If you to agree that the power does not walk so popular thus, which will be the problem? Would be inadequate our democratic model? Or we are guaranteeing the corruption and the disobedience? To bet in these two ideas does not seem incoherent, since the society chooses who said the rules and who would have cumpriz them. The fact is that we vote with hope. We wait of four the eight years to see the results as if we could not influence now in the decisions of our representatives, while everything happens. We deliver the regiment of the country to the politicians for determined period, as who puts a house in the real estate one and if it worries only in receiving the rent.
The against-sense is that we not only pay the rent as correctors and everything more! In a generalized manner we ignore the activities of who of the letters of the game politician with our endorsement. Thus the politicians live in comfortable condition of work, far from the supervision of its masters masters. Who orders after all? We act as if the only right that we have was to choose who will command senzala after the next lawsuit. That type of democracy speaks in reintegration of ownership of the Federal Chamber against citizens who reveal of the materialized democracy inside its repudiation to corrupt Jos Roberto Arruda (DEM)? My reply it would be: The same one of the manifestants whom actual support of the too much students does not have, of owners of house, pensioners. Of people, as we, whom the chance lost to promote the biggest Brazilian excursion to Brasilia, financed for unions, service clubs, entrepreneurs, at last of all these beneficiary we of the decency politics who we could have evoked in each one of these scandals so ours! But not, we are in house and take knowledge of these facts in the telejornais that we soon attend after the instructive televising programs that we see of sunday the sunday. Logical that this we of at least 50% plus one; that is, democratically explained.