France General Discussion

[Bunwahaha [still dunno why, but well, so be it]]

Julien Coupat is free!

PANIC OMG THE TERRORISTSZ IS FREE OMG PANIC

You're making some lipdub with Michelle Alliot Marie words? Lipdub is trendy nowadays...

[Bunwahaha [still dunno why, but well, so be it]]

Bayrou, you won't get my vote.

I'm not speaking about European elections, since I'm 16. Obviously I'm speaking about the only election who really counts for Bayrou : the 2012 presidential. I'm disappointed, terribly disappointed by his pathetic attacks against Cohn-Bendit. Cohn-Bendit is a great candidate, strongly socially liberal, but also intelligent, moderate and deeply european. He is leading a great and passionating campaign and his good performance in poll don't astonish me. If Monsieur Bayrou wants to be ahead of him, the only thing he has to do is doing a better campaign ( I don't know, for example, speaking about Europe instead of Sarkozy ? ). But no, he chose to attack in the stupidest and ugliest way he could : conspiracy theory and mud-digging personal attacks. I feel really stupid to have believed it could be honest : once again, Hashemite and co were right.

As I said in the thread on the campaign. I think that's Bayrou has for the first time clearly been in some bad populism during this debate. And I blame it for so. But, to me, compared to other ones, he's still the best for presidentials. The guy clearly made some bad, ugly, mistakes here but frankly Cohn Bendit is far to be a model concerning the fairness of debates, and his campaign that invites people to dance on the ruins of the world is nothing but a shame when it comes to a political proposition.

Frankly, personally, that's the French political class in its whole that I would blame personally.

[Bunwahaha [still dunno why, but well, so be it]]

Well, personally I won't go in this again, I said all what I had to say in the other thread.

But the bumping of this thread makes me thinking to speak about an other topic.

I just took the train today, a regional one, a "ter", between Castres and Toulouse. We're about 9h56 am, the thing is on time, not much people, a beautiful day is coming. Just fine, I go in the train. And what do I see in it? Well, on all the sits, at least all those of my wagon, there was a very nice flier of several pages which incited to you to invest your money in "nexity", the big real estate stuff. Well, I didn't know that the tax of citizens with which is paid the national railroad company was also here to serve the private interests of that company, or that's just a part of the "plan de relance" (our stimulus bill)?? I didn't think to ask the controller how these fliers came on here, if it was the railroad company who did it, or if it was a guy paid by nexity to do that from their own initiative.

Well, anyways, I have been a bit surprised...

[Bunwahaha [still dunno why, but well, so be it]]

An interessant article about what we discussed about some time ago, Sarkozy's attitude on secularism. See Marianne #634 page 37-39. Always interesting...
By the was, you can also follow the many articles of Charlie Hebdo, particularly those of Agathe André, Caroline Fourest and Fiammetta Venner. Bad news for secularism...

Please just note that these 3 are the climax of absolute laïcism... They are arch-"laïcardes" !

Would you say "bad news for values" just with articles from Valeurs Actuelles and Figaro-Magazine by François d'Orcival, Henry de Lesquen and Philippe de Villiers  ?

Unlikely, to say the least. So, take a more balanced viewpoint on the subject.

Sorry, could you explain me better what "laïcard" exactly means ? I didn't have the impression they were against the practice of religion in the private domain. So they are just secularists.

They write books on the INSIDE of religious organizations (I don't talk about sects, be careful), especially Catholic church, just in order to criticize and make trouble. The "inside", not the public life.
That's "laïcard".

The PRG is a secularist party, for example. Not a "laïcard" one.
Fourest is a "laïcarde", Venner also.

They might be "laïcard" as you say, they might critize some religious organizations but they do it in the perspective of defending their opinion, their point of view on such or such domain. I don't see in what this point of view would be less legitimate than an other one.

[Bunwahaha [still dunno why, but well, so be it]]

An interessant article about what we discussed about some time ago, Sarkozy's attitude on secularism. See Marianne #634 page 37-39. Always interesting...
By the was, you can also follow the many articles of Charlie Hebdo, particularly those of Agathe André, Caroline Fourest and Fiammetta Venner. Bad news for secularism...

