Slamming courts whose rulings make no sense may be fun, but giving credit where credit is due is mostly a pleasant task. Ontario's Court of Appeal ruled in favor of the sex offender registry, with Justice Blair noting the likelihood of reoffending trumps the freedoms of the criminal.
The Globe and Mail made my day sunnier. The score since yesterday is thus
Justice: 1, Nonsense: 1.
If more judges had Robert Blair's common sense we'd all rest more assured that the laws of the land were in safe hands to interpret.
Saturday, 26 April 2008
Friday, 25 April 2008
Non-funny limericks on a non-funny topic
I would have tried to make them funnier, but the Supreme Court decision isn't. A couple of random limericks might just soothe the frustration. PS: I want them improved.
In Sarnia they had a school,
with a pupil really uncool.
The drugs had him caught,
and brought into court
For a sad show of utter misrule.
There was a young man called Brown,
who lived in Calgary town.
He had lotsa heroin,
was about to be travellin',
And the courts did nothing but frown.
In Sarnia they had a school,
with a pupil really uncool.
The drugs had him caught,
and brought into court
For a sad show of utter misrule.
There was a young man called Brown,
who lived in Calgary town.
He had lotsa heroin,
was about to be travellin',
And the courts did nothing but frown.
Supreme Court castrates law enforcement
I am not one to slam the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, but interpretations of its provisions are fair game. The latest one (as CBC reports) lends itself to ridicule so easily it's pathetic.
The Supreme Court with its recent decision on the use of sniffer dogs has effectively castrated the entire law enforcement force network; by linking the admissibility of evidence to reports of criminal behavior and blatantly ignoring the simple truth that one shouldn't break the law six judges have all but handed Canada to the criminal gangs that smuggle the same drugs that kill and maim so many.
It will thus be safe for the cartels to use one-off or limited-use couriers because people with little or no criminal records in bus terminals cannot arouse reasonable suspicion, provided sniffer dogs were even allowed into the terminal.
But the top court wrote that the police had no evidence that any crime had been committed and that there was nothing to establish that bus depots in general or Calgary in particular are rampant with drug dealers.
Perfect! Now carrying drugs is safe as long as no-one rats you out. Pablo Escobar would send the Supreme Court a thank-you card with flowers! What were they smoking?
A school and a bus terminal, as well as airports, streets, cinemas, stations and the like are public spots where your privacy is invaded by tens or thousands of strangers' eyes. Whereas one's home is one's castle, in public the notion of privacy is somewhat different. This is no argument of the "nothing to hide" sort, just a mere constatation that if law enforcement officials are to protect us from crime and misdemanor they have to be able to do their jobs. One is not supposed to bring magic mushrooms to school, as much as one is not supposed to possess heroin, let alone be clearly intentioned to transport it to other destinations for resale.
I don't know if the judges contemplated the consequences of their incompetence and guaranteeism. This ruling can apply directly to sniffer dogs in airports, since air travel cannot arouse legitimate suspicions, can it?
Whether such catastrophic implications are avoided or not, the message is clear: the notions of "right" and "freedom" are being denuded of the responsibility and law-abiding that comes with them. What's worse, those charged with maintaining law and order are being deprived of the tools and means necessary for their job.
Yikes!
Friday, 18 April 2008
If you are a thug who befriends butchers...
attacking the CNN will backfire!
Despite the general condemnation of the way the Tibet discontent is being handled, despite the tarnished reputation of Chinese exports following the scandals with lead paint and date-rape precursors in kids' toys, despite the evident immorality of the dealings with the murderous Sudanese government, despite it all...
China just BEGS FOR MORE!
When you pick a fight you might consider the consequences, as well as obviously checking your ammunition and equipment for technical faults, scarce logic, lack of common sense or the possibility of backfires. Clearly some geronto-techno-auto-mediocrocrat in Beijing thought toying around with the CNN would be a good idea as well as an ego boost. In my eyes it in't working out that well.
