America the Proud?

[jerseydevil]

Originally posted by Elvellon
Hardly, since I disagree with many people, left and right, about many things. BUT, I do not believe to hold The Truth, nor do I believe that any of us, mortals, do.
So if “you” are a Republican, and deny my positions simply because they are not the same as yours, and believe that by divine intervention, personal genius, or whatever, believe that only “your” position can be valid, well then, “you” are a neocon.

So what is a leftist whiner called in Europe?

As long as what he does doesn’t affect us, is strictly your problem, if affects us it becomes our problem. As for what we can do, certainly not vote, but international relations can suffer, something that could be regretful for both of us in the long run. I certainly don’t wish it.

But as I said in previous threads - the President is there solely to represent OUR interests - not the interests of Europe or any other country. As long as we approve of the job he is doing - it doesn't matter. Having bad relations with Europe, except with France and possibly Germany, is a bad thing and not in the best interests of America.

The relationship between France and the US is still very cold - even though they are sending tourist representatives begging Americans to travel there (Chirac should have thought about that before).

JD, I believe I already stated that, the only problem is when you have conflicting rights. Then, wanting or not, one of then AS to give way to the other. You opt for one, since you fear that if not the argument of the other could be abused. It is your option, it is valid.

But when confronted with that problem we see it differently, each freedom has to be measured against the other and then the lesser one gives. We opt for more freedom, not less. That is how we see it, it is not your way, fine, what I cannot accept is the absolute validity you seem to be attributing to your position. Me, I’m defending that our is as valid an option as yours, since none of us is omniscient to say otherwise.

I still can't see how you can claim to be free if you can't say what you want or freely demonstrate even if the majority disagrees with you or your opinions are heinous in the eyes of the majority.

You feel that you are free because your speech hasn't been restricted (you seem to be the mainstream of Portugese Politics)- if you were one of the people whose speech is restricted then you would NOT consider yourself free.

I would suggest you watch or read 1984 and Farenheit 451 for information on what happens when the government restricts people's thought and freedoms. Don't think it can't happen either - the Soviets did it (leftists) and the Nazis did it (rightists). It's still going on in China, North Korea and Cuba - all leftist governments.

Freedom of thought and speech is the most important thing - without that - it means someone else is trying to control your mind and thoughts.

I was talking to someone about this and they had come up with somethign I thought about. How would you feel if Ben just decided to make this board only where you could discuss good things about America? If you posted a discenting opinion on America - it automatically got deleted. What would happen then if we could say all these negative things about Europe - but then anything you said to counter it also got deleted? I have a feeling you wouldn't feel very free to express your opinion and you would feel rather descrimated against by the Americans. I bet it would make you more resentful too. But hey - it's an American board - so we could do it. So from now on - let's just hear how great America is and how it's the savior of the world. Then we won't have to take such drastic action and infringe on your free speech.

[jerseydevil]

By the way - this is Wolfenstein 3-D. The site contains the following warning...

Due to the game content, this game may not be ordered by residents of Germany.

The story: You're William J. "B.J." Blazkowicz, the Allies' bad boy of espionage and a terminal action seeker. Your mission was to infiltrate the Nazi fortress Castle Hollehammer and find the plans for Operation Eisenfaust, the Nazi's blueprint for building the perfect army. Rumors are that deep within the castle the diabolical Dr. Schabbs has perfected a technique for building a fierce army from the bodies of the dead. It's so far removed from reality that it would seem silly if it wasn't so sick. But what if it were true?

As an escaped prisoner in a Nazi war prison, you will move smoothly through a 3D world full of amazing detail and animation Unlike other 3D games, you'll run through a sensational and realistic 3-D environment, with intelligent moving guards and opponents.

Originally released May 5, 1992.

The previous versions of the game came out in the mid 1980's.

What I find strange about it being banned in Germany is that it isn't even a game in support of nazism.

[Lalaith]

Originally posted by jerseydevil
It is a reduction in freedom - when ever you take the freedoms away from one group of people because you disagree with their views - you are limiting their freedom. There is NO way around that. I'm not saying allow them to commit crimes against immigrants or to allow them to prevent freedoms of foreigners - but I assume you have laws to protect those things. People are going to have ideas - whether you like them or not and if they can't express them openly - they will just go underground where they are more dangerous. The only way the National Socialist party would be able to do the things you have said frighten you is if the majority of Austrians support them. So do the majority of Austrians support them?

