朱立倫是精神錯亂還是把人民當白痴？

中國國民黨新北市長候選人朱立倫在他自己的部落格上發表了一篇新聞稿，質疑他的對手蔡英文對當選後做滿任期的承諾：

民進黨主席蔡英文宣布參選新北市長以來，一直不願意正面回答是否會做滿任期的問題，這是不是一開始就打定主意要落跑？

自從蔡英文 5月23日宣布參選後，朱立倫就立刻提出這個質疑，似乎對蔡英文「是不是做滿整個任期」比「有什麼政見」要在意得多。甚且，即使蔡英文已經在 5月25日的記者會 (video)上承諾「一定負責到底」，朱立倫與他的國民黨還是一直咬住這個議題不放，已經快三個月了還在這個議題上死纏爛打，好像非常害怕蔡英文做不滿任期。

更離譜的是，朱立倫這個膽敢拿「承諾不要落跑」當作競選政見的人，本身卻擁有照亮歷史的輝煌落跑記錄。底下這個表格列出朱立倫的從政簡史以及相對應的民選公職任期。注意看那些紅色標出來的日期：

朱立倫從政落跑記錄
朱立倫從政表	立法委員任期	桃園縣長任期
1999/2/1	1999/2/1
第四屆立法委員 開始競選縣長	第四屆立法委員
2001/12/20 落跑！！
2001/12/19		2001/12/19
第十四屆桃園縣縣長	2002/1/31	第十四屆縣長
2005/12/19		2005/12/19
2005/12/20		2005/12/20
第十五屆桃園縣縣長
2009/9/9 落跑！！		第十五屆縣長
2009/9/10
行政院副院長		2009/12/19
2010/5/17
辭職競選新北市長

朱立倫落跑了兩次：一次是 2001/12/20 立委當了一半跑去選桃園縣長。立法院的正式記錄不但寫得很清楚，還特別用紅字標出他「中途離職」（看本文附錄 [1]）。他當桃園縣長後，又在 2009/9/9 任期中第二次落跑去當行政院副院長。事實上，他的從政生崖中必須對選民負責的民選公職，就只有立法委員與桃園縣長兩個位置，但他兩個都給它落跑，落跑率百分之百。

為什麼一個有這麼完美落跑紀錄的人，竟然認為他有那個臉來質疑別人「可能」會落跑？

他的文章中又說：

對於蔡英文競選總部副總幹事鄭文燦指稱國民黨新北市長參選人朱立倫曾有三次落跑紀錄，朱立倫上午表示，他是在立委任期屆滿後才參與縣長選舉，兩任縣長八年做到只剩不到九十天的任期才轉任副院長，而副院長根本不是任期制，他實在佩服民進黨硬拗的功力。

啊？原來他竟認為他是在立委任期屆滿後才參與縣長選舉的？

在這個影音新聞中, 朱立倫微笑面對鏡頭，厚顏無恥地說出這樣的話來：

我是立委屆滿去改選的時候，一起選縣長的。

看著鏡頭，臉不紅氣不喘，公然扭曲事實的硬凹功夫，不但令人嘔吐，更令人質疑 ── 難道，他真的相信過去那些可以輕易查證的事實是如他所幻想的一樣發生的嗎？如果這樣，那表示他是活在幻覺裡，他的精神狀態恐怕已經錯亂失常。

他同時又強調當桃園縣長他只不過提早三個月落跑而已。提早三個月落跑不算落跑？把人民當白痴嗎？

朱立倫現在正在競選期間，也就是說，正在「有求於民」的時候。一個政治人物，在這種時刻，對可以輕易查證的事實都可以這樣公然對人民瞎掰，那等到他手中握有權力、不再有求於民的時候，對於民眾很難查證的公權力運用，他有可能誠實面對人民嗎？

新北市將會是台灣第一大都市，新北市人真該好好想想，把手中神聖的一票浪費在這種候選人身上，最後會不會害了自己。

附錄

[1] 立法院The 正式記錄(截圖1,截圖2)，明顯標註朱立倫「中途離職」：

[2] 朱立倫自己的網站上的自我介紹 清楚寫明他是在2001年，也就是立法委員任期的前一年，就已經就職桃園縣長。

[3] 朱立倫的硬凹影片： 綠批落跑3次 朱嗆勿胡扯硬拗－民視新聞

[4] 朱立倫質疑蔡英文的新聞稿 (截圖).

