EPThttp://fr.news.yahoo.com/jean-luc-mélenchon-traite-équipe-petit-journal-fachos-091028989.html
2012 French Presidential Election - Page 53
| Forum Index > General Forum |
|
Geiko
France1939 Posts
http://fr.news.yahoo.com/jean-luc-mélenchon-traite-équipe-petit-journal-fachos-091028989.html | ||
|
Agathon
France1505 Posts
On May 04 2012 15:08 Geiko wrote: In other news, Mélanchon insulted a team of journalists, calling them fascist and other nice names, and pushed a journalist in the back. http://fr.news.yahoo.com/jean-luc-mélenchon-traite-équipe-petit-journal-fachos-091028989.html Since when "Le petit journal" has something close to journalism??? | ||
|
Geiko
France1939 Posts
On May 04 2012 15:14 Agathon wrote: Since when "Le petit journal" has something close to journalism??? It's not up to me to decide. They have a journalist's card which makes them journalists. Besides, even if they weren't, have you seen the video ? Is that a way to talk to anyone ? How can anybody from the FdG talk about Sarkozy's "casse toi pauv' con" after this ? | ||
|
harlock78
United States94 Posts
He carefully avoided during the debate to explain how he intends to reduce the debt (he mentioned roughly half of it would be from taxes on the wealthy, and half of it from less spending, but where are the cuts?). He said he is increasing public servants in education, but overall no increase, so which sector will get the cut? Does he expects that a slight increase in growth due to his version of a stimulus package (blocking oil prices, rolling back part of the retirement reform etc...) will be enough to balance the cost of all these measures? It might be based on sound economics, but then why is he afraid to explain it? It is sad that no politicians ever has the courage to tell the truth. And the truth is France has been playing the game of globalization, borrowing massively, letting its industry decline, and is now dependent in that global ecosystem. This game has some rules. You can break the rules (but the lenders of money, the markets, will react accordingly), change the rules (would be good, but gl with germany for that) or retire from the game (but when your economy is so dependent and the industry vanishing, not a good idea if you want to maintain your living train). All of which requires more than demagogy. | ||
|
Kukaracha
France1954 Posts
On May 04 2012 05:36 Geiko wrote: -About Napoleon, you're talking about his military successes, I'm talking about his internal politics. Obviously he lost the 1870 war ... When I say good leader, I'm not talking about him being a good military leader. Please stop, just stop, it's very clear that you have no clue of what you're talking about and your only source is a Wikipedia article. That historians have defended Napoleon against Hugo's attacks doesn't mean that he was a good leader, it just means that maybe he wasn't the worse. But aside from huge political failures - Mexico, unofficial support to the Southern States in the American Civil war - he has little to no credit for the changes demanded and performed by hygienists like Pasteur or Hausmann. And he did rush unprepaired in a suicidal conflict against Germany. Now please forget about the subject if all you have to back you up is Wikipedia and a single book. I won't even go into how ridiculous it is to accuse the media for Sarkozy's unpopularity, your paranoia is simply mind-blogging when you consider that he named channel directors himself and that he's served by Le Figaro as his personal Pravda. Not only that but even if you exclude Mediapart's last breaking news (which have been confirmed a couple of times now), there's still Karachi, Bettencourt and the fact that he very simply spied on journalists. But as Hollande said, he's always the victim, it's never his fault. | ||
|
Geiko
France1939 Posts
On May 04 2012 17:33 Kukaracha wrote: Please stop, just stop, it's very clear that you have no clue of what you're talking about and your only source is a Wikipedia article. That historians have defended Napoleon against Hugo's attacks doesn't mean that he was a good leader, it just means that maybe he wasn't the worse. But aside from huge political failures - Mexico, unofficial support to the Southern States in the American Civil war - he has little to no credit for the changes demanded and performed by hygienists like Pasteur or Hausmann. And he did rush unprepaired in a suicidal conflict against Germany. Now please forget about the subject if all you have to back you up is Wikipedia and a single book. I won't even go into how ridiculous it is to accuse