It could be (don't know what is going on in other people's minds), but I doubt it.
I think it is good that NS is forbidden, you are not. We will not agree. End of that disussion.

I know that we made you agree not to go to war and reduction of armies and all this. We did the same thing with Japan. We also helped set up your Constitutions - but I seriously doubt we had you to discriminate against a certain political party or told you to ban certain books.

I said it could be. Not that it is that way.

50% if ridiculous. I'm for flat tax - I think everyone should pay about 20% above 23,000 or there abouts. I think having graduated income taxes is a form of descimination against people who make more money.

Capitalism. Ack.

We have public education and I seriously doubt that ALL schools at equally good. That would be impossible. There are a lot of benefits for people to go to college here and anyone who wants to go to college can go to college. It doesn't have to be a government handout.

As for lower level education - k - 12th - republicans support the use of vouchers that allow parents to choose where they want their children to go to school. I am for that. If someone doesn't like the school that their child would be forced to go to - they should be able to take their share of their money and put their child in the school they want (if it's a private school - then they have to pay the difference). It creates competition within the schools and forces the bad schools to either shape up or close down. Ironically - the democrats are against vouchers which will allow inner city parents to send their children to better schools.

Of course it depends on the teacher and the headmaster but basically every child in Austria can get the same education. So rich people and poor people have both equal chances in competition. (well, not that true, rich children usually find it easier to get a job)

[Lalaith]

Originally posted by jerseydevil
So who determines whose speech gets restricted? And what happens if someone decides that your speech should be outlawed. That what you believe isn't what they want to hear. What is there to prevent that - when you can already prevent another persons?

Damn. You don't get it. Only National Socialism isn't allowed. that's all. They can't just forbid every thought. The right for freedom is in our constitution.

Well then you shouldn't be afraid of the National Socialist Party - because even if they got into power - they wouldn't be able to do anything because of Parliament. The US president is very weak - he is controlled by Congress.. Everything that the president wants to basically has to go through Congress. One person I was talking to mentioned that "well the president picks the Supreme Court". That particular president doesn't pick the justices - only if there is a vacancy. Even then - Congress must approve the Justices. The President submits a budget - but Congress makes changes, additions, deletions, and has to approve it. All bills have to originate in the House - then they pass up to the Senate - if they're appoved by the Senate - they go to the President - where he can either sign them into law or veto it. Even if he vetos - Congress can still override him with a 2/3 vote.

Practically we have almost the same system.

You've taken away their freedom of speech without a second thought - all on the possibility that they will commit crimes.

Yep. And I think it is good.

I can NOT see how you can live in a free society and not allow freedom for EVERYONE. And yes - one of the things I am ashamed of is that it took till the 1960's for segregation to end in the southern half of the US. But we had the means to end it - because EVERYONE had a voice. Martin Luther King was able to stand on the steps of the Lincoln Memorial and give his "I Have a Dream" speech. We have a Free Press that allowed scenes of the police brutality in Birmingham to be shown.

We will never agree on that point. We have the same freedom as you.

Today - becuase of this - we have Colin Powell and Condoleeza Rice in two of the most powerful positions in government. And Condi Rice (who I had received an e-mail from while she was Provost of Stanford) grew up in the segragated south of Birmingham Alabama.

I will go to a rally to stand up against the KKK - but I will also stick up for the rights of those ignorant people to have their little white hooded demonstrations.

One last word:
Do as you please. I cannot (and I will not) hinder you. Your opinion.

[jerseydevil]

Originally posted by Lalaith
Damn. You don't get it. Only National Socialism isn't allowed. that's all. They can't just forbid every thought. The right for freedom is in our constitution.

Obviously it's not that strong in your Constitution otherwise you wouldn't be able to restrict the rights of even the National Socialism. It's very easy to say they're the "only" ones.

Yep. And I think it is good.

You wouldn't think it was good if your freedoms were taken away. I like yourr flippant attitude - show very good that you don't care about other people's freedom - just your own. Your attitude scares me far more than a neo-nazi out in the open. You find it so very easy to restrict the freedoms of others.

We will never agree on that point. We have the same freedom as you.

You don't have the same freedom as we have as long as you can restrict the ideas and speech of others.

