Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

LIVE Thread: France votes on EU Constitution [Schadenfreude Alert]
Various ^ | May 29, 2005 | nwrep

Posted on 05/29/2005 8:21:52 AM PDT by nwrep

***************************************************

Initial reports show a turnout of 25%. Last polls before voting began show the No vote leading by 56% to 44%.


TOPICS: Breaking News; Business/Economy; Culture/Society; Extended News; Foreign Affairs; Front Page News; Political Humor/Cartoons; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: euconstitution; france
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 181-190 next last
To: Betaille

"I bet they're going to disregard the vote on the grounds that turnout was too low."


SHHHHHHHHH! Don't give them any ideas. I'm surprised the turnout is so low.


41 posted on 05/29/2005 9:17:46 AM PDT by jocon307 (Legal immigrant Irish grandmother rolls in grave, yet again.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: MadIvan

Thanks. Want to try and keep up with this and what's going on in Britain. Share my workspace with a man born and raised in Sussex (he's a US citizen now), so would be nice to have some understanding of things when he starts talking about the latest news in Britain from a letter from from his folks.


42 posted on 05/29/2005 9:19:29 AM PDT by SandRat (Duty, Honor, Country. What else needs to be said?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: Right_in_Virginia; Betaille; A. Pole
What will happen if France votes "No"?

The constitution, which is a treaty between 25 states, cannot come into force unless it is ratified by all of them. So a French "No" would mean the constitutional treaty is almost certainly dead.

Experts say France is unlikely to vote on the constitution again, as Ireland did with the Nice treaty, approving it at the second attempt.

They say it is more likely that EU leaders will attempt to salvage key parts of the constitution by other means. Some measures could possibly be implemented simply as a result of agreements between heads of state.

Just like here with Bush and his trade agreements. "We don't care what the peoples think. We are the leaders and they will follow."

43 posted on 05/29/2005 9:20:13 AM PDT by raybbr
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Paleo Conservative

What I fear is this - that the turnout in the French referendum will be so low that Chirac will find in that some license to implement it anyway. He has nothing to lose - his popularity is so low, he can ride roughshod over the voters.

Regards, Ivan


44 posted on 05/29/2005 9:21:34 AM PDT by MadIvan (You underestimate the power of the Dark Side - http://www.sithorder.com/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: SandRat
...Want to try and keep up with this and what's going on in Britain

From Daily Pundit...
...You underestimate the power of the Dark Side. Nine countries have already ratified it, and most of the rest probably would have as well. The most significant 'no' vote would have been the UK's, but if France rejects the treaty then Blair will probably wriggle out of a vote. The EU is a dreadfully undemocratic organisation. Therein lies the seeds of its downfall, but it will be a long time coming.

(whoevere the guest contributer David Gillies is)...

45 posted on 05/29/2005 9:26:57 AM PDT by Ganndy (back to Lurking...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: MikeJ
I've been reading a lot of different opinions about what follows a 'no' vote. Would the proposed constitution simply be modified a bit and resubmitted, over and over, until it eventually passes? Is the Euro dependent on the eventual passage? Does a French 'no' necessarily even stop the current constitution from being ratified by the other nations?

Likely, it's either dead or will be renegotiated to accomodate the contintental socialists even more. Frankly, Old Europe is gone anyway--it will be an islamic state in 35 years--so I don't think the costitution means much one way or the other in the long term for old europe.

The plus is that rejection of the constitution means the Brits are much less likely to go for it. So it may prevent the continent from dragging Britain down with it (as well as selected Eastern European countries). Net net, if Britain and Eastern Europe stays (or becomes) a bastion of freedom near Islamic Old Europe, that is a win for Britain and the world.

Economically, it matters little for the world. Europe is a declining power. The economic focus of the world will increasingly be on India, China, Japan and the US.

The Euro is not dependent on passage.

The constitution has to be ratified unanimously (by all countries) to become effective. So one other possibility is that the French gvt just submits it over and over until they get a yes or, more likely, they just ignore the vote and ratify it in parliament.

46 posted on 05/29/2005 9:33:55 AM PDT by ModelBreaker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: MadIvan

Glad to see you back and posting!


47 posted on 05/29/2005 9:35:27 AM PDT by ModelBreaker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: Chgogal; MadIvan; oceanview; All; jb6; Destro

"the euro elite power structure has too much riding on the EU, they will do anything to rig this vote."

Thank you"Chgogal"persons do know what is good what is evil what is free this persons will vote NO and this is good!!!! EU constitution is toilet paper I do not want this Chirac do have nervous attacks now:}}}}}}}}Thank you


48 posted on 05/29/2005 9:41:00 AM PDT by anonymoussierra (In te credo, in te spero, te amo, te adoro, beata Trinitas unus Deus)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: anonymoussierra

My father recently got back from a business trip to France - his sense of the matter is that the French will vote "No". I hope he is correct.

