NOT FIT FOR PURPOSE
Please, Kurt, let us work. That would be so najs.
Kurt Farrugia, Joseph Muscat’s communications coconut, inspires faith in Labour on his Facebook page:
A new Labour government would use the ‘let us work’ cry as a guide on which to base its policy on economic growth.
Apart from the usual erroneous use of ‘would’ instead of ‘will’, which is particularly offensive coming from a graduate with a job in political communication because the two words mean different things, is that it?
Is this all they can come up with after so many years of mouldering on the Opposition benches, four years of thinking about the electoral programme and three men scratching their head over it, one of them a fossil from Mintoff’s party in 1972?
We can all sleep easy tonight knowing these are the people who will be running the country in a little while.
Or, using Kurtspeak, we could all sleep easy tonight knowing these are the people who would be running the country in a little while.
28 Comments Comment
Leave a Comment
Xejn original;
http://www.lastampa.it/redazione/cmsSezioni/politica/200806articoli/33661girata.asp
” Let us work ” CRY. Exactly, everyone will be CRYING for work when the Socialists are in Castille.
What patronising gits. ‘let us work’. What do they think the country has been doing these last 25 years?
In the meantime…”let us pray”!
This is a confirmation that Mintoff and Sant did not let us work.
Is ‘let us work’ a Malteseism, a literal translation from the expression ‘ejja ha nahdmu!’ in the same vein as in ‘inxammru l-kmiem’?
In that case the proper translation for that would be ‘let’s get to work’.
To say ‘let us work’ is actually confirming the PN’s billboard message.
I guess iparkja u irkibni sounds better in English
PARK and Ride
How silly can you lot get
Kurt Farrugia is spot on.
Under Labour thousands of people will cry out “let us work”.
In response, Scicluna and il-Guy will reactivate the hallowed Mintoff policies on economic growth and we are all elegantly fucked.
Deja vu.
Safe with students.
Safe with business.
Now, safe with gays.
Were any of the above not safe under Nationalist governments?
They were not safe under Labour.
There were no students in the true sense of the word. There was the horrendous student/haddiem scheme. Ask my late lamented friend Ralf Dahrendorf.
Business was a total national fuck-up. Any further comment is superfluous. Hence the staggering low level of productive employment.
Gays were utilised just to call opponents of the regime “pufta”,
“ja pufta”, “qatta pufta”, “nies pufta”, “nazzjonalist bugjarun”.
I lived through this and my memory is still intact in spite of my old age.
No wonder they are pleading with everyone to forget the past.
No wonder.
Their past is abhorrent.
The thought alone of the PL’s recent past is hideous.
They had a certain Stephen Hughes on Thursday, who outlined the Socialist proposal using the EU’s social fund.
At one point he emphasized the minor detail that governments would be obliged to provide jobs to Europe’s young if these don’t manage to employ themselves.
Only a few months ago, the same group was experimenting with the idea that Europe adopt a policy of employing immigrants from Asia and the Indian subcontinent on the basis that these come fully qualified at no cost to member states’ education systems.
Hilarious how the left’s collective idiom transforms itself in reaction to ‘hostile’ market forces.
Pity that these forces happen to be us.
When an Edward Scicluna revisits import substitution, I have my doubts whether it’s to introduce the 0 km producer to consumer concept.
It’s ‘would’ since it is conditional to their being elected.
[Daphne – Statements of deliberate intent are always ‘will’, Kevin, especially in this case where the context of election is implied. In campaign terms, it’s always ‘A Labour/Nationalist government will’ and never ‘would’. Too wishy-washy, besides being incorrect. Haven’t you noticed how Maltese people invariably use ‘would’ instead of ‘will’? The newspapers are littered with it. Work out why.]
Would you leave us alone, Kevin?
Baxxter, jaqaw mietitlek il-qattusa?
Jekk gbajt, nghallmek kif torbot l-ingravata b’ingassa Deffney-style. B’gibda wahda tehles minn kollox – tidghilix jekk issib ruhek fl-eteru…
Ejja orbotieli int.
It’s a reflection of his modesty. Political rhetoric demands deceit. Modesty requires honesty.
Bravu Kurt – and grammatically correct, ukoll.
[Daphne – Somebody who believes in extra-terrestrials is bound to think of Kurt Farrugia as honest.]
I don’t think Kurt believes in ETs, Deffney. You must be confusing him with Antoine Vella, the one who could only cope with the modern world by banning laptops from his kindergarten class. He also claims to own a flying saucer.
She’s talking about you.
Hey Kevvy. You got that right, ‘Political rhetoric demands deceit’. Guess who spouts it continuously, unasked and deceitfully? At least you spelt rhetoric correctly this time.
You’re like a bothersome wart, growing in ugliness and irritation.
Kevvy, before you jump in, ‘spelt’ was so spelled in order to send a cryptic code to Baxxter about ‘nutty grain’, an inside joke about conspiracy weirdos. Sorry your not in the loop–you’re too loopy.
I see why you ended up living among the nexjin of cindrins, Purdie. And you seem to be missing your school days, too.
Daphne, as I have said before, your English is …..
You are wasting your time with people who think in Maltese and write in English.
This is akin to the “incensed” debate.
In politics you will do this and can do that. Being elected is ‘understood’.
The conditional does not feature at all.
Unless, of course, you feel that your chances of doing anything are next to nothing.
In that case you are better off keeping mum.
[Daphne – ‘Keeping mum’: an expression best not used in reference to Franco Debono, lest he take it literally and go ballistic in parliament.]
Love it, Daphne. That’s a big grin on Saturday nite.
Is Kurt trying to convey some sort of “conditionality” in his promise, so that once Labour is in government, they will find all sorts of excuses not to deliver on their promises?
“Oh yes, we told you we would do that, but you see, we found a ‘hofra’ so now we cannot deliver.”
So that is that pudgy short guy with the oversized shirts.
Kev, the good for nothing X cop.
Good for nothing then and even more now.
Labour’s new slogan.
I would if I could but I can’t.
They must have had a good show of hands about this …