than 7 years ago | (#19013201)

Is that really such a bad thing for him to want? I often feel that the wrong side won the Napoleonic Wars. :-)

Good for the economy, at least (4, Insightful)

powerpants (1030280) | more than 7 years ago | (#19013213)

This will be a good thing for France's economy, which has been sluggish in recent years due to the country's labor policies. It is illegal in France to work more than 35 hours a week, which makes it difficult to successfully start a small business. Royal offered a comforting promise that France could keep their old ways in place and still be economically competitive, but France has apparently opted for a tougher kind of love.

Furthermore, just because he's "conservative" by French standards, don't think that means he'd belong to the GOP.

Re:Good for the economy, at least (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19013407)

It is illegal in France to work more than 35 hours a week

As it should be everywhere. Unless you support corporate rape.

Re:Good for the economy, at least (1)

nicolas l. (1098495) | more than 7 years ago | (#19013597)

the 35 hours are more a theory, you can legally work more and you're paid for it, or you can just work more for nothing more. There is a big social pressure about this.

Re:Good for the economy, at least (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19013647)

"It is illegal in France to work more than 35 hours a week,"

It is illegal for an employer to make you work more than an -average- of 35 hours per week or 48 hours in any -one- week.

Sarkozy, interesting name... (4, Insightful)

A beautiful mind (821714) | more than 7 years ago | (#19013259)

His father was a hungarian immigrant, so that's where his name comes from.

Sarkozy is seen as a divisive figure for his demand that immigrants learn Western values (and the French language).
I don't see anything wrong with this. If you don't like it, you should have immigrated into a different country.

Re:Sarkozy, interesting name... (0)

ScentCone (795499) | more than 7 years ago | (#19013455)

I don't see anything wrong with this. If you don't like it, you should have immigrated into a different country.

I'll confess some curiosity about how you feel about the same subject in the US. Are those communities in the US that are starting to pass legislation pointing in the same direction (and being pillaried by the left for doing so) doing something wrong? If not, why is there such gnashing of teeth over it... because such movements make it more difficult to bolster the rolls of voting blocks that are typically adopted by the left? Seriously: why does the very same sentiment in the US produce such vitriol?

Pro-software patent, DMCA and voting machines (5, Informative)

guerby (49204) | more than 7 years ago | (#19013305)

Most important for slashdot readers: Nicolas Sarkozy is a lawyer and has a very strong pro-software patent stance and was behind the hardline DADVSI [wikipedia.org] copyright law (our local DMCA). He was also behind the introduction of voting machines without paper trail requirements, and of the "secret" report about their validity (no citizen could get the report.

More in the PDF with his answers to the "candidats.fr" initiative here [candidats.fr]

Hard time for free software in France. There are still the parliament election next month, but last time french voters put the majority behind the president.

Re:Pro-software patent, DMCA and voting machines (1)

belmolis (702863) | more than 7 years ago | (#19013377)

Yes, on many points my sympathies are with Royal. However, her critics are, I'm afraid, correct, that she knows next to nothing about foreign policy. I don't mean that I disagree with her - I mean that she evidently knows very little and has no policy on many important issues. That is a large weak spot.

It all makes sense now. (1)

twitter (104583) | more than 7 years ago | (#19013659)

Nicolas Sarkozy is a lawyer ... behind the introduction of voting machines without paper trail requirements ...

Now you know how he won. If any of you saw the name "Edwin Edwards" anywhere, the machine came from Louisiana.

Where multicultural tolerance is bad. (4, Insightful)

twitter (104583) | more than 7 years ago | (#19013345)

Sarkozy is seen as a divisive figure for his demand that immigrants learn Western values (and the French language).

Some of that is good. There has been some very bad "multiculturalism" case law in the EU recently, where women have been beaten and abused but that was OK because it was supposedly "their" culture and the host country should not interfere. This makes a mockery of the foreign culture as well as allowing injustice. It is right for France, and every other country, to demand respect and offer protection for all of their citizens. Injustice and brutality should not be tolerated anywhere. Doing so in the name of "in my country we put woman in cage" is racism in disguise.

Re:Where multicultural tolerance is bad. (1)

Alphager (957739) | more than 7 years ago | (#19013563)

Some of that is good. There has been some very bad "multiculturalism" case law in the EU recently, where women have been beaten and abused but that was OK because it was supposedly "their" culture and the host country should not interfere.
That happened in Germany, in Frankfurt am Main to be exact. The judge was thrown out of the case and the woman got the speedy divorce she wanted.

