How Do You Make Dental Aliginate

Reforms Rubalcaba

article Francesc de Carreras, professor of constitutional law at the UAB, published in La Vanguardia.

A constitution is, above all, a framework of coexistence for the present and a framework of trust in the future.

to its twenty-fifth anniversary, two years ago, the day of the Constitution had a ritual character, hardly newsworthy or controversial hint: they evoked the broad consensus that approval is remembered their principles and are used to make a generally positive assessment of its development.

The commemoration was always a pause in the heat of political battle, an encounter in which the parties suspended their daily squabbles natural to reaffirm, year after year, their match in the solidezde the main rules of our democratic life. It is no longer the case. In the twenty-seventh anniversary we celebrated this week, the Constitution has become a disputed issue and our constitutional future uncertain. Perhaps there was a latent distrust of citizens in our constitutional system that, for whatever reason, not surfaced and now, suddenly, has burst onto the scene. Maybe. But I rather am inclined to think that the reason the Constitution is questioned is reckless in the way put at the heart of partisan confrontation. A constitution has been repeated a thousand times, is a framework, a playing field, which should allow all citizens and all political forces to express their preferences and implementing them. Furthermore, in accordance with the democratic principle that sovereignty resides in the people, the Constitution itself can be reformed, even in its entirety.

But constitutions are supreme standards which are characterized by stability and changes must be made only if essential. Therefore, the argument that social change must be reflected immediately on constitutional changes does not seem right. Indeed, the constitutional changes should be made only if the text of the Constitution prevents social change can be regulated by laws or other rules of lower rank. Ordinary legislation is the natural field to adapt to new social realities on the right.

The main function of a constitution is to give unity and stability to the legal system, not in your own text to include the regulation of social change. Typically, therefore, must be that the political disputes occur in the field of ordinary legislation, not in the field of constitutionality, however, at present, the main inter-party confrontation is not between the legitimate goals can be achieved within the marcoconstitucional, but has become a matter of confrontation with the constitutional framework itself. That is, using a sports metaphor, what is at the forefront of the dispute Not the way to score more goals in a game, but the rules by which these goals can be considered valid.

We are not therefore in a phase of political normalcy, but in a phase of rethinking the rules of the game. There is no doubt that all this is legal and constitutionally legitimate, democratic right because, as we have said, can not prevent changes in the rules.

however, doubtful whether such changes as are being developed, are politically expedient. Many questions, too many doubts, fit. On the contrary, there are many reasons to think that all this dispute is unnecessary, superfluous and risky from point of view of general interest. And according to the result to be reached, their drivers are at risk of being branded as irresponsible and even frivolous. Because, indeed, the end result may be pyrrhic. The ongoing reforms are of two types: the statutory and constitutional properly. Leaving aside the ratification referendums, the parliamentary majority must agree Uncas are different and in another: in the statutory just the majority of Congress (half plus one of the deputies), and lasconstitucionales requires a qualified majority of two-thirds in Congress and the Senate, as well as complex unprocedimiento involves dissolving of both houses, new elections and a new vote for the same majority.

Moved to the current political situation, all supposed to approve the statutory reforms mathematically not need the agreement of the PP and to approve constitutional amendments to vote for them is essential. Given the current political situation, can we think that both types of reforms can be carried out at once? Zapatero included in its program of constitutional reform government, but no rejection, no clearly agreed with the bylaw. If both are, in practice, because the majority required, incompatible, why what reforms will tilt the Prime Minister? There is concern in English society. A constitution is, above all, a framework of coexistence for the present and a framework of trust in the future.

The uncertainty about these changes fully justify the concern. Felipe Gonzalez said this week that perhaps the Government's error has been to undertake a reform program without having set a precise direction. Perhaps you've been right: the old rockers sometimes give some memorable performances.

Weakest Interactions No2 Co2

halted an article against the Statute Felipe González

dinners happen Recently involved in former President Felipe González in which he discusses what happens without corsets in the world and with a few hindrance what happens in Spain, particularly around the draft Statute of Catalonia.

was, according to different versions, one of those recent relaxed contexts in which the former leader of the PSOE made comments about how it is driving the process. Gonzalez has been throwing at fault in the now chief executive, José Luis Rodríguez Zapatero, clear leadership, a goal we want to go and how. The former president has commented on the need for clear political objectives set by the paths that must pass a government action.

Indeed, sources close to Gonzalez count Elsemanaldigital.com that this lack of driving by Zapatero was embodied by former tenant of La Moncloa for fourteen years in "a harsh article against the Catalan Statute."

However, again according to the respondents, the PSOE spokesman in Congress, Alfredo Pérez Rubalcaba, managed to stop it and so far, the "goods" remains in the drawer. Nobody

Pérez Rubalcaba as to shorten any leak that might cause the pen of Felipe González. It's a complete player, SUV, and perhaps because of that, turned out to be an important part in governments of Gonzalez as the crossing by Joaquín Almunia in opposition, in the candidacy of José Bono to the Secretary General of the party and now also in Zapatero's team, which may stand as one of the few legacies accepted by the current president of his once adored Felipe.
Alfredo Perez Rubalcaba
A needed just two year term and that the problems will begin to grow the government to become the indispensable man. Proof of this has been its ability to keep silent to Felipe González. It is recognized that as the old guard of PSOE: "An article by Philip at this time would be a real bombshell."

Hormonal Iud Made In India Cost

Maragall insists: "We are a nation"

convictions of President de la Generalitat Pasqual Maragall, have not moved one iota, despite the vehement reactions arisen subsequent to the statute. In the institutional discourse of last year, President called for constitutional reform , to understand that changes are necessary to address the new realities. A claim, always controversial, the Catalan president in his message yesterday reissued institutional televised at 21:00 pm on the occasion of Constitution Day.

Maragall began his message echoing the goals and hopes placed in the Magna Carta in 1978. "They had names: there were freedom, democracy, autonomy and social progress, "he said. A series of objectives, with the State of Autonomous Communities, which, in its view, have been amply fulfilled. "But the realities of today were hardly imaginable 27 years ago," he said. Without going any further, Catalonia has proposed a new statute. A statute ("to see if we understand", said immersed in his work of political pedagogy) that "serves to cover the services and to achieve a higher quality of life. Otherwise, not worth it. " The president said, however, that the Catalan proposal was developed with direction from the Constitution State.

In his remarks, Bush also Catalan recalled the controversy over the definition of Catalonia as a nation, that " Catalonia has put it clearly: we are a nation ." A concept, he said, which means that Catalonia is national identity, which has its own personality, with culture, language and civil law own. He added that the proposal makes clear that Catalonia wants to share his future with all the peoples of Spain. "Our spirit is friendly and respectful. Therefore, we demand respect for our way of interpreting the Constitution, respecting the constitutional jurisprudence, "he said in his message.

But the president stressed Catalan that "the Constitution is sensitive to the changes that society demands, since it can not be an object of worship to petrify a historic moment." In addition, the president felt that "the spirit of transition and the parents of the Magna Carta was one of progress, change and policy improvements."

So Maragall called for constitutional changes that, in his view, are "fully compatible with the recognition of the value of the Magna Carta as the cornerstone of democracy, and self-government statute." The Constitution is, according to the president, the basis and foundation for the building to be erected today's realities, and on this basis, updated Catalonia must build the future. In this sense, Maragall said to be used thoroughly convinced that it is the wish of the majority of the Catalans.

Reason

PS .- That said, it is clear that references to the Constitution in the drafting of the Charter is a constitution that does not exist.

Monopoly Junior Shrek

Víctor Pérez-Díaz is Professor of Sociology at the Universidad Complutense de Madrid.

A risk is the proximity of an injury, or, in other words, the result multiply the cost of an event made possible by the probability of occurrence. Therefore it is said, with truth, that the risk is high if the potential harm esmuy great, and the likelihood of considerable. The potential harm to accept, reject or make a hack with the proposal of the Statute of Catalonia is obvious. Is a substantial increase in regional tensions, which may anger more in a country that has a state of autonomous in a precarious balance since it was designed deleted by its Constitution, and that in 30 years of governments of all political stripes, has failed to develop a strong culture of English constitutional patriotism. With these institutional and cultural foundations, not very strong, the probability that the damage is considerable potential is realized because either approving the substance of the proposal of the Statute (with sections on the Catalan nation, shielding skills, and bilateral funding included), and Here the English state would be reduced to a shadow and the frustration of many English would be great, or is rejected in substance, and in this case the Catalan political class, given their expectations, would suffer a profound disappointment, or approving playing with ambiguity and wanting to please everyone, and in this case it is normal that satisfies no one and the remaining outstanding problems, but with more people suspicious than before. Quite

citizens perceive this risk, and, according to recent surveys, 46% of English, and 31% of Socialist voters believe that the draft statute represents "a threat to the unity of Spain", and 47 % of English and 58% of Socialist voters believe that "significant changes must be made in it to make it acceptable." At the same time, the level of confidence in the socialist leader who could lead such changes 28puntos has fallen over the past 18 months (from 66% to 38%). Ie, enough English seem concerned by the problem and losing confidence in the ability of current leadership to resolve it.
The overwhelming majority of the public, attentive and concerned, he is English, and cares about the symbols, names, and the principle of sovereignty one, indivisible and indispensable part of the English nation. Be attentive to their interesescuando concerned to discuss the financing of the system since it has become accustomed to the idea that we are all equal, which implies that all regions are; want utilities homogeneous and analyze the balance made between regions, can look not only tax a few years, but also trade, financial flows and human resources dating back many years ago. In addition, many think that Spain lacks a functioning state and suspect that this proposed statute leaves us one too weak to current times.

There are situations of terror and war are not resolved with words. Immigration raises disturbing. The march of globalization has many on edge. In Spain you need a state actor in Europe, and the voice of that State or its absence, it shows when its citizens (and their companies) have to go around the world and defend their interests.

With these feelings and ideas in mind, the English can get lost sometimes in the welter of the 111 pages of the proposal of the Statute, with its preamble diffuse the 227 detailed articles and additional provisions, transitional and final, but they understand the merits, and are worried about a socialist leaders whose capacity will begin to be problematic and whose clarity begin to doubt. These leaders seem firmly in the forms, peroson ambiguous in content. At this point it is uncertain whether they will respect the essence of the Catalan proposal or change it substantially. Maybe bet on the volatility of public opinion, while claiming the faith of believers yfustigan his opponents, and rely on a final scramble, the staging of a commitment to double bottom, a miraculous recovery in extremis, a sigh of relief and a vote grateful. But this, forget the trail of mistrust that are leaving the road.

For now, people are ambiguous conduct that is because either the Socialists do not know what they want, and that their competence questioned, or they know but do not want to say, and that question its veracity, or want two things contradictory at the same time, and that questions his consistency. Come say they want the Statute of Catalonia (Pasqual, I promise, I will support the statute passed by Parliament of Catalonia, "Zapatero dixit), but they want so much that I want to change. They do not want to change substantially but make it compatible with the Constitution, which is the substantial change. And when they say they want change thoroughly (and let "clean as a whistle") do not have the votes for it and attack the only party which could be supported for a similar shift, suggesting that in fact do not want to. Quosque tandem Catilina? Hastacuándo Catiline "will tell us two things contrary to the same time? How you run out of voice or until we run out of patience?
Socialists have not yet realized that the flow of public confidence, including your age, is limited. And what's worse. They do not realize that not only deplete the country's confidence in them, but are at risk of losing its own confidence in themselves. His identity is linked to the fundamental ideas of creating solidarity and to Spain, and if they lose their connection with these two ideas are lost themselves. They do not foster solidarity rulers who increasingly widen the gap that separates them from the center right of this country, which draw on the collective imagination as an extreme right, nor can they justify this excess rhetorical opponent's attacks, because they are the rulers of the English including many millions of voters of his rival, and the office of ruling required, to them more than anyone, to a special restraint in words and gestures.

can not pretend to build a political community on just bitter feelings hidden by soft words and can not establish a harmonious atmosphere with words to the Civil War, with repeated contamination of the opponents as being linked to the Franco regime and the deployment, at times, challenge attitudes and animosity to religious sentiment part of society. The erosion of solidarity in Spain for its division into ideological blocs territorial fragmentation is added to the momentum of distributive conflicts between communities and the centrifugal inclinations either, with the aggravating factor that the Socialists have always defined as guarantors of a solidarity based on a strong state, and are now themselves weaken this foundation. At the end of this process can be very little about the identity and tradition of English socialism. The Spain of the transition was made possible by the contribution of the English Socialists in a leading role shared with others. Only then fell behind the Spain of charanga and tambourine, the Spain of hatred Cainites. Only Spain and was rebuilt.

constituents would be regrettable if the Socialists and the ruling Socialists of those years rest to go down in history as the makers of Spain yesterday, and witnesses of getting rid of the Spain of today.

© The Country

Cool Sounding Elements

risk on a boycott of Catalan products

article Thomas Domingo Pérez published in Las Provincias.

In Germany, back in the fifties, Erich Lüth in a newspaper published an open letter urging the cinema owners not to include in your schedule for a film director Veit Harlam, due to collaboration this with Nazism. It also recommended the audience to refrain from going to see the movie. This incitement to boycott made Harlam Lüth sued because he felt that he had voluntarily caused harm. The case was that the matter was referred to the Constitutional Court German Federal and led to a sentence in the history of European neoconstitutionalism. The Court protects Lüth finding that the boycott constituted an incitement to the lawful exercise of the right to free expression, noting that this should be accounted for courts of general jurisdiction.

Indeed, the right to freedom of expression not only protects the expression of ideas or opinions, but allows persuade, influence others intellectual. What is not protected, it also confirms our Constitutional Court, is the exercise of coercion or defamation. Incitement to boycott is lawful if freedom does not deprive the recipients of the message to follow or not the slogan, and if not based on falsehoods. In Germany the Federal Constitutional Court has been said in the statement Blinkfuer the call to boycott is lawful even if it comes from a competitor in the professional or economic great power. Look at this finding by the Court: "If the person who incited the boycott has economic power, its influence may be relevant, but this fact alone does not make incitement to boycott unacceptable. The Constitution does not prohibit who holds greater economic power to take sides in an intellectual debate of opinion. "

Inciting boycott is a perfectly lawful behavior, but can certainly rely on weak arguments, unsustainable or inconsistent and therefore flawed. On the other hand, if the boycott is intended not to buy certain products, in fact the measure could not be regarded as unfair, because those who sell only entitled to bring to market their products and not to spill lies about them or about the company that produces them. Therefore, if the consumer chooses not to violate the law and not commit any injustice. That does not mean, however, that a boycott is justified. In reaching this conclusion should discuss the reasons given for its promotion. For example, it seems reasonable not to buy products that are manufactured with highly polluting methods, or refrain from purchasing goods made in factories where working children exploited.

But these days there is talk of these cases, but the boycott of Catalan products. It has fired the warning light and voices have emerged that threaten legal action against those who urge a boycott. Click on bone, since, as just shown, this constitutes a legitimate exercise of the right to free expression. But these threats divert attention from what's important. What happens in Spain for many citizens of their own volition decided not to buy products Catalans? The boycott is primarily a measure of pressure to draw attention and get something. It is a form of expression. Well, what is happening in Spain for many citizens to resort to the boycott as a form of expression? This is what needs to be analyzed. The answer is clear: many people do not find another way to externalize their rejection of what is being promoted from Catalonia.

As noted a few weeks ago in another article, the draft statute intended to Catalonia decide how far it reaches its solidarity with the rest of Spain. The English know that their representatives will discuss a draft statute that may affect the structure of the state and will only be hoped that what comes out is why it is not unconstitutional. It seems logical that the city wants to hear your voice as effectively as possible and, therefore, resort to the boycott, to show that the welfare of a part of Spain can not be achieved apart from the rest. Some think it's an absolutely wrong idea.

The truth is that the success of the boycott of Catalan products is a symptom of the state of English society. It seems incredible that it has reached a situation where consumers can distinguish when purchased between products from different communities. It is unfortunate that this happens, but in any case I want to emphasize and defend the liberty of the citizen to decide whether to undertake or not a boycott, and that of everyone who wants to give reasons to promote or criticize.

provinces

Bachelorette Funny Party Outfit S

Bargalló and history of the boycott

For Luis Ignacio Parada (ABC )

Captain Charles Cunningham Boycott was driving with an iron hand the farms of absentee landlords Lord Earn. The Irish Land League, which sought to reform the system of land tenure, asked in 1880 a reduction in the price of leases. The captain refused. To force him to surrender, the League decided to suspend all kinds of dealings with him, the laborers refused to work, shops to sell food, mail stopped sending her letters, even had to recruit workers in Northern Ireland to reap the harvest. The "Times" found a name for this new form of pressure: the word boycott was born. And he made history.

In 1915, Gandhi called on India to boycott British goods. It was the first of the actions that allowed the country to regain its independence in 1947. 50 years ago, a black seamstress named Rose Alabama Parks refused to relinquish her seat to a white man on a bus. The civil rights leaders organized a boycott of the company at whose head he placed the black pastor Martin Luther King. A year later, the Court U.S. Supreme unconstitutional segregation on buses. The abolition of apartheid in South Africa began with a boycott against Shell, Kellogg's and Coca Cola. The suspension of French nuclear testing in Polynesia had its origin in a boycott of French wine industry. American companies stopped contracting discrimination against Catholics in Northern Ireland after a 12-year boycott against Ford Motors, which ended in 1998. Scott Paper abandoned plans to establish a eucalyptus plantation and paper mill in Indonesia five days after Survival International threatened with a boycott of its products in the United Kingdom because the plans threatened the survival of indigenous peoples. Maybe that's why the 'Councillor first "of the Government starts to be so nervous.