the media for Sarkozy's unpopularity, your paranoia is simply mind-blogging when you consider that he named channel directors himself and that he's served by Le Figaro as his personal Pravda. Not only that but even if you exclude Mediapart's last breaking news (which have been confirmed a couple of times now), there's still Karachi, Bettencourt and the fact that he very simply spied on journalists. But as Hollande said, he's always the victim, it's never his fault. Here are some articles for you to read (google is a nice friend): http://www.larousse.fr/encyclopedie/divers/Empire/118024 http://www.lefigaro.fr/lefigaromagazine/2006/08/18/01006-20060818ARTMAG90362-sous_napoleon_iii_le_progrs_fait_rver.php http://www.histoiredumonde.net/Napoleon-III.html http://www.canalacademie.com/ida148-Les-Historiens-et-la-legende-noire-du-Second-Empire.html http://www.historia.fr/mensuel/736/napoleon-iii-sort-de-la-legende-noire-01-04-2008-55614 Oh and I found an article from Le Monde comparing Napoleon III and Sarkozy like I did: http://www.lemonde.fr/politique/article/2008/11/15/sarkozy-napoleon-iii-meme-combat_1119100_823448.html You should read it, it gives argumentation from both sides. | ||
|
DOUDOU
Wales2940 Posts
On May 04 2012 15:14 Agathon wrote: Since when "Le petit journal" has something close to journalism??? well, while the show is the perfect example of shameful infotainment (the interviews are a joke, every time there's a hint of inconvenience in a question and the interviewee answers bullshit, there's absolutely no follow-up), the journalists really are doing a nice job investigating the smallest things and keeping tracks of real news (often better than other TV news, and sometimes better than some newspapers) i don't see why one would request their journalist rights to be revoked, other than inconvenience, but that's exactly what i want in my journalists | ||
|
Kukaracha
France1954 Posts
Nothing here says that he can be compared to others such as Louis XIV or Louis the Saint. These articles simply defend him against Hugo's hatred, which was exaggerated (and I admit it willingly). As for comparing Sarkozy to Napoleon III, why not? They both were half a success and half a failure, both wanted changes but didn't manage to do much that lasted more than 15 years. The first because he's leaving next week under the mockery of the French people, the second because he wasn't able to see a thing through Bismarck's plans. | ||
|
Geiko
France1939 Posts
On May 04 2012 18:09 Kukaracha wrote: Yes, so you show again that your knowledge is limited to a google search. In Le Figaro, for example, they give him credit for the urbanization of Paris, when all Napoleon did was appoint Hausmann. Period. Nothing here says that he can be compared to others such as Louis XIV or Louis the Saint. These articles simply defend him against Hugo's hatred, which was exaggerated (and I admit it willingly). As for comparing Sarkozy to Napoleon III, why not? They both were half a success and half a failure, both wanted changes but didn't manage to do much that lasted more than 15 years. The first because he's leaving next week under the mockery of the French people, the second because he wasn't able to see a thing through Bismarck's plans. Dude I'm not insulting you, please stop judging me, and stop your overall condescending tone ,my knowledge is not "limited to a google search". Can you please make your next post without direct or indirect attacks on me ? Attack my ideas if you want, but don't presume to know anything about me. I gave you multiple sources to Historians and journalist saying Napoleon III's reign was grossly underestimated for a number of years because mainly of bad press from Victor Hugo at the time (he called him Napoleon "le petit", see any interesting parallels here ?). All of these Historians seem to agree that the Second Empire has a rather positive Bilan regarding social and economic progress, which was my original point (once again, not talking about military success or failure). If you wish to disprove this point, please do post some sources of authorities saying the contrary. I don't understand your point about Hausmann deserving all the credit. If you mean to say that Napoelon III wasn't an architect or city designer, then I agree with you. Napoleon III was the man who decided Paris had to be renovated and allocated an important sum of money to make it happen, appointing Hausmann in the process. Sarkozy isn't leaving under the mockery of the French people. At least 45% of French voters will vote for him, please respect these people. | ||
