Today on Blogcritics
Home » Sarkozy Est L’homme! (Sarko’s Da Man!)

Sarkozy Est L’homme! (Sarko’s Da Man!)

Please Share...Print this pageTweet about this on Twitter0Share on Facebook0Share on Google+0Pin on Pinterest0Share on TumblrShare on StumbleUpon0Share on Reddit0Email this to someone

It should come as no surprise to anyone who knows me well that I backed Nicolas Sarkozy for the French presidency, and I'm jubilant about his victory on Sunday. Especially as I had previously called this one.

A year before the race for president began, I wondered, why doesn't "Sarko" go for it? He was the only person in Chirac's cabinet that seemed to have any clue as to how France was changing and how that change must be dealt with. All we ever heard from Chirac and Co. was typical Gaullist head-in-the-sand railings against "les Anglo-Saxons." Sarkozy, however, is a transatlanticist, someone who admires both Britain and the U.S. and seeks a much closer relationship with both. Sarkozy opposed the War in Iraq too, but he was determined not to let that stand in the way of what he considers a natural friendship between the U.S. and Britain, though he also vowed not to be "submissive" to the U.S. He also intends to bring greater economic liberalism to France by allowing a 40-hour week (or more), confronting the unions, and tearing down some of France's protectionist walls.

Sarko did gain some notoriety by calling the rioters during the unrest in Paris and throughout France in the fall of 2005—young deliquents with nothing better to do than cause trouble and blame it on French society—"scum." Well, Sarko is right. They are. Last month's riot at the Gare du Nord station in Paris was a disgrace. (The rioters were sticking up for a Nigerian fare-dodger who headbutted a ticket inspector when confronted.) With Sarko in charge, these thugs may just be brought under control and it's about time they were. French society, to be fair, does need to become more accommodating toward young immigrants, but it's no excuse for large-scale rioting and violence on the part of those who feel left out of the loop.

Segolene Royal or "Sego," his socialist rival, looked to protect welfare benefits for layabouts and slap the thugs on the wrist. Not impressive. Royal also, typically for a Left-winger, saw Israel as an aggressor and America as a threat. Nothing would have changed if she'd been elected. But, fortunately, that didn't happen. Sarkozy beat Royal soundly, 54%-46%.


"Thanks to Sarkozy, we too became people!" OK, now, what do normal people, as opposed to knee-jerk Lefties, make of this?

There was still a considerably sized undecided voter base left over from the independent centrist Francois Bayrou, who had criticized Sarkozy. On the subject of Sego, Bayrou stayed quiet but refused to endorse her campaign, much to her Socialist party's bewilderment and anger. One woman, interviewed by Britain's The Guardian last month, who voted for Bayrou in the first round said, in the wake of Bayrou's third-place finish, that she planned to vote for Sarkozy, even though he "scared" her, because she did not think Royal had what it takes to be president. If that was the majority opinion among Bayrou voters, it's not surprising that Sarko hung on to his lead and won the prize that he'd worked for his entire adult life.

And France will be much better off for it.

Powered by

About Nightdragon

  • Ruvy in Jerusalem

    So, Mark…

    Is it good for the Jews?

  • http://nightdragon.diaryland.com Mark Edward Manning

    Ruvy: Do you know something I don’t?

    Sarkozy has always been more pro-Israeli than most French politicians and won’t kowtow to the Arabs/Palestinians, although he did think Israel used “excessive” force in last year’s Lebanon war. Still, I’m confident he’ll be Israeli-friendly and help the Jewish community in France.

    Besides, Sarkozy is Jewish — half Jewish, anyway.

  • Ruvy in Jerusalem

    “he did think Israel used “excessive” force in last year’s Lebanon war.”