Please just note that these 3 are the climax of absolute laïcism... They are arch-"laïcardes" !

Would you say "bad news for values" just with articles from Valeurs Actuelles and Figaro-Magazine by François d'Orcival, Henry de Lesquen and Philippe de Villiers  ?

Unlikely, to say the least. So, take a more balanced viewpoint on the subject.

Sorry, could you explain me better what "laïcard" exactly means ? I didn't have the impression they were against the practice of religion in the private domain. So they are just secularists.

They write books on the INSIDE of religious organizations (I don't talk about sects, be careful), especially Catholic church, just in order to criticize and make trouble. The "inside", not the public life.
That's "laïcard".

The PRG is a secularist party, for example. Not a "laïcard" one.
Fourest is a "laïcarde", Venner also.

They might be "laïcard" as you say, they might critize some religious organizations but they do it in the perspective of defending their opinion, their point of view on such or such domain. I don't see in what this point of view would be less legitimate than an other one.

Read again from the beginning.
Antonio wrote "bad news...".
I just wanted to say that articles by Fourest and Venner are NOT news, they are opinions and they are biased opinions.
An article by François d'Orcival on values is NOT news, it's a point of view.

And our discussion has taken another path, on the word "laïcard".
Fourest and Venner are not traditional secularists as the PRG, they are more than that: they fight religion even in the private sphere. So, their articles are all the more biased.

Yes, of course, they are biased, they are as biased as some Catholic points of view on such or such things, everyone is biased, in that sens there is no problem with their point of view, it is just different than yours.

After that, Antonio feared for secularism and you pointed out that he didn't have to fear for secularism following the biased views of the cited people, because they are what you call some "laïcards". So, let's say they are rather interested in defending what you would call "laïcardisme", once again, their point of view is just different than yours but is legitimate to exist. Something you may not contest, maybe you just wanted to make a difference between our traditional secularism, and something you would call "laïcardisme".

[Bunwahaha [still dunno why, but well, so be it]]

Anyways, I'm of the opinion that a local is somehow better than a metropolitan like Jégo (who was incompetent).

For Mitterrand, I'm willing to give him the benefit of the doubt. The only thing I know of him is the time he was a TV5, where he was decent if not boring.

Ow, ow, ow...

Here I disagree. First on Jégo. At the beginning of the conflict in Guadeloupe, I've been also thinking, what the hell this guy does here?? But events shew that in fact it was Fillon ( so, Sarkozy??) who totally messed up all the points there, and that Jégo just understood very well and very fast what was happening there, and he quickly gave the right solutions, the solutions that the govt finally approved after a big general strike that just give more strength to the movement of protests in the country (what a good management sirs Fillon and Sarko...) and some solutions which from the point of view of all the experts where the only one available and were legitimate. Jégo has been great there and people of Antilles liked him for his competences in this affair, we had with him a good guy for dealing with the social movements and who could have even given some force to the govt because of the psychological adavantage he had now the people of Antilles respected him... What a shame he is fired, was he too popular and thus unpleasant to Sarkozy?? Anyway, his firing is nothing but stupid.

And concerning Mitterand, Fredo, I'll agree with fab here. To me that guy in the govt is maybe a bigger mistake than Rachida Dati. The guy is mainly someone who love the provocation and who have a certain contempt for the popular culture, outside of the fact that I don't like this kind of things, at an epoch where the govt has to do nothing but to play low profile toward popular movement and culture, it is nothing but an error, to have him in the govt. Plus the guy has some references in the realm of the culture but he doesn't seem at all to be done for politics, if ever politics is still considered has being something serious. Anyways, on the both board, it's a mistake for me.

Concerning the rest of the new govt. Well, Chatel at Education Nationale? Isn't that a playground for the school and student unions?? Then, Darcos, he is a good guy for who I have enough consideration, but that same unions of school and students have put him a washing machine, he seems clearly burned, and he is asked to do what?? To deal with all the unions of the country now?? Hell! So good choices...