One last word:
Do as you please. I cannot (and I will not) hinder you. Your opinion.

i didn't ask for your premission. In the United States of America - I don't need to ask permission to state my opinions or get anyones approval for my ideas and thoughts. Obvisouly if you have any thoughts close to what might be considered the National Socialism party though - you had better keep it to yourself.

By the way - I'm currently watching Uprising - can you get this DVD is Austria or Germany? It's about the Warsaw Ghetto.

[GrayMouser]

JD, I agree with almost everything you say on free speech, even though my political opinion is very different BUT

Le Pen did not almost win the French election. He got enough support in the first round to edge out the Socialist candidate

National Front (Le Pen): 16.86%
Socialist (Jospin): 16.18%
RFR: (Chirac): 19.88%

with the rest divided among a plethora of minor parties.

In the run-off required by the French electoral process he was overwhelmingly rejected.

Chirac: 82.21%
Le Pen:17.79%

And of course, he was not running as a fascist but as a anti-immigrant nationalist , complaining about all the foreigners who come over and don't learn the language or culture, identify themselves with their old country, go on welfare etc. , etc.
and all those liberal pc multiculturalists who help them get away with it.

[jerseydevil]

Originally posted by Lalaith
It could be (don't know what is going on in other people's minds), but I doubt it.
I think it is good that NS is forbidden, you are not. We will not agree. End of that disussion.

No we will not agree - you think it is perfectly acceptable to restrict the thoughts and speech of those you disagree with. I do not. I believe freedom for everyone as long as they don't resort to violence.

I said it could be. Not that it is that way.

I didn't say you did.

Capitalism. Ack.

Wow - so your a communist then? That's good to know. I personally like capitalism - it means if I work hard I can buy things I would like and better my life in other ways. So if you don't like capitalism do you give all your money away?

Of course it depends on the teacher and the headmaster but basically every child in Austria can get the same education. So rich people and poor people have both equal chances in competition. (well, not that true, rich children usually find it easier to get a job)

I think it matters far more than that. As I said in the post above - I am currently watching Uprising - I'm listening to the actors commentary. It was mentioned how one of the child actors in the movie who is from Vienna Austria had been forced to chang schools in Vienna because of the racism against him for being a jew.

Even if you subtract the known racism against Gypsies and other ethnic groups within Austria, Germany and other countries of Europe - people are NOT equal. You can NOT guarantee that everyone gets the same education and the same oppurtunities for college or that all schools are the same.

[jerseydevil]

Originally posted by GrayMouser
JD, I agree with almost everything you say on free speech, even though my political opinion is very different BUT

Le Pen did not almost win the French election. He got enough support in the first round to edge out the Socialist candidate

National Front (Le Pen): 16.86%
Socialist (Jospin): 16.18%
RFR: (Chirac): 19.88%

with the rest divided among a plethora of minor parties.

In the run-off required by the French electoral process he was overwhelmingly rejected.

Chirac: 82.21%
Le Pen:17.79%

And of course, he was not running as a fascist but as a anti-immigrant nationalist , complaining about all the foreigners who come over and don't learn the language or culture, identify themselves with their old country, go on welfare etc. , etc.
and all those liberal pc multiculturalists who help them get away with it.

I know about LePen - and that he didn't almost win the final round - but the French didn't even want Chirac and LePen should never have gotten as close as he did. They voted for LePen as a message to Chirac - not thinking that LePen would actually get that much of the vote and then they were basically forced to vote for Chirac to make sure LePen didn't win. I also know that LePen ran as an anti-immigrant - but he was also very racist and bigotted.

We had a former KKK member run for the presidency - he didn't get half way through the primary - let alone with the primary. For all intensive purposes - LePen won the equivalent to one of our primaries.

By the way - this is the description on Amazon of Uprising

Description
After Germany invades Poland in 1939, the Nazis decree that 350,000 Warsaw Jews be forcibly moved into a cordoned area known as the Warsaw Ghetto. Idealistic teacher Mordechai Anielewicz (Hank Azaria) decides the Jews must rise up against the Nazis and creates the Jewish Fighting Organization (JFO). He tries to secure the support of Adam Czerniakow (Donald Sutherland), the morally conflicted head of the Warsaw Ghetto's Jewish Council, but Adam declines because he knows that any act of resistance will provoke the Germans to retaliate by killing innocent Jews. Determined to mobilize a resistance alone if he has to, Mordechai recruits his friends and covert couriers whose ability to pass as Aryan helps them smuggle in arms and explosives from the Aryan side of the city, building up an arsenal to fight the Nazis.