Delusional Eric Chu and KMT's Suicidal Campaign Strategy

 

The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT)'s New Taipei City mayor candidate, Eric Chu (朱立倫), posted a news release on his own blog, questioning why his counter part, the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP)'s candidate Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文), doesn't promise clearly to finish the full term of mayor if she gets elected,

民進黨主席蔡英文宣布參選新北市長以來，一直不願意正面回答是否會做滿任期的問題，這是不是一開始就打定主意要落跑？
Since she announced to campaign for the New Taipei City mayor, DPP's president Tsai Ing-Wen (蔡英文) never answered directly if she will finish the full term once she gets elected. Isn't she intending to run away in the first place ?

Chu has been hammering at this topic ever since Tsai announced her campaign on May 23rd (2010). In fact, asking Tsai to promise the full term -- but not what Tsai has to offer for the New Taipei City -- seems to be Chu's major concern since day one.

Tsai already responded, on May 25th, in a press conference (video) that she will "be responsible to the end" if she is elected. That doesn't seem to slow down KMT's attack on this issue at all.

But that's not the issue here. Chu, who has the audacity to question other's commitment, is a politician with outstanding records of quitting his public service positions in the middle of the terms. As shown in the table below, the first column is Chu's political service record; the 2nd: the official Legislator term, and the 3rd: the official commissioner term. Note the dates marked with red.

朱立倫從政落跑記錄 Eric Chu's Runaway Record First column: Chu's political service record; 2nd: Official Legislator term; 3rd: Office commissioner term. TCC: Taoyuan County Commissioner
朱立倫從政表 Chu's history	立法委員任期 Legislator term	桃園縣長任期 TCC Term
1999/2/1	1999/2/1
第四屆立法委員 The 4th Legislator 開始參選競選縣長 Start campaigning for TCC	第四屆立法委員
2001/12/20 Quit!	4th Legislator
2001/12/19		2001/12/19
第十四屆桃園縣縣長 14th TCC	2002/1/31	第十四屆縣長 14th TCC
2005/12/19		2005/12/19
2005/12/20		2005/12/20
第十五屆桃園縣縣長 15th TCC
2009/9/9 Quit!		第十五屆縣長
2009/9/10		15th TCC
行政院副院長 Vice Premier		2009/12/19
2010/5/17
辭職競選新北市長 Resign to campaign for New Taipei City

Chu broke away from his commitments twice -- the first on 2001/12/20 when he quit the legislator (see the official record cited in [1] in the end of article) to take up the post of Taoyuan County commissioner (TCC), and the 2nd on 2009/9/9 when he quit his TCC post to be sworn in to the vice premier position. In his political career, he served only two public-elected positions (legislator and TCC), yet he dumped them both.

Why does a person of such a record think that he is in a position to question others' commitment ?

The news release I cited in the beginning might shed some light. Chu wrote:

對於蔡英文競選總部副總幹事鄭文燦指稱國民黨新北市長參選人朱立倫曾有三次落跑紀錄，朱立倫上午表示，他是在立委任期屆滿後才參與縣長選舉，兩任縣長八年做到只剩不到九十天的任期才轉任副院長，而副院長根本不是任期制，他實在佩服民進黨硬拗的功力。

In response to Tsai's deputy campaign chief Cheng Wen-tsang's (鄭文燦) claim that the KMT's New Taipei City mayoral candidate Eric Chu (朱立倫) has a history of leaving his public service posts three times before finishing his term (when he previously held the positions of KMT legislator, Taoyuan County commissioner (TCC) and the vice premier), Eric Chu said in the morning that he finished his legislator term before he started campaigning for the Taoyuan County commissioner , and when he left the commissioner for the position of vice premier, their was only 90 days left in his 8-year term of Taoyuan County commissioner. As for leaving the vice premier for the current campaign, he said there's no "term" for vice premier position. He said that he is indeed impressed by DPP's fact-twisting ability.

