| For sale: France. Price: $6.00 per person-all offers accepted |
![]() Blog For Free! Archives Home 2007 July 2007 May 2007 April 2007 January 2006 October 2006 September 2006 August 2006 June 2006 May 2006 February 2005 December 2005 November 2005 October 2005 September 2005 August 2005 July 2005 June 2005 May 2005 April 2005 March 2005 February 2005 January 2004 December 2004 November 2004 October 2004 September 2004 August 2004 July 2004 June 2004 May 2004 April 2004 March 2004 February 2004 January My Links EWTN Dayton Right to Life Org. Just the Facts.Org My Yahoo Group Toys for Tots 2004 tBlog My Profile Send tMail My tFriends My Images Sponsored Blog
|
posted by: Sarah (reply) post date: 03.30.05 (9:40 pm) okay, i don't get what's so insidious about this. i get your antipathy towards the french- well, don't "get" it but have picked up on it. but as far as this goes, it seems to be just another case of a nation disagreeing on its fiscal policy. and while you can argue that chirac and his cronies are lousy politicians, and that their economic policy is communistic and/or corrupt, it's not THAT rare that any democratic nation- american, european, whatever- has a debate of this nature, involving politicians pandering somewhat deceptively in order to win support. one side is bound to be wrong. just because britain's debate over this issue would be different from france's doesn't automatically make france "pathetic." it's just part of democracy- you get what you voted for. if someone is unhappy, they deal with it in the next election cycle. if no one is unhappy, there's no problem. posted by: LynnKramer (reply) post date: 03.31.05 (7:25 am) sarah, how about if the potus wanted to surrender the US's soverenty to the UN? Had a vote and the people said no. then the postus asked the truck drivers union how much money they would take to switch their votes and swing the election the other way, and thereby submit the USA to the UN? and what if the union said ok we'll sell out the country for $6 each? and what if potus paid off the union with taxpayers money? you don't see anything wron with this scenario? come on. you like this kind of coruption? posted by: Sarah (reply) post date: 03.31.05 (10:22 pm) Thanks, I understand your argument a lot more clearly now. Sorry. posted by: BerlinBear (reply) post date: 04.05.05 (6:26 am) Umm, is it just me, or is vote buying not an element of *every single* election-year budget everywhere in the world? Gordon Brown, like finance minsters in democratic countries all over the world, gives strategic handouts to groups he wants to get onside every time there is an election coming up. That is how democracy works. And why does democracy work like that? Because *most* voters don't bother to inform themselves about the issues - just as you have clearly not bothered to inform yourself about the EU consitution and what it entails - they just vote on one particular bugbear issue, and which issue it is is often decided by how much money it will put (back) in their pockets. It seems to me that your objection is not actually to France, but to democracy and the way it works. |
|
||||||||||||||