Friday, February 11, 2011

I may be sinner but my foes want coup: Berlusconi - World -

I may be sinner but my foes want coup: Berlusconi

IF Mr. Berlusconi had been a loyal-without-a-second-thought LEFTIST... he wouldn't be facing this private-life-obsession from the LEFT.

Nor his ouster based on stuff he does in private that has nothing to do with how he does his job.


Why is it ok for guys like Bill Clinton to be total cads, whereas non-left-wing guys must be exposed and deposed if they're imperfect?

Seeing things as they apparently are... is NOT a mental disorder, NOR will it cause one to become paranoid.

Refusing to see patterns in empirically-observed reality... THAT is a mental disorder.

Inability or refusal to see the double standard between how left-wing pervert politicians are treated and how right-wing pervert ones are treated... THAT is a mental disorder.

Perhaps Mr. Berlusconi can be a douchebag sometimes.  Ok, he is sometimes.

But then again, so are the leftists.  Like Obama.

But the Left and Lamestream Media don't try to destroy leftists like Clinton and Obama.

They only target non-leftist politicians, opportunistically making hay out of every indiscretion...


Balbulican said...

Following the logic of your last post, CS - doesn't Berlusconi's behaviour mean that he's not a REAL conservative after all, and therefore his actions only discredit the LEFTISTS (which, of course, his overactive libido clearly proves him to be)?

∞ ≠ ø said...

Compare this to Watergate.
This is Italy. They're so wacko over there they make the Clinton's look like extreme conservatives.

Fun quote:
"I have never paid a woman - he declared - I have never understood what satisfaction there is if the pleasure of conquest is absent".


Berlusconi said, in his own defence: "In the entertainment world everybody knows that, in certain situations in RAI TV you work only if you prostitute yourself or if you are leftist. I have intervened on behalf of some personalities who are not leftists and have been completely set apart by RAI TV."

Canadian Sentinel said...

The point, Balbsy, is DOUBLE STANDARD.


Comprendo? :)

Balbulican said...

Yep, I understand. But you're contradicting yourself a bit, aren't you?

You claim media are picking on Berlusconi because he's conservative.

But according to your prior post, Berlusconi isn't conservative, since "True conservatives have the self-control to not commit or attempt to commit adultery or make lewd homosexual public poopery advances, etc."

So which is it, my friend? Are conservatives actually capable of immoral behaviour, or is Berlusconi actually a closet leftist?

glacierman said...

Balb, you are the one calling Berlusconi a conservative, not CS.

The definition needs to be established, then we can come to an agreement on the issue.

Berlusconi is a moral leftist but a fiscal conservative/capitalist.

Please state clearly which it is that you are defending or accusing someone to be using the proper definition so as to clear up any misconceptions which may occur, otherwise you are being disingenuous to the debate.

Consilium - Aarluk - Stonecircle said...

My dear glacierman, I promise I will abide by our host's definition of Left And Right in future. CS, could you clarify that for us, please?

You will concede, I assume, that CS, not myself, is establishing the left/right moral distinction; it is his hypothesis, not mine, that Berlusconi is being attacked by media because he is "not a leftist".

I myself haven't noticed that leftists are morally superior to right-wingers, or vice versa - having met near-saints and reprehensible scumbags on both sides of the spectrum. (Which is the real point I'm trying to make, I suppose.)

Balbulican said...

CS, sorry, screwed it up again. I forgot to sign out. Mea culpa, I think I finally have it straight.

Glacierman, there are two separate issues here;

a) the moral superiority of righties/lefties (and I don't think either end of the political spectrum, or the middle, are inherently more or less moral - which appears to be our host's position in the previous post.

b) the degree to which "the MSM" are biased against "the right". To be honest, I think the degree of bias an observer detects in the MSM is directly correlated to their distance from the political centre. In other words - my more extreme left wing friends are utterly convinced that CanWest, Murdoch etc. are pushing a corporatist, right wing agenda: my more extreme right wing friends are convinced that media are in the pocket of the international communist conspiracy. They both treat the others' perspective with complete incredulity. Now, either they're ALL lying, or what we're seeing is observer bias (which is what I believe).

I think we all like to think of ourselves as reasonable, intelligent, thoughtful people. Which means, of course, that anything to your left or or right is obviously misguided, and media that reflect that misguided position are obviously biased.

∞ ≠ ø said...

The Balbster has posted w his company stuff again. I assume this is in error. I've had fun with it but do not have any genuine issue. I jested earlier with an ACORN comparative to draw his ire. As this sport potentially involves unintended consequence my only comment is oops. (Again??!!)

Burlesque-ony is a media giant himself. He runs the private sector while his prosecutors run the public RAI TV.

A very political game of pot kettle.

His comments on the affairs of the public side, and the fact that this does not dissuade his critics, demonstrate the purity of the double standard.

Jen should love this, the whole thing should be 'right up her alley' :o

Hi Jen! ;)