French conservatives should not help France's socialists

We received the following request from our friend in France, Gerard Pince, addressing his fellow members in the FRF ("Federation des Resistants de France", the Federation of Resisters in France) and we pass it along (translated by myself) for the sake of our many visitors from France, in the event that they may not have seen it posted yet at the various French Blue Revolution sites:

"Resisters should not add their votes to those of their enemies who support Ségolène Royal. We therefore call upon all our partisans and friends to block the socialist candidate on May 6."

This story is a good excuse to bring back a certain video offering a prediction on France's likely future in the aftermath of a potential socialist victory in this presidential election.
Hold your nose and vote Sarkozy.

Segolene to France: vote for me, or else

The French Socialist party candidate, Segolene Royal, still trailing in the polls leading up to this weekend's presidential election , seems to have thrown decorum to the wind, by appealing to the same xenophobia that she has accused her opponent Sarkozy of playing to (and being guilty of).
From Yahoo:

"Choosing Nicolas Sarkozy would be a dangerous choice," Royal told RTL radio.
"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.
Pressed on whether there would be actual violence, Royal said: "I think so, I think so," referring specifically to France's volatile suburbs hit by widespread rioting in 2005.
...
A relaxed Sarkozy laughed off her comments.
"She's not in a good mood this morning. It must be the opinion polls," he told Europe 1 radio.
"She's finishing in violence, in a certain state of feverishness," he told reporters during a trip to the Alps. "When I hear her remarks, I wonder why a woman of her qualities carries such violent feelings. It adds nothing to the debate."

Yes, it is her "responsibility" to warn the French that there exists a veritable army of barbarian marauders poised to burn down the nation... a bleak fate only to be averted by pleasing the barbarians through the selection of a Socialiste to the presidency of France. Funny that no one asks her why such an appalling criminal element would seemingly welcome a Royal presidency... what is it about the socialist candidate that violent brutes would find so calming? If I knew that a thug preferred a particular candidate to win over another, I'd be more drawn towards the side that the bad guys are opposed to. But then, I'm not a socialist.

From Yahoo France, more of the socialist's hyperbolic last-minute campaign rhetoric, where she seems to predict a return to the dark ages should voters exercise free will in their selection process and blaspheme against nature by picking Sarkozy over her: [my translation from the original french]

"There remains two days to stand up (...) to seize your ballot (...) Stand up for a strong France (...) Stand up for light!" she declared, exalting, during a public meeting at Lorient in mid-afternoon.

French presidential debate: Emotion vs Intellect

I’ve just watched the two-hours-plus televised debate between French presidential candidates Nicolas Sarkozy and Segolene Royal. Here are some initial reactions from a tired mind:

Sarkozy impressed me, Segolene depressed me... royally. God help the French Republique should she win its presidency following the second round of their election! I can't see how any nation could survive such a person as their steward for five long years, let alone today's France with today's problems in today's world.

This debate might as well have been between intellect and emotion as between two politicians. Sarkozy was wall-to-wall facts and figures, Segolene was nothing but "feelings" and platitudes. Which seemed to get the socialist's goat every once in while; more on that in a moment.

Watching the two of them discuss business and finance put me in mind of the old stereotype of a woman driver talking with her auto mechanic, the driver saying that she hears a funny clicking sound coming from under the hood, while the mechanic goes to great pains to describe how her engine works, specifying that the problem is with the carburetor, concluding with a long list of payment options for getting it replaced.

Throughout the debate, the socialist Segolene Royal was emotional, undisciplined, and lacking in self-control, to an unsettling degree. Meanwhile Nicolas Sarkozy, presented a calm, cool, and very self-controlled contrast.

The debate format allowed for both candidates to address each other directly, within topical bounds established by the debate's two moderators (although the socialist candidate started off demonstrating an inability to focus on the topics at hand, it took her half the debate to learn how to stay on subject). A pair of clocks kept less-than-exact account of how much time each candidate incrementally used of their 60 minute time period (Sego torpedoed much of this system's accuracy by talking over Sarkozy's time quite frequently, with the timekeepers understandably slow in turning his clock off and activating hers).