|
Biff The Understudy
France7913 Posts
On May 04 2012 15:52 harlock78 wrote: It is so hard to get meaningful info from the other side of the atlantic. As much as I want Sarkozy to go, I can't get any idea of Hollande's economic plan. He carefully avoided during the debate to explain how he intends to reduce the debt (he mentioned roughly half of it would be from taxes on the wealthy, and half of it from less spending, but where are the cuts?). He said he is increasing public servants in education, but overall no increase, so which sector will get the cut? Does he expects that a slight increase in growth due to his version of a stimulus package (blocking oil prices, rolling back part of the retirement reform etc...) will be enough to balance the cost of all these measures? It might be based on sound economics, but then why is he afraid to explain it? It is sad that no politicians ever has the courage to tell the truth. And the truth is France has been playing the game of globalization, borrowing massively, letting its industry decline, and is now dependent in that global ecosystem. This game has some rules. You can break the rules (but the lenders of money, the markets, will react accordingly), change the rules (would be good, but gl with germany for that) or retire from the game (but when your economy is so dependent and the industry vanishing, not a good idea if you want to maintain your living train). All of which requires more than demagogy. http://www.debateco.fr/la-cellule-de-chiffrage/francois-hollande/creation-de-60-000-postes-dans-leducation-nationale-sur-5-?tid=39 As far as I understand, he keeps cutting half of the jobs for every single area where there are fonctionnaires, except police and education. In particular, Defense should be hit strongly: http://www.liberation.fr/politiques/01012386316-postes-de-fonctionnaires-crees-hollande-utilisera-les-departs-a-la-defense So basically, it's like doing the same than Sarkozy, but with no economies being done and a massive human investment in education and security. For the second half of your post you are right, but you are wrong. Rules are not "just there", rules are being made by countries and governments at an international level (in particular, at the European level for us). I don't expect much from Hollande on many areas, but I will support him to death because he is the one that can change a little bit European economic orientation which is basically led by Merkel and is turned 100% towards austerity. I believe it is suicide. And I am not the only one. Even the conservative Financial Times says it: http://www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/2/dbb65da8-9062-11e1-8adc-00144feab49a.html The inflexible position of the Merkozy axis is absolutely ridiculous. You inflict austerity everywhere, you demolish your growth and you increase the debt problem, except that in between, you have to deal with more unemployement, and way more social problems. We need a mix between keynesianism and rigor. That's not what we are doing, we are losing time. Now I know Hollande won't change everything by himself, but he will have a positive influence while Sarkozy has a negative one by being aligned with Merkel who is doing horribly since the beginning of the crisis, and he will probably have left wing allies in the next few years among the string economies (Denmark already, probably germany soon etc...) I expect from Hollande what I expect from a MP. I know my local MP won't make laws by himself, and maybe he won't have a decisive influence. But he will have one, and these are the rules. Hollande will have a voice in Europe that is crucial right now. | ||
|
Kukaracha
France1954 Posts
On May 04 2012 18:22 Geiko wrote: Dude I'm not insulting you, please stop judging me, and stop your overall condescending tone ,my knowledge is not "limited to a google search". Can you please make your next post without direct or indirect attacks on me ? Attack my ideas if you want, but don't presume to know anything about me. I gave you multiple sources to Historians and journalist saying Napoleon III's reign was grossly underestimated for a number of years because mainly of bad press from Victor Hugo at the time (he called him Napoleon "le petit", see any interesting parallels here ?). All of these Historians seem to agree that the Second Empire has a rather positive Bilan regarding social and economic progress, which was my original point (once again, not talking about military success or failure). If you wish to disprove this point, please do post some sources of authorities