Regards, Ivan


49 posted on 05/29/2005 9:42:00 AM PDT by MadIvan (You underestimate the power of the Dark Side - http://www.sithorder.com/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: raybbr
What will happen if France votes "No"?

This is AFP's guess what will happen...

Should France reject the treaty, Chirac -- who celebrated his 10th year as president earlier this month -- would be unlikely to seek a third term in office in 2007, opening the door to his arch-rival, UMP leader Nicolas Sarkozy.

Chirac has however ruled out his resignation should the "no" camp prevail.

-----------
The question is, Can Europe have economic integration and nationalism at the same time?

50 posted on 05/29/2005 9:42:34 AM PDT by cloud8 ( (Et alors?))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: nwrep
I'll try and explain this critter, if I can.

This isn't really a vote on a constitution, as Americans know it.
This is a Referendum on an International Treaty, that requires a super majority to continue.

The constitution itself, is an abomination of socialist New Speak and Political Correctness that runs to several volumes, is not finished, and probably never will be.

In the real world, the 25 countries in the EU are already under control of the shadow constitution:; money; measurement; weights; labeling; environment; housing; health; criminal and civil law; torts; bureaucratic regulation; borders and passports; tolls and taxes, to name a few.

As it now stands, France will run Euroland, Germany supplies the muscle, and Belgium becomes the proxy front man.

If todays vote doesn't pass, they simply rewrite the treaty until it does. It is inevitable, just like the local school board demanding a new building.

51 posted on 05/29/2005 9:44:52 AM PDT by FreedomFarmer (Socialism is not an ideology, it is a disease. Eliminate the vectors.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Paleo Conservative
But does this mean the EUrocrats will just ignore the votes and implement it anyway?

If a small country like Czech Republic or even The Netherlands would say NO they would probably just tell them to repeat the referendum (they did so with Ireland when they rejected the Treaty of Nice). However if a large country like France or UK rejects the treaty they have a serious problem. Theoretically the Constitution says that if in two years time from its signing (that is around June 2006) it is ratified by not all, but at least 20 countries (out of 25), which is very likely, the leaders of the EU should meet and discuss the problem. However, if France and then UK reject the treaty the situation is going to be very difficult for the eurocrats. As to the turnout - don't worry about it, it's going to be high. 25% by noon is VERY high turnout, by the end of the day it's going to be at least 60% IMO.

52 posted on 05/29/2005 9:45:56 AM PDT by Tarkin (St. Maximilian Kolbe (1894-1941))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: ModelBreaker

All 25 countries must ratify the constitution, not the citizens/subjects of those countries but the countries themseleves. I assume by countries they mean governments.

The vote in France and Brussels is a political gamble, not neccessary for eventual passage of constitution, but a yes vote in France would be used to beat UK and any other resisters into submission. Looks like they will have to try Plan B.

No all 9 countries who have signed on so far signed on did it by referendum, some just did it.


53 posted on 05/29/2005 9:46:36 AM PDT by keat (Click to hear theme song)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: MadIvan

he is Ivan he is how do you do good friend
this EU total stupid constitution is total Chirac only Chirac Thank you


54 posted on 05/29/2005 9:48:06 AM PDT by anonymoussierra (In te credo, in te spero, te amo, te adoro, beata Trinitas unus Deus)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]

To: Stellar Dendrite

French governments have a tradition of getting the "proper" result !

A "non" would be bad for the euro too.


55 posted on 05/29/2005 9:51:05 AM PDT by 1066AD
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: nwrep

I heard the French exit polls are showing Kerry in the lead.


56 posted on 05/29/2005 9:53:16 AM PDT by marymc
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: keat
All 25 countries must ratify the constitution, not the citizens/subjects of those countries but the countries themseleves. I assume by countries they mean governments.

Of course. After all the European Union is simply a net of treaties between these 25 countries. Formally such organisation as EU does not even exist (as opposed to EC and Euratom).

As to the ratification process, it depends on the country. In some countries (like in Ireland) all international treaties are a subject to popular vote, whereas f.ex. in Germany there is no possibility to vote on such matters in a referendum. However in all 25 countries the treaty must be accepted by parliament/popular vote and then of course signed by the head of state.

57 posted on 05/29/2005 9:53:38 AM PDT by Tarkin (St. Maximilian Kolbe (1894-1941))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies]

To: All

"As to the ratification process, it depends on the country. In some countries (like in Ireland) all international treaties are a subject to popular vote, whereas f.ex. in Germany there is no possibility to vote on such matters in a referendum. However in all 25 countries the treaty must be accepted by parliament/popular vote and then of course signed by the head of state."