Sarkozy was clearly the better debater; an amusing tactic of his that made for some entertaining moments, was his recurring ability to slip in a stiletto-sharp cutting remark towards his opponent whenever she would interrupt him, delivered through either an impish smile or accentuated with those facile eyebrows of his ("she asks questions then doesn't let me answer them", "I'll answer that if madame gives me her permission", "I have too much respect for you, madame, to let you deceive yourself", etc) Sometimes his little sarcastic remarks would slip by under her radar, unchallenged from being unheard, other times it would noticeably tick her off, prompting a renewed (and unflattering) emotional outburst out of her, as she probably felt like he was contemptuous of her intelligence.

Which he undoubtedly was. Sarkozy went into detail, again and again, about the mechanics of how his proposals will work: where the money will come from, explained in a cause-and-effect description. Sego’s “cause and effect” was to have more “social dialog” and to “work with industry” in order to “launch economic growth above 2%”. At a later point, Sarkozy challenges a specific Segolene proposal: "what tax rate will you apply to fund that policy?" Sego's answer, “My tax will be what is necessary to bring about social justice", was about as specific as anything else she had to offer voters during the debate drama.

Segolene erupted into a particularly unbecoming and (if you'll pardon the expression) gauche emotional outburst at the 50-minute mark, over remarks Sarkozy made concerning integrating handicapped children into regular public schooling, accusing him of "immoral politics" over the issue (they disagreed over statistics on how thoroughly this was being done, and how important to Sarkozy it was that it be higher). Sarkozy handled the outburst with statesmanship and aplomb, toning down his voice in direct contrast to Sego raising hers. Final word on the point came from Sarkozy, before the moderators shepherded them towards a new topic: "I don't hold it [your outburst] against you, because everyone can lose their temper"... such polite contempt!

Also memorable was Sego using the terrible news of a recent rape of a female police officer to announce that women should be accompanied on their way home from work, and that subsequently she would not be reducing the number of government employees, to insure that these extra police escorts would be available. Sarkozy, at his turn, asks her, "are you saying you want female civil servants accompanied home each night..." (Royal, interrupting: "At night, yes")... "so we should have one civil service for the French public, and another civil service to serve the civil servants". His solution, he says, is to simply have fewer delinquents, and being tougher on sentencing.

The moderators began with an unintentionally revealing question at the very start of the debate. They asked each candidate, “to ease the tension” and to calm the atmosphere: "How do each of you feel?"

Royal: [smiling] “Very happy, thank you”
Sarkozy: [decidedly not smiling] “Focused, because a debate is very demanding.”

Emotion vs Intellect.

French election vote breakdown

There was much uncertainty during the lead-up to today's presidential election in France; one could even be forgiven for indulging in a measured amount of optimism... was France waking up, shedding its flirtation with nihilist socialism?
Then this morning came the voting results to torpedo such positive daydreams. Reality is that France is in a lot of trouble.

The official website for France's Minister of the Interior lists the entire voting breakdown, candidate by candidate, department by department. Here is some overall voting data:

On the left:

Ségolène Royal, PS ("Parti Socialiste", Socialist Party): 9,402,797 (25.83%)
Oliver Besancenot, LCR ("Ligue communiste révolutionnaire", Revolutionary Communist League): 1, 494,446 (4.11%)
Marie-George Buffet, PCF ("Parti Communiste Francaise", French Communist Party): 705 487 (1.94%)
Dominique Voynet, "Les Verts" (Green Party): 570 240 (1.57%)
Arlette Laguiller, LO ("Lutte ouvrière", Worker's Struggle): 486 495 (1.34%)
José Bové: 479,125 (1.32%)
Gérard Schivardi, PT ("Parti des Travailleurs", Worker's Party): 123 305 (0.34%)

Out of the total 36 395 644 votes cast, left-leaning candidates totals come to 13,261,895, or 36.45% of the total vote.

On the right:

Nicolas Sarkozy, UMP ("Union pour un mouvement populaire", Union for a popular movement): 11 323 599 (31.11%)
Jean-Marie Le Pen, FN ("Front National", National Front): 3,824,258 (10.51%)
Philippe de Villiers, MPF ("Mouvement Pour La France", Movement for France): 815,789 (2.24%)
Frédéric Nihous, CPNT ("Chasse-Pêche-Nature-Traditions", Hunting-Fishing-Nature-Traditions): 420,097 (1.15%) (sounds libertarian, so I'm including them with the right-wing party totals until I'm advised otherwise)

Out of the total 36 395 644 votes cast, France's equivalent of conservative candidacies received 16,383,743 votes, or 45.01% of the total vote.