When the Germans begin deporting 300,000 Jews to the Treblinka death camp, the JFO begins acts of resistance that culminate with ghetto fighters firing their first gunshots against the Nazis. When it becomes clear that the JFO is a force to be reckoned with, the German High Command sends in General Stroop (Jon Voight), who is determined to end the uprising in two or three days.

Capturing the horror that unfolds is Fritz Hippler (Cary Elwes), a filmmaker assigned by Hitler's chief propagandist to promote anti-Semitism with a film about Jewish life in the ghetto.

When the Nazis continue to suffer more casualties in their battle with the ghetto fighters, General Stroop decides to raze the ghetto. But even that can't stop the JFO. Forced to go underground into bunkers but energized by their success, the resisters fight on, ultimately holding off the Nazi army longer than the entire country of Poland. They're determined to live with honor--and if need be, die with honor--while lighting the torch for resistance in the occupied territories.

[afro-elf]

Originally posted by Spock
Then too the political correctness in this country has had "Huckleberry Finn" removed from many libraries along with "Tom Sawyer" and other classics to future readers loss.

I may have mentioned this ages ago but they removed the N-word from "Gone with the Wind"

The line was " We just house N*****s"

Whinny ass black people piss me off.

[jerseydevil]

Originally posted by afro-elf
I may have mentioned this ages ago but they removed the N-word from "Gone with the Wind"

The line was " We just house N*****s"

Whinny ass black people piss me off.

I didn't realise that. I'm pretty sure the book has "nigger" in there- but I know the movie doesn't. You can't whitewash history just because you don't like it.

It's like the damn Pirates of the Carribean ride. After 20 - 40 years of Walt Disney World and really Disneyland having the ride - a womens groupd complained about the ride. They had an issue with the pirates chasing the women around. I couldn't believe it when Disney folded and gave into them. The woment now carry plates of food - so the pirates are no longer chasing the women - they're chasing the food. The women's organisation felt it was demeaning to women - to hell with the fact that it was historically accurate.

[Artanis]

I agree with those who say freedom of speech should be for everyone, even if they're voicing extreme views. For me the only exception is statements which are asking people to take illegal actions. Extreme views are better dealt with in the open, instead of forcing them to remain underground, where I think they grow all the better.

Having said that I understand very well why so many people in Germany and Austria want to forbid the Neo-Nazis, even if they're marginal. European countries still live with the demons from WW2. Young Germans seem to have inherited the shame of the sins of their fathers. Heck, young people from Germany are coming here every year offering their help for free in hospitals, home care for elders and other social welfare structures. They want to 'make up for their grandfather's deeds' during the war. When I first heard of that it made a deep impact on me. It tells much about how the war is still remembered, more than 50 years later.

Oh yeah, and I'm proud of being Norwegian.

[Elvellon]

What business is it of the governments? I shouldn't have to carry around anything that tells them who I am. I carry a license that let's them know I can drive - that is all I need to carry. If I leave the house - I don't have to carry anything. What is the card used for? What might the government want to use it for later on? We have a history of not trusting the government because of colonial times - our Bill of Rights, as I have said - was written to protect us from the government. Our form of government as laid out in the Constitution was developed specically to keep any one branch of the government from getting too strong.

Here the ID card is usually used to identify yourself whenever you have to sign any official or important document. It tells you are who you are supposed to be, not someone trying to impersonate someone else. By the same reason it is used in banking transactions.

Possibly, if for some reason you are confused for someone else by the police, it is an easy and quick way to clarify who you really are.

With it, we are identified as citizens of our state and the EU, and can travel without the need of passport. Etc.

Oddly enough, given our recent history, it would be logical if we would suspect more of ID cards, but it doesn’t happen.

On the other hand identification in the Internet is frown upon by many.

So what is a leftist whiner called in Europe?

Good question, it seems they are somewhat rare nowadays, and further don’t belong to a single loud group. New Right whiners are much more militant

You feel that you are free because your speech hasn't been restricted (you seem to be the mainstream of Portugese Politics)- if you were one of the people whose speech is restricted then you would NOT consider yourself free.