    Well, Mark, I guess you answered my question. The more things change…

  • http://nightdragon.diaryland.com Mark Edward Manning

    Ruvy, who did you want in the Elysee Palace then? Segolene Royal, the Palestinians’ would-be best friend? Le Pen, without doubt the biggest anti-Semite in all of France? Bayrou — who the hell knows where he stood, though “moderate” or “centrist” tells me he would likely have criticized Israel too.

    Sarkozy was the only pragmatic choice for Jews as well as anyone else with a sound brain.

    Sarkozy probably only said what he said with regard to the Lebanon conflict to stick by Chirac, hoping to secure his endorsement. Sometimes politicos have to tow the line of their predecessor before they break away from them — it’s the nature of the game.

  • Ruvy in Jerusalem

    Mark,

    French Jews voted overwhelmingly for Sarkozy, I’m sure. But every Jew asks about every non-Jewish leader, “is it good for the Jews?” Don’t believe me? Ask Mark Schannon. Ask Elvira Black.

    If Sarkozy follows the same policies as his predecessor in terms of foreign policy, the interests of Israel (not necessarily those of toadies like Shimon Peres) are not necessarily helped.

    The French Jews, who have been jumping like rats from a rotting gruyère, will give Sarkozy a certain amount of time to perform, and then will decide to stay or to go. If attacks against Jews continue under this man’s leadership, they will continue to leave France, and will be smart to do so. There is nothing like the test of reality to see whether a man will stick with his words and treat scum like scum.

  • Arch Conservative

    It would seem that French leftists have a great deal in common with American leftists.

    When French leftists lose an election they take to the streets to riot and cause violence. They say that the system is not fair or is broken because their feeble little minds refuse to see reality which is that the majority of their nation rejected their views and their candidate.

    When American liberals lose an election they invent voter scam conspiracies that never actually happened. They try to discredit the process and suggest a need for change in the way elections are run simply because they lost. The best interests of the nation be damned as they do everything in their power to delegitimize the legitimate winner. They show up at the inauguration yelling and screaming and throwing eggs. They refuse to believe that anyone could deviate from their views and that every time they suffer a loss it is because something underhanded has been done and not because their views are different from the majority of the population.

  • bliffle

    I only saw a couple guys jump the turnstiles in the Paris Metro last month, and they looked very ordinary, even middleclass. Maybe they were stiffed by the ticket machines which seemed unable to accept credit cards for a few days. And the guy who was sitting in my $60 firstclass seat, briefly, on the Tours-Paris TGV was a well-dressed businessman, probably a Sarko supporter.

    Anyway, Sarko will never be able to breakup the logjam of the French economy because that would require busting up the trusts and monopolies that dominate French business, and he can’t go against his own masters. It’s dumb to think that their problems revolve around the 35 hour workweek or jobs for immigrants. The problem is the unholy marriage of government and corporations that both find so cozy at the expense of everyone else.

  • http://nightdragon.diaryland.com Mark Edward Manning

    AC: “When French leftists lose an election they take to the streets to riot and cause violence. They say that the system is not fair or is broken because their feeble little minds refuse to see reality which is that the majority of their nation rejected their views and their candidate.”

    True enough. But at least Royal hasn’t demanded a re-count. And the Socialists are calling for an end to the violence and telling their own to respect democracy. So, credit where credit is due.

  • http://www.elitebloggers.com Dave Nalle

    The problem is the unholy marriage of government and corporations that both find so cozy at the expense of everyone else.

    A valid point. People who complain about the undue influence of corporations in US politics have no idea how much worse it could be – but to find out they need only look at France with its government granted monopolies for favored businesses.

    Dave

  • Zedd

    Sarkozy est l’homme de l’heure.

    Lets not get carried away. Just wait and see.

  • bliffle

    Royal was the 2007 version of Bob Dole.

    Nothing will change. Nothing was meant to change.

  • Arch Conservative

    “Royal was the 2007 version of Bob Dole.”

    Then who was the French 1994 version of Norm Macdonald?

    I used to love his Bob Dole impressions.

%d bloggers like this: