Again, a false argument. Shooting down arguments because they came from women cannot be compared to shooting down arguments because they come from AN INDIVIDUAL who has been assessed and found seriously wanting.

I hasten to add that I am not speaking of ad hominem arguments, but of something different: a sales pitch/idea from somebody who is untrustworthy.

I evaluated his ideas and wasn’t impressed either. But you’re applying a particular meaning to what I wrote, which does not reflect what I meant.

I too evaluate people who seek my custom, my favour or my vote. In fact, I evaluate individual candidates, not political parties, and vote for the individuals I believe have some mettle, not for political parties.

What I meant was that if the idea is good, I don’t shoot it down just because I happen to have a low opinion of the proposer. They used to do that with women in the old days and look where it left them for millennia.

There’s your fundamental error, right there. That’s exactly why people voted for Muscat and made him Prime Minister, while yelling at me in disdain because I focused doggedly on evaluating him as a person while not even bothering to look at his ideas.

I suppose that confirms my original conclusion that we’re not living in a “proper” democracy, as well as its consequence that we cannot assume politicians will resign unless they break the law (sometimes not even then).

An “Evarist Bartolo Register” would have made Dr Mizzi’s and Mr Schembri’s ownership of their Panama companies illegal and we’d have had much better leverage to ensure they move or are moved out of office.

My God, nobody is suggesting that a crime has to be proven against Konrad Mizzi and Keith Schembri for them to step down – nobody normal, that is.