Jack Cafferty, a CNN commentator, attacked the Chinese government labelling them as goons and thugs, as well as generally filing Chinese exports into the "junk" category. Personally I do not think he is far from the truth. A little push for controversy would land me firmly by his side.
This angered the Chinese government who demanded an apology and picked on the apparent (to them) stereotyping by Cafferty of ALL Chinese people as goons and thugs making junk. The nonsensical attack on Cafferty's comments (one of the many) can be read here on Xinhua.
The comments could have been surely more qualified (thus making them stand even stronger in the face of scrutiny). However, it is generally agreed that one cannot accuse a whole nation of the faults of the few, particularly the few who rule. Failure to pick this up denotes stupidity or blindness, or both. The end result is further publicity for Cafferty's comments underlining a sad reality and further humiliation for China before the world public opinion.
However, as Cafferty is accused by the Xinhua-published columnist of double standards, let us take a look at China's actions and friends.
1) Inaction during the Burmese monks' unrest, while butchering of peaceful demonstrators was internationally reported.
2) Dealings with the Sudanese government and stalling discussion on Darfur in international bodies
3) China's very own repression frenzy in Tibet
4) Last but not least, selling weapons to Zimbabwe's government days after the election when it was clear the government would be voted out and put up a fight.
If you tell me who your friends are I'll tell you about yourself. You are what you do. The verdict for China is unequivocal and unanimous: a bunch of thuggish goons befriending butchers and assasins, peddling trusting Westerners poisonous junk if we dare take an eye off them for a moment, brutalizing the populace whose souls and minds they long to own and sending those whose ownership they cannot extort to Laogai slave labor camps. To make junk.
Picking a fight with the CNN for telling reality isn't going to work unless the act is clean to start with.
Despite the general condemnation of the way the Tibet discontent is being handled, despite the tarnished reputation of Chinese exports following the scandals with lead paint and date-rape precursors in kids' toys, despite the evident immorality of the dealings with the murderous Sudanese government, despite it all...
China just BEGS FOR MORE!
When you pick a fight you might consider the consequences, as well as obviously checking your ammunition and equipment for technical faults, scarce logic, lack of common sense or the possibility of backfires. Clearly some geronto-techno-auto-mediocrocrat in Beijing thought toying around with the CNN would be a good idea as well as an ego boost. In my eyes it in't working out that well.
Jack Cafferty, a CNN commentator, attacked the Chinese government labelling them as goons and thugs, as well as generally filing Chinese exports into the "junk" category. Personally I do not think he is far from the truth. A little push for controversy would land me firmly by his side.
This angered the Chinese government who demanded an apology and picked on the apparent (to them) stereotyping by Cafferty of ALL Chinese people as goons and thugs making junk. The nonsensical attack on Cafferty's comments (one of the many) can be read here on Xinhua.
The comments could have been surely more qualified (thus making them stand even stronger in the face of scrutiny). However, it is generally agreed that one cannot accuse a whole nation of the faults of the few, particularly the few who rule. Failure to pick this up denotes stupidity or blindness, or both. The end result is further publicity for Cafferty's comments underlining a sad reality and further humiliation for China before the world public opinion.
However, as Cafferty is accused by the Xinhua-published columnist of double standards, let us take a look at China's actions and friends.
1) Inaction during the Burmese monks' unrest, while butchering of peaceful demonstrators was internationally reported.
2) Dealings with the Sudanese government and stalling discussion on Darfur in international bodies
3) China's very own repression frenzy in Tibet
4) Last but not least, selling weapons to Zimbabwe's government days after the election when it was clear the government would be voted out and put up a fight.
If you tell me who your friends are I'll tell you about yourself. You are what you do. The verdict for China is unequivocal and unanimous: a bunch of thuggish goons befriending butchers and assasins, peddling trusting Westerners poisonous junk if we dare take an eye off them for a moment, brutalizing the populace whose souls and minds they long to own and sending those whose ownership they cannot extort to Laogai slave labor camps. To make junk.