Interesting, but... (0, Troll)

Idaho (12907) | more than 7 years ago | (#19013373)

How is this "News for nerds. Stuff that matters". OK, I can see the second part, but not the first.

How do you say... (4, Insightful)

HangingChad (677530) | more than 7 years ago | (#19013409)

Sarkozy is seen as a divisive figure for his demand that immigrants learn Western values (and the French language).

How do you say 'Thank you, Diebold' in French?

Seriously, though, if I'm going to move to France I'm at least going to try and learn French. And I don't think it's unreasonable to suggest that if you want to come and work in America, you might pick up a little English first.

Perhaps making it a demand is what makes it unreasonable? I'm not sure. It doesn't seem like it should be that divisive. To me it would be reasonable to expect that those wishing to immigrate would reflect the values and language of their adopted country.

If I moved to Canada I'd say "a-boot" instead of about. It's just polite.

Re:How do you say... (1)

Bert64 (520050) | more than 7 years ago | (#19013551)

I think it's perfectly reasonable to expect immigrants to blend in with the local culture...
It's not like immigrants are forced to come to the country. Immigrants choose to migrate to france, and they knew that the french speak french *BEFORE* they went there.
It's actually far more arrogant of immigrants to think that they can go to a foreign country, which already has their own language religion and culture, and then to try and change the country to suit their own! If they want to live in a country which speaks their language then they should stay where they are. If they want to live in france, they need to blend in with the french culture. It's a trade off, you can't have your cake and eat it.

As a counter example, how do you think most muslim countries would like it if large numbers of frenchmen emigrated there, refused to learn arabic and demanded the government provide information in french aswell, at their own cost. As well as demanding to eat pork, to ignore muslim religious holidays and refuse to work on christian religious days etc.

Re:How do you say... (1)

The One and Only (691315) | more than 7 years ago | (#19013671)

As a counter example, how do you think most muslim countries would like it if large numbers of frenchmen emigrated there, refused to learn arabic and demanded the government provide information in french aswell, at their own cost. As well as demanding to eat pork, to ignore muslim religious holidays and refuse to work on christian religious days etc.

If you consider similar issues with Jewish immigrants, such as the observance of Jewish holidays and the use of Yiddish in Jewish communities in Europe, could this explain the centuries of European anti-Semitism?

Re:How do you say... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19013595)

If I moved to Canada I'd say "a-boot" instead of about. It's just polite.

I agree with what your saying; however, I'm a Canadian and I say about and I wouldn't consider that pronunciation a core value of "living in Canada". Also, its not frozen up here right now for anyone who thinks we freeze all the time.

sarko sucks (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19013429)

today is a dark day for france.

tomorrow we will wear black.

we still feel like rioting!

Slavery is an old game (-1, Flamebait)

Baldrson (78598) | more than 7 years ago | (#19013521)

Sarkozy is a friend of the north African Arabs. Sarkozy is simply a slave trader in the old tradition of the Marano Jews. The game gets played by the slave-providing (frequently African) society with the slave-trading society (frequently Jewish) against the target territory (frequently European-controlled):

  1. Get the elites of the target territory addicted to cheap labor.
  2. Destroy the middle class (yeomen) of the target society by turning the elites against their own people.
  3. Put enough "feet on the ground" in the form of slaves from the slave-providing society -- so many that it is impossible to repatriate them.
  4. "Liberate" the slaves and destroy the remainder of the society you have already gutted of its yeomen/middle class.

Viva la Fromage! (1, Funny)

Organic Brain Damage (863655) | more than 7 years ago | (#19013529)

He's a conservative, right?

As such, I expect he will protect the quality of the wine, cheese, and poulet de bresse. That's all I can really hope for from a politician.

too damn right! (1)

GURU Meditation 8000 (790934) | more than 7 years ago | (#19013537)

I'm sorry. but I totally agree with this guy on this singular aspect (his other policies generally suck!) if someone comes to my country, then I expect them to no only learn the lingo, but also to embrace the culture and society of the country. THAT is surely why they were moving to the country and what makes that country attractive in the first place, no? the residents of the country shouldnt expect to have to start making new laws enforcing the views and cultural requirements/demands of the incoming people. THAT is just wrong.

Does this mean an end to "Freedom Fries"? (1)

Orion Blastar (457579) | more than 7 years ago | (#19013545)

Will we call them French Fries again?

Will France now help out in the Iraq War to end it?
Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...