Categories
Uncategorized

Marisa revisited (the Benoit remix)

Blurred Nation
Blurred Nation

It’s amazing what time can do but it’s just great sitting back and watching the ripple effect of Labour’s latest appointment. J’accuse would like to point its readers to Marie Benoit’s hilarious article penned in the aftermath of the 2004 Labour “electoral” victory. The article is called “the unbearable heaviness of being Marisa” (22nd June 2004) and Benoit, who makes no attempt to hide her labourite leanings takes pleasure at driving huge digs in the direction of Marisa and her (at the time) Monday column on the Independent.

Marisa was then still working as Chairman of the Housing Authority. Click on READ MORE  and you will find a few juicy clips from Benoit’s tirades (my subtitles).

Premonition?

Should the Chairman of the Housing Authority who serves people mainly from the lower echelons of society be allowed to write with such bias in newspapers? She seems to be simulteanously running a campaign for the Nationalists, Labour and now Alternattiva all at the same time.

More money, more problems

To Marisa the Nationalists are a moral crusade. She sees them as the self-proclaimed party of the nation and no one should ever take their place. And who can blame her? What would she do with herself if Alfred Sant came into power? No wonder she is ready to emerge at every election and referendum and almost every column in between with her sulphurous class prejudices, anti-Labour spiel and now anti-Alternattiva vindictive. She would like the Nats to have perpetual, untrammelled power. It was the Nats who put her there after all. But she is paid and chauffeured around by your taxes and mine and those of the ‘uneducated’ who vote Labour and whom she so despises.

The Shadow

Votes are votes. What Marisa really wants is not to be Chairman of the Housing Authority having to deal with the hoi polloi but to be Minister swanning around in a chauffeured car with frequent freebies abroad. She has no pedigree when it comes to the Nats. She can’t claim, like one other columnist, time and time again ad nauseum, how she was beaten up by Old Labour (now very much a declining force) and even spent one night locked up in a police station. She may have voted Labour in her years in Brixton but that does not give her the much needed common touch in politics.

And now Brussels…

Here’s another pearl of Marisa wisdom: “It will be a loss to this country if three excellent Nationalist reps don’t make it and we have three negative Labour reps instead.”  Your loss is our gain dear. I am delighted with Joseph Muscat, Louis Grech and John Attard Montalto, all three worthy representatives in Brussels. All three with excellent backgrounds. It is these candidates who are going to stand up strongly for our interests but especially the interests not of the elite but of the man in the street. So go on bleating into your Chardonnay Marisa.

The Cherry on the Cake

For the sake of the Nats, for the sake of our readers for my sake I hope her column on Mondays is but an Indian summer. There are enough columnists in English-language journalism who stoop to personal abuse that is ignorant, nasty, stomach-turning and brutal. I say give her, this woman with a mixture of obsessions, a desk at party headquarters and get her to address envelopes in the Nationalist cause. But perhaps Marisa has as yet to understand that ultimately what matters about human beings is not their politics but their goodness.

Well, Marisa  may have got her headquarters mixed up but she has finally got the desk. Who knows she may have discovered that there is “goodness” on the other side… in any case this story is really turning out to be one hell of a juicy issue – exposing the political tabula rasa on both sides of the sorry political divide.

Facebook Comments Box

8 replies on “Marisa revisited (the Benoit remix)”

“Subtitles” are those really irritating things that appear at the bottom of the screen for those who either (a) do not understand the language being spoken or (b) are challenged of hearing. You mean “headings”.

I get it. Like those irritating comments that appear at the bottom of a post. :) I guess I am watching too many series with ‘subtitles’. Really though every post has a title and therefore the secondary titles should be subtitles. No?

Thanks for digging this up Jacques. I had found it to be spot on the first time round. It’s even funnier (though true) now

@FM Yep the blogger vs commentator idea becomes tedious after a while. Interestingly, while researching Marisa’s articles I came across Daphne’s first article (Be Vigilant – should be 2nd March 2008) that introduced her new page on the web (Running Commentary). Her introduction to what has now become a blog for all intents and purposes included a very clear declaration:

“For the remainder of the election campaign, I’ll be writing a running commentary and passing remarks on http://www.daphnecaruanagalizia.com. It’s not a blog or a forum, because I have enough to do without moderating the sort of obscene slander I have had to put up with from violently irrational Labour supporters over the last few days, and the police cyber-crime unit is busy enough as it is without my adding to its workload.”

As we all know, Running Commentary would get its own comments section very early in its life and would become a fully fledged blog no matter how much its owner would call it otherwise. It does say something however that even someone who is supposedly informed in media and PR would have trouble classifying what is a blog – little wonder that lesser informer persons would commit the same mistake. As for Marisa’s blunder – having read through (most) of her contributions to the Indy I am not quite convinced that Labour have made the greatest investment. Someone who has been in the journalism circle for quite some time should be able to tell the difference between a blog, a newspaper article and a comment on either of the two.

P.S. So headings it is. Sub/headings maybe?

@ Jacques. Naqbel mieghek perfettament fuq din il-post u dik ta qabilha, imma interessanti wkoll taghti daqqa t’ghajn x’kienu jghidu tal-PN fuq Marisa meta kienet ghada pupa taghhom. Sa xi sentejn jew tlett snin ilu Marisa ma kinetx “bitter” u meta kienet tikkritika lil xi hadd (dejjem skond dawn in-Nazzjonalisti) kienet taghmel hekk ghax kellha ragun. Issa saret “bitter”. Ara ftit x’qalet Daphn f’kumment fuq il-blog tieghek fl-14 ta Frar tas-sena l-ohra:
“Marisa Micallef doesn’t
criticise Harry Vassallo because she’s ‘bitter’. She criticises him because
he’s a politician deserving of criticism.”
Nisopponi dan jghodd ukoll ghal meta Marisa kinet tikkritika lil Joseph Muscat.
– Il-punt tieghi mhux fuq jekk Marisa kellha ragun jew le tikkritika l-Labour, imma kif in-Nazzjonalisti jisapportuha meta kienet qed taghmel hekk u issa ghax qed tikkritika lilhom saret “bitter”

Sully – grazzi tal-kumment u tar-ricerka. Nahseb li huwa pjuttost ovvju li sa xi sena ilu Marisa Micallef ma kienet iddejjaq lil ebda nazzjonalist. Ghalija dan mhux il-punt laqqas – ghalija huwa li partit jew iehor… kollox xorta!

@Jacques
Ghandek mitt ragun. Kollha l-istess….imma tad-dahk kif sa ftit ilu Marisa kienet fuq l-istonku tal-MLP u issa saret l-istilla taghhom….insomma kulhadd gostih u jista jbiddel fehemtu..u ahna nippruvaw nifhmu xid-dinja qed jigri ghax in-nies qed jigru minn partit ghall-iehor qishom cipitati

Comments are closed.