Was this worth waiting for?

The fragrant Commissar is back and one rather wonders what has been going on. She seems less coherent than ever.

Now, after Pope John Paul II’s funeral and with the Vatican Conclave about to start its formal meetings next week, the lady has decided to begin her posting with her rather unremarkable memories of the great Pontiff.

“The Pope’s eyes.”- she begins her latest Dear Diary entry. The sentence (well, phrase, really) rather reminds us of B-feature horror movies but the fragrant Commissar then expounds:

“That´s what I remember most vividly from meeting the Pope in 1989 (when a Pope visited Sweden for the first time and I was a Minister for the (then state) church. The way he looked intensely at you, straight into your eyes, fully concentrated on seeing the person in front of him.”

Oh gosh, he looked at me. Actually, the comment about the Pope’s ability to concentrate entirely on the person before him has been made by everybody who ever met him or saw him, which makes one wonder whether Commissar Margot did actually get anywhere near him or, in fact, whether she has any clear idea of what she is doing.

This bemusement is reinforced by the following paragraph that was at first edited with the phrase beginning with the words “the harm done to these children must not be covered up!” struck through, the whole text posted with the striking through included, then corrected again and the original ridiculous syntax restored.

Before anybody accuses me of being unpleasantly anti-foreign here, I think I ought to add that if the fragrant Commissar cannot write in English, she should accept editing and not impose her own incompetent ideas.

“A new Pope will have to handle several important challenges. For example: the way the paedophile scandal was handled by the Catholic Church: the harm done to these children must not be covered up! and the attitude towards homosexuality and contraceptives.”

And without pausing for a minute, she returns to the Constitution and the question of whether a referendum is a good idea. Apparently, it is quite a good idea because it is a form of direct democracy. Presumably, that is why the Commissar’s own country Sweden has decided to forego the pleasure of asking the people what they think on the subject.

For on the other hand, it is not such a good idea, as

“It creates a divide between ‘yes‘ and ‘no‘ in the population that can be difficult to overcome.”

Then again, this is the sort of complex issue that people feel their elected representatives should deal with and are disappointed if that does not happen. Which people are those, dear Commissar? Most people we know in many countries feel that this is not that complex a subject and they must be consulted directly.

It is the ones whose opinion is not asked, such as the people of Sweden, who are likely to be angry and disappointed.

Then there is France, where the situation is worrying. How could a country like France take “a giant step backwards” and reject the Constitution?

Backwards where? Into the dark hole where

“The current treaties do not refer to the social market economy and to full employment as important values and objectives of the European Union. The Status quo does not make the Charter of Fundamental Rights legally binding. We will not have more of a social Europe through a NON in France.”

Yes, indeed. Welcome to the no camp Margot. You seem to be making all our arguments.