Hillary = France? GOP election strategy

[stonecutter]

Somewhat entertaining. It's time for a detente....


http://www.salon.com/opinion/feature/2007/05/04/france/index.html

"Hillary equals France"

I hate to sink the GOP's toy boat, but it was the French who inspired the U.S. Constitution, a document written by geniuses so it could be followed by idiots.

By Bill Maher

May 4, 2007 | New Rule: Conservatives have to stop rolling their eyes every time they hear the word France. Like just calling something French is the ultimate argument winner. "Aw, you want a healthcare system that covers everybody and costs half as much? You mean like they have in France? What's there to say about a country that was too stupid to get on board with our wonderfully conceived and brilliantly executed war in Iraq?"

Earlier this year, the Boston Globe got hold of an internal campaign document from GOP contender Mitt Romney, and a recurring strategy was to tie Democrats to the hated French. It said, in the Machiavellian code of the election huckster, "Hillary equals France," and it envisioned bumper stickers that read, "First, not France."

Except for one thing: We're not first. America isn't ranked anywhere near first in anything except military might and snotty billionaires. The country that is ranked No. 1 in healthcare, for example, is France. The World Health Organization ranks America at 37 in the world -- not two, or five -- 37, in between Costa Rica and Slovenia, which are both years away from discovering dentistry.

Yet an American politician could not survive if he or she uttered the simple, true statement, "France has a better healthcare system than us, and we should steal it." Because here, simply dismissing an idea as French passes for an argument. John Kerry? Can't vote for him -- he looks French. Yeah, as opposed to the other guy, who just looked stupid.

I know, if God had wanted us to learn from the Enlightenment, he wouldn't have given us Sean Hannity.

And I'm not saying France is better than America. Because I assume you've already figured that out by now. I don't want to be French, I just want to take what's best from the French. Stealing, for your own self-interest -- Republicans should love this idea. Taking what's best from the French: You know who else did that? The Founding Fathers. Hate to sink your toy boat, Fox News, but the Founding Fathers, the ones you say you revere, were children of the French Enlightenment, and fans of it, and they turned it into a musical called the Constitution of the United States. And they did a helluva job, so good it has been said that it was written by geniuses so it could be run by idiots. But the current administration is putting that to the test. The Founding Fathers were erudite, well-read, European-thinking aristocrats -- they would have had nothing in common with, and no use for, an ill-read xenophobic bumpkin like George W. Bush.

The American ideas of individuality, religious tolerance and freedom of speech came directly out of the French Enlightenment -- but, shhh, don't tell Alabama. Voltaire wrote "men are born equal" before Jefferson was wise enough to steal it.

Countries are like people -- they tend to get smarter as they get older. Noted military genius Donald Rumsfeld famously dismissed France as part of Old Europe, but the French are ... what's the word I'm looking for? Oh yeah, "mature." We think they're rude and snobby, but maybe that's because they're talking to us.

For example, France just had an election, and people over there approach an election differently. They vote. Eighty-five percent turned out. The only thing 85 percent of Americans ever voted on was Sanjaya.

Maybe the high turnout has something to do with the fact that the French candidates are never asked where they stand on evolution, prayer in school, abortion, stem cell research or gay marriage. And if the candidate knows about a character in a book other than Jesus, it's not a drawback. There is no Pierre Six-pack who can be fooled by childish wedge issues. And the electorate doesn't vote for the guy they want to have a croissant with. Nor do they care about the candidate's private lives: In the current race, Ségolène Royal has four kids but never bothered to get married. And she's a socialist. In America, if a Democrat even thinks you're calling him a liberal he immediately grabs an orange vest and a rifle and heads into the woods to kill something.

The conservative candidate is married, but he and his wife live apart and lead separate lives. They aren't asked about it in the media, and the people are OK with it, for the same reason the people are OK with **** beaches: because they're not a nation of 6-year-olds who scream and giggle if they see pee-pee parts. They have weird ideas about privacy. They think it should be private. In France, everyone has a mistress. Even mistresses have mistresses. To not have a lady on the side says to the voters, "I'm no good at multitasking."