Then, well, other than that, I'm not sure that Hortefeux that would lead the same policy as the one of Sarkozy at ministry of interior is a good choice, not sure at all, a kind of policy of quotas and that give a big part to repression that I anyways disapprove.

Other than that, Alliot Marie at justice is better than Rachida Dati, for sure, but for me it's not a wonderful choice for this minister too. Ultimately I think Jospin would be a great minister of Justice, he has in the same time the rigidity of principles and some fair compassion, but well, Jospin minister in a Sarkozy's govt, we should be back to reality...

Other than that Rama Yade at sports and youth is very good I think. Seems also we still need a minister of indignation with Wauquiez... Then, Lemaire seems a good choice for one side of the agriculture realm, Brussels, but for the other side, speaking with workers of the agriculture I'm not sure such a technocrat is a good point, especially in our period. Then, well, we've sharkies like Apparu coming, why not, we'll see, I think that guy would have been a good spokesman of the govt and that Chatel worn out for this, he would have given some good energy.

Well, good luck to this govt, may it does good things, autumn could be hot.

[Bunwahaha [still dunno why, but well, so be it]]

Funny.

Difficult to translate for English speakers...

Hacking or would some Google developers be trying humor?

[Bunwahaha [still dunno why, but well, so be it]]

Ségolène Royal received, like other big French politicians before her a matter of time ago, a letter that threaten her of death, with a big bullet in it. Would she be that Machiavellian??

[Bunwahaha [still dunno why, but well, so be it]]

Some on the looney left seem to be certain that this was a media fabrication to boost his approval rating.

Haha. Who and what did you hear exactly about this?

[Bunwahaha [still dunno why, but well, so be it]]

Well, concerning the list:

Seems Lefebvre is no more sure since this week-end.
I would be surprised Tron accepts. Through, you never know.

Sarkozy, campaign 2007: I'll have a tiny team, 15 ministers maximum. We have now to finish with overcrowded governments...

Then, what I'll say on this govt won't be very original. The time where ministers had a real power is out with Sarkozy, definitely, seems the guys are really here just for medias, communication, real ideas and decisions coming from Elysée. Even if Mitterand was very directive I think he had still some strong ministers, who carried something in term of ideas, oppositely to Sarkozy.

[Bunwahaha [still dunno why, but well, so be it]]

Sarkozy, campaign 2007: I'll have a tiny team, 15 ministers maximum. We have now to finish with overcrowded governments...

Aha, he said ministers. He still has 15-16ish ministers, but IIRC, he never talked about secretaries of state! Mitterrand cabinets had a lot more Ministers (plus a lot of secretaries of state).

Héhé. Yes, yes. . That's why I added the second sentence he also said, the exact word he said in French was "pléthorique" IIRC, secretaries of state fall in this formula.

[Bunwahaha [still dunno why, but well, so be it]]

Yes, Mitterand impressed a lot, so influenced a lot.

Though I tend to think that the management you describe could fit with more or less all presidents, that are some classical political tactics, maybe practiced with more or less intuition and more or less success.

Other than that, yes, Sarkozy is the totally opposite of Mitterand. One was calm, stayed in the background and wanted to give some weight to his words when the other one is excited, wants to be inside the action, wants to do 100 things at the time and think that the words he pronounces are like some acts. One was from the book, the other one is from the TV. I'm curious to see the one who will be from the net.

[Bunwahaha [still dunno why, but well, so be it]]

Maybe a small secretary of state for the MPF soon... When I say that it's a Mitterrand-like government...

I would be very surprised it happens. The government is here for the image and De Villiers would be the hell of a wrong image. Plus for being in this government, you have to be liked by Sarkozy and to accept to be more or less a puppet of him, two other conditions that make the entry of De Villiers in the govt very unlikely.

Maybe a small secretary of state for the MPF soon... When I say that it's a Mitterrand-like government...

