What about this thursday in the SER it was someone else’s shame. What Rocío Monasterio (Vox) questioning the credibility of the postal threats to Iglesias (Marlaska and María Gámez) gave the Madrid candidate of Podemos the opportunity to make a departure as theatrical as that of Espinosa de los Monteros —betrothed to Monastery, as is known—, which in its day also broke the deck because the vice president of the Government he had referred to the coup vocation of Vox.
“Close on leaving, Your Honor,” he said then Iglesias. “Get out, brave,” the lady told him yesterday. Chulería for cockiness. Hate mongers in the vote market. The extremes meet and not precisely in the field of ideas but in that of theatricalizations. An unbearable cockfight between those who want to electorally thrive in tension and that obsolete civil warfare that exchanges fortunately dead verbal stones.
There is hatred in Vox speech. It is cruel and inhuman his electoral poster against the ‘menas‘pushed by misery to the doors of our houses. And their lack of solidarity with people threatened with death is reprehensible. But whoever refers to the PSOE as the party of quicklime and the PP as a criminal group does not ooze less hatred.
In the perpetration of hatred, nothing so bitter as the infinite benevolence of Iglesias with the crimes of ETA
I’m sorry, but some of us don’t renounce memory as an invincible element in the apprehension of reality. To be credible in the war on haters We must lead by example. This is not the case of the Podemos candidate at elections in the Community of Madrid. In the perpetration of hatred, nothing is so bitter as his infinite benevolence with the crimes of ETA. Faced with that dump of ‘anti-Spanish’ hatred, he never felt as offended as he felt yesterday, when the Vox candidate questioned the veracity of the death threats against the already former vice president of the Government.
Of course, the lack of empathy of Rocío Monasterior with the recipients of the postal threats. To put examples closer to the anger of yesterday’s radio debate, neither more nor less reprehensible than kicking the head of a policeman, burning in public the image of the King or requesting an ice ax hit on the head of a certain political leader, with respect to which there is no documentary evidence that Iglesias was caused by the Same outrage as Monastery’s disdain for the hatred deposited in a mailbox.
The signed cobblestones of Vallecas are no holier than anonymous threats by post. There is the same sectarianism in forgiving one or the other depending on which side of the political barricade one stands on. But the intolerance that sins against democracy is the same. In other words, at the risk of being kicked by the Phariseeism on duty that does not tolerate equidistant people. What can we do.
Monastery is strengthened thanks to Churches. He remains a victim, like a sheep cornered by the left and the media
With an eye toward the uncertain electoral recount of May 4, it is clear that Monastery has been strengthened thanks to Churches. With his regional landing he did a favor to the PP of Ayuso. Now he does it to Monastery, which comes out grown like a sheep cornered by the mastiffs of the left and the “dictatorship of the media” [sic].
Edmundo bal he was left alone begging the rest of the candidates (Ayuso did not participate in the debate) not to play Vox. And Angels Barceló was disappointed without success asking Iglesias that, in the name of democracy, dismantle Vox with arguments and not with a leak that later spread to the other representatives of the left, Gabilondo and Mónica García. She will be the most benefited from yesterday’s row, while the real Gabilondo, the one with “with this Iglesias, no”, has definitely failed in the Gabilondo under the tutelage of “Pablo, we have twelve days to win.”
Ay, bad company, teacher.