Picking a fight with the CNN for telling reality isn't going to work unless the act is clean to start with.
Monday, 14 April 2008
Reflections on an expected outcome
Italy is Berlusconi's, again. I expected this result and therefore am not shocked, scandalized or appalled. A mix of gullibility, disillusionment with the left-wing government and blind loyalty brought the colorful billionaire a majority even without the centrist or ultra-fascist votes. Hats off.
This new Parliament, son of a ghastly election law, will however be a great improvement on the past. First and foremost the radical parties have been wiped out by the coherence of the major allies, who refused blackmail by the so-called kings of the 1%.
A usual deal would involve an ininfluential party demanding more "safe" seats from its greater counterpart in exchange for its tiny but potentially crucial contribution. In this election things were different. The radical left were left stranded by the moderate wing of progressives and catholics merging into the Democratic Party (PD), in coalition with former prosecutor Di Pietro's Italy of Values. The radical and unrepenting fascists were left out by the coerced convergence of populists and the (reformed) heirs of the fascist lineage into the PdL, in coalition with two autonomist parties. The centrists gambled most, and won.
As it stands now, Berlusconi should have a solid House majority of 340 (out of over 600), the Democrat coalition at 241 and the centrists alone at 34. At the Senate the right coalition will have 163 versus the PD's 141, plus two senators for the centrists who managed to overcome the 8% barrier somewhere.
Overall several parties caucused into the major ones, but a total count puts six parties in Parliament, plus sprinkles of regional parties caucusing with one of the majors. The hopeful radical left didn't break any of the barriers, slipping from a total of 10% in the last election to a meagre 3% this time, resulting in its parliamentary caucus which included pacifists, trotskyists and whatnot being wiped out. Fascist factions too have been wiped out, as most minor parties.
The outcome of this election offers food for thought.
The tremendous success of the Northern League (the Lega) is not just a protest vote against immigration or the political "caste". It is the only party openly advocating federalism and the North, cheated by the left in 2006 on the promise of a constitutional review, propelled the party to peaks of 25% in Lombardy. Federalism will be achieved this time and a referendum will be called again. If it fails on the votes of the numerous (and money-sucking) South I fear a rift will open. The irrelevant southern autonomists should push the federalist case HARD. Fiscal federalism is the only way to starve the Mafia of state money and make the regional administrations accountable for their waste.
Italians have abandoned communist delusions. Irresponsible trade unions, unintelligent pacifism, ambiguity on anti-globalization vandalism and ill-advised externations have cost the left dear. We have had enough.
Fascism is confined to the black dustbin of history, with all of the remaining parties scooping up less than 4%. Reformed nationalism is now part of the PdL, and it's a historic change.
The Catholic centre is irrelevant and I wish it well, since it could be a good counterbalance to Berlusconi's excesses in the next Parliament (my hopes of the latter retiring after this term in office would be extremely naive).
Parliament has become a little more governable, and the country too. This is not an opportunity to waste. It is also a wake-up call: old politics is on the way out and it is up to the survivors to bring Italy out of the factionalism that has dogged it since WW2 into a more Liberal vs Conservative arena.
Photo: AP
Sunday, 13 April 2008
A disillusioned manifesto for a sleepy election
My country goes to the polls and I fail to feel any passion. Often elections are a time of euphoria and suspense, waiting for the people's verdict after months of campaigning, promises, criticisms, commitments, debates and other dressings on the ballot salad. This time round it almost feels like a long-overdue medical treatment. Two years of government by Romano Prodi, although courageous in many aspects and certainly efficient on certain deregulations and public debt, left me disillusioned about the entire reformist cause.