saying the contrary. I don't understand your point about Hausmann deserving all the credit. If you mean to say that Napoelon III wasn't an architect or city designer, then I agree with you. Napoleon III was the man who decided Paris had to be renovated and allocated an important sum of money to make it happen, appointing Hausmann in the process. Sarkozy isn't leaving under the mockery of the French people. At least 45% of French voters will vote for him, please respect these people. You didn't quote any historians. You didn't read any historic (no need for a capital H) works. You read a couple of internet articles, like a true Wikipedia scholar. I could raise you Gérard Jorland, Farid Ameur or T. Evans, which I have read. Keeping Hausmann as an example, do you truly believe that Napoleon had any role in his works other than simply appointing him? The budget tripled and the leader of the state didn't do anything about it. He had no part in the urbanization of Paris. Same for Pasteur's initiatives. So sure, Napoleon wasn't the incompetent child that Hugo described, but he wasn't a brilliant leader neither. You will see historians defend him but you will also see historians defend Marie-Antoinette, because eveyone has a certain bias and a certain agenda, so this alone doesn't mean much. And quite frankly, I fail to see how the fall of the Empire is a minor mistake, because it's the cause for the abrupt interruption and loss of most of his personal doings. And, well, it's the fall of the Empire, too. And Sarkozy is very impopular, many people are vothing for him because they don't want Hollande, not because they like him. And even then he's losing by at least a good 6% (see Roland Cayrol's take on this). Ps : I'm not mocking you, I simply have little to no respect for any meaningless Wikipedia knowledge. | ||
|
Nouar
France3270 Posts
Between 1985 and 2008 Correze was presided by RPR then UMP. Hollande took control in 2008. Here are the debt figures : http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conseil_général_de_la_Corrèze#Endettement 2004 : 106 Million euros debt, increase of 36.6% UMP 2005 : 148 Million euros debt, increase of 39.6% UMP 2006 :199.3 Million euros debt, increase of 34.7% UMP 2007 : 258.2 Million euros debt, increase of 29.6% UMP 2008 : 289.9 Million euros debt, increase of 12.3% UMP/PS 2009 : 333 Million euros debt, increase of 14.9% PS 2010 : 345.6 Million euros debt, increase of 3.8% PS Notice the trend, and the increase lowering starting from 2008. This is hardly bankrupcy. He inherited a highly endebted Correze, and in 2.5years it's debt increased by a lot less than it did previously. Shameful right ? Total : 21% increase in a crisis period for Hollande, 283% increase for UMP between 2004-2008 without a crisis. During the same time, he reduced the local taxes by 45% between 2008 and 2011, from 371€/inhabitant to 203€, while other taxes remained stable, but indirect taxes increased by 44%. Is that such a bad result ? | ||
|
Kukaracha
France1954 Posts
Damn leftist medias! | ||
|
Nouar
France3270 Posts
On May 04 2012 08:01 Geiko wrote: Is Jean Sarkozy and Epad such a big deal ? No one pointed any fingers when Mitterrand was doing 10 times worse... And yes it's a fucking BIG thing for me to try to put your 24yo son, without a diploma and repeating his year, at the head of the biggest trade place in Paris. Times changed, information is king, Mitterrand is dead, Sarkozy is trying to run for presidency again. Lybia and Bettancour funding, Sarkozy hasn't been condemned yet. He's protected by presidential immunity but that doesn't mean he is guilty. When you think about it, both PS and UMP's campaign were controlled and priced at 20M. do you seriously believe that UMPs campaign cost 50M€ ? The people controlling must of done a piss poor job to miss out on 30M ( plus whatever Bettancourt gave him ). I followed the 2007 campaign, I don't see on what UMP spent all that money. The PS had the exact same funding as far as I'm concerned. I don't know, I'm not judging, but why should they wait until AFTER the election to release the info they got ? "Oh, he might be reelected, we'll withdraw information until after he's elected again, it's fairer". I agree the press is against him, but for a reason lol. Just look at Eric Woerth... I sincerely hope Hollande will do what he said if he's elected and remove immunity, and I'll be the first one to boo if he doesn't, and to booo even more if he's not clean. There were imprecision from both Hollande and Sarkozy during this debate (no other nuclear power plant on a sismic