You have to read it aloud with a cheesy Inspector Clousseau sort of accent...
then after a few bottles of wine... she will all begin with ze making of ze sense...
and good comedy...
Posted on 10/09/2004 1:59:40 AM PDT by Cornpone
A 8 heures par e-mail, recevez la Check-list, votre quotidien du matin. Abonnez-vous au Monde.fr
The republican camp let burst its joy, at the end of the debate televised between MISTERS Bush and Kerry, Friday evening in Missouri (center-is of the United States). Less hesitant and more aggressive than at the time of the preceding duel, the outgoing president defended nozzle and nails all the great decisions of its mandate, including the invasion of Iraq without constant ADM. Plus, the democratic candidate does not have demerity, in particular in its attacks on a recovery which "benefitted only the rich person". "Mr. President, can you give us three examples of bad decisions which you made and to say to us what you made to correct them?". The response of George Bush to this question - the last of this second debate televised between the two candidates with the American presidency, Friday evening October 8, in the sporting complex of the university Washington de Saint Louis, in Missouri - summarized its very whole service of the evening, on the topic: "Not, I do not regret anything". In the large files of these four last years, Mr. Bush estimated to have taken the "good decisions, without making error", conceding just some blunders in the appointment of certain persons in charge whom it did not quote. "the president makes decisions and assumes his responsibilities", repeated Mr. Bush, for better underlining the suspicion, continuously exploited again, on the "inconstancy" of his adversary, which could not be shown equal to the task of commander as a head of the armies, in these times of war.
Iraq had been the principal topic of the first debate, 30 September, devoted to the foreign politics and safety. The conflict in this country and terrorism have Friday monopolized evening more of third the 90 minute old of exchanges, where the candidates answered this time varied questions of a sample of voters, without knowing them as a preliminary, with the possibility of moving towards the public, on a plate with the arena paces. Elements a priori overpowering for Mr. Bush: published Wednesday in the report/ratio of Charles Duelfer, the conclusions of the American inspectors in Iraq established that, as opposed to what its government obstinately supported, the mode of Saddam Hussein had neither arms with massive destruction (ADM), nor program to get some, before the American invasion of March 2003. And the last factory which would have been able to produce some was dismantled, according to this report/ratio, since 1996 by the inspectors of UNO.
"WEAPONS OF MASSIVE FRAUD"
But, for the current one occupying of the White House, not very inclined to make honourable fine on an unspecified subject, the "threat was real" and the Duelfer report/ratio shows that "Saddam Hussein wanted to get rid of the sanctions to develop ADM" . In any case, it explained, it was necessary to go to see on the spot if there were or not. "the world goes better without Saddam Hussein (?) and if John Kerry had been a president, it would be always there ", launched Mr. Bush putting in his counterparts, sometimes almost shouted, much more firmness and of passion that at the time of its preceding service. Stressing that it was not a question "of getting rid of the sanctions but of the ADM" , renamed by him "weapons of massive fraud", Mr. Kerry estimated that "the world is more dangerous today" since March 2003 (Iran, North Korea, nuclear stocks of weapons without protection in the ex-USSR, terrorism), before again exposing his plan for an exit of chaos. He associates in particular all the allies and concentrates on "the good war" to carry out, counters Oussama Ben Laden and Al-Qaida, contrary to the "bad war, the bad place, at the bad moment ", that against Iraq.
Europeans are in anger against the United States, regretted a électrice in its question. "I recognize that I made decisions which could be badly included/understood" abroad, Mr. Bush said, quoting, inter alia, his refusal to dialogue with Yasser Arafat or his rejection of an international penal Court likely to consider soldiers American. But the president "assumes", just like Reagan (quoted by him) had assumed in his time the recriminations of the "old continent". None of the two candidates however preached a new conscription to reinforce the troops in Iraq.
With a question about the means to take to avoid a new terrorist attack in the United States, the senator of Massachusetts answered without turning: "the question is not to know if it will occur or not, it is knowledge when". It then attacked a president who prefers to grant tax cuts to the minority (1 %) of rich person of the country, rather than to finance a correct monitoring of the containers or compartments of the planes, for example.