France has its faults -- the country has high unemployment, a nasty immigrant problem and all that ridiculous accordion music. But its healthcare is the best, it's not dependent on Mideast oil, it has the lowest poverty rate and the lowest income-inequality rate among industrialized nations, and it's the greenest, with the lowest carbon dumping and the lowest electricity bill.

France has 20,000 miles of railroads that work. We have the trolley at the mall that takes you from Pottery Barn to the Gap. It has bullet trains. We have bullets. France has public intellectuals. We have Dr. Phil. And France invented *** during the day, the ménage à trois, lingerie and the tongue.

And the French are not fat. Can't we just admit we could learn something from them?

[Atlantic Friend]

Cripes ! References to France set aside, the guy has a vitriolic pen. It's a wonder people do not assault him everyday and twice on holydays.

[Merfeller]

I read until I saw "Bill Maher."

[[WDW]Megaraptor]

I hate to sink the GOP's toy boat, but it was the French who inspired the U.S. Constitution, a document written by geniuses so it could be followed by idiots.
Bill Maher needs a :bash: and a :bash: and another :bash: just for blatant re-writing of history.

France in 1787 was ruled by Louis XVI, who certainly didn't believe that all men were created equal.

The main inspirations of America's founding fathers were:
1) Colonial traditions of freedom and limited government stretching back almost 200 years (no Thomas Jefferson and Ben Franklin did not invent American democracy).
2) English common law, democratic principles and the Magna Carta (England at that time was just about the world's only democracy).
3) The Bible.
4) The ancient Roman Republic.
5) John Locke and other English philosophers.
6) Voltaire and any other French philosophers would be down here if at all.

[Hollis]

I read until I saw "Bill Maher."


2X..........................................

I hope some people take up Atlantic Friends suggestions too, in a verbal sort of way.

[mas-36]

"Hillary = France" makes as much sense as saying "Romney = Germany 1939"

I thought Maher's comments were amusing. I am most surprised to notice that many on the French left have awakened to the fact that it no longer makes any sense for the Left to be anti-American and it obviously doesn't automatically win an election for you.

The American Right on the other hand, have yet to demonstrate that their capable of running a coherent platform without having to invoke anti-French bigotry.
Some simply refuse to grow up.

[Atlantic Friend]

Megaraptor;2482449']Bill Maher needs a :bash: and a :bash: and another :bash: just for blatant re-writing of history.

France in 1787 was ruled by Louis XVI, who certainly didn't believe that all men were created equal.

The main inspirations of America's founding fathers were:
1) Colonial traditions of freedom and limited government stretching back almost 200 years (no Thomas Jefferson and Ben Franklin did not invent American democracy).
2) English common law, democratic principles and the Magna Carta (England at that time was just about the world's only democracy).
3) The Bible.
4) The ancient Roman Republic.
5) John Locke and other English philosophers.
6) Voltaire and any other French philosophers would be down here if at all.

Actually there's a rather thorough debate over who influenced whom at the Salon.com website, as people commented Maher's article at great lengths.

[angry cow]

At least OUR democracy has managed to continue functioning without rewriting since 1787, where as the French are on their what? 5th try?

[muck]

I read until I saw "Bill Maher."

I don't know who he is, but indeed he won't convince anyone when fighting populistic and polemic behaviour with a populistic polemic. That mistake is repeatedly done in these days.

[futurepilot2004]

At least OUR democracy has managed to continue functioning without rewriting since 1787,

Apart from the 27 amendments of course.

[2Sheds_Jackson]

Maher tries for the kind brilliant sardonic wit that Bill Murray has down to a science, but he just comes off as a petulant nag. He sneers out an endless litany of complaints and easy one-liners...with truth taking a back seat to the opportunity to get a laugh. Is he supposed to be taken seriously or not? If not, why is anybody paying attention?

