Rush for confusions
By Andrei Munteanu
It is not a doubt any more that the politicians in the Republic of Moldova used to double deal. Unfortunately after communists’ quitting power, who were “masters” in this regard, this shameful trend has not been ceased. The situation gets even worse, when even statements claimed to be “sincere”, … are not clear. A sample of double crossing in Moldovan policy turns out to be even the leader of the Democratic Party – Marian Lupu.
Previously he got “famous” with his “genial idea” that we talk a language which has “scientific name” and “political name”, respectively – Romanian and Moldovan. He does not seem to have any remorse about it, because his explanation is as simple as that – he does not care at all for the people whose votes he is trying to “extort” from, by … confusions.
This politician has already an image of speaking much and without sense. I got convinced previously, and I am still convinced now, when he attempted to give a political definition for something which has already straightforward scientific definition.
His statement with regard to Romanian language is a big insult not only for the people he keeps talking, hoping that nobody will understand him, but even more – an insult for the academic and scientific circles of our country, and foreign ones, who via their representatives expressed unequivocally on this subject in the International Conference on the name of the state language of the Republic of Moldova.
Probably being “inebriated” by „fame” that after an aberrant declaration there have been neither reactions nor well-deserved criticism, his rush for confusions continues and, on August 26, 2010, during a press briefing, the leader of DPM Marian Lupu expresses „concern” towards the alleged delay, by the current Government, of the terms stipulated by law, on working up the frame of fiscal and budgetary policies.
Can it be that Mr. Lupu is so “tired” of the concern towards people, inasmuch as be unable make distinction between the notions of “recommended” dates and “obligatory” dead line? Rather, there is manifested one of his typical characteristics – that of rushing for confusion, for those from whom he expects votes from. How would otherwise be so “interesting” in politics?
Comments