Horrible... I thought getting rid of Boutin meant finally stopping the social regression...

Who the hell cares? The MPF is irrelevant and always will be. It's not some Villiers hack who will influence government policy in the State Secretariat for Sewer Systems and Dog Catchers.

I know, but that make me feel very uncomfortable to see these people considered as "normal politicians" and people you can work with, and not as the crazy reactionnaries they are.

Boutin is reactionary but not crazy she just tries to apply her Christian views by political means (when the hell Christians will get that Christianity and politics are incompatible?...). You can disagree with her, what I do on such or such topics, you can dislike her behavior, what I do too, you can also think that to apply Christian principles the best and more logical way is out of politics, what I do too. But you can't say she's crazy. For Villiers...hmm...that's like Bush, such guys are funny as long as we don't give them something that has to see with some power...

[Bunwahaha [still dunno why, but well, so be it]]

And, Benoît, I've just refered to a small post for an MPF man, not for Villiers himself, of course not. Bruno Retailleau is a possible candidate.
Nobody would notice it !

Pardon if I misunderstood, ya, ya, a second knife can be possible.

As for Christians in politics, well, christianity isn't exactly only rules on sexuality...
The so-called "solidarité" -everybody has this word on theirs lips nowadays in France- is in fact an old Christian concept.
The same for the rule of law in working areas, for the respect of human, animal and natural life (I'm not talking about abortion), for the idea of respect.

Well, concerning Christianity in politics. I'm very aware that Christianity is not the caricature that some would like it to be. What I wanted to mean is that, in the teaching of his prophet, Christianity wouldn't be destined to make some politics, that are some teaching to be spread for the sake of the human being. I won't be very original by giving this quote of the Bible: "Give it back to Cesar what belongs to Cesar", which is my translation, I don't know if that's the same in the English Bible.

Islam is very coherent when it makes some politics, Christianity isn't.

Then, of course, the Christian principles can inspire some people who make some politics, their views views, their way to govern, but they should never act in the name of Christianity, they should never justify their act because of Christianity, because here they would break the basic principle that the Christ wanted to stay out of politics. That's all what I meant.

[Bunwahaha [still dunno why, but well, so be it]]

Villiers has just agreed to join a contact committee between parties of the presidential majority.

After his bad results in European elections, he's forced to rally the big party of the right.
It was the same after 1995 presidential election: he was indebted and then began his dependance on the RPR and on Pasqua especially. Pasqua even tried to swallow all the MPF in the RPF.

Maybe a small secretary of state for the MPF soon... When I say that it's a Mitterrand-like government...
(Bruno Retailleau, deputy of Vendée, was already about to enter the government in January, but Sarkozy stopped him at the last moment.)

Now, it's CPNT turn...

Its leader, Frédéric Nihous (a former RPR member), has just said there are talkings with Xavier Bertrand on CPNT joining the contact committee of the presidential majority.

It may be the end of this hunters' story in French elections, as South-West hunters, more on the left, won't follow.

And maybe a sad day for Hash !

CPNT...

Or how to give some content, and sometimes some relevant one, to some people who gather themselves before everything because they feel lost, afraid, and don't get a sh**t of what happens in the current world, and thus who are before everything here to give some voice to a kind of knee jerk conservatism from the countrysides... Though, as I said in the beginning, they succeeded to create a beautiful, and sometimes relevant, political display...

[Bunwahaha [still dunno why, but well, so be it]]

- There is one party that, surprisingly, has no "places" as Antonio says, this is the PRG, neither as a party of course (initial hesitating of Baylet in 2007 is really over: almost all of PRG members are really left people), nor through some figures (although Giacobbi and Schwartzenberg have recently been among the rumored future members of the government).

Oh, PRG...

Actually, they are nothing but an old-fashioned thing, a beautiful speech but not slightest energy behind. PRG is Baylet, and Baylet seems to be nothing but the King of Tarn-et-Garonne and of La Dépêche du Midi (a big regional paper of the south-west).

