PARIS — It was apparently just a little summertime spinning with the aid of a grocery chain, but Luc Chatel, the education minister and government spokesman, found himself in some hot water over a supposedly staged visit to a quiet supermarket on Monday.

Journalists accompanying Mr. Chatel and Hervé Novelli, the secretary of state for commerce, on a trip to an Intermarché supermarket in Villeneuve-le-Roi, southeast of Paris, became suspicious when the aisles were suddenly filled with well-dressed, articulate women eager to praise a government freeze on the price of some school supplies before the new school year began.

One of the women was Virginie Meyniel, a local politician allied with the governing center-right party, who said she just happened to be in the store and also happens to help oversee schools for her town, Vulaines-sur-Seine, 30 miles away.

The radio station France Inter raised questions, and the newspaper Libération had a detailed article on Wednesday headlined, “Supercherie au Supermarché,” or “Hoax at the Supermarket.” It described how some of the women left the store together in a car after the minister left, without buying anything and leaving their school supplies in shopping baskets.

Sound like anyone else you know? Of course, the difference is that the French media hates Sarko and will go out of their way to point out the embarassing aspects of his administration accordingly, unlike our own MSM, who believe the President of the United States walks on water.

And the beat goes on.

DRESDEN, Germany — After mending fences with the Muslim world in Cairo on Thursday, President Obama might want to keep his diplomatic tools handy for his stopover here, to repair his increasingly strained relationship with Chancellor Angela Merkel.

A rift has quietly opened up between Germany and the United States, marked by official statements of harmony and private grumbling. It is not an outright crisis in relations, but there are underlying tensions and disagreements on matters ranging from the global economic crisis to the future of inmates held at Guantánamo Bay.

On a more basic level, there is a sense that the Obama administration is ignoring the needs and counsel of longtime allies. Divided Germany was once at the center not only of the cold war, but of American foreign policy as well, which is no longer the case. Yet the United States can ill afford to alienate Europe’s largest economy and its most important intermediary in the strained relationship with Russia. “They’re not angry, they’re not anti-Obama or anti-American,” said John C. Kornblum, a former United States ambassador to Germany and now a business adviser in Berlin. “But they’re confused by the wave of criticism which has been sent at them by the administration and people close to the administration.

“It’s not that they don’t like him,” he said. “They just feel like things aren’t working, like the levers of government are not being engaged to make issues run smoothly.”

[...]

In the early stages of the Obama presidency, officials in the Merkel government were dismayed by the scarcity of staff in midlevel positions at the Treasury Department. And Germans remain surprised that an ambassador to their country has not been named more than four months after Mr. Obama’s inauguration. There is a sense that, with his focus split between domestic concerns and the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, the new president is taking his staunchest European allies for granted.

“There is definitely this disappointment in Europe, complaining that there’s nobody home,” said Stephen Flanagan, senior vice president of the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington.

Hey Euros – welcome to our world.

In all seriousness, can you imagine the level of outrage this “rift” would receive if it was Bush and a European leader? Well, we don’t have to imagine – we all remember well how often Bush was criticized for allegedly “destroying” longstanding relationships with European allies due to his and his administration’s “lack of diplomatic finesse.”

Not only do we have “rifts” we’re trying to heal with Germany, but there’s another one emerging between our celebrity President and France’s celebrity president:

The Obamas turn up in Paris this evening, but have declined a dinner invitation from the couple next door: the Sarkozys.

President Obama’s reluctance to spend more than minimum time with the French leader on his visit for the D-Day anniversary has come as an embarrassment to the Elysée Palace.

America’s First Family will not be dining with President Sarkozy and his wife, Carla Bruni, even though they are staying at the residence of the US Ambassador, yards from the Elysée apartments where the Sarkozys spend their weekends.

Mr Sarkozy’s staff were trying yesterday to arrange another private moment between the couples. Mr Obama is due to fly back to Washington tomorrow night or on Sunday.

Mr Sarkozy has been pilloried in France for his failure to invite the Queen to the events. “The palace is fearing a snub,” Le Parisien newspaper said yesterday after the news emerged of the Obamas’ plans to keep themselves to themselves.

[...]

