April 4, 2001

8:19 AM

France slams the US.
posted by Mocata (36 comments total)

Welcome back to BushFilter. But the article is worth it just for that picture!
posted by hijinx at 8:23 AM on April 4, 2001

"It doesn't seem to think," said Mr Jospin, "that a certain number of rules that make the international community work need necessarily to be taken into account.

Not a big gaffe (great article, by the way... ), but the translators need to work a bit on the contextual evidence when rendering "Il ne pense..." as "_It_ doesn't", instead of the appropriate "_He_ doesn't".

It's all in the details.
posted by silusGROK at 8:48 AM on April 4, 2001

"It doesn't" is correct...
posted by mimi at 8:50 AM on April 4, 2001

I think, Vis, that "it" refers to the Bush administration. Normally, I think "he" would work, but in this instance, it would wrong to assume that "he" is making any decisions at all.
posted by jpoulos at 8:52 AM on April 4, 2001

Wheeeeee. God Bless America.

Don't blame me, I voted for the other guy (no, not that other guy, the other other guy).

Seriously, though, I've noticed a lot of contempt for the US from just about every other country's citizens, but I haven't heard much from the governments. It's nice to see them finally speaking up.
posted by CrayDrygu at 8:57 AM on April 4, 2001

dang, that pic looks like something out of that somethingawful forum.
posted by cheesebot at 9:12 AM on April 4, 2001

I had been under the impression that none of the countries who signed the Kyoto accord have ratified it. Isn't it Congress and not the Executive Branch that has made this decision, or am I just whistling dixie?
posted by liquidgnome at 9:14 AM on April 4, 2001

In my reading, "it" clearly refers to the antecedent "the adminstration," which may be nonhuman, and in that case "it" could for BushWackers also refer to the President.
But why worry about the French? They gave us french fried potatoes for MacDonalds and french toast and the Renault. Not much, right?
Besides, as Huck Finn observed: if they are really humans like us, why don't they talk like us?
posted by Postroad at 9:26 AM on April 4, 2001

Plus, Paris is being eaten by bugs.
On the plus side for the French though, citroen is a really good car.
posted by u.n. owen at 9:42 AM on April 4, 2001

They gave us french fried potatoes for MacDonalds and french toast and the Renault.

The Belgians would challenge your french fry claim, and the colonial Americans your french toast claim. But no one will quibble about Renault.
posted by iceberg273 at 9:45 AM on April 4, 2001

Well, there is that whole French kissing thing. I'd rather keep that than have extra pollution credits.
posted by anapestic at 9:45 AM on April 4, 2001

Someone actually still cares what the French think?

It seems to me that the French policy is to want the exact opposite of everything we do and it has been that way for the last 20 years.
posted by revbrian at 9:49 AM on April 4, 2001

I had been under the impression that none of the countries who signed the Kyoto accord have ratified it. Isn't it Congress and not the Executive Branch that has made this decision, or am I just whistling dixie?

Bush's decision was to not submit the treaty for ratification. Also, he's looking into ways to "un-sign" the treaty so it can't be brought up again. No citations 'cause I'm lazy.
posted by norm at 10:09 AM on April 4, 2001

Isn't it Congress and not the Executive Branch that has made this decision, or am I just whistling dixie?

You are correct but slamming Bush seems to be a much more enjoyable sport then grasping how the US government works.
posted by Mick at 10:10 AM on April 4, 2001

*wipes egg from face*
posted by Mick at 10:11 AM on April 4, 2001

More than 30 countries have actually ratified the treaty. Our main sticking point as ugly americans is that less developed nations are not held to the same pollution emissions standards as we are. All those Africans and Indians with their wood burning stoves are getting off the hook, and we can't possibly allow that to happen. At least that's the way we're rationalizing it to the international community.

Never mind the fact that the US contiains only a fraction of the world's population but consumes nearly 25% of it's resources.

OK, enough ranting. I'll go compose myself now.
posted by aladfar at 11:02 AM on April 4, 2001

Don't blame me, I voted for the other guy (no, not that other guy, the other other guy).

Not to rehash this yet again, but if you voted for Nader, CrayDrygu, I blame you very much!
posted by jpoulos at 11:22 AM on April 4, 2001

President Clinton signed the treaty while still in office, but the U.S. Senate voted it down 95-0. What Bush has done is at least admit the obvious -- the U.S. isn't going to wreck it's economy to implement it. (Ooops, Bush already wrecked the economy).