Italy is a nation with an overwhelmingly vital spirit, strifled by a morass system of power, favor, connection, corruption and self-serving lack of sense of State duty. From the worst kind of university professor to the worst kind of spoiled public employee, from politically appointed heads of hospital wards to political calculations in public management decisions, from monopolist professional corporations to out-of-touch trade unions Italy seems an inscrutable mosaic of small centers of power. A boot-shaped colony of small and big octopi maneuvering and sharing their citizen preys, playing with them and enjoying the untouchability granted by condescending higher spheres of power.
I love my country and wish to see it prosper. But the promises of the main parties fail to tackle the essential lack of liberty that destroys people's hopes. Promises to reduce bureaucracy are empty when they are confronted with public employment trade unions to whose demands most governments had to yield. Deregulation is not the granting of more taxi licenses in the city of Rome but the abolishment of fixed-quota taxi licensing altogether. Promises of job creation cannot be fulfilled when punitive business fees and union rules prevent enterprise, when professional orders rule their professions like a mafia and a law graduate can't set up shop without the blessing of the local monopolist order branch.
Italy needs to
-- redefine its national unity in a federal framework, promote fiscal responsibility among its 20 regions to stop the outflow of taxpayers' money from North to South,
-- create a stronger and freer Government with greater PM powers,
-- reform the election laws to introduce rigid first-past-the-post systems,
-- cut public expenditure by cutting red tape and administrative power centres,
-- abolish the 108 (and counting) Provinces as per referendum (conveniently shelved)
-- deregulate all professions leaving the orders as highly-respected certifying bodies,
-- eradicate trade union politicization,
-- reform higher education toward greater private financing and professorial accountability,
-- Privatize all publicly-owned corporations to eliminate the root cause of their politicization and inefficiency (government appointments)
-- Reform its pension system to aim for the radical downsizing of the national pension fund
Parties promise some or many of these. But these aims are impossible to achieve for a coalition alone. While Berlusconi and his tactics are in politics, no great consensus can be reached. The delusional and archaic leftists may well influence a left-wing majority. And certainly constitutional reform will be stalled due to lack of a 2/3 majority.
I feel close to no passion because I have almost ceased to hope for an awakening of people's sense of civic duty. Italy's problems are before their very eyes, yet the blame-game is still the most popular pastime in Rome. Lack of strong and sweeping commitments denotes complacency with the constituted status quo and power equilibrium.
I remain hopeful, but no party can expect my passionate endorsement until it decides to take a strong and consistent stance on greater freedom of choice, personal liberty, devolution and deregulation.
The ideas are there, maybe; the willpower definitely isn't. How can that excite and inspire a voter?
Italy is a nation with an overwhelmingly vital spirit, strifled by a morass system of power, favor, connection, corruption and self-serving lack of sense of State duty. From the worst kind of university professor to the worst kind of spoiled public employee, from politically appointed heads of hospital wards to political calculations in public management decisions, from monopolist professional corporations to out-of-touch trade unions Italy seems an inscrutable mosaic of small centers of power. A boot-shaped colony of small and big octopi maneuvering and sharing their citizen preys, playing with them and enjoying the untouchability granted by condescending higher spheres of power.
I love my country and wish to see it prosper. But the promises of the main parties fail to tackle the essential lack of liberty that destroys people's hopes. Promises to reduce bureaucracy are empty when they are confronted with public employment trade unions to whose demands most governments had to yield. Deregulation is not the granting of more taxi licenses in the city of Rome but the abolishment of fixed-quota taxi licensing altogether. Promises of job creation cannot be fulfilled when punitive business fees and union rules prevent enterprise, when professional orders rule their professions like a mafia and a law graduate can't set up shop without the blessing of the local monopolist order branch.