The French were also piqued after the White House said that it was working on an invitation to Normandy for the Royal Family. Face was saved when the Prince of Wales agreed to attend with Gordon Brown. “Sarkozy has pulled off a double hit: insulting Queen Elizabeth and exasperating Obama,” the weekly Canard Enchaîné said on Wednesday.

[...]

Mr Obama’s irritation with his French counterpart began when Mr Sarkozy tried to grab the limelight at the G20 summit in London in April and talked condescendingly of the US President in private. Mr Sarkozy told colleagues that he found Mr Obama to be inexperienced and unbriefed, especially on climate change. Mr Obama hit back last month, telling a visiting French minister: “Please tell Nicolas that I shall do my homework, and in two months I’ll know all about climate change.”

The leaders will have lunch in Caen tomorrow while their wives meet near by. They will then all attend the ceremony at the US cemetery at Colleville-sur-Mer, above Omaha Beach.

Look, Sarko’s proven himself to be nothing more than an attention hog, and has not been the great ally I and many other conservatives had hoped he’d be after his election a couple of years ago. He’s been a jerk to President Obama, from what it sounds like, and as a result Obama’s sending subtle indirect jabs at Sarko – communicating without saying a word. So I really don’t blame the Obamas for the dinner snub. But at the same time, I also remember what a jerk Chirac was regarding Bush and how at the time the left here in this country resented the fact that our relations with France were, at best, “on ice.” Bush was ridiculed and vilified for his desire to ignore and overlook the pompous Jacques Chirac on the world stage. Yet Obama snubs Sarko, and in turn he’s praised in the French press and not criticized here at all from the same left who went out of their way to critique every word and every gesture from Bush and his administration when it came to dealing with our allies.

In any event, our relationships with Germany and France are not all wine and roses and perfect harmony as so many implied/predicted they’d be once Obama took the oath of office. If anything, at least with Germany, he and his administration have damaged one of the few good relationships Bush had with a European leader (Merkel) and is on shaky ground with another. All in a matter of just a few short months after his inauguration.

Nice work, Mr. President. Too bad that reset button is out for repairs, eh? Or, hey – maybe you can blame all this on Bush?

Flashback on the foreign policy “experts”:

• 9/22/08 – Joe Biden’s Tuzla moment
• 8/12/08 – Who needs 300+ foreign policy advisors when you’ve got George Clooney?
• 4/8/08 – Obama asserts that his VP selection would be “somebody who knows about a bunch of stuff that I’m not as expert on”
• 3/24/08 – Clinton campaign continues to dig deeper hole on alleged Tuzla sniperfire incident
• 11/21/07 – Senator Obama: Foreign relations “experience” based on 4 years spent overseas when he was a child

Barack Obama rejects Normandy trip to avoid offending Germany

…was a hearty “WTF?” The President of the United States passed up touring one of our most sacred battlefields with the President of a close ally? What the frack was he thinking? “Here we go again,” I thought. “Another liberal-lefty with contempt for our military and our history.” I was all set to write a post clubbing PBO for yet again dissing the country he leads in order to placate others.

Then I read the rest of the article. The text makes it clear that France was trying to use the American president as part of a “prestige contest” with Britain and Germany. Sarkozy’s ego and French pride were the problems here, not Obama. Not this time:

“During this trip, we wanted to maintain a balance between the British, German and France”. A White House spokesman in London declined to comment. Last month, White House officials briefed that a Normandy visit had been considered but it had not been logistically possible.

Mr Obama will arrive in Strasbourg on Friday for the Nato summit. He will hold a meeting with Mr Sarkozy and a brief press appearance in Strasbourg and then fly to Baden-Baden to do exactly the same with Chancellor Merkel of Germany. He will then fly to Prague on Saturday.

Mr Sarkozy is said by French officials to be piqued that Gordon Brown became the first European leader to meet Mr Obama and was then lavished with praise by him at a 50-minute joint press conference in London on Wednesday.

The French president tried unsuccessfully to meet Mr Obama before he was sworn in after the G20 summit in Washington last November, even stationing a French military plane on 24-hour standby nearby to whisk him to Chicago should the then US president-elect change his mind.

He had also hoped Mr Obama would agree to a meeting before attending the G20 summit in London on April 3. The French had suggested that Mr Obama fly from London to Normandy on Friday morning for a stop before the Nato summit. Instead, he is going directly to Strasbourg.

