A-bian a Crook and Taiwan a disgrace

And why not? At least we know a pedophile would be able to get the trains running on time.[/quote]

Yah lost me. How so?

[quote=“Gainsbourg”][quote=“Huang Guang Chen”]

Ha ha ha! I just realised who that was too! You can tell by the hate . . . a woman spurned and all that. :laughing:

HG[/quote]

Let me roll over and ask your mama.[/quote]

You’re a necrophile too! :noway:

Actually, that figures, I don’t suppose a corpse puts up much resistance? :laughing:

HG

Now this is a point I don’t understand. Many countries (yes, even democratic ones) change their leaders before the term is up.

Let’s See
Japan
UK
USA
… I’m sure I can think of others but I’m going to work now…

So, why do you assume that just become someone is elected, that we all have to suffer the fool until the change of leader.

Protest is a legitimate form of democratic government, (not Violent).

Kenneth

And why not? At least we know a pedophile would be able to get the trains running on time.[/quote]

Yah lost me. How so?[/quote]
Because.

Now this is a point I don’t understand. Many countries (yes, even democratic ones) change their leaders before the term is up.

Let’s See
Japan
UK
USA
… I’m sure I can think of others but I’m going to work now…

So, why do you assume that just become someone is elected, that we all have to suffer the fool until the change of leader.

Protest is a legitimate form of democratic government, (not Violent).

Kenneth[/quote]

Well, in the UK and other parlimentary systems when governments get toppled a new general election is held. Here the president would only be replaced by the vice-president. The legislative would remain the same.

There is also the point that the legal means of ousting the president have been tried…and failed, and so there is the attempt now to use “people power” to do what the system couldn’t.

And why not? At least we know a pedophile would be able to get the trains running on time.[/quote]

Yah lost me. How so?[/quote]
Because.[/quote]

Ah.

[quote=“LA”][quote=“Feiren”][quote=“plasmatron”] it sets a great precedent for future would be leaders of Taiwan, namely that no matter who you are, deep green “local boy” or deep blue “semi-commie” if you and/or your family lie, cheat, and steal from the Taiwanese people you will be removed from office…

more power to them IMHO… 阿扁下檯![/quote]

No, it sets a horrible precedent. If your political enemies with plenty of access to the media can exaggerate relatively minor unproven charges into wild allegations of corruption, then you can raise a mob and remove your democratically elected leaders from office by extra-constitutional means.[/quote]

Don’t go to Kalifornia, USA. You’ll be shocked as to what they did with that ex-dude. :runaway:[/quote]

What are you on about? California voters recalled their governor through a legal process-one that is in the state constitution. That is hardly comparable to current efforts to remove Chen.

The ROC constitution provides a means for removing the President: impeachment. People who’d like to see the back of Chen should either follow legal processes for getting him out of office early or just wait until 2008, all the while preparing to beat the next green ticket.

[quote=“KenTaiwan98”]Now this is a point I don’t understand. Many countries (yes, even democratic ones) change their leaders before the term is up.

Let’s See
Japan
UK
USA
… I’m sure I can think of others but I’m going to work now…

So, why do you assume that just become someone is elected, that we all have to suffer the fool until the change of leader. [/quote]
In the case of the US, the way to remove a President is through impeachment. The same basically holds true in Taiwan. In Japan and the UK, a PM can step down to save his party’s chances in the polls. In a parliamentary system, I can’t imagine any PM staying at the top long enough for impeachment style processes to get underway; it would kill his/her party. Choosing to step down is a political choice. Nixon left office after hard evidence was stacked against him and legal proceedings aimed at removing him were in motion. CSB’s situation is not the same. Though at some point it may be politically wise for him to go, I think it unlikely (based on what we know now) that he will be removed through constitutional processes (impeachment) before his term ends.

I haven’t noticed much defending of any political party in this thread. I haven’t noticed it in any other threads of late, either. What I have noticed is a good number of people posting in defense of the rule of law. If you can’t comprehend the difference between the two, then perhaps you should take your insolent self back to a civics or history classroom to learn a thing or two from those who perform a job you so strongly disdain.

[quote=“Gainsbourg”][quote=“Huang Guang Chen”]
I don’t suppose a corpse puts up much resistance? :laughing:

HG[/quote]

Ask your wife. After living with you for more than a year, I would categorize her as part of the “living dead.”[/quote]

Or in other parlance, a stiff?

Hard and reliable as a rock, big boy, and no need for chemical enhancement. There’s plenty of lurving over my way.

HG

Ding. Absolute ding.

I think the discussion about the legality of the protest movement is an important point, but I just have one question in response… wasn’t CSB’s administration supposed to be reforming the legal system and constitution in order to increase public oversight while strengthening democratic institutions? Remember the referendum law of 2004? Is there anything undemocratic about a recall law? Wouldn’t it increase public oversight?

And I’ll also point out that the anti-Bian movement has remained within the limits of the law at all times. They’ve assembled peacefully and legally to call upon CSB to resign. There’s nothing inherently illegal in that move.

If the blue-red alliance truly believes that the overwhelming majority of Taiwanese wish for Chen’s removal from office at any cost, then they have a simple and guaranteed way to achieve this without destroying social order and flouting the constitution.

Step 1: Their legislators pass a vote of no confidence against Su and his cabinet. They can muster a sufficient majority to do this whenever they care to. This will result in the toppling of the administration, the dismissal of the legislature by the president, and the calling of legislative elections.

Step 2: They focus their election campaign on asking for a sufficient majority to recall the president. If the electorate really are so desperate to be rid of Chen, red-blues should easily be able to win the requisite two-thirds majority.