Italy needs to
-- redefine its national unity in a federal framework, promote fiscal responsibility among its 20 regions to stop the outflow of taxpayers' money from North to South,
-- create a stronger and freer Government with greater PM powers,
-- reform the election laws to introduce rigid first-past-the-post systems,
-- cut public expenditure by cutting red tape and administrative power centres,
-- abolish the 108 (and counting) Provinces as per referendum (conveniently shelved)
-- deregulate all professions leaving the orders as highly-respected certifying bodies,
-- eradicate trade union politicization,
-- reform higher education toward greater private financing and professorial accountability,
-- Privatize all publicly-owned corporations to eliminate the root cause of their politicization and inefficiency (government appointments)
-- Reform its pension system to aim for the radical downsizing of the national pension fund
Parties promise some or many of these. But these aims are impossible to achieve for a coalition alone. While Berlusconi and his tactics are in politics, no great consensus can be reached. The delusional and archaic leftists may well influence a left-wing majority. And certainly constitutional reform will be stalled due to lack of a 2/3 majority.
I feel close to no passion because I have almost ceased to hope for an awakening of people's sense of civic duty. Italy's problems are before their very eyes, yet the blame-game is still the most popular pastime in Rome. Lack of strong and sweeping commitments denotes complacency with the constituted status quo and power equilibrium.
I remain hopeful, but no party can expect my passionate endorsement until it decides to take a strong and consistent stance on greater freedom of choice, personal liberty, devolution and deregulation.
The ideas are there, maybe; the willpower definitely isn't. How can that excite and inspire a voter?
Sunday, 6 April 2008
Italian business just got a little free-er
Italy's antitrust watchdog ruled today that it is not OK for local municipalities to impose compulsory closing days on commercial enterprises (i.e. shops). The ruling came after a complaint against the Rome municipality, which fined shopkeepers who opened up on Easter Monday.
This precedent will allow anyone owning a shop to be open anytime they wish, be it a working day or a Sunday, without the constraint of town bureaucrats gagging business supposedly in the interest of the workers, who need in the mind of these statist wonks to be shielded from the (by default) exploitative owner and greedy capitalist.
Reactions range from relief (consumers) to outright condemnation, with the Archbishop of Pompei even calling it an "attack against God", while others point the finger against consumerism, spout unionist drivel or attempt to sound academic about changing society and shops as social space. They are so full of bull!
The very essence of free enterprise in a capitalist society is being able to do business how one wishes to. A little bastion of socialism and nonsense has fallen in Italy. Sadly there's still way to go before I can call my home country a truly economically and socially free nation.
This precedent will allow anyone owning a shop to be open anytime they wish, be it a working day or a Sunday, without the constraint of town bureaucrats gagging business supposedly in the interest of the workers, who need in the mind of these statist wonks to be shielded from the (by default) exploitative owner and greedy capitalist.
Reactions range from relief (consumers) to outright condemnation, with the Archbishop of Pompei even calling it an "attack against God", while others point the finger against consumerism, spout unionist drivel or attempt to sound academic about changing society and shops as social space. They are so full of bull!
The very essence of free enterprise in a capitalist society is being able to do business how one wishes to. A little bastion of socialism and nonsense has fallen in Italy. Sadly there's still way to go before I can call my home country a truly economically and socially free nation.
Thursday, 3 April 2008
What kind of mother
can do this to the baby she bears in her womb?
To learn that not only drug-addicted babies are born and have to suffer the consequences of their brainless mothers' recklessness but that their numbers are so high is truly chilling. More chilling, though, are some of the comments to the story. Some people advocate forced sterilizations, some support the idea of criminal proceedings for damage to the unborn, others lay the blame on the insufficient amount of welfare. The same person states:
Surely more could have been done earlier to prevent them from beginning to do drugs in the first place. Surely they could have educated about pregnancy prevention, about responsibility to self and others. And surely they could have been educated about the unattractiveness of single motherhood as a choice (and it often isn't). By parents and family first and foremost. By the school system secondly.