The president’s objective for the summit on this trip was to gain support for his economic agenda (whether I like it or not), and getting into the middle of a junior-high clique-fight among jealous heads of government wouldn’t support that goal, nor would it be fitting the office of the President. There’s a much better time for Obama to visit Normandy and commemorate our sacrifices there, as the article itself points out: the 65th anniversary of the landings this upcoming June.

In the end, I think the Telegraph’s headline is gratuitous, meant to inflame Obama opponents, not enlighten. It doesn’t help the Right’s cause to work itself into a lather that will only make it look irrational to middle-of-the-road voters. Do I wish PBO and his staff had found some way to avoid getting mixed up in intra-EU games while making a quiet, dignified visit to Normandy? Yes, it would have been better. But I just don’t see this as the craven appeasement of the Germans that the Telegraph paints it to be.

I’ve said before that, while I’m quite willing and ready to criticize Obama and the Democrats when they merit it (which is often), I will not descend to the level the Democrats and the far Left hit with their incessant, irrational, and Copperheaded attacks on President Bush. Obama doesn’t deserve it, the nation doesn’t need it, and it does no one any good. We can and must be better than that. The Telegraph’s headline writer should have been.

LINKS: Jim Hoff and Dan Collins muster the outrage for me.

(Cross-posted at Public Secrets, my home on the Web)

Russian president Vladimir Putin on
a recent trip to the Siberian mountains.

France’s president Nicolas Sarkozy, on his visit to
New Hampshire from a couple of weeks ago.(That photo,
by the way, was airbrushed by the French magazine L’Express.)

I don’t really cotton to seeing shirtless pix of world leaders because that’s not the way I really want to look at them – unless they looked like Hugh Jackman or Matthew McConaughey, which in either case would mean I’d be forced to make an exception to my rule.

That said, the shirtless pix above in no way compare with one of the most unintentionally sexy moments for a world leader ever caught on camera – not shirtless, but in a flight suit instead:

Now, normally I would never put the words “President Bush” and “sexy” in the same sentence, but in this case …

Update: In semi-sorta related news, Jules Crittenden blogged today about a new campaign in Australia designed to “stop young studs from speeding” – by suggesting that guys who speed do so because they’re making up for, uh, deficiencies elsewhere

(AP) Barbra Streisand performed her first-ever concert in France this week – and was rewarded with a medal of the Legion of Honor.

French President Nicolas Sarkozy awarded the medal to Streisand in a ceremony Thursday, the first time he has bestowed the honor since taking over from Jacques Chirac last month.

“You are the America that we love,” said Sarkozy, who is seen as more U.S.-friendly than Chirac. “Women like you … do a lot to bring our two peoples together.”

She might do that there in France, but she sure as hell doesn’t do that here in her own country! LOL. And I hope that you love more about America than Babs Streisand-types, Mr. French President.

Photo courtesy: AP/Philippe Wojazer, Pool

Since French men are such notorious charmers of women (and the new French prez even tried that route with his combative Socialist opponent Segolene Royal in the run-up to the elections there), I’ll forgive Sarko for his lapse in good judgement – this time, anyway

The second – and most important round – will be the final round, which takes place on June 17.

If the conservative wave continues and is successful next week, it will make it all the more easier for Sarko to implement the sweeping reforms he wants to, most regarding the French economy.

Speaking of Sarko, the Politque blog has video of what looks like a slightly tipsy new French president … doing some early celebrating, perhaps?

Prior:

• From “Freedom Fries” to “Friendship Fries”: What a difference an election makes!
• What Republicans can learn from Sarko’s victory
• The countdown to Sarko versus Sego
• Going down to the wire in France
• Anti-Sarkozy forces in France paint him as a Nazi
• French elections: Conservative Sarkozy versus Socialist Segolene Royal
• French rioters engaging in “civil disobedience”
• France is burning …

(Hat tip: ST reader Lorica)

Update: Here’s my lame attempt at altering the House cafeteria menu:

He’s promised to be an ally of the US, which is welcome news to just about everyone but the left. What’s especially noteworthy is not just his promise to be a friend to the US, but the reactions of his supporters to that part of his victory speech, via John Rosenthal:

But what was revealing was the spontaneous applause and cheering that broke out among the crowd when he uttered the words “to say to them that they can count on our friendship”: “pour leur dire qu’ils peuvent compter sur notre amitié.” You can hear and see it here. The passage on Franco-American relations is just over half way through the tape and a cursor control at the bottom of the media player allows you to skip forward. Even supposing such a pledge of friendship to the United States might — with all the “appropriate” qualifications — be found, for instance, in a speech by Jacques Chirac, it would certainly not receive such an enthusiastic response from his partisans — to say nothing of the partisans of Mme. Royal. This already represents an important difference between the old regime and the incoming new one.

Wow – so like the French actually like us (well a majority, anyway)? Who’da thought?

Anyway, I read a piece this morning which should inspire Republicans who are feeling like next year’s presidential elections have already been decided, who think that because Republicans lost so badly last year, that it’s certain that we’ll have a Democrat elected to the WH in 2008. Newt Gingrich, one of the smartest men in politics, tells Republicans that there is a lot they can learn from Sarko’s victory (bold emphasis mine):

Incumbent French President Jacques Chirac had been twice elected, has served a total of 12 years in office, and is very unpopular. Coming into this election, people were very tired of the Chirac government and there was a sense that there had to be change.

But the opposition on the left, the Socialist Party, failed completely to capitalize on this desire for change. They nominated a candidate of great achievement, Ségolène Royal, but she proved herself to be the candidate of the status quo, not the candidate of change. She was actually committed to keeping all the bureaucracies that were failing and all the policies that were creating unemployment. She was committed to avoiding the changes necessary for a French future of prosperity, opportunity and safety.

Normally, with the incumbent conservative government so unpopular, the left would have been expected to win the election, probably by a significant margin. But the conservative candidate, Nicolas Sarkozy, won decisively because he is an aggressive, different kind of French political leader. He is a member of the Chirac government — the Minister of the Interior. But not only is he a man who is willing to stand up and fight for what he believes in, but Sarkozy is also a man who hasn’t followed the normal French path to success by going to an elite university, becoming part of the ruling elite and fitting in.

[...]

As for the opposition in the French election, much like the American Democratic Party, it is trapped by its commitment to big labor, big bureaucracy, high taxes and social values people don’t believe in. Every time French voters seriously looked at Ségolène Royal and the kind of politics she represents, she lost ground. She simply couldn’t make the case that left-wing Socialist policies would work.

The result was a surprising and powerful upset by Sarkozy — a victory by a center-right reformer, a member of the unpopular ruling party, who came to personify change.

And here’s where American Republicans really need to pay attention: In France, voting for change meant voting for the party in office, but not the personality in office. And voting to keep the old order meant voting for the opposition, not for the incumbent party.

If Republicans hope to win the presidency next year, they better find a candidate who is prepared to stand for very bold, very dramatic and very systematic change in Washington. Not only that, but they had better make the case that the left-wing Democrat likely to be nominated represents the failed status quo: the bureaucracies that are failing, the social policies that are failing, the high tax policies that are failing, and the weakness around the world that has failed so badly in protecting America.

Only if we have that kind of campaign do we have a reasonable chance to expect the American people will vote for effective change for a better, safer and more prosperous future — and that they will see that effective change as being Republican.

Who will be that candidate?

And speaking of the French election and comparisons of it to the upcoming election here, the Hillary campaign is downplaying comparisons between the Senator and Royal. Rest assured had Ms. Royal won on Sunday, becoming France’s first female president, the Clinton camp would welcomed the comparisons and played them up to their advantage.

Related: Jules Crittenden has some words of advice for Sarko.

Prior:

• The countdown to Sarko versus Sego
• Going down to the wire in France
• Anti-Sarkozy forces in France paint him as a Nazi
• French elections: Conservative Sarkozy versus Socialist Segolene Royal
• French rioters engaging in “civil disobedience”
• France is burning …

The French Election blog will be posting poll results later today, so if you’re interested in seeing the results of this election, keep checking back there. Pajamas Media is also following this election closely and will have updates. I’ll post updates as well once I find some links to update with.

More: Memeorandum has more stories and links to bloggers discussing this election.

