From the editorial of the last edition of MaltaToday:
"It is the likes of Alfred Sant that will keep the Labour party in opposition for another five years".
- Saviour "Hogan" Balzan
Nationalist spin? Eppur' si muove!
.... and I almost missed out on this part of the editorial....
"Which takes me back to the Labour party, the only political alternative that can be elected and expected to govern, so help me God. And if that is their intention, someone in the administration of this party should be so kind as to export Alfred Sant away from the island until the day after the elections. The less he talks the better the chances for the Labour party to replace the Nationalists in this grand task of governing this grand small island we have chosen for our home."
- still Hogan... my Hero
20 commentaires:
My commnet on Xifer to Antonio's same query...
Salvu Nazzjonalist mhuwiex zgur...naive lanqas. Ma nistax naghtih agegttiv ghax bhala editur-kittieb, hemmhekk qed naraw l-espressjoni studjata ta' agenda politika personali.
Jista' jkun li forsi jemmen hekk, u li ghalih l-MLP jiehu r-ruh minghajr Sant.
Jien nghid li l-MLP ma jistax jiehu r-ruh ghax m'ghadx fadallu ruh.
Ah! I see Archie beat me to both quotes. Well "Jista' jkun li forsi jemmen hekk, u li ghalih l-MLP jiehu r-ruh minghajr Sant." And like him many others... whether you agree with them or their reasoning is another matter. Whether you encourage or discourage them to keep on "hesitating" (will stick to this word once I chose to use it) is yet another. But they are out there and, personal agenda or not, there are many people who believe in that sentence:
IF Sant="GONE" THEN Vote Labour
IF Sant="STILL THERE" THEN GOTO rule of lesser evil
*The Rule of Lesser Evil
IF choice is Alfred Sant or Anything Goes then Anything Goes.
Anything Goes means I vote PN because in my limited knowledge (and thanks to PN propaganda) it is the only feasible alternative.
Anything Goes means AD are a bunch of tree-hugging instable minds who can speak of the sun, the sea and maybe rent (which on its own is too confusing).
hawwadni ha nifhmek...what is your point? what is your problem, after all? this seems to be more of an intellectual game than a political discussion. Why is Sant always in the way? How ever put him in the first place? Why is he the centre of the equation?
Point? Problem? Game?
and now Sant is the victim. Must we apologise because he heads the Opposition? Are we supposed to lay down our guns/avoid scrutinising him because he is not in government yet? Must we ignore Sant and take him with a pinch of salt just because he is not the PM yet? Are we not allowed to complain that he is our only alternative?
Centre of the equation? He is one of the many weak bits of it. You forget that whenever there is a discussion about the alternative we already imply that the PN alternative has been dismissed a priori and that we are searching beyond for the valid alternative.
I do not see any nationalist sympathisers complaining "why is our (failing) government at the centre of the equation?" You fail to realise this when you react to the Sant comments.
Problems? No I have no problems...
The Labour Party does. (and maybe anyone who falls victim of their spin abot Sant's victimisation)
Sthajjiltu Robert De Niro f'Taxi Driver lil Vella gej bil-"What's Your Problem?"...:-)
(naf li "YouLookingatMe?" jghid De Niro imma insomma...)
The question is: who gives a toss about Sant anyway? The perversity of this is that the PN spin can be quickly muted into sympathy for Sant.
I suggest we move the discussion elsewhere.
I still claim that this obsession with Sant is the end result planned out by the PN machine.
can we talk about ideas now? please?
[Into the mirror] You talkin' to me? You talkin' to me? You talkin' to me? Then who the hell else are you talkin' to? You talkin' to me? Well, I'm the only one here. Who the f**k do you think you're talking to? Oh, yeah? Okay! [whips out gun] Huh?
laqqas lookin' David... dawk il-kajbojs ta' Paceville... X'ghandek thares mann?
move elsewhere xejn... it is healthy for my hits :P
unless you mean change topic
Skuzawni talli qlajt din il-burraxka kollha. Jien qatt rreferejt ghal Sant bhala l-unika problema u li jissolva kollox jekk idabbar rasu. Biss, jekk xi darba l-MLP jrid jiehu r-ruh (avolja Mark qal li ma fadallux ruh), nassumi li minn hemm irid jibda - wara kollox dan prezentement huwa l-unika gvern alternattiv.
Bl-istess mod, jien ghidt kemm il-darba l-istess haga (ghalkemm fuq binarji differenti) dwar l-ghaziz isqof ta' Malta, li ilu b'hangover minn wara t-tieg ta' kana.
Xi tghidu jekk inkomplu d-diskursata fil-blogg tieghi halli nzid ftit hits jien ukoll? :P
talkin' goddam of course it's talkin' not lookin'
1. archibald. ma qlajt xejn. the argument was ripe for plucking. Hadd ma hu jghid li Sant hu l-uniku problema. Jien kont biss komplejt dwar il-fatt li ma nistax naqbel ma min ma jaccettax li hemm nies li verament jivvotaw ghal Labour format gdid.