Let's take a look at a couple of his assertions in here;


France has its faults -- the country has high unemployment, a nasty immigrant problem and all that ridiculous accordion music. But its healthcare is the best, it's not dependent on Mideast oil, it has the lowest poverty rate and the lowest income-inequality rate among industrialized nations, and it's the greenest, with the lowest carbon dumping and the lowest electricity bill.

Does Bill go to France to have his medical work done? No, I bet he doesn't. France is as dependent on Mideast oil as the rest of us are - they don't exist in a bubble. France may be "green", but I'd venture to say that's because they're shipping their factory work (and lots of jobs) to China...who is probably the least green one could imagine. And that low electricity bill is courtesy of a power grid that's 80% nuclear - would Bill support the US doing the same thing?

And yeah Bill, I voted against Kerry just because he looks French. I so hate people who look French, whatever that is.

-gah, the guy can't even be intellectually honest within his own ranting. Why has he got a column, or a show, or anything?

[muck]

And yeah Bill, I voted against Kerry just because he looks French. I so hate people who look French, whatever that is.

So I bet you also eat freedom fries instead of french fries...? Hating them, for what reason if I may ask?

[Martel]

I so hate people who look French, whatever that is.
oh really ...

[Abolith]

oh really ...

So I bet you also eat freedom fries instead of french fries...? Hating them, for what reason if I may ask?


2sheds was doing a little thing call SARCASM.. check it out sometime it's really fun. ;)

[foxtrot023]

oh really ...

he also hates people that are left handed but pose as right handed :roll:

[muck]

2sheds was doing a little thing call SARCASM.. check it out sometime it's really fun. ;)
I bought that statement. To do it more obvious he should try, just to avert any suspicions of being a dumb and ignorant French-hater. p-)

[Skutatos]

Hillary=France doesn't make sense...and Im a republican. This is the stupidest thing I have ever heard.

[angry cow]

People were just pissed at France because the French are easy to blame. The vast majority of Americans are way past it and if the Republicans really think it will help them to equate Hillary and France, they are so out of touch I will happily change my vote.

Besides, France just elected a pro-American conservative who likes to ride horses on his ranch, give them a break.

[Sharp]

french SS (Social Security) is not good anymore.

they are giving free **** (understand bad/reduced products) so that you have to paid the medicals product yourself if you want to get the good one and be healthly.

at least if i had to choose i would choose the usa cuz you still can find a job.

[[WDW]Megaraptor]

This anti French stuff is so 2003 for most people...

[pistol]

Megaraptor;2482449']Bill Maher needs a :bash: and a :bash: and another :bash: just for blatant re-writing of history.

France in 1787 was ruled by Louis XVI, who certainly didn't believe that all men were created equal.

The main inspirations of America's founding fathers were:
1) Colonial traditions of freedom and limited government stretching back almost 200 years (no Thomas Jefferson and Ben Franklin did not invent American democracy).
2) English common law, democratic principles and the Magna Carta (England at that time was just about the world's only democracy).
3) The Bible.
4) The ancient Roman Republic.
5) John Locke and other English philosophers.
6) Voltaire and any other French philosophers would be down here if at all.

This is neo-con revisionist garbage. John Adams, Thomas Jefferson, and Benjamin Franklin all spent time in France. Maybe you've heard of "Separation of Powers". Did James Madison come up with that all by himself? No, the idea of independent executive, legislative, and judiciary branches of government were originally put forth by Baron de La Brède et de Montesquieu, an important political thinker during the Enlightenment (which by the way started way before the 1787 date you threw out above). If you had even taken 5 minutes on Wikipedia before pulling the "main inspirations of America's founding fathers" out of thin air, you would have known this. Here, I'll do it for you (http://www.google.com/search?q=%22Montesquieu%27s+triparate+system%22&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a).

[Ratamacue]

To do it more obvious he should try,Speak like Yoda, you do.

[muck]

Speak like Yoda, you do.

p-) Very tired, I am. Leaving these forums soon, I will.


People were just pissed at France because the French are easy to blame. The vast majority of Americans are way past it and if the Republicans really think it will help them to equate Hillary and France, they are so out of touch I will happily change my vote.