58 posted on 05/29/2005 9:55:43 AM PDT by anonymoussierra (In te credo, in te spero, te amo, te adoro, beata Trinitas unus Deus)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 57 | View Replies]

To: JLS

We shall see indeed, in a few hours.

Schadenfreude would be very nice, but I am also hoping that a NON will shake things over there (though not really holding my breath).


59 posted on 05/29/2005 9:59:59 AM PDT by beckaz (Hey Senate Pubbies, act like the majority already)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: anonymoussierra
It's also this fellow, who drafted it...

Valery Giscard d'Estaing

Valery Giscard d'Estaing, commonly referred to in France by his initials VGE, likes to see himself as a GOM - Grand Old Man of French politics.

He has perhaps earned himself the right to be considered one of Europe's elder statesmen too, after spending the last year chairing the Convention on the future of the EU.

Born in Germany in 1926, where his father was a civil servant with the occupying forces after World War I, he had a precocious political career serving as finance minister for many years in the 1960s.

Then, in 1974, he launched a successful bid for the presidency, presenting himself at the time as a modern and moderate alternative to the austere conservatism of Gaullism.

He founded the UDF party, still today a force in France, as his political vehicle.

His seven-year term saw some important social reforms and as a convinced European he joined forces with the German Chancellor Helmut Schmidt to launch the European Monetary System, the precursor to the European Monetary Union.

Diamond scandal

But Valery Giscard d'Estaing was mocked for his lordly and arrogant style.

There was a scandal over diamonds given to him by Emperor Bokassa of the Central African Republic, and in 1981 he was defeated by the socialist, Francois Mitterrand.

After that he based himself in his political heartland - the Auvergne region of central France - delivering regular pronouncements to newspapers and to television stations about the state of the nation.

His national standing sank so low that he became known as Monsieur Ex in Parisian political circles - but then came the call came to head the Convention.

His selection for the job was the result of intensive lobbying by French President Jacques Chirac, who is said to have insisted on it at the EU's summit in the Belgian town of Laeken in December 2001.

Many criticised the choice of a man in his late 70s for a job designed to bring the EU closer to the people, and especially the young.

Now a little about Giscard d'Estaing's friend, Emperor Bokassa -

Central African Empire

Introduction

In 1960, the Central African Republic gained its independence from France with David Dacko as the first President of the republic. On the first day of 1960, Dacko's cousin, Colonel Jean-Bedel Bokassa (born 1921) seized power. He abolished the constitution and gave himself absolute power. In 1972 he declared himself president for life. Bokassa would later surviv several coup and murder attempts. After a meeting with Qadaffi of Libya, he converted to Islam and changed his name to Salah Eddine Ahmed Bokassa, although he later converted to Catholicism once he seized absolute power.

In 1976 he dissolved the government and declared the republic a monarchy. Bokassa changed the name of his country to the "Central African Empire". In December 1977 he held a huge ceremony (which costed: 20,000,000 $) in which he had himself crowned as Emperor Bokassa I. The corononation resembled the crowning of Napoleon, whom Bokassa admired.

The former colonial power of the region, France, supported his rule and the French President Valéry Giscard d'Estaing befriended with Bokassa. He supported Bokassa both economically and financially. In exchange, Bokassa provided France with uranium.

Bokassa was said to be a very cruel man. He drank the blood of his enemies and he even ate the flesh of human babies. He fed wild animals with his political enemies.

In April 1979 schoolchildren protested against their school uniforms. Those uniforms were far to hot for the local climate, and were monopolized by a shop owned by Bokassa's wife. Bokassa had them arrested and about 100 of the children were killed. Bokassa was said to have participated in those killings and even ate some of the bodies. Thereafter, French paratroopers landed in the Empire and put Dacko back in charge. At that time, Bokassa happened to be in Libya. He asked for asylum in France, but it was refused, so he went to Ivory Cost. Dacko remained president until Andre Kolingba overthrew him in 1981. The name of the country was restored to Central African Republic.

In 1986, Bokassa returned to his country, hoping he that would again come into power. But instead, he was arrested. He was sentenced to dead, which was later changed into 20 years prison. In 1993 he was granted amnesty but died of a heart attack in 1996.

I cannot help but remember all this when they discuss the EU Constitution - the author is severely tainted.

Regards, Ivan

60 posted on 05/29/2005 10:00:11 AM PDT by MadIvan (You underestimate the power of the Dark Side - http://www.sithorder.com/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 54 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 181-190 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson