Typical of Bush friends and allies, Silvo Berlusconi continues to display his utter contempt for democracy. As weazl outlines extensively in his earlier entry Bushism In Italy, Silvio refuses to relinquish his grip on power. Despite having lost the election, and having had the Italian Supreme Court confirm the result of challenger Prodi's victory, Berlusconi continues his refusal to concede. Even the Moron was finally compelled to call to congratulate Prodi (only a couple of weeks late). Yet being the patriotic Italian that he is, Berlusconi is threatening that the government will collapse and that no bills will pass the Senate. But as an example of the type of "democratic revolutionaries" that the Moron calls his friends, the reason why Berlusconi cannot be peeled from the reigns of power? The desire for him to avoid prosecution and possible jail.
A clear warning and example to American citizens (and world spectators) about what it will take to remove our own crop of criminals.
(E per i miei amici italiani, potete ripartire i vostri pensieri sul tema in italiano.)
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
12 comments:
So are you comparing America's constitutional powers and procedures to that of Italy's?
Is it somehow Bush's fault that Silvo Berlusconi, who isn't even Italy's head of state (that would be President Carlo Azeglio Ciampi) refuses to step down?
In Italy, the Prime Minister has more power than the President on matters of foreign policy. And yes, I would make the comparison: both are thoroughly corrupt and criminal, and have impacted their countries in ways that have fundamentally threatened and impaired the democratic processes in each, with absolutely no regard for the "will of the people." In fact, they both laugh and scorn such a quaint and naive little notion.
OK...the fish are biting today.
Who has a better system of government than ours? What state/country would you model democracy after?
You're scraping the bottom of the barrel. Italy's democracy, given the extemism and corruption of the Forza Italia party are perhaps only matched in the West by the thoroughly corrupt Republicans. Both countries are disgraces to democracies, and it's no surprise they are bosom buddies. Hopefully, under Prodi, Italy can clean itself up, as it has a lot of economic problems to deal with. But weazl was just there in January for three weeks, and had simply the best time, met the best people, and hopes that Italy can save itself from leaders like Berlusconi (which it appears that it has). But since the Supreme Court in this case wasn't thoroughly compromised like the US' in 2000, sadly I would have to say that their system was better. Every credible study showed that Gore won Florida. After that the country went completely down the toilet.
Says a lot when Italy's democracy, with a man who owns almost all the media and criminal convictions, still comes out on top. Very sad times.
Sorry, I did not clearly define my question.
I was asking other than the US or Italy, which country would you model a democracy after?
"Every credible study showed that Gore won Florida."
This isn't what the official recount showed.
Bush by 537 and yes, I've seen were at least four different counts would have given Gore a slight margin.
But I'm sure neither one of us wants to argue 2000 again. Time to move on, everybody else has.
Besides, would you really want Al Gore to be your President? His oil connections run just as deep and I don't trust his ties with China.
I'll be back later but probably won't comment. I got my daughter this weekend.
Later
Grunt..I took it as a given that everybody already understood the differences between a democracy and a Representative democracy.
The shortest response is that many countries have a parlamentiary type electoral system that allows for many more parties to be represented and would be a welcome improvement for Congress.
putting an end to gerrymandering would solve some of those problems.
I would agree with that suggestion certainly, but I think the problem really is the need to include more voices than are represented by a two party system.
Ecco perchè Silvio non andrà via.
Secondo Platone, tra i tre regimi conosciuti in Grecia, la democrazia, la oligarchia e la tirannia, quello democratico è quello che apparentemente permette di vivere meglio. Ma il problema, ecco appunto IL PROBLEMA, nasce dal fatto che senza
una costituzione, un insieme di leggi, una organizzazione sociale, ognuno può gestire le sua legge, la sua costituzione e
l'insieme di questi eventi origina una disorganizzazione sociale in cui la demagogia ha il sopravvento. La democrazia che
auspica Platone è quella, ad esempio, che non vuole il Cav. Berlusconi: regole certe, leggi, organizzazioni sociali uguali
per tutti (www.fisicamente.net).
Le elezioni politiche del 2006, hanno confermato e rafforzato la condotta politica e morale del Cavaliere.