- Now, for DLR, it led a small campaign for the European elections. And most of its campaigning consists in media blitz appearances of Dupont-Aignan himself. So, it doesn't cost much !
And being a parliamentarian and a mayor, he has some means to act... maybe on the edge of irregularity, but anyway regularly, as many French politicians have learnt to do.

And now that MPF specificity will fade, DLR may have a small opportunity to grasp Villiers' former media time, as the only "true" opposition from the right.
So, DLR won't join the UMP.

No, no, Dupont-Aignan is clearly out of date, even fans of De Gaulle, who would vote for him, wouldn't believe in him at all. He seems to be also a kind of small Bayrou, he believes in him, no matter the rest, in worst, more passionate than Bayrou, and oppositely to Bayrou, I think he wouldn't even have like him a small clan of passionate fans around him. Then, he can't work on Villiers' ground, Villiers clearly works on xenophobic feelings and on a strong social conservatism, Dupont-Aignan doesn't.

- And, in a way, some wings inside the UMP are sidelined indise the majority....
See the old or middle-old "chiraquiens" (Raffarin, Perben, Baroin, Jacob,...) and, of course, "villepinistes" (Tron, Mariton,...).

That's a pity in the case of Baroin, but I think Sarkozy wants to let "chiraquiens" fade away... And, tactically, he may be right:
Gaymard is out, after a (silly) scandal of appartment,
Dutreil has left politics after his defeat in Reims,
Robien is out after his defeat in Amiens,
Perben has weakened himself in Lyons,
Raffarin is out-of-date (and there's the easy argument of having Bussereau, the only "raffariniste", inside the govenrment)
Ollier can be kept outside with the easy argument that Alliot-Marie, with whom he lives, is inside,
Baroin is forgotten by French people (all the more now that he doesn't live any longer with Marie Drucker, a good-looking TV anchor and daughter of the big media family of the Druckers... and when a politician isn't "inside" the media business any longer, it's a big impediment !).

Apart from Albanel (already out and not threatening politically),
Sarkozy has only "saved" the former juppéistes: Woerth, Bertrand, Apparu, Jégo (but he's now outside the government...).

Pécresse, Falco, Joyandet were real "chiraquiens", but they have rallied Sarkozy early (even before Xavier Bertrand) and well served during the presidential campaign.
And they are local biggies (Falco and Joyandet) or want to become one (Pécresse: BTW, if she loses in 2010 in Ile-de-France, Sarkozy will drop her without hesitating more than a half second, you'll see...).

You spoke about the real opposition on the right with Dupont-Aignant, according to what I said I disagree with that.

Yes, for me the real opposition on the right can come from...Villepin. For me he is the only one who has the energy and the real will to fight against Sarkozy, and you surely saw that he already did, and strongly for someone from the right. Plus he is the only one who would have the strongest network. Yes, as we can see Sarkozists are not that numerous, most of people are chiraquiens, some like Bertrand or Pécresse really converted, but I think that a big number could change if they felt the wind changing. And Villepin can anyways count on his 3 strong supports that are Tron, Mariton and Goulard, these guys can become very strong I think if they have the opportunity. Mariton is a real sniper, Tron is a bit too much of a fan but he can be useful and Goulard has the image of someone serious and efficient. This is for the close guard, and throughout all chiraquiens that could rally him, I think Villepin could find a strong support with Baroin (IMO, Villepin is the only possibility of future for Baroin), and also with...Raffarin, both have been clearly sidelined by Sarkozy but both are strong, and if Villepin has a dynamics around him he could count on that both I think.

In short, the biggest danger for Sarkozy in the years to come is Villepin, and personally, in a run with even Strauss Kahn I could vote for him in presidentials I think, Strauss Kahn is too much a technician, it is not an "homme d'état" (way to refer to a man who is able to lead a state) IMO.

rofl. Who's next? The PS?

Those who could come already did.

Only NPA has not ( yet ) one or two places.

Haha. Please, the "yet" has clearly not its place here. For sure. NPA.

[Bunwahaha [still dunno why, but well, so be it]]

Héhé. Not to mention I expected seeing such remarks on Villepin...