"BIG GOVERNMENT"
Such was the heart of the sales leaflet of John Kerry at the time of this debate: the outgoing president évertué himself, during his mandate, to make so that the recovery benefits the rich person, by tax cuts which dug an abyssal deficit, whereas the finance public were in order under the Clinton democrat. Mr. Bush has been the first president "for 72 years" to count a balance of creation of negative job during his mandate (1,2 million stations removed, according to Mr. Kerry), while 5 million Americans, whose many children, remain without any medical cover. The democratic candidate yesterday evening committed himself "lowering the taxes for all the Americans who gain less than 200 000 dollars per year", to increase them for the rich person, to make so that each one of its fellow-citizens has a insurance-health, increase the allowances for the guards of child or to facilitate the access to the university of poorest, while reducing the deficit "of half in four years". "It is quite simply not credible", sliced Mr. Bush, who endeavoured to depict his adversary like "the most liberal senator" (to include/understand "on the left") among the democrats, follower of the" big government "(concept honni of all the conservatives) and thus of the increases of taxation intentionally bureaucratic.
The democratic candidate (red tie sharp, dark blue costume) unquestionably marked a point on his opponent (tie light blue, dark blue costume) by evoking the prohibition emitted by the current administration to import less expensive drugs of close Canada. And did Mr. Bush make in return odd by evoking on this subject the need for checking the reliability and the quality of drugs "imported of the Third World"?
The voters will have, on the other hand, a less clear opinion of the positions of Mr. Kerry on the abortion, while Mr. Bush camps, him, with firmness, in its refusal to see the least public mony being used directly or indirectly for this act. The senator of Massachusetts had voted against the law, that its rival made adopt, on the prohibition of the late abortions, after twenty weeks of pregnancy. Recalling that he was catholic practitioner, the democratic candidate gave an opinion for the "constitutional law to the abortion".
Mr. Kerry, who has revenge approved Patriot Act , - law intended to improve the fight against terrorism after 11-September, ridiculing with the passage certain civil freedoms, clearly did not explain in which direction it would amend it.
While the "fact-checkers" - specialists henceforth convened on the chains in American television to confirm or dispute any figure quoted by the candidates or any factual charge - reviewed the statements of each one, the persons in charge for the electoral machines betrayed their spontaneous feelings, after this second debate, all the more crucial as the last surveys give the candidates to the elbow-with-elbow in the intentions of vote. Joy in the republican camp moved by the fact that Mr. Bush avoided awkwardnesses of the preceding duel - mimicry of scorn, hesitations, downtime before its answers. Satisfaction moderated in the democratic camp, following a televisual performance overall with the height of the stake, the often right glance in the objective of the camera or the eyes of its interlocutors.
The impétrants have nothing any more but only one occasion to decisively widen the gap, before the poll of November 2. Their ultimate televised face-to-face discussion is scheduled for October 13, over questions of domestic policy exclusively, this time.
Thanks, France. Now shut up.
The on-line translaters give up a lot of garbage that does not add to the discussion. I read the original article in leMonde.
Summary: they hate Bush, love Jean le Kerré, and think we are a bunch of religious fanatic cornpone hics.
What the hell do those Frenchies means by "nozzle & nails"?
BTTT
They are p!ssed because phone menus have a Spanish option and not a French option in America.
Yeppers, my thoughts X-actly!
The article was kinda hard for me to follow, but I still second your comment!
Translation: Frogs are funny. At least, that's all I got out of it.
Comment to a previous post
_________________________________
As someone who has traveled and worked all over the globe I have come to the conclusion that though cultures may be vastly different, people everywhere are essentially the same. Most believe in a god, want to live in peace and pray for a better future for their children. I also believe wanton killing is wrong and war is a last resort. However, I'm quickly coming to believe the French warrant an exception. We should never have allowed them to lead the victory parade into Paris after WE liberated France, we should have assassinated Charles de Gaulle at our earliest convenience and we should have placed them under economic embargo the second they broke their alliance with NATO and refuted payment of their war debt. Otherwise, the French are no worse or better than any of god's other slimy, amphibious creatures.
You have to read it aloud with a cheesy Inspector Clousseau sort of accent...
then after a few bottles of wine... she will all begin with ze making of ze sense...
and good comedy...
Turd world... in spite of their pretense, the french have always been turd world.
Remember, before the UN, I suppose, the euros weren't considered some kind of classic civilization that must be cultivated and kow-towed to... they were the barbaric "old world" that we started this country to get away from. And we were always leery of getting sucked into their endless warring.
As a newbie perhaps you are unaware, but it is impolite to make up a title and not give out the de-coder ring in advance.
a good summary... LOL
The short answer is, no.
LOL!!
Were it not so early and I had had my second cup of "hot joe", I would have done my normal rant on the French (spit! ... spit!) lepers.
It is good to be reminded, through articles such as this, that there are multiple reasons to hate them, other than they are unwashed, amoral, and a haven for the worse elements of humankind. ;)
Regards
WTF? Is this a mistranslation, or did they mean to say this?
Wishful thinking...
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.