Update I: The AP is reporting that Sarko has won the election by a vote of 53% to 47% (hat tip: ST reader Lorica). French Election 2007 has many more updates.

Bloomberg is reporting voter turnout was around 85%. Wow.

Update II: In Sarko’s victory speech, he told America that we can count on France as a friend. Heh. More, via CNN (emphasis added):

U.S. President George W. Bush called Sarkozy to congratulate him on his victory, a White House spokesman said in a written statement.

[...]

Prior to the election results being made public, Sen. Richard Lugar, R-Ind., said a Sarkozy victory would be favorable to the United States.

“Clearly, his views are more in line with ours,” Lugar told CNN’s “Late Edition With Wolf Blitzer.”

Sen. Charles Schumer, D-N.Y., concurred: “I do. I do,” he told CNN. “I mean, it would be nice to have someone who is head of France who doesn’t almost have a knee-jerk reaction against the United States.

LOL! Now if Schumer’s own party would stop having knee-jerk reactions to the US …

Also, here are tons more links on Sarko’s win via Memeorandum.

Update III: ¡No Pasarán! has links here and here to anarchists showing their, ahem, displeasure at the results of the election. (Hat tip: Instapundit)

Prior:

• The countdown to Sarko versus Sego
• Going down to the wire in France
• Anti-Sarkozy forces in France paint him as a Nazi
• French elections: Conservative Sarkozy versus Socialist Segolene Royal
• French rioters engaging in “civil disobedience”
• France is burning …

With just two days left before the election, Socialist candidate Ségolène Royal is continuing to pull desperation moves in an attempt to steal the momentum away from Sarkozy, who has polled ahead of her in over 100 polls taken since the threw their respective hats into the ring. After Wednesday’s debate between the bitter rivals, the lastest polls show him moving further ahead of her, opening up a lead of nine points in one poll. Royal’s response:

After the publication of the polls today, Royal turned up her rhetoric, saying on RTL radio that his candidacy is “dangerous” and that this election could “trigger violence and brutality across the country.” Sarkozy, speaking on Europe 1 radio, called the comments “outrageous.”

“She’s trying to frighten the voters in the middle,” said Robert Harneis, a Royal biographer.

Here’s an expanded version of those comments:

“I think that choosing Nicolas Sarkozy would be a dangerous choice. I do not want France to shift towards a system of brutality,” Royal told RTL radio.

[...]

Royal warned of potential violence in France’s ethnically mixed suburbs if her rival won and she said he was unable to enter some areas for fear of sparking violence. The suburbs were hit by riots in 2005, the worst in 40 years.

Sarkozy has portrayed himself as a tough crime-buster but Royal said street violence had risen recently

“When a candidate has so much nerve to tell lies and counter-truths and cannot even go everywhere in the country, then yes, I think this candidature is a risk.”

[...]

In an interview with Le Parisien daily, Royal said Sarkozy was imitating the techniques of U.S. President George W. Bush, who is reviled by many French.

“(Sarkozy) carries the same neo-conservative ideology. He doesn’t hesitate to envisage dismantling public services, when we badly need nurses and teachers.”

You know she’s getting desperate when she starts comparing him to the President, because, as Private Pigg reminds us, in France they view Bush as another Hitler. Of course, some of them view Sarko as Hitler, too – even when they, of all people, should know better.

I’m very interested in the outcome of this election, because the US is fast losing allies in Europe. Steadfast ally Tony Blair is on his way out, and his Labour party suffered big time losses in the elections in the UK this week. Three years ago, the US lost an important ally, Jose Maria Aznar of Spain to the Socialist Jose Luis Rodriguez Zapatero in the Spanish elections. As I’ve written before, Sarkozy doesn’t hate Bush (Royal does), even though he has said he believes the war in Iraq was a mistake. So at a time that the US is losing a valuable ally in Blair, it’d sure be nice to pick up one in Sarko. I’m not saying he’d be remotely close to Blair in terms of siding with the US on the majority of the major issues the US deals with on an international level, but at least he wouldn’t bring to the table the overt hostility Jacques Chirac did in his dealings with the President, nor – on a diplomatic level – would he automatically discount what the Bush administration had to say because he doesn’t share hatred that Chirac has for Bush. When France was burning in late 2005, and others in the Chirac government were not calling the riots riots but instead ’social unrest’, Sarkozy called the rioters “scum“, which in turn drew calls for his resignation. So you have a guy who is definitely not afraid to go against the grain.

