Indeed it is.
He never tricked or cheated.
He failed, and even once as he tried to joke.
did not make it at the time of his first TV appearances - I'm talking about the time of the first private radio stations with little more than regional coverage - or when, using all possible tricks, disguised himself as a political statesman.
Overnight, trusting to my first impression, I realized that, with that person, I could not even share a bench in a public park.
course, someone will object that can not be based on the opinions and suggestions but this is right, at least for that time, the instinct or the "suggestion" I get my information more appropriate to look at the character in the clearest light.
From then on, I had the opportunity to hear or read statements or reflections of personality, which, having had to approach for different reasons, knew him, and unconsciously, confirmed my earlier suspicion (see Enrico Cuccia and Indro Montanelli).
Along the way, the mutant Berlusconi, huddled other comments made by some more personality to list them now, and perhaps it would be too long now, useless.
On the other hand, certain names should be known or at least you created between what we are made from initial idea to seduce can make some remnant of advanced power in the trough of a pig that, in many, even today, by all means, try to get close.
Oh, sure, many of them today are disappointed, saddened. Some, like Guzzanti father, seems to have changed even in the worst of Berlusconi inquisitor: the analysis, the team and reveals it in its different facets psychological.
But unlike in an opinion that many are scrambling to spread on the action of premier, debating how and why certain attitudes and statements, I think, today, Silvio Berlusconi, consistent with its being, has given the best. I am convinced
I've played to perfection the role that is given from the very beginning of his rise in the Italian political scene, ie, the stagnant swamp in which foul the air over Europe.
since "big shot" (invented by its current Minister of Development, Paolo Romani ed) when, with that program, he began to inoculate the "tissue" in the people of viewers less informed and probably more repressed, the subject never stopped anointing of the video image with its plastic, poison and embarrass any form of intelligence with the insipid jokes (Model WC elementary class IV), to make laughable in the eyes of any civilized inhabitant of our world, unhappy and sad country, subject to him.
I have never voted or supported and to be honest, I've never even hated. No, I was not disappointed, in fact, has passed than I expected from my personal and negative, never changed, first impression.
Therefore, I can not find, anywhere, in any context, any valid reason to declare disappointed.
But now I have a doubt and I ask myself, but I, simple, single marginal citizen-viewer, as I have understood from the outset, though instinctively, what pasta was made such a figure? How come the "pundits" (including every sense) of the policy that opened its doors with the apocalyptic mess of the "bicameral" (confession here) did not notice, immediately, the personality of the subject? These are truly "masters" so naive? Or are they only appeared at the service of other powers? What kind of credibility would clothe itself again?
0 comments:
Post a Comment