[quote=“Marvin”][quote=“mr_boogie”]
AC, just remember that most of the media is really blue, except maybe for some few newspapers and Apple Daily, who only sides themselves.
[/quote]
We also need to remember that most of the information you get is from someone who hates KMT enough to leave the country if they are ever elected. However the media is, your eyes and ears are all mounted with a green filter.[/quote]
Sorry, but you got me wrong. My source of information is the chinapost, etaiwanews, taipeitimes and forumosa. My wife is too busy working to even see the news these days.
Now let us talk about the speech. Surelly one can understand half that what has been said these days is pure BS.
The opposition is charging Chen of violation of the Constitution by running a minority government. I am not fully aware of the Constitution, but this seams to be very strange, and, mostly, not reasonable. If the Constitution would not allow minority governments, either the LY or the President should be voted until both of them are the same color (which is extremelly doubtfull someone has ever thought about this prospect, unless they are thinking about a single party regime).
Then they charge that the government had the power to ruin the economy, harming cross-strait relations and suppressing media freedom, among other charges. While it might be true that some of this can happen (although the media freedom part is astonishing, as I myself never saw so much irresponsibly free media), this goes against the first charge. If the government is a minority one, then we are talking about a tetraplegic government - it can move his head, but the rest doesn’t follow. While most people are unpleased with the fact that the government made no reforms, the truth is that most of the reforms where either block/eaten/punched/insert-your-favourite in the LY, which is controlled by the opposition, and where anything except democracy goes inside. So while the head of government may be responsible in some more controversial policies, the truth is that most of the reforms (which have to be passed as law) have to go through the non-functional part of the government’s body, aka LY. The flood bills is another good example of how the LY is blocking the government’s head.
On the charge that his family members and in-laws have accepted money in exchange for political favors, unless this is proven by a competent judicial body, this is all alegations (and therefore, should be taken into consideration only by prosecutors). Don’t forget that the first lady “allready bought a supermarket in US”.
On the charge of isolating politically Taiwan, let us not forget who lost the seat in the UN. Also, on the subject of Beijing’s white flag, even the United States is upgrading their bases in the Pacific, so one can wonder what kind of peace Beijing wants. And, let us also not forget that there are 800+ missiles pointed to Taiwan, plus an anti-secession law. This will account for how much firendly Beijing is. Maybe what most people in the opposition now have is a sort of Stockholm Syndrome http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stockholm_syndrome.
On the charge of heightening cross-strait tensions, resulting in a stagnation of cross-strait interactions, this is also not true. What this government did, as any responsible government in the world would, is to try to diversify the investments Taiwan is making overseas, not to depend solelly on China. Currently, if China wants, they can probably obliterate Taiwan economically. In the last week we also had a opening in the links between China and Taiwan, but only in matters that ultimatelly represent gains to China. The non opening of cargo from China to Taiwan, oposed to the opening in the other way, is saw as an attempt of protection of the Chinese air cargo companies against the Taiwanese giants. So in the end, the ones not wanting to have links are the Chinese counterparts, not the Taiwanese governement.