You always get bashing from some quarters - for Prodi, earlier it was Rifondazione. Vendola in Puglia, and the moderate leftist leaders daring to name him candidate, also received lots of bashing. Moreover, I'm not sure the catholic ultra-right's media presence and politicians convert to that much followers among voters. (I have my doubts even for voters of Christian centrist parties that all of them would follow the party line on this.) Do you have some polling data on this?

the Vatican still controls an absoluetly enormous number of votes

How much of that on the left? How much of that is blind followers who'd vote for the Right if called on?

I diagree with the view that Prodi lost power in 1998 becuase of he was not "courageous", however.

We will disagree on what Prodi should have done with those demands (at least part of which were in the coalition charter if I recall correctly), and the demands of the business community, i.e., I think he should have dared a more leftist economic policy rather than the usual 'reforms'. But, when I wrote of lack of courage, I was more thinking of such omissions as the lack of a new media ownership law - omissions he shared with his successor d'Alema, which allowed Berlusconi to regain his semi-dictatoral powers. I.e., I was more thinking of how the insane Right could return, rather than his personal fall from power. (He also received similar criticism of indecisiveness for his tenure as EU Commission President, however, as the Council calls the shots here I don't blame him much.)

The solution to this problem of using the electoral system as a means of extortion is to finish the job of eliminating the last vestiges of proportional representaion and move more decively to a truly bipolar, and eventually, two-party system, IMO.

I fear that's a double-edged sword all in itself, and won't deliver the benefit you expect from it.

I recognise the need to bust the old Partitocracy and system of blackmail, which the mixed system was supposed to achieve. But, blackmail works in a two-party system, too: just this time, within one of the parties; what have been power-wrestling coalition partners are now power-wrestling party wings. Witness the US Democratic party for self-destruction from the centrists, and witness the US Republican party for executing the agenda of the extremist minority.

Furthermore, I deeply resent a two-party system. First, I think it limits democracy: it limits the opinions that get an unblended representation. (As much as you dislike RC and PCI, as much as I dislike Fini's postfascists, there are a lot of people who share those parties' views.) Party wings don't offer that much diversity of opinion (as opposed to power groups), while their power balance within the party has not much to do with relative support in public opinion. Second, the two parties limit public discourse - if the just two parties agree on something, it will be very difficult to advance or even get a forum for an opposing policy (see the USA again). Third, if just two parties get entrenched, they can turn even more corrupt and power-monopolising that a partitocracy: they can play one hand washes the other, ally against any third usurper of the system, or blackmail voters with "if you don't vote for us, The Other Side wins" (see the USA again, especially the election system and campaign finance, and the Nader case).

_{*Lunatic*, n.
One whose delusions are out of fashion.}