Women who remain faithful in face of their husband’s adulteries can be saints as Saint Queen Elizabeth of Portugal. On Italy’s and the UK leaders I was referring to their heads of state.

[Daphne – Their heads of state are not decision makers, so their age is irrelevant. Women are not divided into virgins, whores, nisa hziena and saints, David, and none of those things are predicated on sex, except for the first, anyway.]

[Daphne – Take it from a grown-up, David: it is stupidity, unless you define ‘love and fidelity’ as the sort usually associated with Fido or Spot.]

On elderly people are these incompetent persons fit only for the rubbish dump or an old peoples home? Are Italy, the UK and the Vatican led by incompetent persons? Are France and the new European Commission led by soon to be incompetent persons?

[Daphne – The British prime minister is in his 40s, David, and the Italian prime minister in his 30s. Your example of the Vatican is unfortunate as it proves the point with the two popes immediately prior to this one. Hollande is, what, in his 50s? The European Commission definitely has at least one highly incompetent person – ours. But he would have been incompetent at 35. Now he is incompetent and rambling.]

Same goes with me.

Daphne, ma stajtx tispjega aħjar. U dawn huma tnejn jew tlieta biss minn dawk li għamlu tant hsara lill-PN.. u minkejja dak li għamlu nerġgħu nagħtuhom ir-riedni biex jgħidu li jridu fi hdan il-partit stess.

U lil dawk li baqgħu jemmnu fil-PN minkejja kollox, lil dawk ħallewhom jittewbu. Il-PN jew javda wisq jew inkella lin-nies li jibqgħu leali lejh, mhux jagħrafhom.

…and Marco Cremona.

Thank God there was MP Philip Mifsud.

I hope Simon Busuttil learned from these mistakes.

From what I can see, Ms Thake, the convention organiser, did a good job and Simon Busuttil is learning fast, he was brilliant.

I am starting to believe that the PN can do it next time.

The bigger they are the harder they fall.

What I found most offensive (and deceitful) was his comparison of Joseph Muscat in 2013 to Eddie Fenech Adami in 1987. The two men could not be more different.

Fenech Adami was a man of principle who was in politics to be of service. Joseph Muscat is in it for the money and for an ego boost. He is a habitual liar who made pre-electoral promises which he knew he will not keep (for example meritocracy).

In stark contrast to Fenech Adami, Muscat is an opportunist with no sense of morals.

Whatever you do don’t put anyone on an ego trip.

Specify that only that particular one will do.

What is it that keeps him (the SG) there?

It’s not as though he’s loved where he comes from. Much to the contrary, for reasons that have to do with his own commercial expectations and the behaviour of his family.

This is no big secret.

This is where I’m going to appear extremely naïve by saying it’s still wrong.

Where the value proposition of the lobbyist is superior, then yes, on that merit.

But not on any other.

I know how politics is done. But at the end of the day, so does an administration need to deliver to get voted back in.

Results are results, in whatever language.

He who delivers a superior end-product with the “same” ingredients deserves the job.

I fully agree with you about access and transfer of message though.

If access is blocked, the process is frustrated.

If the conceptual language is different, that process is doomed.