There are no such people here.

I would suggest you watch or read 1984 and Farenheit 451 for information on what happens when the government restricts people's thought and freedoms. Don't think it can't happen either - the Soviets did it (leftists) and the Nazis did it (rightists). It's still going on in China, North Korea and Cuba - all leftist governments.

Idid (1984) but there was no need, my country lived under a rather oppressive dictatorship until 1974. My own country history tells me what a totalitarian regime can do. That is why we are able to see the value of freedom better than many.

Freedom of thought and speech is the most important thing - without that - it means someone else is trying to control your mind and thoughts.

It is one of many freedoms, not the only one. I do not attribute the same level of importance to publish an article about the pink underwear of a minister, and that of uncovering a case of governmental corruption.

I was talking to someone about this and they had come up with somethign I thought about. How would you feel if Ben just decided to make this board only where you could discuss good things about America? If you posted a discenting opinion on America - it automatically got deleted. What would happen then if we could say all these negative things about Europe - but then anything you said to counter it also got deleted? I have a feeling you wouldn't feel very free to express your opinion and you would feel rather descrimated against by the Americans. I bet it would make you more resentful too. But hey - it's an American board - so we could do it. So from now on - let's just hear how great America is and how it's the savior of the world. Then we won't have to take such drastic action and infringe on your free speech.

True, but what someone comes here with the full intension of shouting everybody else out? What if those people wants to use the board to, say, plan bashing people of the wrong religion, colour, etc?
You are making the assumption that if something was banned it was necessarily harmless, if detestable. But you are not basing that in knowledge, are you?

By the way - this is Wolfenstein 3-D. The site contains the following warning...

I played the game. Frankly, since I know what it is about I doubt it is a good example. I don’t know of any ban on Commandoes for instance, or other similar games.

So I presume is simply a judicial fluke.

[GrayMouser]

Originally posted by jerseydevil

By the way - really funny how France almost voted in LePen there.

I know about LePen - and that he didn't almost win the final round - but the French didn't even want Chirac and LePen should never have gotten as close as he did. They voted for LePen as a message to Chirac - not thinking that LePen would actually get that much of the vote and then they were basically forced to vote for Chirac to make sure LePen didn't win.

[jerseydevil]

Graymouser - what was your point? They did almost vote him in. They didn't want Chirac - Le Pen got a huge amount of the vote in the second round. The only reason why he was defeated in the second round was because the French citizens had backed themselves into a corner.

The French almost voted LePen in.

[Jonathan]

Originally posted by jerseydevil
The French almost voted LePen in.

I wonder how many times the French and the rest of Europe did not vote for the extreme right...

[jerseydevil]

Originally posted by Jonathan
I wonder how many times the French and the rest of Europe did not vote for the extreme right...

That is questionable - because there have been a influx of politicians who have been very anti-foreigners getting into high positions. I can not remember the politician who was assinated - but he was extreme right.

The racism in Europe is not unknown over here - even if not all the people are "extreme-right" - it seems like many Europeans think nothing of treating the gypsies and othe rminorities as less than human. I haven't been to Germany or the areas that it seems to be the worst in - but we hear about the things that happen over there a lot of times. I jave also talked to other people on the web who have told me about it - particularly the gypsies.

[Lalaith]

Originally posted by jerseydevil
Wow - so your a communist then? That's good to know. I personally like capitalism - it means if I work hard I can buy things I would like and better my life in other ways. So if you don't like capitalism do you give all your money away?

Why do you always have to think in extremes?
There is something in the middle. I don't have to be a Capitalist and still can be NO communist.

I think it matters far more than that. As I said in the post above - I am currently watching Uprising - I'm listening to the actors commentary. It was mentioned how one of the child actors in the movie who is from Vienna Austria had been forced to chang schools in Vienna because of the racism against him for being a jew.

Even if you subtract the known racism against Gypsies and other ethnic groups within Austria, Germany and other countries of Europe - people are NOT equal. You can NOT guarantee that everyone gets the same education and the same oppurtunities for college or that all schools are the same.

Racism is always a problem. But that has NOTHING to do with our good education system.