Ok, we're in France now, and in France, today, pardon but it's hard to find a decent leader. The only reasonable one, Strauss Kahn, is not, IMO, fit to be at the head of a state.

We have also to deal with great leaders, so with people you have to expect they are a bit particular.

Also, leading a nation is a lot of story telling, differences are between those who are sincere, those who are not and those who are more or less, and those who tend to be "crazy".

For me Villepin, no matter what others could think, would rather be a "more or less". His lyricism has nothing shocking for a big political leader, they all are, and at least I feel he is a bit more sincere and realist than Sarkozy when he goes in lyricism (should I remind the "sacrifice to the nation" of Guy Moquet, the jew child of the holocaust for each French pupil, the "politics of civilization", damn that is all some stupid and pointless lyricism, just because the guy is persuaded his ideas are wonderful, he thinks he should allow himself to throw it like that).

Ok, Bayrou has something like that too, but I still find him more decent than Sarkozy in this realm, the same for Villepin. Then, Royal...should I really speak about her? I put her in "tend to be crazy".

Then, among all leaders, I'll go for Villepin and Bayrou. Héhé, I know it may doesn't play for me here.

Yes, Villepin has 2 big problems, CPE and Clearstream. Hmm, CPE, he could come, apologizing, saying it was an error, "that the crisis helped him to see clear now", something like that. Clearstream, it's 50/50, either he loses and he's politically dead, either he doesn't, and...everything is possible. Actually have you seen the energy he puts in media for a come back. The guy knows whether or not he is innocent, and the slightest we can say it is that he feels very confident. So, we'll see.

And, on the right, there is nothing but Villepin according to me, as a credible opposition, he is the only one able to stand against Sarkozy, Copé is too weak against a Villepin, plus, he wouldn't dare challenging Sarkozy that early, he would be afraid of it I think, Copé is a wonderful speecher and sniper in debates but that's all, the guy is really weak politically.

And concerning big Villepin followers, Tron, Goulard, Mariton, sure they are not known, but today media recognition isn't a problem. It isn't a problem in the sens it can go very fast (who the hell knew Christianne Kelly before? and in a few days...). The only point is to be good and efficient and to be in a dynamics. These 3 can be very good I think.

Anyways we'll see what happens, but, actually, in case of big problems for Sarkozy (damn he will have to fight swine flu in autumn, the thing that would be his best ally against a social crisis ), if the guy found him in real big difficulties, before the elections or when the elections will come, what are the alternatives?

Villepin, Bayrou, Royal, Besancenot.

The only decent card would be Strauss Kahn, if ever he succeeds in overcoming its technocrat attitude, we never know...

[Bunwahaha [still dunno why, but well, so be it]]

France general discussion...

WTF... It's hot nowadays...

Several days at about 37C here... And they announce it to continue until Thursday...

Just shut inside all the day.

[Bunwahaha [still dunno why, but well, so be it]]

Concerning polls:

I'm always surprised to see Kouchner regularly high. Damn.

Then, let's note that Besancenot has still a bit less than a majority of unfavorable.

And concerning the PM, thanks for the data, but actually, since the Sarkozy's system, PM data don't really matter anymore.

Hachémite veut parler français dans ce sujet.

Tiens donc, alors tu parles français?

[Bunwahaha [still dunno why, but well, so be it]]

Non; mon français est horrible. J'use Wiktionnaire.

I did not know Wikitionnaire/Wikitionnary, that said, I don't have the wiki reflex generally speaking, thanks, that can be good for some stuffs, though I find it a bit messy, not enough convenient in its form, but the content seems good.

You can also try reverso.net, that's what I use when I need help, in its French version, I find their form convenient and their content enough rich.

[Bunwahaha [still dunno why, but well, so be it]]

The PS and the left is still bitching amongst each other about primaries and alliances. Mélenchon is pissed off about the talk of a PS-Green-MoDem alliance and continues to act like a jerk. And he also hates the Italian PD a whole lot, calling them a right-wing party and pretending as if there are no left-wingers in the Italian Parliament. He favours an alliance between the Left Front and the NPA in the first round, everywhere, and then runoff alliances. But he's quite livid about an alliance with the "centre". The PS seems close to adopting the idea of a primary in 2012, but a large-scale primary similar to the primaries in Italy in 2005 and 2007.

First, on primaries. Since the night of Euros elections, I think this is the only way for PS not to be shot by Greens, and maybe even to eat Greens. The Greens' dynamic is strong, and it's a very trendy one, they have an actual political content to come with, when the PS continues to stick on an accumulation of small ridiculous chiefs with an old rhetoric who seem not to be able to go beyond "we have to find a new project...". By these primaries, PS could integrate this Green dynamic and make it playing for them. Though, that's a double edged sword, if Greens come with a strong candidate, and if this one wins! Bubye PS... I tend to think that the results of these primaries would anyways lead to the creation of a new political movement/party on the left, like the UMP on the right, and the one who will win these primaries would give the dominating color of this new party (Pink, Green, or Orange if ever Bayrou runs it, which would surprise me). Anyways, all talks about this will make more sense after the results of 2010 regionals' results, they are a big stake I think. Last news about this primaries: my France24 widget just said that Aubry would agree with it, seems it's ok now, it will go that way.

Concerning far-left. I think Mélenchon should wake up and figure out that Besancenot and him are not on the same ship. NPA plays, and will always privilege the pavement IMO, something which is logical given it seems to be the only way for them to do something, to provoke a ballot by the pavement, this is my opinion anyways, and that's not the first time I expose it. Seems that Mélenchon is just dreaming on a new "Gauche plurielle", with him as a charismatic man, he's logical to bitch on the fact that centrist forces would be present in primaries, that would condemn him in these ones, while he could have chances to do something in it without it.

Well, anyways, all of this to me is still suspended to the economical situation, and that speedy recovering doesn't really convince me, according to what we can hear from here and there seems that people didn't really got a lesson of what happened and continue the old methods to catch some fast track benefits by any means. In case of a new krach there all these analyzes could be wiped out, in this case, I maintain that at least a big political mess is possible here, and the far-left who bet on the pavement could be ahead of the scene. Though, as I always said that's an extreme scenario, for an extreme economical situation. But, even if we don't know an other krach soon, still seems to me that the political situation could be hot, yes, people seeing the economy recovering very fast, seeing all these massive bonuses, and them unemployed, that remains an explosive situation, but I couldn't say the size of this explosion. A big come back of swine flu would be IMO the only mean to avoid something. Though that's also a double edge sword, if media and politics go too much on worrying people and if nothing happens, then people could go on "they worried us to divert our attention from the big problems" and so on.

A last parameter would be imo to be taken in consideration for what could happen in the home situation, the international situation, not the hottest one, but one to keep in mind I think. Personally, I can't help stopping to think that this new military base in Abu Dhabi could have important consequences for us if ever the situation became geopolitically hot for Iran, and in each Israeli speech it's clear that for them the striking option is clearly on the table. Adding to this that Ahmadinejad and Sarkozy seem to clearly be in a psychological confrontation, declaration after declaration, Sarkozy psychologically becoming more or the less the western "cow-boy" since the departure of Bush, compared to other western leaders.

Well, we'll see...

[Bunwahaha [still dunno why, but well, so be it]]

http://www.lemonde.fr/politique/article/2009/09/11/qu-a-vraiment-dit-brice-hortefeux_1238863_823448.html#ens_id=1238747 (the 2nd video of the page)

The big polemic in France this times, in this video, Brice Hortefeux, the current Home Minister, would have some kind of racism statements, he demented, but actually when you watch the stuff, his explication is a bit...weird.

Anyways, no matter whether he actually spoke of Arabs or not, the bad is done. Sarkozy had "karcher"  and "racailles", Hortefeux will have this. This govt didn't really need that...

[Bunwahaha [still dunno why, but well, so be it]]

Surprise, surprise, it's the Vichyist.

Haha. Didn't think about that...

[Bunwahaha [still dunno why, but well, so be it]]

Well, the point being that personally I think that we wouldn't have seen that fast growing up of MoDem (about 60,000 adherents within a few weeks, that's something) if it had been something ideological, so I don't put into the fact that the MoDem is the place of the "real centrism" and of some "real centrists". (come on, will you now believe the story telling of Bayrou??! ). Yes, the guy comes up with "I'm the real center" blahblahblah, but that's nothing but some story telling... As I've always said, that guy may be the most interesting political leader we have today in terms of reflexion (may people watch some interviews of him by some interesting journalists to see it), and that's why I keep supporting him, but he's more and more the hell of a wrong politician, unluckily. (though, if I can recognize some qualities in him, that's just compared to others, of course, I can't make an ideal of this guy...).

To me, the fast growing of MoDem and the main part of its adherents is mainly some people who were fed up with the knee jerking of both parties and who found in Bayrou someone decently smart as a man who could represent something new in politics, screwing the old used borders, that's imo what was MoDem and its speedy growth during 2007 presidentials and shortly after. It very quickly had some importance and then, it had to live, and here began the problems...

In short the fact that, even if this guy can be interesting, he most of all thinks to "him as president" and tries to elaborate all strategies mostly in order to make win the great guy he surely thinks he could be for this country, instead of trying to make live a movement of people around some ideas (may he be reassured, he is not the only one to do that, it's just that there uses to be only 2 chairs for this game, and both are taken, so he "galère" (means it's hard for him, familial expression)). And like he galère to this game, and like until now he said "I said want be a 3rd chair" but didn't clarify with what he would build his chair he goes from loss to loss (maybe this tending to make him think that if everything is against him, he may be right, "The Chosen" complex...). And I would be very surprised that all these people who saw something new and interesting in him in 2007 and a bit after are still interested by him now. I really think Greens made a big coup on his electors with the euros, some still resting in MoDem, and the rest going to, yes, Jean Arthuis style for the rebirth of UDF (eh! do this man knows that it's useless to try to make relive something?? nah nah, nothing personal, just a , really) and well, yes, NC. If I had to be asked, I'd say that MoDem has at big maximum 40% of center-right, all the rest I'd see it as some center-left, the guy has clearly a leftist sensibility/attitude.

So, well, all of this surely makes him leaving his "extreme center" blahblah talk to "two sides one" now... (will he one day be aware that he just had to expose a clear project of society, a clear direction, instead of losing himself in poor strategies, well maybe, and that's what i think he just doesn't have one...). That would suit with the fact that I said earlier that he could come in primaries, if so, we wouldn't have finished to see him "manger son chapeau" ("eating his hat", I let those interested try to find what it means...), but well, that remains very possible.

These primaries are a big stake for the future of the PS, and of all the left in France, from center-left to NPA, NPA excluded, I still believe in the creation of a big movement coming from these primaries (which would be pink-green-orange, but I still wouldn't be able to say what would be the major color). These primaries will depend a lot of regionals. These regionals seem more and more to come as a big stake, for the left, and for the right too.

To finish, because it was question of where would go the "real centrists". Well, to answer,  Bayrou almost got it. The "Left/Right stuff" is effectively screwed, but not totally. It's screwed in terms of ideology, but it remains valid in terms of attitude. Emotions replacing ideas. That's why that's funny to see all these small clubs who still "think" like Jean Artuis, Robert Hue, while what really matters in politics now has gone far from it. And that's why I think we shouldn't analyze politics of today too much in terms of ideas displayed, rather in terms of attitudes... We have on one side those who keep thinking that politics is mainly ideas, on the other side those who well got it mainly  turned itself into emotions today. Just hope some things like what the Greens could represent when they are good, but not only that, would grow...

[Bunwahaha [still dunno why, but well, so be it]]

In short I personally think that in France today it is:

Who will put the hand on the left side of this country? Pure, simple and period. And all this agitation is this.