Ma is a joke. He will become next president simply because people like him (he probably shook enough hands on tv these last couple of years). Ironically he will not give Taiwan a choice when “time comes”. Did the KMT ever give Taiwan a choice?
This interview represents very well his personality. Ma would just say anything to please anyone, that’s the main reason why he contradicts himself so often.
[quote]Did the KMT ever give Taiwan a choice?
This interview represents very well his personality. Ma would just say anything to please anyone, that’s the main reason why he contradicts himself so often.[/quote]
…but…but…he’s a politician, silly.
Hammer meet nail.
Great interview. Loved Ma’s remark at one point: “LISTEN TO ME.”
Can’t wait to listen to him some more!
I especially liked what he said today at the KMT’s 228 memorial ceremony when he refused to apologize for the party’s part in the killings:
(Paraphrasing here, but the gist is) “The 228 incident was crushed not by the KMT but by the government of the time. However, the KMT was the government, so the party should not be held wholly without blame.”
:bravo: :bravo:
[quote=“sandman”]I especially liked what he said today at the KMT’s 228 memorial ceremony when he refused to apologize for the party’s part in the killings:
(Paraphrasing here, but the gist is) “The 228 incident was crushed not by the KMT but by the government of the time. However, the KMT was the government, so the party should not be held wholly without blame.”
:bravo: :bravo:[/quote]
Jeezus! He’s starting to sound like Bush!!!
Will I soon have a calendar of Ma-isms on my desktop?
So A (incident) was caused by B (government), not C (KMT), but B=C, so isn’t it the same as A was caused by C?
So, in the same line of thought, bad economy because of government, and as DPP = government, only in a small percentage can DPP be held responsible? Jesus I don’t get Ma…
Anyway, my fiancee told me that Ma told that they should take all the blame. The best part however was that explanation:
“Many Taiwanese had to be sacrificed to protect people from other provinces”
This can sound like a pragmatic path, don’t you think?
mr_boogie, you should just let your fiancee write, so we can cut out the middleman. 
she is less interested in politics than me, I just asked her help on this matter…
If you need information, I’m filiated in the Portuguese Social Revolutionary Party (extreme left party), a party who holds 6% of the seats in the Portuguese Parliament. I’ve allways been socially and politically conscious, even when I have to stand against my bosses…
She mistranslated. It’s a subtle point but an important one – he said the KMT is “not without blame,” the implication being that it wasn’t all the fault of the KMT.
Senior KMT officials are eligible for government employee pensions based on their service to the KMT.
taipeitimes.com/News/taiwan/ … 2003277685
But the KMT isn’t the government? Which one is it?
For those that don’t know, I should point out that Hardtalk is a BBC4 program aired in dead slots exclusively on digital satellite/cable. Back in the UK, I used to watch it for the unintentional comedy of poorly researched and generally lightweight interviews.
With that said, I think neither the interviewer nor Ma made a decent effort. The interviewer didn’t really seem to understand the situation and relied on a Paxman-wannabe technique of pushing unimportant questions that were difficult to answer in order to give himself more weight.
I wasn’t impressed with Ma’s ‘you just don’t understand Chinese culture’ retort half-way through - lazy and condescending. ‘One China Policy? Never! I spit at you! Nooo, see what WE’RE talking about is One China with Different Interpretations. It’s okay, you’re a stupid foreigner and you can’t be expected to understand these subtle differences.’ I noticed a lot of contradictions in what he was trying to get across, both within the interview and as common knowledge amongst followers of Taiwanese politics; for example, presenting the KMT as a neutral, ‘the-people-want-status-quo’ popular party while subsequently lambasting Chen for abolition of the NUC.
The rhetoric used to spin the referendum was clever and practised but, I fear, not telling the whole story. I was very disappointed that the interviewer had not done enough homework to make a bigger point out of the so-called ‘veto’.
‘Poised and professional’? Hmm, we’ll have to agree to disagree there. To be fair, I think Ma was struggling with language and made a good effort, even if most of what came out of his mouth was rehashed KMT waffle.
All in all something of a disappointment whichever side of the fence you happen to sit on.
[quote=“phibert”]Not bad - Mayor Ma seemed poised and professional on his BBC Hardtalk interview…
Judge for yourself -
It wasn’t just rhetoric – it was a lie.