However we cannot allow such well-intentioned permissivism to permeate policymaking. The link between poverty, single motherhood and drugs is not causal. You do drugs because you do drugs, period. And while everyone chooses their own poison there's nothing guaranteeing anyone the right to choose anyone else's. While single motherhood is challenging from a work-life balance and financial perspective, there is no situation whereby the only options are either welfare or selling drugs.
I shall not ramble on. But a few key concepts deserve mention:
A) Accepted pregnancy automatically carries responsibility for a being incapable of making autonomous decisions. And despite all the good-ism two months without a period and morning sickness might sound a few bells. Therefore there is a direct responsibility of the mother for consciously destroying her child's physical abilities and such responsibility (or abjuration of) must be accounted for. How, that's up to policymakers and society to decide.
B) The notion of drug use and abuse as a consequence of factors beyond people's control has to be eradicated from the public perception as an obvious, dangerous and destructive fallacy brought by permissivist traitors of common sense and perpetuated by weak-minded mediocrocrats. The needle doesn't find your vein and the spliff doesn't undergo spontaneous combustion. For God's sake do whatever you want with your body and your life, but blame it on no-one but yourself and don't let it maim others.
C) Although the social stigma might lead us to conclude that the problem is mainly affecting single mothers, nothing in the article says so. It could just as well have been future mommy and daddy happily smoking crack in their back garden with their junkie friends. It could have been future mommy and daddy chainsmoking spliffs. This isn't a problem of insufficient welfare. It could be a problem of insufficient treatment. It definitely is, though, a problem of lack of education, lack of character-building, lack of law enforcement and a spreading culture of everything being allowed without the need to face the consequences.
Life is tough. It's tougher when you're weak and ignorant. It's tougher on others when you are irresponsible. All those three notions should be carved in your mind since childhood. And for that last point you must pay.
"They are sweating and crying. They can't breathe. They have fast heart rates, vomiting and diarrhea. We have to actually give them morphine to make their life bearable," said Hay earlier this week.
Drug-addicted newborns suffer everything from drug withdrawal to kidney failure, strokes and heart attacks.
"We need to start doing the same for drug addicted-affected babies, particularly for cocaine, marijuana, crystal meth and heroin," said Hay.
To learn that not only drug-addicted babies are born and have to suffer the consequences of their brainless mothers' recklessness but that their numbers are so high is truly chilling. More chilling, though, are some of the comments to the story. Some people advocate forced sterilizations, some support the idea of criminal proceedings for damage to the unborn, others lay the blame on the insufficient amount of welfare. The same person states:
"It is about addictions and the conditions in society that promote the downslide of women into poverty and despair. Drug addicted women can often barely look after themselves, so the task of nurturing their unborn or newborn is overwhelming and incomprehensible to them. "
[...]
"But a single mom selling drugs can make more in a few days than she can all month on welfare. And the gap between selling and using is small. "
Surely more could have been done earlier to prevent them from beginning to do drugs in the first place. Surely they could have educated about pregnancy prevention, about responsibility to self and others. And surely they could have been educated about the unattractiveness of single motherhood as a choice (and it often isn't). By parents and family first and foremost. By the school system secondly.
However we cannot allow such well-intentioned permissivism to permeate policymaking. The link between poverty, single motherhood and drugs is not causal. You do drugs because you do drugs, period. And while everyone chooses their own poison there's nothing guaranteeing anyone the right to choose anyone else's. While single motherhood is challenging from a work-life balance and financial perspective, there is no situation whereby the only options are either welfare or selling drugs.
I shall not ramble on. But a few key concepts deserve mention:
A) Accepted pregnancy automatically carries responsibility for a being incapable of making autonomous decisions. And despite all the good-ism two months without a period and morning sickness might sound a few bells. Therefore there is a direct responsibility of the mother for consciously destroying her child's physical abilities and such responsibility (or abjuration of) must be accounted for. How, that's up to policymakers and society to decide.