Besides, France just elected a pro-American conservative who likes to ride horses on his ranch, give them a break.

Quoted for Truth, also the situation in the United States does not affect me. I wondered all the time where this aversion would come from since although Germany refused it's following into the war but wasn't that unpopular as France was.

[Sharp]

the USA only learn respect from the ones they fight.
and since they never fight with the french ...

[2Sheds_Jackson]

People were just pissed at France because the French are easy to blame.

It's easy to blame the dog for somebody farting in the TV room. IMHO there's a whole lot more traction for blaming the French government over Iraq. One could start with their cozy arrangement with Saddam, their manipulation of the oil-for-food program (with ex French g-men working with Saddam's regime, and reportedly keeping the French government advised), and then the bait & switch over the UNSC WMD vote. That's what I blamed them for, not just because it was "easy".

This would all be water under the bridge - and completely dismiss-able as everyday national me-first-ism...except that Americans are still dying in Iraq. We did precisely as we said we would do, and voted exactly as we said we would vote. Had the UNSC held firm, there would have been no need to invade at all - and we wouldn't be in this mess. It was a gamble on all sides that failed for everybody.

Germany took some heat, but not as much as France...becase Germany did as Germany said it would do from the beginning - and France destroyed any chance of a united front when it stated it could under no conditions support force to uphold the cease-fire conditions (which was 180º out of phase with their position just 15 minutes before).

Hey, I don't hate France, or the French - they're entitled to do what they want. But I don't have to like what happened. I find that it doesn't serve anybody's interests to generate an alternate reality where everything is rosy and nice. I think the time has definitely come to move on...and it's pretty dumb to still be dredging this up as a political device.


This is neo-con revisionist garbage. John Adams, Thomas Jefferson, and Benjamin Franklin all spent time in France. Maybe you've heard of "Separation of Powers". Did James Madison come up with that all by himself? No, the idea of independent executive, legislative, and judiciary branches of government were originally put forth by Baron de La Brède et de Montesquieu, an important political thinker during the Enlightenment (which by the way started way before the 1787 date you threw out above). If you had even taken 5 minutes on Wikipedia before pulling the "main inspirations of America's founding fathers" out of thin air, you would have known this. Here, I'll do it for you (http://www.google.com/search?q=%22Montesquieu%27s+triparate+system%22&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a).

Fair enough, but he's not wrong, he's simply not giving credit where you think it's due. Baron de La Brède et de Montesquieu is not France - he's one guy...who evidently was voted into Baron-hood by a majority of the voters? :)

[Macs.]

I wondered all the time where this aversion would come from since although Germany refused it's following into the war but wasn't that unpopular as France was.

"Punish France, ignore Germany and forgive Russia." p-)

[Rictor]

This would all be water under the bridge - and completely dismiss-able as everyday national me-first-ism...except that Americans are still dying in Iraq. We did precisely as we said we would do, and voted exactly as we said we would vote. Had the UNSC held firm, there would have been no need to invade at all - and we wouldn't be in this mess. It was a gamble on all sides that failed for everybody.

Had he jury only voted in my favour, there would have been no need for me to track down the defendant and get in to a fist-fight with him, thereby causing me horrible injury. They're to blame for my suffering by not producing a verdict which was sufficiently in my favour.

[NeedsABetterName]

Had he jury only voted in my favour, there would have been no need for me to track down the defendant and get in to a fist-fight with him, thereby causing me horrible injury. They're to blame for my suffering by not producing a verdict which was sufficiently in my favour.

Is this the same jury that did a 180, going from finding you not guity to guilty, life, no chance at parole? Just curious.

[2Sheds_Jackson]

Is this the same jury that did a 180, going from finding you not guity to guilty, life, no chance at parole? Just curious.

heh heh. Yeah, and it's not exactly the best analogy. More like if the DA and the defendant worked out a plea bargain in exchange for his testimony - the DA signs the papers to dismiss the charges then the guy gets on the stand and delivers entirely different testimony than was agreed on. I'd say the DA had a right to be slightly miffed as the guy walked out the front door.