Step 3: They use their newly increased majority in the LY to initiate a referendum for Chen’s recall. If public antipathy toward Chen is anywhere near what the opposition claims, the recall referendum will be certain to succeed.

So why aren’t they doing this? Why aren’t they taking this democratic, constitutional route? What are they afraid of?

Very good question Omni.

HG

[quote=“Mick”][quote=“Hobart”]That corrupt thing is a load crap, as the KMT single party machine was one of the most corrupt regimes in the world.
[/quote] How does the KMT being even more currupt, make the charges of corrution crap? DPP are in power, they want to bring charges of corruption against LTH and the KMT , then do it. Get the proof and charge them, I’m sure the people will thank the DPP for doing so.[/quote]

Honestly, you guys don’t care about the corruption, just any excuse to get those damn DPP out of control of the Presidential Yuan. Oh my president is so corrupt, oh my, get him out of office. Hahahahaa…the only reason you want him out is because he is Green. You guys have been wanting him out since before he took office. You started using scare tactics about China invading soon back on March 21, 2000. Brought the market down every time you opened your fricken mouth, then had the nads to say oh President Chen is ruining the economy. You Blues ruined the the economy with your doomsday seers.

I think those are all very fair questions, Omni.

My answer is that any of those steps are exactly what James Soong and the extremists would pursue, if they had the pull to make it happen. However, the pan-Blue party is undoubtedly under the thumb of Ma at this point… and Ma has shown very little interest in doing much more than waiting for the 2008 elections. I don’t think he wants the precedent of forced resignations, and I don’t think he really cares if he takes the Presidency in 2007 or 2008. Even the previous recall vote in the legislative yuan was more posturing for the benefit of Soong than anything else. You’ll note Ma has kept his involvement with Shih’s protests very low-key, and mostly on a “humanitarian” level.

I agree with your point here, CC, but I still have one question: what purpose does any of this serve? If they think they can take the President down through constitutional processes, then by all means, they should go for it. Otherwise, all of this street action is just a bunch of bellicose bellowing that blocks traffic and creates more tension. While that isn’t illegal, I don’t really see how it is good for Taiwan. It certainly doesn’t improve the quality of political debate.

Ma’s hand would almost certainly be strengthened by an early LY election. The PFP would be liquidated under the new electoral system, and that would be amen to any lingering clout still wielded by Soong. What’s more, while Ma is experiencing some highly threatening opposition within the KMT, mainly from Lien and like-minded hardliners and adherents, he has the overwhelming support of grassroots KMT members and supporters (as demonstrated by the result of the chairmanship election), and so should be able to use the election to get more of his own people into the LY and consolidate his leadership of the pan-blue camp.

Silly rabbit, why would the Bluies want to topple Chen. He is doing such a good job destroying the Greenies. Just keep up the heat and watch the entertainment. Popcorn ready. :beer:

As for Ma, he needs to implement KMT anti-corruption reform first before he runs for the presidential election. Corruption will always happen (we are talking about politicians after all), but he will have a mechanism to get rid of it.

I agree with your point here, CC, but I still have one question: what purpose does any of this serve? If they think they can take the President down through constitutional processes, then by all means, they should go for it. Otherwise, all of this street action is just a bunch of bellicose bellowing that blocks traffic and creates more tension. While that isn’t illegal, I don’t really see how it is good for Taiwan. It certainly doesn’t improve the quality of political debate.[/quote]
Is a social safety valve and allows people to voice their political dissatisfaction. The crux of your question is why have freedom of speech and freedom of assembly. If you grant the right for the Greens to do hands-across-Taiwan and anti-ASL demostrations on the island, then naturely one must allow the Greens to do a depose-Abian demonstration.

Seriously the validity of freedom of assembly and freedom of speech is not a fuction of whether or not it is for or against any particular party.

Perhaps the depose-aBian demostration will have a magnifying effect to let the middle of the road constituent say “Hey I’m not crazy to think aBian is a dipsh*t, I’m empowered in a democracy to do something. I’ve had enough.”

ac, we all saw the DPP legislators today wearing red shirts today in the LY, didn’t we?

Anyway, as far as I’m concerned, this all story is just a way of diverting the public of the real thing: The fact that this government, all of it, is just pure shit.
So, to all that are here talking about disgraces of Taiwan, let us do a quick check on how many bills where passed in the last legislature, what they where about, and what good they will do to the population of Taiwan. For sure we would get a nice picture of how this country is really steared.

I’m sorry to say, but mostly all the businessman want 0 change in this country, the laws suits them well and they will use all their power to make it all stay the same. Reform, which led the DPP to power, will be be impossible to get as the opposing forces are too big. No one that is in the winning side will want this to change, and those on the winning side are the ones who confortably live in their apartments in Xinyi district.

I think the businessmen of ROC, want the 3 links established yestarday and lift the restriction on the dollar amount for direct investment into PRC. The DPP is in the way.

Get rid of the DPP President with his TI aggenda and businessmen will be much happier on Taiwan.

So your claim that the constiuents in the business community are statisfied with status quo at this time is incorrect.

The 2 things may be the only things they want to change, because that will help them win more money (or, maybe Taiwan is allready too late with Beijing announcing a cool down in foreign investment). All the real reforms (the ones that only have to do with Taiwan, and the ones you couldn’t care less) are completelly and totally blocked.
More protection to the workers (you should see some agreements sales people have to sign in some companies over here), better welfare, more tax justice and better environment, are all vital to keep the economy and the population in a good way.