What Bush did is abandon Clinton's policy of talking the talk to foreign governments knowing full well we were never going to follow through on our promises. I don't like Dubya-D-40 or his policies, but if he's getting the French in a snit, then I may have to reconsider.

The French they are a funny race, they ....
posted by darren at 11:46 AM on April 4, 2001

Darren slipped in with the right number, 95-0 not 98-0.
posted by aaron at 11:54 AM on April 4, 2001

but if he's getting the French in a snit, then I may have to reconsider

I sympathize, Darren, but getting the French into a snit is an accomplishment of roughly the same difficulty as getting a lead ball to fall down rather than up.
posted by anapestic at 12:10 PM on April 4, 2001

What left? You mean there's a monolithic, one-size-fits-all left to be in lockstep with? Seems to me the "right" is more concerned with being doctrinaire and "politically correct". Sounds like the usual projection to me.

Thanks for the straw, I'll try to build something out of it more permanent than the strawmen you're fond of building.

(mutters) First I miss getting my copy of the "gay agenda", and now it turns out there's a left masterplan I haven't been on the mailing list for. Serves me right for being an independent thinker . . .
posted by retrofut at 12:11 PM on April 4, 2001

Not that Kyoto would have had any real positive effect on the environment even if it were implemented full-tilt. It's a feel-good measure, something people in power want so they can point at it and say "See? We're trying!!"

aaron: Do you mean to tell me that a 20 percent reduction in emissions will not have any real positive effect on the environment? For those of us that do care about the environment, global warming, and future capacity for life on this planet, this is very much an environmental and not a partisan issue.
posted by dogmatic at 12:44 PM on April 4, 2001

Don't blame me, I voted for the other guy (no, not that other guy, the other other guy).

I agree. If you voted for Nader, you handed a vote to Bush. And if you live in Florida, shame on you times two.
posted by darren at 1:15 PM on April 4, 2001

...or do you live in Florida and voted for Buchanan? Damn that poor ballot design!
posted by Loudmax at 1:27 PM on April 4, 2001

Will everyone please stop encouraging people not to vote their conscience. If you want to berate people, aim it at the people who voted for Bush. You are not saying anything they cannot turn around on you, if enough of you Gore voters had voted Nader instead, he would be president now. Shame on you for voting Gore, you handed it to Bush.

I know... Nader Nader Nader.
posted by thirteen at 1:36 PM on April 4, 2001

You know, that cutesy little Nader bit about Gore voters costing him the election was funny ... for about 2 microseconds.

... they fight with their feet ....
posted by darren at 1:39 PM on April 4, 2001

2 microseconds is an extremely ungenerous assessment.
posted by thirteen at 1:50 PM on April 4, 2001

Thanks for the clarification, folks.
posted by liquidgnome at 1:51 PM on April 4, 2001

We should volunteer to reduce emissions on our own, without international participation.

(Boo, that's ludicrous! Feeble mind! You just don't get it!)
posted by mblandi at 2:45 PM on April 4, 2001

mblandi: You obviously don't get GWB's environmental policy...
posted by Neb at 3:43 PM on April 4, 2001

Oh geez. Stop harassing the trivial minority of the country who voted for Nader already and start worrying about the multitudes who actually thought Bush Jr was going to do a good job as President. The American political system has plenty of problems, but the existence of the Green party and their candidate for president is not exactly one of them.

-Mars
posted by Mars Saxman at 3:53 PM on April 4, 2001

"Not to rehash this yet again, but if you voted for Nader, CrayDrygu, I blame you very much!"

If I hadn't voted for Nader, I wouldn't have voted at all. You can't blame me for a god damn thing.
posted by CrayDrygu at 3:56 PM on April 4, 2001

"I agree. If you voted for Nader, you handed a vote to Bush."

Didn't see this last time, but since you people didn't get it the countless times it was said in the past few months, I guess it bears repeating.

I did not give a vote to Bush because my vote would not have gone to Gore either. Had I not voted for Nader there would have been no vote for either side.

And thank you, Mars and thirteen. It's nice to see that someone else besides me actually gets it.
posted by CrayDrygu at 4:00 PM on April 4, 2001

CrayDrygu, I get it, too.
posted by daveadams at 10:45 PM on April 4, 2001

And add me to the list of those who 'get it'. Don't really feel the need to justify my vote to anyone but myself at this point, but I too voted with my conscience.
posted by u.n. owen at 12:38 AM on April 5, 2001