[NeedsABetterName]

heh heh. Yeah, and it's not exactly the best analogy. More like if the DA and the defendant worked out a plea bargain in exchange for his testimony - the DA signs the papers to dismiss the charges then the guy gets on the stand and delivers entirely different testimony than was agreed on. I'd say the DA had a right to be slightly miffed as the guy walked out the front door.

I don't think that far with a beer in my hand.

[9mmRifle]

France is as dependent on Mideast oil as the rest of us are - they don't exist in a bubble.

No, they've got a sh't load of Nuke power plants in France, in other words they don't just burn oil to produce electricity and nations like Sweden plan on becoming oil free
http://www.militaryphotos.net/forums/showthread.php?t=72015

[Macs.]

No, they've got a sh't load of Nuke power plants in France, in other words they don't just burn oil to produce electricity and nations like Sweden plan on becoming oil free
http://www.militaryphotos.net/forums/showthread.php?t=72015

Oil is used for aaaaaaaaallllooooooot of more things than electricity...

[Ratamacue]

Oil is used for aaaaaaaaallllooooooot of more things than electricity...If I remember correctly from research I did last semester, oil is barely used for electricity production at all--almost all of it goes towards heating and vehicle fuel.

[Rictor]

heh heh. Yeah, and it's not exactly the best analogy. More like if the DA and the defendant worked out a plea bargain in exchange for his testimony - the DA signs the papers to dismiss the charges then the guy gets on the stand and delivers entirely different testimony than was agreed on. I'd say the DA had a right to be slightly miffed as the guy walked out the front door.

As far as I can recall, and I admit I may be wrong on this one, France never agreed to the use of force. When the US went from merely demanding inspections to demanding war, it's understandable that they would fail to support the new, radically different, platform. The point is that asking the UNSC for a judgement on the matter is implicitly recognizing their authority to decide. They do not serve as a rubber-stamp court, there only to legitimize actions which would have been taken anyway.

Whichever reason you choose to accept for France's threat to veto the resolution - corruption, a peaceful disposition, spite, rabid unrelenting anti-Americanism - the fact remains that at no point did the UNSC authorize a war, much less an occupation. If it came down to a straight vote, not even accounting for vetos, China, Russia and France were against, the US and UK were for.

[[WDW]Megaraptor]

This is neo-con revisionist garbage. John Adams, Thomas Jefferson, and Benjamin Franklin all spent time in France. Maybe you've heard of "Separation of Powers". Did James Madison come up with that all by himself? No, the idea of independent executive, legislative, and judiciary branches of government were originally put forth by Baron de La Brède et de Montesquieu, an important political thinker during the Enlightenment (which by the way started way before the 1787 date you threw out above). If you had even taken 5 minutes on Wikipedia before pulling the "main inspirations of America's founding fathers" out of thin air, you would have known this. Here, I'll do it for you (http://www.google.com/search?q=%22Montesquieu%27s+triparate+system%22&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a).

Yes I know 3 of the Founding Fathers spent time in France.

You seem to be under the impression that these men invented American democracy...American democracy existed long before Montesquieu, Franklin, Voltaire, Jefferson etc were even born.

[BMF_EOD]

Your average American anti-French armchair general pisses me off. Tonight as you type on your computer French servicemen are in more than a few ****holes supporting OEF. That's right they are doing good things in Afghanistan and Africa while you sip a cold brew and wax your crank. They are having guys get killed or injured - rarely even receiving coverage in the US press. I worked hand in hand with them risking their necks to help us get the job done. It's hard for me to hold a grudge about their leadership when the men I worked with (Trepel & De Montfort) were some of the finest soldiers I've met. .

Hating the French people for their governments position on Iraq is about as stupid as Europeans hating Americans because of their president....oh but wait....

BTW- Bill Maher is a "ratings guy". He's never worked a real job in his life and is about as entertaining as a vasectomy. Every time I read his crap I feel just a little bit dumber.

[mas-36]

Megaraptor;2484335']American democracy existed long before Montesquieu, Franklin, Voltaire, Jefferson etc were even born.

I'd like to know how American democracy existed before America became independent of UK.

[loganinkosovo]

Hillary has always equated to the Anti-Christ in a smelly polyester pants suit and always will.

http://www.strangepolitics.com/images/content/125120.jpg

[muck]

:cantbeli:

[Atlantic Friend]

At least OUR democracy has managed to continue functioning without rewriting since 1787, where as the French are on their what? 5th try?

You seem to confuse changing the Constitution and changing the democratic nature of the regime here.

[Atlantic Friend]

p-)Quoted for Truth, also the situation in the United States does not affect me. I wondered all the time where this aversion would come from since although Germany refused it's following into the war but wasn't that unpopular as France was.

Dr Rice's strategy was "Ignore Germany, punish France, forgive Russia".

With the comfort of hindsight, one could say she had her priorities a bit askewed...

[Atlantic Friend]

This would all be water under the bridge - and completely dismiss-able as everyday national me-first-ism...except that Americans are still dying in Iraq.

Which has little to do with France, I think.



We did precisely as we said we would do, and voted exactly as we said we would vote. Had the UNSC held firm, there would have been no need to invade at all - and we wouldn't be in this mess. It was a gamble on all sides that failed for everybody.

But in the end, didn't the UNSC hold firm, giving the green light for OIF if Iraq was found in breach of its agreements ? Wasn't it basically what the whole UN shenanigan was about, IIRC ?

I doubt a united front at the UNSC would have made Saddam a suddenly nicer guy, or would have decided the US Administration to move around tens of thousands troops.

When the debate atbthe UNSC turned bitter, it was clear here for the Pierres on the street that Iraq was going to be invaded no matter what, because of WMD claims, because of links with AQ claims, because of links with 9/11 claims. The Baathist regime was a sure goner, and saddam was going to kick the bucket if he didn't fmlee the country.

So why would the French government engage in secret and not-too-pleasant business with a dead man, a dead government and a dead regime anyway ? That's the part where I can't agree with statements about secret deals and France assuring Saddam there would be no invasion. For Pete's sake, everybody knew there WOULD be one.

Let us face it, if it had been for oil, there was a much, much better option for France. France could simply have joined the Coalition : the Iraqi army was going to be defeated in a matter of weeks, the Baathist regime would be gone, and France would find itself sitting at the table of the victors to talk about the spoils, having gained brownie points with the Us Administration. No pain, maximum gain.

Supposing we found the idea of invading Iraq too distateful, we could have just stepped aside and let eveything happen, helping here and there through political influence or intelligence to score a few brownie points, hopefully enough to still be invited to the table to discuss one or two juicy contracts.

Now I'd like to think we opposed the invasion because of our analysis of what a post-Saddam and ME would like. There were experts, diplomats, and intelligence operatives warning about Iraq coming unglued, and the risks of civil war, some even said there would be long-term consequences for the stability of the ME, as power would be redistributed among nation-states and other players. But I suspect de Villepin's posturing had little to do with that either.

In fact, I think what de Villepin did had next to nothing to do with Iraq and everything to do with its ego - and his hopes for a certain election we've had lately. He wanted to be the dashing hero, riding in the white horse, champion of Justice and International Law, ready to defy the United States and then to lament the fact he hadn't been paid enough attention. That would have been a useful attire to wear 2 years later, appearing as the man who dared talk back to the US, Chirac's true heir, an echo of real Gaullism and all that sh*t.

[Jobu]

1441 was passed unanimously and found Iraq in material breach of the cease fire.

That was all the legality needed.

[2Sheds_Jackson]

As far as I can recall, and I admit I may be wrong on this one, France never agreed to the use of force. When the US went from merely demanding inspections to demanding war, it's understandable that they would fail to support the new, radically different, platform. The point is that asking the UNSC for a judgement on the matter is implicitly recognizing their authority to decide. They do not serve as a rubber-stamp court, there only to legitimize actions which would have been taken anyway.

We haven't ceded our sovereignty to the UN (yet).

Powell had been given assurances - to the point where their generals had been touring our C&C facilities to prepare their people for the joint command structure. Then suddenly, just hours before the vote, they publicly announced they would veto any kind of a deadline or use of force.

I maintain that if the vote had proceeded, and we had managed to approve a final deadline backed up by the threat of force - we would have been able to knock the inspection issue off dead center and get the inspections accomplished without a war. If Saddam saw that he was truly without support or allies, he would have relented - and there was no way the US or anybody else could have invaded while he was cooperating.



If it came down to a straight vote, not even accounting for vetos, China, Russia and France were against, the US and UK were for.

Well we don't know, do we? France announced that they would veto under any circumstances. BTW, Iran was watching, and learning...and is now playing us like a fiddle. They noticed who blinked first, and wrote it down. So, who has this high-minded "diplomatic" open-ended, no deadline, no-use-of-force modus operandi really benefited? Welcome to the future. :|


Your average American anti-French armchair general pisses me off. Tonight as you type on your computer French servicemen are in more than a few ****holes supporting OEF...


Well that's true enough, but what's it really got to do with anything? I'm sure you could have found members of the NVA, or hell- even the Taliban who were good honorable men...doing good work, but that's kind of beside the point when it comes to geopolitics.

Hey the US gov't has done crappy things too - the only point I'm trying to make here is that IMHO there are real reasons to criticize recent French actions (and inactions). It's not all just brainless "French surrender monkey" BS - although I grant you that yeah, you can find those people around and they do need a slap.

[budgie]

I read until I saw "Bill Maher."

I cannot teach him. The boy has no patience.

[budgie]

Megaraptor;2482449']Bill Maher needs a :bash: and a :bash: and another :bash: just for blatant re-writing of history.

France in 1787 was ruled by Louis XVI, who certainly didn't believe that all men were created equal.

The main inspirations of America's founding fathers were:
1) Colonial traditions of freedom and limited government stretching back almost 200 years (no Thomas Jefferson and Ben Franklin did not invent American democracy).
2) English common law, democratic principles and the Magna Carta (England at that time was just about the world's only democracy).
3) The Bible.
4) The ancient Roman Republic.
5) John Locke and other English philosophers.
6) Voltaire and any other French philosophers would be down here if at all.

Note he said the French (presumably Voltaire et al) and not the French government. Read again.

[[WDW]Megaraptor]

I'd like to know how American democracy existed before America became independent of UK.

The American colonies had a longstanding tradition of democracy, almost since their founding. Plymouth Charter, Puritans, etc. Sure, some of them were crown colonies with rotally appointed governors but many others, especially in New England, elected their leaders. America's democratic ideals didn't spring up out of nowhere in 1776...

[BMF_EOD]

2SHEDS-

My comments weren't directed at you- but to the Americans who sit on there asses (having never served their country) and bash the French people as a nation even though they are sending some of their finest soldiers into harms way to support an American endeavor.

I realize your points on Iraq and many are indisputable: but I think the vast majority of Americans are either a.) unaware of the French contribution to the GWOT/OEF or b.) ungrateful assholes who are taught their opinions off Fox news.

[muck]

2SHEDS-

My comments weren't directed at you- but to the Americans who sit on there asses (having never served their country) and bash the French people as a nation even though they are sending some of their finest soldiers into harms way to support an American endeavor.

I realize your points on Iraq and many are indisputable: but I think the vast majority of Americans are either a.) unaware of the French contribution to the GWOT/OEF or b.) ungrateful assholes who are taught their opinions off Fox news.

Quoted for truth, although I disagree with the "ungrateful" part. Not that they would really care about balanced opinion-forming, but those are the most-patriotic Americans that for sure would honor any tribute paid to their nation.

http://www.einsatz.bundeswehr.de/C1256F200023713E/CurrentBaseLink/W2665L9R744INFODE/$FILE/oef_img-220x165.jpg

However: Despite some dissensions do we stand together.

I wonder if you really come from San Diego though. p-) (no offence intended).

[mas-36]

Quoted for truth, although I disagree with the "ungrateful" part. Not that they would really care about balanced opinion-forming, but those are the most-patriotic Americans that for sure would honor any tribute paid to their nation.





I wish that were true. I've regularly made pilgramages to Yorktown, and I'm always dismayed by the piss-poor ceremonies (if any) taking place there to remember the French effort. Even during the 225th anniversary, I wasn't impressed with the coverage. I certainly didn't see Beck or O'Reilly there speaking of Rapprochement, though i do remember seeing nit-wit Hannity on TV in Normandy France, June 6 2004, basically saying how the French should remember and grovel at our feet. Seldom I've been more embarassed of my fellow citizens.

Compare that with what the French do for the D-Day anniversaries and our vets who travel there. Perhaps time, 225 years as opposed to 60+ years in events make a difference, but still we could make a better effort.

I have to conclude that unfortunately, many of our fellow Americans are indeed ungrateful, or at least ignorant of the French sacrifices not just in our War of Independence, but in WW 1, WW 2, and elsewhere.

[BMF_EOD]

I wonder if you really come from San Diego though. p-) (no offence intended).


Don't come from here- just stationed here. My opinions are based off first hand experiences in OEF......you know the stuff that doesn't happen because it's not on CNN or FOX???

BTW- My wife loves traveling to France- I much prefer Germany.

[[WDW]Megaraptor]

I have to conclude that unfortunately, many of our fellow Americans are indeed ungrateful, or at least ignorant of the French sacrifices not just in our War of Independence, but in WW 1, WW 2, and elsewhere.

There's several factors to remember here...

1) The intervention in the American Revolution was carried out by the repressive, corrupt French monarchy, not the Republic.
2) France killed their king a few years later, replacing him with sociopaths and then a military dictatorship.
3) France went to war with the United States a few years after the American Revolution (look up the "Quasi War")

Also, i'd like to point out that France waited until the Americans were winning the Revolution before they intervened. After Saratoga it was mostly downhill for the British, they surrendered the northern colonies and tried to conquer the southern ones (Georgia and the Carolinas). The only battle the French played a significant role in was Yorktown. In my opinion, the Americans would have won the war anyways, even without French intervention.

[ElHombre]

Megaraptor;2488052']Also, i'd like to point out that France waited until the Americans were winning the Revolution before they intervened. After Saratoga it was mostly downhill for the British, they surrendered the northern colonies and tried to conquer the southern ones (Georgia and the Carolinas). The only battle the French played a significant role in was Yorktown. In my opinion, the Americans would have won the war anyways, even without French intervention.

And why were the Colonials having so much luck? Because Britain was involved in other wars than just the revolt in the Thirteen Colonies. Not to mention quite a bit of financial aid being given the the Colonials. And take Yorktown. Without the French Navy blocking the exit and the French Army providing siege guns, the Brits would have won.

It's a cliche, but still accurate: 'The American Revolution was started in the North, fought in the South, and won by the French'.

[[WDW]Megaraptor]

Without the French Navy blocking the exit and the French Army providing siege guns, the Brits would have won.

Yes, and it would have been just another defeat out of many for the American armies, but they would have withdrawn and the army would have survived like they did at Long Island, Bunker Hill, Ticonderoga, Hobkirk's Hill, Guilford Courthouse, Monmouth, Brandywine, Eutaw Springs, Camden and a host of other battles. The only really decisive British land victory of the war (leading to the capture or destruction of significant portions of the American armies) was at Charleston.

Cornwallis made the very stupid move of trying to conquer Virginia while leaving the Carolinas and Georgia mostly unguarded, with General Greene's Army mostly intact and rapidly re-capturing these states. This would have left Cornwallis stranded in Virginia. He could either have broken out of Yorktown and split his forces to protect his supply lines, leaving himself vulnerable to being surrounded and cut off from his lines of retreat Saratoga-style, or he could have stayed in Yorktown where the Royal Navy could re-supply him but be unable to do much else.