[GrayMouser]

Originally posted by jerseydevil
Graymouser - what was your point? They did almost vote him in. They didn't want Chirac - Le Pen got a huge amount of the vote in the second round. The only reason why he was defeated in the second round was because the French citizens had backed themselves into a corner.

The French almost voted LePen in.

The French did not almost vote Le Pen in- he lost, 82% to 18%

Since when is a 4 to 1 defeat almost victory ?

In the first round the vote split 38% for left-wing parties, 32% for centre/right and 19% for right-wing (Le Pen's National Front and a splinter group).

The other 11% split 5% Green, 4% "Hunting, Fishing, Nature, Tradition"and 2% independent Ecologist.

Le Pen only made it to the second round because the Socialist leader Jospin was so uninspiring that many French Leftists voted for other left-wing parties as a protest, figuring that in the first round it wouldn't matter- they would hold their noses and vote Jospin in the run-off.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/1946937.stm

So in the second round everyone else coalesced around Chirac because by French election law there was no other choice- that's what a run-off is.

At no time was there the remotest possibility of Le Pen winning.

You might as well say Wallace almost won in 1968 (14%)

[jerseydevil]

Originally posted by Lalaith
Why do you always have to think in extremes?
There is something in the middle. I don't have to be a Capitalist and still can be NO communist.

Well you said - "Captalism ack". So if you're not a Capitalist and not a communist - then what are you? All Socialism is is really a mixture of Capitalism and Communism (simplistic view). So if you're a Socialist - then you must support some Capitalism. I believe in small govenrment and the government staying out of people's lives. I feel that the majority of what I work to earn I should get to keep. I feel that if I work and make $120,000 I should pay the same percentage in taxes as someone who earns $30,000. I shouldn't be penalized for having worked harder, or was able to get a job that enabled me to make more money. I don't believe that companies should be heavily taxed - it just gets passed onto the consumer anyway in higher costs and the companies will move out to where taxes are lower (that's why so many companies leave NY and move across the river to NJ).

Racism is always a problem. But that has NOTHING to do with our good education system.

We have a good education system too - at least in NJ. You see one of things people dont' understand is that the education system is state based when it comes to what is taught. Everyone in the US is guaranteed a public education - plus we have community colleges. Anyone who wants to go to college CAN go to college.

Sure not everyone can get into Princeton - but if they have what it takes - Princeton will make sure - regardless of how much money they have - that they get in. Princeton is a private University too. I assume that Austria has private schools.

Here are some web sites so you can see how education works in the US -

US Department of Education
National Center for Education Statistics
NJ Education
Indiana Education
Princeton Univeristy Finacial Aid
Mercer County Community College

I don't know how your educational system works - but you claim to know that your educational system is better than the US's and it seems as if you don't even know anything about our educational system.

Also - education has nothing to do with freedom. Freedom is doing what I want to do - as long as I'm not hurting others. I am free to go to college - but I'm not guaranteed Princeton University without a lot of hard work.

[jerseydevil]

Originally posted by GrayMouser
The French did not almost vote Le Pen in- he lost, 82% to 18%

Since when is a 4 to 1 defeat almost victory ?

In the first round the vote split 38% for left-wing parties, 32% for centre/right and 19% for right-wing (Le Pen's National Front and a splinter group).

The other 11% split 5% Green, 4% "Hunting, Fishing, Nature, Tradition"and 2% independent Ecologist.

Le Pen only made it to the second round because the Socialist leader Jospin was so uninspiring that many French Leftists voted for other left-wing parties as a protest, figuring that in the first round it wouldn't matter- they would hold their noses and vote Jospin in the run-off.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/1946937.stm

So in the second round everyone else coalesced around Chirac because by French election law there was no other choice- that's what a run-off is.

At no time was there the remotest possibility of Le Pen winning.

You might as well say Wallace almost won in 1968 (14%)

We would have said that he won the primary. if a KKK member won the primary of the Republican ticket or if Louis Farhakhan (sp) won the primary for the democratic ticket - I would be disgusted. I don't think either one of those would win the primary though - which is basically what LePen did.

As I said - the French didn't even want Chirac reelected - but were forced to vote for him after LePen won.

I am also perfectly aware of what a run-off election is.

The fact remains that LePen was voted into the run off and the French were forced to vote for Chirac. You may argue that he was not almost voted in in the final round but how many people voted for Chirac who didn't even want him?