Berlusconi come Bush? Si è possibile, anzi se si analizza la sua campagna elettorale si può dire che egli ha aggiunto
una forte tocco di populismo e demagogia. La sua avversione contro il "comunismo",le aggressioni contro Prodi e la sua
coalizione, le assurde "televendite" (ancora dovrà spiegare come abbatterà l'ICI, l'imposta sugli immobili), le risposte mai date alle precise domande che gli vengono rivolte.
Ma la cosa che più di tutte ci spaventa (di cui nessuno parla) è che il Cavaliere, fa parte di un disegno di destabilizzazione
dello stato che risale a tantissimi anni fa. Pochi italiani ricordano (smemorati) che negli anni ottanta fu smantellata
e scoperta la famosa loggia massonica "propaganda 2" , nota come P2, capitanata dal fascista Licio Gelli. Alla loggia
appartenevano grosse personalità della politica italiana, dell'alta finanza, del SISDE (i nosrti servizi segreti), della guardia di
finanza, dell'esercito e di tutti i soggetti che avevano un grossa influenza nel sistema statale italiano. Guarda caso anche il
nostro caro Silvio era un tesserato della P2 (n° tessera 1816) ed in questo personaggio Gelli e company hanno visto la chiave di volta per aprire un varco nel mondo della comunicazione e dell'informazione. Tutti pensano che ormai la P2 è scomparsa, ma si
sbagliano di grosso, la P2 esiste ed è più forte di prima. Con Berlusconi, stanno mettendo definitivamente fine al progetto di creare
lo stato parallelo: sono riusciti a conquistare il parlamento, la televisione, i giornali, l'editoria e l'esercito italiano
capitanato dal ministro della difesa prof. On. Martino, casualmente anche lui ex piduista. La nascita di mediaset e di tutte le società
che Berlusconi ha creato (da notare che l'uomo più ricco d'Italia non produce beni ma bensì servizi), fanno parte quindi di un
sistema creato da finanziamenti di ignota provenienza (da dove provengono?) necessari a monopolizzare entro gli anni 90 i media.
Quindi ricapitolando - Avanzamento lavori loggia massonica propagada due (P2):
1. Influenzare il parlamento ed il senato (fatto);
2. Monopolizzare i media (fatto);
3. Ministero della difesa (fatto);
4. Servizi segreti (fatto);
A questo punto mancano i "comunisti" e la magistratura.
Ciao Luigi.
P.S. ( e poi chissà perchè il Cavaliere odia così tanto i "comunisti" e la magistratura? Spudorato golpista)
Luigi, thank you very much for your post. I am going to respond in English, because it is clear that you were able to understand the language to get to this point, the other readers may not understand Italian, and it will save me the shame of having a much smaller vocablulary and making grammatical errors. ;-)
Getting to the point, I really want to thank you about the discussions of P2. I had never heard of P2 and then did a Wikipedia Search that seems to have a bit of interesting information:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Propaganda_Due
And this will be something I will further look at, especially at it seems to be a conduit as well for CIA funds. Historicially, the CIA had been an almost parallel government. Their strength has been gradually destroyed by this Bush Administration seeking to eliminate any and all threats to power and thus has targeted the CIA.
http://www.commondreams.org/views04/1118-23.htm
http://www.antiwar.com/justin/?articleid=3980
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A45940-2005Jan3?language=printer
http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/008283.php
And now the White House (and the shell CIA it has created) seeks to control any dissemination of information:
http://news.ft.com/cms/s/499ab500-d55a-11da-93bc-0000779e2340.html
Okay, okay, that's some of the American side. But what I want to know, and what you haven't attempted to do, is to explain the consequences of this Prodi victory, in your opinion. I mean, we know that the media is Berlusconi controlled, and I can take your word for it about the secret service and defense, but parliament? You have mentioned that this is a done deal, but Prodi has put together a majority coalition, albeit fragile. Are there chances for brighter prospects? Weazl did say that if Berluscioni won, democracy would be finished in Italy, and essentially you don't seem to be disagreeing. But you seem perhaps more pessimistic than weazl, for you haven't mentioned that the Italian elections had any impact on the pervasive influence to attribute to this P2.
Anyway, I look forward to your response, and, as before, feel free to respond nella sua lingua.
Post a Comment