I think the interviewer had bigger fish to fry than trying to explain the convoluted veto of the referrendum.
The big money question was trying to get the KMT to look like they were in conspiring with the CPP against the DPP. Unfortunately, for TI supporters, he did not succeed and Ma masterfully used the “reality of Taiwan” card.
Ma also most got caught up towards the end of the interview in why wasn’t his position more antagonistic towards the PRC, like most of the West. But once again saved himself with the “majority on Taiwan support Status Quo” with a little “silly TV personality cannot comprehend Status Quo.”
[quote=“ac_dropout”]I think the interviewer had bigger fish to fry than trying to explain the convoluted veto of the referrendum.
[/quote]
It wasn’t a veto.
That is a lie.
The interviewer didn’t catch it, but I agree, it wasn’t a big deal for him not to call him on it.
The rest of the interview exposed Ma for what he was…disingenuous.
You’re right, it wasn’t a “veto” per se. The referendum simply failed. But something tells me it’s useless to argue about Ma with STOP_Ma. No matter what Ma says or does, he’s wrong Wrong WRONG! If it’s any consolation, many in the PFP share your opinion.
Stop_Ma,
Only you and the other TI nutters on the board caught it.
The rest of us accept it as a succinct description of what happened to the referrendum.
I know it must drive you crazy that Ma then using the results of the “veto” referrendum to justify why the KMT is blocking the arms package in the LY.
Now the entire English speaking community believe the Taiwanese people don’t want to enter an arms race with the PRC. How dreadful.
If we could only make the English speaking 1st world nations understand that we really want them to fight the PRC for us Taiwanese. We would be forever grateful if they died in our place and fight for our independence. Don’t let our draft dodging be in vain.
per se?
It wasn’t a veto in any sense of the word.
It was a lie.
And I may say he’s wrong (it’s easy to do), but at least I back it up. If you choose not to debate with me, that’s your perogative.
even though we all know you deep green TI folks live in a fantasy world of your own construction, this statement is really pushing the limits of even your own “A-Bian in wonderland” reality…
in another thread on this very topic, forumosa.com/taiwan/viewtopi … 6&start=20
, I pushed you on a point of proving what Ma’s English slip up could possibly prove regarding his capacity to lead Taiwan and why you felt it necessary to dedicate an entire thread to the fact that he said “president”… a prime example of how you lot love to jump on irrelevant trivialities and dress them up as “reasons” to hate Ma… not only could you offer nothing but clumsy, childish, low watt attempts to avoid the debate and offer your unsubstantiated opinions dressed up as facts, but you made a fool out of yourself with your own inability to apply basic logic and consistency to your “eye’s wide shut” anti Ma utterances… In the end, the only “argument” and “back up” you could muster was this shining example of your inability to engage in rational, cultured debate…
Although it seems that inside your TI bubble you’re incapable of realizing it STOP-ma, but you’ve proved time and time again, that all your anti Ma vitriol, amounts to is nothing but uninformed and bigoted opinion that you are utterly incapable of backing up, but still try to pass off as fact…
Plasmatron, that was a nice example of selective cutting and pasting – it really was! I’m sure AC is taking notes.
Let’s put that comment together with the rest of the words that you conveniently deleted in that post:
[quote]Plasmatron:
You’re an idiot.
Ma fumbled nearly the entire interview – on logic alone.
I just found that “President” remark to be icing on the cake.[/quote]
And let’s put these words in context to what you said earlier in that thread…
[quote=“plasmatron”]:lol: honestly… you’re hilarious STOP_ma… :bravo:
so your argument is and I quote, “Ma is proving himself not to be fit for the high-pressured responsibility of leading Taiwan, defending this country against an opponent that is infinitely more hostile than a BBC reporter.” and your evidence to support this assertion is, the fact that he perhaps used an incorrect title for his colleague during an interview with the BBC which was conducted in English… damning evidence to be sure…
so STOP_ma… using your own arguments, logic and criteria then, let’s construct a little ‘what if’ scenario to ascertain Chen Shuibian’s suitability for the high pressure responsibility of leading Taiwan…
[quote]Interviewer: “Mr.Chen welcome to BBC hardtalk…”
CSB: “eehhh… you say is what-uh…?”[/quote][/quote]
It seems to me that you are the one creating the bubble.