2. Hits hits hits.
3. Issa kif qal sew Mark imiss li nitkellmu dwar x'nemmnu li ghandha tkun il-bidla, inkella naqghu fin-nassa ta' l-argument mimli non sequitur ta' Vlad.... (imbaghad nibbloggja dwarha la ikolli hin)
Dwar x'nemmen li ghandha tkun il-bidla nahseb wara l-gimgha d-diehla meta jkolli naqra iktar hin. Jigifieri time-out ghalissa jien habba l-ezamijiet...
Look quite frankly there is a democratic deficit:
Nationalist party is not rightist but bending over backwards to be social and keep bums in a job despite the brain drain and funds from the EU being lost due to ministries, embassies etc. being understaffed. A Thatcherite Austin Gatt (which is what this country needs) unfortunately has not yet appeared on the horizon, and sadly might never appear.
Labour: Look do we really have to go into this whole Sant thing again? A �Labour� party that has loads of valid things to criticise the PN about and never does ex. not getting the best out of Europe, treatment of refugees, tertiary education etc. etc. Well, as Mark said �partit bla ruh�. And as much as we smash Sant, tell me ONE person in the Labour party who he can be replaced with.
AD: Well, if more people like Jacques contested the election with them they might have enough valid candidates to form half a cabinet. Well I said half so although the best option, still not good enough realistically. Therefore valid on the moral and ideological front but not an option either - yet.
Norman Lowell (if he contests holding his nose): my God can we really ever sink to such depths? It would be like electing the American criminal Edward Smith (only an unimprisoned version)! Mutants like me would be eliminated overnight anyway. Us Xmen have enough hassle as it is protecting poor refugees returning home after a day of back-breaking work as it is from that shitbag and his Nazi �daddy didnt let me play heavy metal when I was young and so I wank everyday and punch niggas�gang.
People who can get out of the country thanks to the PN getting us into the EU won�t have to face the awful dilemma of voting for the worst of the worst evils in a few years time.
However for those left behind there is a terrible choice to be faced in the next election: NO choice. The Xmen are struggling daily for change but don�t think we will make it in time for next election. Just too many problems in the world, not to mention Malta!
What intrigues me is that no one has yet come up with an alternative....everyone complains about the three main parties and still no one has the balls to find a solution to the problem....if the MLP are still corrupt, the PN even more corrupt and the AD tree hugging people talking about rent....where does that leave the voters??
"Opinions are like balls, everyone has them" (Eastwood)
Meanwhile, hsejjes, this is yet another rant we often hear... whether it is aimed at the "liberal elite" (whoever they are) or at the complainers in general, it is always the same: You complain but offer no alternative.
Patience I think is a good virtue. It takes a large amount of sounding out to find out if there is a common ground to form an alternative. Just having a need to change is not good enough. I think we are on the right track since we are exorcising the ghosts of the past and ridding ourselves (gradually) of inbuilt prejudices. This will not happen overnight. The discussion for the discovery of the common ground is open I intend to tackle it in a more organised way on J'Accuse.
However, it is useless coming up with the macho terms of "no one has the balls". It is just as inconsequential a statement as saying "women are part of the root of all political evil in Malta because the only ones that took part in politics have made a mess of it and the rest just followed." So? Does it get us anywhere? Will we sidetrack into issues like "what does it take to have balls" or the "suppression of women in Malta in the XXth century"?
I hope not. And I also hope Clint was wrong... and that it is not just the people with balls who have opinions. ;)
PS Where does that leave the voters? They should be thinking about action.
I actually thought the expression went "opinions are like arseholes...". But that might have just been a variation (with corrections) on Eastwood's theme. At any rate it's more inclusive.
I do agree incidentally that kicking off this debate is useful in itself. Whether it's simply a way of sounding out who's on the same wavelength, a manner of engaging in political discourse with a difference, simply notching up some wankellectual points or actually starting the snowball down its long journey down the mountain.
don't you just love the idea of the fact that a phrase including the term "arseholes" can be seen as "more inclusive" from a gender equality point of view...
balls is sexist
arseholes includes women
simple innit?
yes, it's one of those delicious paradoxes ;-)
I thought is went something like "opinions are like arseholes - everybody's got one and most of them stink".
On a defintive point, the correct version is "well opinions are like assholes; everybody has one", Clint being American and not British. The confirmation may be listened to here.
www.clinteastwood.net/realmediafiles/soundclips/opinions.ram
It is from easily the most foolish of all Dirty Harry films, noteworthy as one of Jim Carrey's early roles, playing a murder victim. It is a shame it didn't come from Sudden Impact, where a rape victim dispatches her agressors to a painful death by initially shooting them in the balls, as it would have dovetailed nicely with the previous messages.
Aaah, the joys of a wasted youth...
Enregistrer un commentaire