Yes, it’s true that Sarko worked in Chirac’s government, but they had a falling out in 1995 when Sarko backed someone other than Chirac for president, and the relationship hasn’t gotten any better between the two of them.

Besides, the Socialist Sego has already started to get chummy with a chap we’re all very familiar with:

Yep, that’s DNC Chair Howie “I hate the Republicans and everything they stand for” Dean, an apparent admirer of the Socialist Sego – and Socialists in general, if these pictures (more here) of him speaking at the annual PES-Congress of European Socialists Parties convention last December are any indication.

Royal was supposed to have met La Clinton on a visit she was going to make to the US late last year, but the visit was postponed. The ‘official’ reason Royal gave was fatigue, but off the record Clinton sources told the UK Telegraph that Clinton didn’t want to meet with her because she was worried that meeting with a French Socialist who sympathized with Hezbollah wouldn’t be good for her image. The Telegraph also reported that Royal was lining up meetings with two other Democrats, though: Barack Obama …. and Bill Clinton (here’s a tip, Sego: don’t meet with America’s most well-known adulterer alone).

Can you imagine if Royal got elected this Sunday and then next year a Democrat was elected as president here in the US? That’s a France/US ‘alliance’ I would not want to see.

Also blogging about this: Jawa Report, Atlas Shrugs, Little Green Footballs

Ms Royal, the left-wing candidate who is about four points behind the conservative Mr Sarkozy in polls, denounced her opponent for the “great violence” and “brutality” of a campaign that she maintained was frightening away voters.

She will use a critical television debate with her opponent tomorrow to contrast her “France at peace with itself” with Mr Sarkozy’s “France of the hard Right”.

Ms Royal’s line of attack, five days before the country goes to the polls, was amplified yesterday by aides and supporters. In the latest torrent of anti-Sarko vitriol, 100 stars of the arts and sciences declared that “Sarkozy embodies a hard radicalised Right . . . with all its fears and hates. Entrusting the presidency to a demagogue like this means real danger.”

For the Left, vilifying Mr Sarkozy offers a last hope of breaking his march to the Elysée Palace on Sunday. Ms Royal’s aim is to stir anti-Sarkozy fears among those who voted for the centrist candidate, François Bayrou, who was eliminated with 18 per cent of the vote on April 22.

After attacking Mr Bayrou as a stealth Sarkozyite in the first phase of the campaign, Ms Royal has reversed course over the past week and waged a charm offensive towards him and his voters. In another gesture yesterday, she suggested that, if elected, she would appoint as prime minister Dominique Strauss-Kahn, a Socialist rival who is popular with the pro-Bayrou centre.

Fomenting the TSS factor (Tout sauf Sarkozy — anyone but Sarkozy) became inevitable when he emerged from the first-round vote with much greater credibility than Ms Royal but little popularity.

A CSA poll on Sunday found that 65 per cent of French people think Mr Sarkozy “solid” compared with only 24 per cent for the Socialist. Yet only 29 per cent find him likeable, compared with a 57 per cent rating for Ms Royal.

[...]

As a tough Interior Minister until last month, the ambitious Mr Sarkozy earned the dislike of many young people — especially those from the immigrant ghettos. His doctrines of radical economic reform and individual responsibility — never before aired by a senior French politician — have been welcomed by many as a revolution, but cast by opponents as divisive, cruel and unFrench.

Mr Sarkozy has offered opponents new ammunition over the past month by breaching politically correct taboos on immigration and national identity and successfully wooing supporters of Jean-Marie Le Pen, the far-right candidate.

[...]

He proceeded to spur fresh fury among the left-wing Establishment by blaming the “generation of 1968″ for the moral crisis of France. The Socialist party elders and many top civil servants and academics were students in that year of revolt.

Pro-Royal campaigners have called him a “French Berlusconi”, a new Bonaparte and a “French George W. Bush”.

Using celebrities, and painting your opponent as a crazed right wing radical ready to steer you back into the dark ages. Sound familiar?

