So it was Monday. No, so ordinary, but "debate". This time the Republic took the lead, and, to be fair, they showed us how to do it. And the contrast with the horse's area debate was a readable setting even for the biggest fool in Tusk's cape. It was Meisterstück, And at the same time, something that carries a certain profession. Not due to the fact that the questions were not the right ones, and Mrs. Gójska kept order, but she didn't bother. What, then, can we be disgusted with, praise what?
I admit that I was waiting for answers to the first question:Does the responsive want to exercise his rights as president? The question is clear as day. And yet I had the impression that either it was not understood or the respondents had no thought of the President's powers. In both cases, that's a bad sign of presidential candidates. The answers were focused on what the president should have done, and, as always, he was attributed to the prerogatives which at the end of the 19th century only the Tsar, the emperor, could boast.
That's 1 thing. The answers to another questions should be assessed individually. The problem is, would it pay off? I don't think so. I'd alternatively say any surprises. Mr. Braun's N. p. answers amazed me. They were calm and constructive on many issues. Mr. Holownia – forgive me honesty – did not disappoint me, but was surprised. Finally, he will gotta say that he is simply a writer and, for a year and a half, in any case, in charge of the Sejm, to get some, if not knowledge, he will at least gotta usage words to operate. Meanwhile, his performance was characterized by cabotinism. I explain: cabotin is simply a man who is willing to usage cheap, tacky tricks and grabs to get individual interested. The hoarding home behaves in this way at all times in the Sejm, but there it is simply a regular bread, so it does not fall under as it is in specified a disposition. Apparently, Mr. Holovnia felt that during his performance he should not forget his work to fight PiS. In this case, however, it was a mistake, and in addition, in assessing the achievements or shortcomings of PiSu, it missed the fact or simply lacked knowledge.
In addition, another statements can be accepted or not, but they were written in a way not only that of a individual culture, but besides that of quite a few knowledge. Another thing is that many respondents avoided the content of the question, choosing a free lecture of their views.
The Absence of Trzaskovsky can be re-signed with the saying: the absent are wrong. On the another hand, I realize his absence. The lie we are utilized to erstwhile it comes to Tusk's people could not have success during the debate, and the fact that Trzaskowski confesses would simply kill him even in the eyes of his most thoughtless devotees.
Does the lame run of the coalitions to the presidential seat want to support a man named Marian Banas? I hear he's preparing ‘bomb’ to the final of the election campaign, in the form of a control study carried out by the ultimate Chamber of Control which he manages. It is the Institute of National Memory, whose president is the candidate of Poland Karol Nawrocki.
Of course, Banas is willing to do specified a service you know to whom. Only, will he not install this “bomb” besides much in his own way, that is to say, serfly and after a dilemma he will not plant it, and will it not detonate in his hands? But let us be optimistic. He's a man who appreciates Providence, but does he abuse it?
