Comments on: “Ronald Reagan has retired” – Aaron Farrugia, chief of Labour’s Fondazzjoni Idejat and self-described ‘ekonomista’

By: Seggy

Seggy — Thu, 01 Dec 2011 15:08:54 +0000

In reply to BC. Margeritas ante porcos.

By: ciccio2011

ciccio2011 — Thu, 01 Dec 2011 12:55:43 +0000

Precisely Wayne. But considering the current hot topics in the media, I would reword your second sentence as follows to make it “topical”:

“What the country does not need, for sure, in these trying times, is a leader full of Carbon Dioxide and with zero emissions like Joseph Muscat.”

By: Wayne Hewitt

Wayne Hewitt — Thu, 01 Dec 2011 12:48:42 +0000

I met the Prime Minister yesterday and he didn’t look at all exhausted.

What the country does not need, for sure, in these trying times, is a leader full of hot air and zero substance like Joseph Muscat.

By: La Redoute

La Redoute — Thu, 01 Dec 2011 12:47:09 +0000

In reply to BC.

Ronald Reagan didn’t retire. He served two full terms in office (1981-1989), the maximum possible in the US, so Aaron Farrugia’s statement is not only wrong, it is irrelevant.

What he means to say (I think) is that times have changed but some people haven’t. I couldn’t agree more. Hasn’t Karmenu Vella, the Labour Party’s current policy wonk, been around since the early 1970s? That’s almost ten years before Ronald Reagan was elected for the first time in 1981.

By: oldtimer

oldtimer — Thu, 01 Dec 2011 11:11:17 +0000

PL has finally find someone with a limited knowledge of English, to interfere in this blog. This is BC, who has a “before Christ” mentality.

By: Intellect

Intellect — Thu, 01 Dec 2011 09:17:21 +0000

Aaron Farrugia can often be seen roaming the streets in Brussels with a cheeky grin on his face. I can confirm that as a youngster he was one of Alfred Sant’s chosen few, hence has automatically become Joseph Muscat’s.

He tries to pass off as a progressive person however I can assure you his inner beliefs of Labour politics are far from progressive.

How he ‘represents’ our country with his appalling English diction beats me…

By: The chemist

The chemist — Thu, 01 Dec 2011 07:39:29 +0000

In reply to BC. 'Biskuttini f'halq il-hmir ' comes to mind here, Daphne.

By: Kenneth Cassar

Kenneth Cassar — Thu, 01 Dec 2011 06:59:34 +0000

In reply to BC. "a writing is never restricted to any rules neither those of common sense, that being the reason why writing is one of the most free and liberal form of art". I must agree with BC here. Everyone has the right to write in a way that disregards common sense or rules. In fact, to put it more directly, everyone has the right to show the world he's a complete idiot.

By: BC

BC — Thu, 01 Dec 2011 00:14:01 +0000

In reply to BC. That's the answer I was expecting.

By: BC

BC — Thu, 01 Dec 2011 00:05:28 +0000

In reply to BC.

STATE THEM TO ME….if you want to get it to this extent…and btw if there is any you violated a lot of them then, because at most in such rules there should be one which represents respect or something between those parameters.

[Daphne – I am not a teacher of English and this is not a didactic blog. Find one and pay for lessons. It would be money well spent, far better than whatever it is you spend your money on.]