not enough to be liberal to be libertines. And a governor has no real privacy Poverino! Un Capo di Governo, arci-milionario, strilla alti lai (Parini, cit): qualche bau-bau lo spaventa, qualche fantasma gli fa tottò sul sederino. Che paura, come deve soffrire il tapino. Certo è che il Mondo è ingiusto con i Capi di Governo, come con tutti i poveri diavoli, con i deboli. Ah, com'è crudele il Potere con chi lo dirige! Non vorremmo essere al suo posto.
But the cleverness has its limits, beyond which it becomes offensive. And as avid players of "three cards" Fork (Naples) or Portaportese (Roma), cheaters are always sostenutori trainbearer and the Prince. The Court, you know, it is often worse than the sovereign. Thus, the smart guys who defend the indefensible arrogance of the Prince autocrat even dare to call themselves "liberals", a sacred word, whose use mascalzonesco cries.
Moreover, even if they were convinced, be libertines and libertarians, anarcho-individualist and that is therefore potentially disobedient to that law which is the cornerstone of liberalism, is not sufficient to be called liberals. Unless you are a ranch in Arizona in the middle of an old western movie from the 50s.
But how the hell we did for four centuries, we liberals, to make the rules, ie to check kings, princes, popes, cardinals, generals, priests, governors, deputies, prefects and guards, to ensure that they also undergo laws as ordinary citizens (and indeed even the liberal state have called the "Rule of Law"), and now some smart power would remove the law, and many conservatives that the scoundrels are the servants of groped involved would be confusing to citizens taking advantage of their ignorance, giving them to understand that liberalism is the "no rules"?
Come on, do not the dumb: the Liberals are useless against the rules that hinder trade, development, or the free choice of religion or morals of the citizen, or to intervene in the private life when it had no public-policy relevance. And now, because for the liberal morality, which derives from Protestantism, so has its severity, there is a public ethics for the powerful shift that takes account of private morality. Also because the liberal idealism of ethics, who is privileged to lead by example. Eg a head of government who do not pay taxes or go by car with red light or recommend someone without merit, should immediately resign.
Therefore, friends of the Right (including too many radical friends, actually more anarcho-libertarian liberals who are wrong ...), and big. Confuse arrogance with anarchic freedom and license, the honest citizen who respects the laws, even after they have been criticized, coll'imbroglione that the breaks, thereby corrode and a second core of liberalism: equality of initial opportunities, equality in rights, competition, which is nothing if not the law of equal respect for all citizens ... competitors.
and then just common sense: a head of government is rather tormentor, never the victim. It 's the prime suspect in attacks on freedom, not the first victim. Anyway, the "poor" can not rely on the "privacy" as we ordinary citizens. Nor can, with the means that, blame other Powers. This fact puts it subversive, as the balance of power core of the liberal state. And then liberalism derives historically from Protestantism to Catholicism who forgives all and separate private and public life (see the hypocrisy of the politically correct was DC). There is also the concept of "scandal". Moreover, in the modern liberal systems-citizen wants to know everything to vote for the politician, even his private habits. It is a 'product' on the market, like any other, and the label must be clear and complete (see Anglo-Saxon countries).
not Mr Smith, but a head of a government that claims to be a "breach of privacy" ... Paradoxical. Really out of the canons of liberal democracy, not elected by the citizens know that they have no rights but rather duties more? And among the first duties is absolute transparency, where the private is public? If the head of government had taken so long to privacy should not ever be in politics. One more proof that "came down in the field" for personal gain.
But this reasoning is not clear is signed by many conservatives (who call for modesty "right-wing libertarians") that obviously - parliamentarians, politicians, local administrators, journalists and opinion makers from the web - they earn something from defending the current government illiberal. And so misrepresent the words: called "liberal" that is profoundly illiberal. The lexical
scam is the first and the easiest for the Conservatives. Let us always remember the word 'secular' brazenness reformulated by clergy in defiance of history and the dictionary.
The Italian, then, is an ancient hereditary policies born anarchist and disobedient. This is the clever Mr. B knows this very well. It is psychologically so perfect that the average Italian does not pay taxes, park in the third ... row, builds a semi abuse, make recommendations, or recommend, not enforce laws and regulations (with the excuse that they are "unjust"), use the side streets and friends for everything. That's why so much has followed.
But it is wrong to demonize the Left (with all the wrong governments, inefficient and uncertain that he gave that as this Government have not conducted any liberal reform), to present the current government as the sole architect of the Italian degradation. At the time of the previous Italian governments was perhaps different? No. But the previous governments, including DC, acted with the mentality of the liberal formal "irreproachable" the political. She had never had an example so harmful. And that liberalism must also educate a citizenry that is illiberal ignorance is shown by all authors and politicians of old, from Nathan Cavour, Mazzini to Einaudi). The rulers diseducator smooth the hair to the worst man in the street Italiot. From the top of their privileges and their illiberal and anti-liberal bias, confirm that the Italian middle class has every right to continue to "get his cocks," and that even this unabashed individualism disobedient and anarcho-fascist right thing or even "liberal"!
And I just want to see - we will laugh and cry - and if we can recycle as posing "always" reformists, liberals, honest and efficient. So, I predict, will all be well-known "antiberlusconiani", as in 1945 suddenly declared itself a nation of fascists always anti-fascist.
Really, must still pass the night. We are on the darkest night and shameful history of Republican Italy.
was sworn in today at the Ministry of Labour and Social Policy Observatory National Volunteer, from January 2, 2011 that was renewed in its composition. 