B) The notion of drug use and abuse as a consequence of factors beyond people's control has to be eradicated from the public perception as an obvious, dangerous and destructive fallacy brought by permissivist traitors of common sense and perpetuated by weak-minded mediocrocrats. The needle doesn't find your vein and the spliff doesn't undergo spontaneous combustion. For God's sake do whatever you want with your body and your life, but blame it on no-one but yourself and don't let it maim others.
C) Although the social stigma might lead us to conclude that the problem is mainly affecting single mothers, nothing in the article says so. It could just as well have been future mommy and daddy happily smoking crack in their back garden with their junkie friends. It could have been future mommy and daddy chainsmoking spliffs. This isn't a problem of insufficient welfare. It could be a problem of insufficient treatment. It definitely is, though, a problem of lack of education, lack of character-building, lack of law enforcement and a spreading culture of everything being allowed without the need to face the consequences.
Life is tough. It's tougher when you're weak and ignorant. It's tougher on others when you are irresponsible. All those three notions should be carved in your mind since childhood. And for that last point you must pay.
Tuesday, 1 April 2008
Mugabe's April fools ... or not?
Zimbabwe has been a messy business for years. It just got messier.
The recent rumoured election results, as most know, give the butcher Mugabe losing to opposition leader Morgan Tsvangirai. Official results, however, are delayed. And I am not surprised.
Those who place high hopes in Mugabe taking the advice being showered upon him from all corners to quit, run and hide sound well-intentioned and noble but naive to me. A look at the assasin's record would freeze anyone's blood, and I for one am all too sure he wouldn't hesitate to murder half of his country beginning with the election commission if he needed to do so to stay in power.
I pray for Zimbabwe and I pray for Mugabe's criminal fury to have grown colder, or at least withered with age. I pray for him to go and for there to be as little blood as possible. But I prepare myself for the bitterness of waking up one morning and finding out Mugabe still steers Zimbabwe on its route to destruction.
I have no place in Italian politics
This is a pretty straightforward explanation for why Italian politics looks like a total muddle to me, and why I am frequently accused by fellow members of the Italian expat (and not) community of being a hypocrite because I criticize every candidate's position as inappropriate for the country but will end up voting anyway.
Yes I do vote, I do not waste my ballot. And No, I do not choose the least worst candidate, nor do I vote a party "to keep the other guy out".
The "Politometro" gives 15 statements which I can totally/partially agree/disagree with or be neutral. The statements span topics such as research freedom, abortion, in-vitro fertilization, trade unions, civil partnerships, school vouchers, nuclear energy, returning to Iraq, deregulation, minimum wage, flat tax, etc. If my fiscal conservative - social libertarian mix is anything to go by, no major PM candidate in Italy is the right choice for me.
So it should come as no surprise to anyone that my vote (in the foreign North America constituency) went not to a candidate representing the party closest to my views but to the person I judged most suitable (based on total lack of information or campaigning save by Berlusconi's party) to represent expat views in the national parliament: both the youngest and only foreign-born Italian in the candidate list. Incidentally, a woman too. I wish her success.
Yes I do vote, I do not waste my ballot. And No, I do not choose the least worst candidate, nor do I vote a party "to keep the other guy out".
The "Politometro" gives 15 statements which I can totally/partially agree/disagree with or be neutral. The statements span topics such as research freedom, abortion, in-vitro fertilization, trade unions, civil partnerships, school vouchers, nuclear energy, returning to Iraq, deregulation, minimum wage, flat tax, etc. If my fiscal conservative - social libertarian mix is anything to go by, no major PM candidate in Italy is the right choice for me.
So it should come as no surprise to anyone that my vote (in the foreign North America constituency) went not to a candidate representing the party closest to my views but to the person I judged most suitable (based on total lack of information or campaigning save by Berlusconi's party) to represent expat views in the national parliament: both the youngest and only foreign-born Italian in the candidate list. Incidentally, a woman too. I wish her success.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)