zone in France ? really ?). There are always imprecisions, but Fessenheim IS the oldest one. I've heard a lot more insults directed to Sarkozy then from Sarkozy to be honest. Honestly, maybe, but remember he's alone insulting while everyone insults him :p He was the source of more insults as a single man, than anyone taken individually. You say that we cannot blame Hollande for the disastrous state of Corrèze because there were right wing people governing before him. However you guys have the right to attack Sarkozy on his Bilan ? And we can't blame the 35h of Martine Aubry ? I fail to see how 35h hurt the country, since I'm not an economist, but I'd like to think that with working less, companies SHOULD recruit more, instead of having people do overtime. Then again, I'm a total newbie about that. Can you explain exactly, with YOUR opinion, why 35h hurt France ? Comments on syndicates were totally justified. These guys explicitely called to vote against him. During their manifestation, they are only saying things like "Sarkozy, dégage !". And they can't accept when he tells them its unacceptable for an organ supposed to represent ALL the workers to take position like that. They said that for a reason, first, lol. They got tired, too. Do you remember what happened when a few workers from that metal plant in the northeast came to Paris in front of Sarkozy's campaign office to talk ? They didn't destroy anything, and were driven out by CRS with smoke grenades and shit, while protesting respectfully (though probably orally not cool, as always). Respect ? That was the last straw that earned him that vote calling against him. And MEDEF supported Sarkozy, before suddenly remembering they shouldn't. You do know those organs are ELECTED by WORKERS ? So, they represent most workers, since they are elected. lol again. Like the president, you know. Regarding the mediapart incident, you are exactly correct. NO ONE can know who is lying and who isn't in so little time. So what is the point of releasing this 7 days before the elections ? It's called slander, it's just a way to manipulate public opinion. It does damage to Sarkozy's image whether it's true or not. If that is independent an unbiased journalism to you ... answered up there. Waiting until after the elections would be biased, from my point of view. Whatever the side. For what they know, the document presented to them by officials can be true, they don't have to do EVERYTHING, after that, justice has to decide, and they can't, cause of immunity. What to do, wait 5 more years ? | ||
|
DOUDOU
Wales2940 Posts
On May 04 2012 08:01 Geiko wrote: Lybia and Bettancour funding, Sarkozy hasn't been condemned yet. He's protected by presidential immunity but that doesn't mean he is guilty. When you think about it, both PS and UMP's campaign were controlled and priced at 20M. do you seriously believe that UMPs campaign cost 50M€ ? The people controlling must of done a piss poor job to miss out on 30M ( plus whatever Bettancourt gave him ). I followed the 2007 campaign, I don't see on what UMP spent all that money. The PS had the exact same funding as far as I'm concerned. that's the whole point, faking campaing funds is how you divert money | ||
|
ulan-bat
China403 Posts
On May 04 2012 20:47 DOUDOU wrote: that's the whole point, faking campaing funds is how you divert money Or it could be 5 millions instead of 50, then what? Or it could have been a maximum but Sarkozy didn't need it all. Or Mediapart was fooled by some informer and nothing happened at all. Who knows really? The only thing I believe is that Sarkozy has a hard time defending his position with facts, for now at least. He's all about trust, "really, you would believe this libyan more than me?". We'll see what the justice says. | ||
|
Geiko
France1939 Posts
On May 04 2012 19:59 Kukaracha wrote: You didn't quote any historians. You didn't read any historic (no need for a capital H) works. You read a couple of internet articles, like a true Wikipedia scholar Having been warned numerous times about name calling in this thread, I think you know you needn't expect any answer to this post  On May 04 2012 20:07 Nouar wrote: Oh, and just by the way because this is pissing me off : about Copé and UMP bitching about Correze and its debt, here are some figures. Between 1985 and 2008 Correze was presided by RPR then UMP. Hollande took control in 2008. Here are the debt figures : http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conseil_général_de_la_Corrèze#Endettement 2004 : 106 Million euros debt, increase of 36.6% UMP 2005 : 148 