Can you imagine France turning into an ally of the US under his leadership? The Euros would go NUTS! For that reason alone, I hope he wins

Pejman Yousefzadeh writes that while Sarkozy is far from perfect, he would “represent a clear, dramatic and refreshing break from France’s status quo, a status quo alarmingly bereft of dynamism.”

American Enterprise Intitute Research Assistant Jurgen Reinhoudt takes us ‘inside the mind’ of Sarkozy.

French Election 2007 has a preview of tonight’s big debate between Sarkozy and Royal, which will be broadcast at 9 pm France’s time, which is 3 pm ET. (Correction: That debate was Wednesdsay night, not Tuesday night)

Of course, comparisons to Nazis happens too frequently here, especially from liberal icon George Soros and affiliated Dems/groups, but considering that this IS France we’re talking about here … I mean, you’d think they’d know the huge differences between Sarkozy and Hitler, to the point that it’s pointless to even compare them at all?

I guess not.

Prior/Related:

• French elections: Conservative Sarkozy versus Socialist Segolene Royal

Centre-right candidate Nicolas Sarkozy will face Socialist Segolene Royal in the run-off of France’s presidential election on 6 May, results indicate.

With most votes counted in Sunday’s first round, Mr Sarkozy had nearly 31%, with Ms Royal, bidding to be France’s first woman president, on 25%.

Centrist Francois Bayrou got 18%, and far-right Jean-Marie Le Pen almost 11%.

Voting throughout the day reached record numbers, with turnout put at 85% – the highest for nearly 50 years.

On a bright spring day, disillusionment with politicians and their promises did not translate into apathy, reports the BBC’s Caroline Wyatt in Paris.

Instead, young and old alike queued at the polling booths at schools and town halls, although in their choices they remained as divided as ever.

Voters turned out in such high numbers that the authorities decided to allow more time for people who were still queueing.

Of the main candidates, Mr Sarkozy, a former interior minister, promised a “rupture” with the past and real economic reform, while Ms Royal has pledged a fairer society.

Both are controversial figures who have divided the French.

Mr Sarkozy is hated by the left as a reformer who many fear would change the French way of life by making the nation work harder and longer and by cutting back on its generous welfare state.

Ms Royal is also regarded with suspicion, seen as too authoritarian and conservative by some Socialists.

It’ll be interesting to see if Sarkozy wins the election, because he’s made a few enemies in France because he doesn’t hate America, nor President Bush. Ms. Royal, on the other hand, despises Bush.

The Associated Press, perhaps sensing a Sarkozy win next month, has an “analysis’ which suggests, according to the writer, that Sarkozy may not be a US “lapdog” which you can read here.

The BBC posted a profile of Sarkozy back in January, which is well worth the read.

Pajamas Media has a link round-up of French election coverage.

French is the traditional language of diplomacy. Diplomacy is the art of saying one thing while doing another.

In recent weeks, France stepped forward to act as a broker of peace in Lebanon. “Act” is the key verb in that last sentence, as it now would seem that the only other verifiable part of the sentence is “in recent weeks.”

To correctly parse that sentence, one must understand that when France suggested it wanted to broker peace in Lebanon, it did not necessarily mean “broker” or “peace” or “Lebanon” in the way we might understand those words. The same is true when France further suggested it wanted to “lead” a “strong” “multinational” “force” there.

I don’t speak French, so I have no idea what the actual French words are for those concepts or what possible nuances there may be. I’ve been relying on news reports in English, which now inform me that the French do not intend to send any significant number of troops to what is supposed to be a force of 15,000 in Lebanon, like everyone thought they said they would.

The heady moment of peace brokering having passed, upon sober reflection, the French now say they already have a general and some staff in south Lebanon ordering about UNIFIL, the U.N. monitoring entity there. That’s plenty of leadership, the French suggested: All France needs to contribute now is another 200 combat engineers.

In tactical terms, when it comes to securing a Middle East conflict zone, that can be referred to as “squat.”

Indeed.

Make sure to read the whole thing. And while you’re at it, bookmark the link to Jules Crittenden’s prior opinion pieces. Good stuff.

Read more on who Jules Crittenden is by clicking here.

Read more about French military victories here.