Now, I've left one candidate out of these calculations: the "third man" (you'd think that was his Party name, as the French media refer to this expression so frequently when citing him), François Bayrou, candidate for the UDF ("l'Union pour la démocratie française", Union for french democracy). Considered a "centrist" candidate, his platform seemed to lean much more to the left than the right. With a final tally of 6,750,006 votes, his supporters could swing the election in the second round. His 18.55% block is up for grabs, since Bayrou, in his consession speech, failed to recommend either Sarkozy or Royal.
Listening to the various consession speeches this morning streaming over the net, there seemed a common theme within each respective side of the political spectrum. Neither Le Pen or de Villiers made recommendations for their conservative supporters to vote for Sarkozy in the second round. Meanwhile the leftist candidates tended to be more strategic in their consession speeches, urging voters to choose Royal "with no illusions", but out of desperation to beat the "right".
I think it's a safe bet that the next election will probably not see another 84.6% turnout rate, as France's right of center voters may not feel there is sufficient difference between the remaining candidacies of Sarkozy and Royal. Still, while not the best of choices, there's still difference enough between the likely success of each candidate's taking the helm of the ship of state.
Let's hope that the center-right can accept Sarkozy as the lesser of two evils, and return to the polls in sufficient strength to save France from perpetual civil unrest, rapid economic decline, and Segolene Royal.

France goes to the polls

France goes to the polls this sunday, to choose the next President of their nation.

I was trying to think of a way to frame a greeting to our French readers as they vote sunday in the first round of their Presidential Election, but I can't seem to come up with a turn of phrase that seems appropriate to the occasion.

"Good luck"? "Our condolences"? "I feel your pain"?

It probably sounds like a joke, I guess, but I am trying to be sincere. It's very hard to imagine any good to come out of this process; the only candidate that I felt would have shifted France back to a position of strength, Philippe de Villiers, has been consistently marginalized to the bottom of the list in poll after poll, seemingly unnoticed by his fellow citizens, despite the clear vision with which he identifies France's true problems and needs.

As we discussed at our meeting last week, over a third of the voters in these pre-election polls are declaring themselves "undecided", which makes the first round vote a gut call rather than a sure thing. Are they really undecided, though, or just ashamed to admit their intention to cast a vote for anti-American and anti-Israel Front National candidate Jean-Marie Le Pen..?

I'm going to put the remaining scraps of my credibility on the line, and project Le Pen and gadfly François Bayrou as, respectively, the number one and number two winners in tomorrow's election. I think Sarkozy will come in a close third, with Segolene Royal a distant fourth.

I think Bayrou will end with most of Sego's socialist party's immigrant voting block, pushing him ahead of her, and pulling her behind Sarkozy. I think Sarkozy will lose much of his conservative support to Le Pen, who will be seen as more hardline on the law and order issues that plague the nation.

Then in the second round we will see history repeating itself, as France declares itself horrified at the news of Le Pen in the second round once more, and will hold their collective noses and raise Bayrou to the Presidency.

Which reminds me, maybe there can be some good to come out of this election, following the second round, after all:

French citizens won't have this gentleman in charge anymore....

What are Your election predictions?

UPDATE: I'm listening to election returns over France-Info, and so far my prediction isn't shaping up very well! First results are Sarkozy at 29%, Royal at 26%, Bayrou at 18%, with Le Pen at 10%.

UPDATE: Philippe de Villiers at 2%! That's even less than in his previous presidential campaign.

UPDATE: Le Pen is talking, he's disappointed in the people for choosing "the representatives of the system" in casting their votes for Sarkozy.

UPDATE: some interesting commentary on the "collapse" of the small parties, particularly on the left. Less than half of the total vote as compared to their numbers in the last election.

UPDATE: Televised Presidential debate between Sarkozy and Royal set for May 3. Based on the high electoral turnout (over 80%!) that debate will likely score very high ratings.

Claude Reichman's latest article on the French Presidential elections

Claude Reichman, spokesperson for the Blue Revolution, the French movement dedicated to promoting economic and social reform in France, has a new article out on the current French presidential elections. He addresses the urgent need for significant reforms in their system, and surveys the likelyhood for their implementation following the election.
[translated by myself; clarifications or corrections welcome]

Presidential elections: a marionnettes show

The four principal candidates for the presidential election are partisans of rupture. None announce themselves as part of a continuity. None dare post a track record. And why! Of the four, only Jean-Marie Le Pen at least has coherence going for him. In the case of rupture, he has been lauding it since the creation of the Front National, over thirty-five years ago. Yet for a track record, he doesn’t have one, since he’s never been in power. But the others!

M. Sarkozy is the heir of RPR["Rassemblement pour la République"], of whom its glorious jewel, Jacques Chirac, has vigorously massacred France’s chances throughout his forty years of political life. Mme Royal is the heir to the socialist party, of whom their glorious jewel, François Mitterrand, plunged France into the chaos of deficits, debt, economic collapse, uncontrolled immagration and moral perversion since that party was created thirty six years ago and their first party leader became president of the Republic twenty six years ago. As for M. Bayrou, he is the heir of Union for french democracy [UDF, "Union pour la Démocratie Française"], created thirty three years ago for supporting the actions of its glorious jewel, Valéry Giscard d’Estaing, who, in order to guard our nation against socialism, judged it prudent to hurry towards it, just like the fool who throws himself into water in order not to get wet.

Therefore, each being the inheritors, whether they want it or not, of disastrous track records, M. Sarkozy, Mme Royal and M. Bayrou ask us to believe they are capable of a rupture that nothing in their pasts has made the least bit predicted. At least if they had a program! But no, nothing. Roaring words but empty of sense, unrealizable promises without any actual break with the economic, fiscal and social system that strangles France for the last third of a century, in short, just hot air. And it seems that the presidential campaign enthralls the French. Have we become this people without memory that Tocqueville had once perceived when he said that "in a democracy, each generation is a new nation"? It truly seems so.

Yet [,consider this]. There is conscious memory, and there is that which, huddled up within the deepest depths of the cortex, shelters remembrances both sorrowful and grandiose, the craziest of hopes and the most ancestral of fears, the unappeased desires and the most violent impulses. And it is this memory that waits to deliver its terrible exhalations, just as it always had in previous centuries when the nation was in danger.
Therefore, our candidates for the presidential election are but marionnettes in a scenario that overtakes them. When the great breath of history blows over our country, from the inmost depths of the people must rise a man or woman in whom France may recognize itself and to whom France will confide its destinies. For a limited time only, of course; for the rule demands this time once more that the savior is to be dismissed as soon as their mission is fulfilled, so that the people may once again danse a jig of regained happiness and unconcerned joy.

What can you do, happy people have no history. It is true everywhere, even in a nation with a history such as ours, at the same time glorious and tragic, and who primes itself to invest itself with new dramas that their leaders, unconsciously, have so well prepared for them.

Glory, therefore, to the next elected leader of the nation. If they knew what was in store for them, they would flee as fast as their legs could take them. Yet our political class, because they have appropriated for themselves the monopoly of popular representation and have therefore sheltered themselves from every true sanction, for such a long time now, can no longer even know that actions have consequences. A few decades ago, there was a theatrical play that became very successful. It was called "La facture" ["The bill"]. It seems that, together, we are prepared to reenact it. And this time no one will find it funny.

[The play Mr. Reichman refers to is a comedy about a woman that everybody likes, so well in fact that she fears the day she feels she will receive "the bill" for her good fortune.]

French mayor whores his vote to the highest bidder

Candidate: Would you vote for me if I gave you a million dollars?
Mayor: Sure!
Candidate: Would you vote for me for twenty bucks?
Mayor: Hey, what kind of a public official do you think I am?

All of France now knows what French Mayor André Garrec is; they're just haggling over his price.

First, some background to this story. You need to know a curious fact about the French Presidential election system, and I turn to one of my favorite blogs, French Election 2007, for this concise summary:

In order for a candidate to be on the ballot, they must have received the support /signatures of 500 elected officials around France. There is of course a finite number of elected officials in France, but this still allows for the potential of dozens of candidates in the first round of voting.

A handful of would-be French candidates, such as the high-profile campaign of controversial firebrand Jean Marie Le Pen, have been unable, at this date, to secure their required number of 500 signatures. While I'm certainly not going to lose any sleep if that piece of... ahem, if that candidate fails to obtain his required 500 sponsorships, there are some other candidates definitely worthy of support, for instance our preferred choice, Phillipe De Villiers (who, as far as I know, still needs the coveted 500 names himself!)

Now we can introduce you to His Honor, André Garrec, mayor of the small Normandy village of Noron-la-Poterie (population: approx 300), and his justification for turning tricks in order to participate in his country's process for determining which fellow French citizen will emerge with the stewardship of their nation. Courtesy of French news magazine, Liberation: [my translation from the original french]

In face of the difficulty for several candidates to obtain the 500 precious signatures, the mayor of a Normandie village has found a [profitable?] scheme:
he will grant his to the highest bidder.
…
[Mayor André Garrec] explains his approach: in order to put an end to the solicitations from representatives of dozens of candidates, he decided that “until the 14th of March”, that is two days before the deadline for handing in sponsorships, he will grant his signature [his patronage] “to the highest bidder”. The mayor has specified that he is not doing it “for myself personally, but for three [charities? “associations”, in the original French] and for the school” in his community.
“If I get a check from a candidate, it will be shared equitably.” Garrec has not discussed the legality of his initiative which he must have taken on his own, but must nevertheless feel that it is approved by the majority of his constituents.
….

One constituent, in particular, is quite vocal in his support for the mayor's absence of principles. From a news story in yesterday's french news site 20minutes.fr, "I am putting my conscience aside": [my translation]

[The mayor's] project is supported by the mayoral deputies contacted by 20minutes.fr. “He is right [to do this]", says Guy Richet, 2nd deputy who leans socialist. “The candidates make us all puke and badger us with their letters. Obviously, they have a lot of cash to waste. As for us, we want to get some of it!”

[I'm up for debate as to whether Mr. Richet's french expletive, "...nous font tellement chier..." is accurately translated as "..really make us all puke"]

Today there were some new developments on this story, again courtesy of the news site 20minutes.fr .... someone has put in a bid for the mayor's, er, services: [my translation from the original french]

[Garrec] has confirmed to 20minutes.fr that he has received a financial offer from a member of the Front National to sponsor Jean-Marie Le Pen. FN’s European deputy Ferdinand Le Rachinel visited the mayor’s home and offered him “in friendly payment” four cheques for 250 euros each, towards three charities in the community and the kindergarten school. The checks would be in the name of “Mr and Mrs Le Rachinel” and not in the name of the FN.
…
André Garrec, who has not yet received any other offers from other candidates, said he would wait for the “end of the auction” on March 14 before he would give his sponsorship. If no other candidate outbids him, the mayor will grant his signature to Jean-Marie Le Pen “without any remorse”.

So it seems that, barring any last minute campaign spending, the good mayor of Noron-la-Poterie, hizzonor Garrec, will have secured the equivalent of $1,550 Canadian dollars worth of charity for his little community's children and dispossesed. What if some lunatic candidate ends up winning the election, what would then befall his nation? Well, if the mayor's got his wad of cash, today, why would he care what happens to the rest of his fellow countrymen, tomorrow; he's adamantly just looking out for his own. Besides tomorrow is such a long way away.

What if the candidate who ends up becoming France's next President, causes such unprecedented trouble for France, that every single blessed citizen of Noron-la-Poterie in favor of their mayor's act of prostitution are thrown out of work and onto the dole so prized by his honor Mr. Garrec... What then? Any remorse then?

If his little hamlet is so hard up for financial aid, forcing the mayor to shop his wares at the national street corner, maybe he and his constituents could spare a thought as to WHY their condition is so desperate, and see which candidate might come closest to steering things right.

France is dying because far too many of its citizens live, like Mayor Garrec, without remorse. May Canada learn from France's mistakes.