Million euros debt, increase of 39.6% UMP 2006 :199.3 Million euros debt, increase of 34.7% UMP 2007 : 258.2 Million euros debt, increase of 29.6% UMP 2008 : 289.9 Million euros debt, increase of 12.3% UMP/PS 2009 : 333 Million euros debt, increase of 14.9% PS 2010 : 345.6 Million euros debt, increase of 3.8% PS Notice the trend, and the increase lowering starting from 2008. This is hardly bankrupcy. He inherited a highly endebted Correze, and in 2.5years it's debt increased by a lot less than it did previously. Shameful right ? Total : 21% increase in a crisis period for Hollande, 283% increase for UMP between 2004-2008 without a crisis. During the same time, he reduced the local taxes by 45% between 2008 and 2011, from 371€/inhabitant to 203€, while other taxes remained stable, but indirect taxes increased by 44%. Is that such a bad result ? I could call you a wiki-scholar and not answer to this post, but I'd rather try to give my opinion on this. I only pointed out the example of Corrèze in this thread to illustrate François Hollande's "double discours". On the one hand he claims that Sarkozy is accountable for the situation of France today and shouldn't reject the fault on other people. On the other hand, he refuses to be accountable for the situation of Corrèze today. Double discours. On one hand he says (this isn't a direct quote but almost), that when you inherit a country in debt, you need to show the example and reduce your salary. So he plans on reducing the president's (and ministers') salaray by 30%. On the other hand, as he took the head of the most indebted department of France, he maintained his salary (if you cumulate all his fonctions, it adds up to 30 500€/month). On the one hand, he accuses Sarkozy of unkept promises, on the other hand he never closed the Chirac Museum which he promised he would close. This is his "bilan" after 3 years as president of the department and it's only legitimate we bring it up in this context (where he is attacking Sarkozy's Bilan). | ||
|
Biff The Understudy
France7913 Posts
On May 04 2012 21:13 ulan-bat wrote: Or it could be 5 millions instead of 50, then what? Or it could have been a maximum but Sarkozy didn't need it all. Or Mediapart was fooled by some informer and nothing happened at all. Who knows really? The only thing I believe is that Sarkozy has a hard time defending his position with facts, for now at least. He's all about trust, "really, you would believe this libyan more than me?". We'll see what the justice says. The thing with these affairs is that they accumulate, and that Sarkozy and his surrounding is involved not in one, where the doubt is always possible, but in a zillion very different ones, including some of absolutely extreme gravity. The worst one being Karachi of course, which happened in correlation with Balladur campaign that Sarkozy was directing. Nothing is proved councerning Sarkozy, that's right. In many countries, however the fact of beinng mentionned in ANY of these affairs would have been the resignation from office the following day. You can't rule a country being suspected to be not only a crook but a criminal. Now, Mitterand has been quite bad councerning honesty, but never done anything as outrageous as putting his 23 years old son with no studies, no political experience except some nepotist shit in the Hauts de Seine at the head of such a gigantic institution like the epad. Mind you, all of this come from the president who justify inequalities growing because of the "merit and "hard work" (well, I should be president of the planet then), and the one who promised "une République irreprochable". I wonder how people who ever believed him are not beeding from the asshole. And people still vote for this clown. It's time to invest into the vaseline market. | ||
|
Geiko
France1939 Posts
On May 04 2012 20:26 Nouar wrote: And yes it's a fucking BIG thing for me to try to put your 24yo son, without a diploma and repeating his year, at the head of the biggest trade place in Paris. Times changed, information is king, Mitterrand is dead, Sarkozy is trying to run for presidency again. I don't know, I'm not judging, but why should they wait until AFTER the election to release the info they got ? "Oh, he might be reelected, we'll withdraw information until after he's elected again, it's fairer". I agree the press is against him, but for a reason lol. Just look at Eric Woerth... I sincerely hope Hollande will do what he said if he's elected and remove immunity, and I'll be the first one to boo if he doesn't, and to booo even more if he's not clean. There are always imprecisions, but Fessenheim IS the oldest one. Honestly, maybe, but remember he's alone insulting while everyone insults him :p He was the source of more insults as a single man, than anyone taken individually. I fail to see how 35h hurt the country, since I'm not an economist, but I'd like to think that with working less, companies SHOULD recruit more, instead of having people do overtime. Then again, I'm a total newbie about that. Can you explain exactly, with YOUR opinion, why 35h hurt France ? They said that for a reason, first, lol. They got tired, too. Do you remember what happened when a few workers from that metal plant in the northeast came to Paris in front of Sarkozy's campaign office to talk ? They didn't destroy anything, and were driven out by CRS with smoke grenades and shit, while protesting respectfully (though probably orally not cool, as always). Respect ? That was the last straw that earned him that vote calling against him. And MEDEF supported Sarkozy, before suddenly remembering they shouldn't. You do know those organs are ELECTED by WORKERS ? So, they represent most workers, since they are elected. lol again. Like the president, you know. answered up there. Waiting until after the elections would be biased, from my point of view. Whatever the side. For what they know, the document presented to them by officials can be true, they don't have to do EVERYTHING, after that, justice has to decide, and they can't, cause of immunity. What to do, wait 5 more years ? I'll answer to all your points in seperate paragraphs. He didn't try to put Jean Sarkozy at the head of the EPAD, Jean wanted to start his career in politics and as an "élu" from Neuilly, he was in his right to apply for that position. The people responsible for designating the president were most likely "des lêches culs" who thought they could gain points with Sarkozy by voting for his son. Sarkozy explained he never encouraged him to do so. What about Eric Worth ? I could just as well say "look at DSK ?" or "look at the Fédération des bouches du Rhônes ?". There are currently just as many trials and condamnations involving members of the PS as members of the UMP. That's what I said, you can't blame Sarkozy for distorting the truth when Hollande did just as much during this debate. So everyone is insulting everyone... What do you learn from this ? Everyone now agrees that the 35h was a mistake. We are the only country to have tried, and it has failed miserably. Even the PS know better then to try to enforce the law again. In principle it's a good idea: "less individual work time = more jobs". In reality, it's less individual work time = less competitivity in France. The 35h have drastically increased the cost of work. The MEDEF never supported Sarkozy. Its president said she agreed with Sarkozy and would probably vote for him on a personal level. Kind of like Bayrou didn't support Hollande, but said he would vote for him (without engaging his political party). Regarding Mediapart, they should have waited, not 5 years, but only seven days. Even Hollande said this (easy to say once the documents have already been published though). | ||
|
Geiko
France1939 Posts
On May 04 2012 21:13 ulan-bat wrote: Or it could be 5 millions instead of 50, then what? Or it could have been a maximum but Sarkozy didn't need it all. Or Mediapart was fooled by some informer and nothing happened at all. Who knows really? The only thing I believe is that Sarkozy has a hard time defending his position with facts, for now at least. He's all about trust, "really, you would believe this libyan more than me?". We'll see what the justice says. It's not 5 Millions, the document says 50 Millions, which is why it's most likely a fake. And yes, who knows ? So why publish it 7 days before an election if you know that this case won't be solved before this. It's a political act, by a political media to damage Sarkozy's image. At best it is true, yeaaah we got a scoop. At worse, it's a fake, but people will know that after the elections so we don't care, the damage to Sarkozy's image would have already been done. Sarkozy defends his positions with facts: Fact: The person who supposedly wrote the letter said it was a fake Fact: The person who supposedly received the letter said it was fake Fact: The current president of the transition gouverment of Lybia said it was fake. What has the other side got ? Takkieddine (who said he would vote for Hollande) said it's possible that it's not a fake. | ||
| ||
You can do better than that. Is that all that is left ? The media conspiracy ?