He argued, and wrote clearly in black and white, that he finished his legislator term before he started campaigning for the Taoyuan County commissioner !! In a video, he smiled at the camera and delivered that outright lie without a blink of eye:

我是立委屆滿去改選的時候，一起選縣長的。
I campaigned TCC after I finished my legislator term, at the same time as the re-election of legislators.

The as-a-matter-of-factly attitude of fact-twisting is truly mind-boggling. Did he really believe that's what happened ?

He also argued that "leaving the post only 3 months earlier before the end of the term" doesn't count as leaving the post earlier. With that kind of twisting, he went on to attack DPP being fact-twisting.

Now we know at least one thing --- he is probably in such a delusional state of total denial to the fact that he did run away from his duty twice. When a person is so far out of the touch of reality, his mental health is in serious doubt.

KMT's Suicidal Campaign Strategy

But this might not be as simple as a single politician going delusional. The KMT campaign is handled by KMT Secretary-General King Pu-tsung (金溥聰), Ma Ying-jeou's most trusted spin doctor and the master mind behind all KMT's campaign strategy. Chu's move has to be approved by King. In fact, Chu's delusional statement echoes King's, which was made on the same day.

It triggers some pondering on KMT's campaign approach: Chu has a complete record of breaking away, yet Tsai has none. So Chu is like "using own weakness to attack others' strength." Isn't that suicidal? The more Chu chases this subject, the more people will be reminded of Chu's own record of dumping his commitments, not to mention that this attack is delivered in a manner of Chu going delusional. Chu's credibility will be further crashed, and his mental health will be questioned. Both would seriously jeopardize his chance of winning the New Taipei City election.

Why on earth would the KMT adopt this stupid and apparently suicidal strategy to trash her own candidate ?

It is even more suspicious if we take into account that Chu is considered Ma Ying-jeou's successor in the KMT. Not only is it the consensus of public opinion, but also Ma's move of making him the vice premier is considered a pre-arrangement for KMT's future. Sacrificing KMT's next generation leader is like eradicating KMT's own lineage.

Previously I pointed out that the KMT plans to use admitting incompetence on all fronts as their campaign strategy. In which I asked why the KMT would adopt a self-trashing approach for the year-end campaign. Chu's move described here pushes the KMT one step further along the suicidal path.

But, why ? Do Ma and King have a priority other than winning the Battle-Of-Five-Cities - the year-end election that is considered the most critical for Ma if he wants to win the 2012 presidential election, such that they don't mind sacking KMT's own lineage ?

References

[1] The official record of Legislation Yuan on Chu's profile . Chu's mid-term runaway is highlighted in red on the official site. Magnified here:

[2] Chu's profile on his own website, on which clearly written that he switched from legislator to TCC on 2001.

[3] Chu's lying video: 綠批落跑3次 朱嗆勿胡扯硬拗－民視新聞 in which Chu delivered fact-twisting statements shamelessly.

[4] Chu wrote in black and white his shameless fact-twisting on his own blog.

[5] Chu's wiki (in Chinese). Note that in Chu's English wiki page, his legislator term is not listed.

政治人物是人民實現理想的「工具」

楊秋興叛黨有感

政治人物是人民實現理想的「工具」。

自製書桌，不同的步驟需要不同的工具。有時需要鋸子，有時需要鐵鎚，有時需要磨光機。

我們從木板開始，每進入到下一個階段的時候，就必須換一個工具。我們不能換了階段、有了新需求之後，還把舊的工具抓在手上，否則我們就沒有手來拿新的工具以應付新的階段任務。

或者，如果我們工作了一半，手上的工具壞掉了，我們只要換個新的工具繼續完成我們的工作就好，不必去為壞掉的工具感傷。

面對政治人物亦可如是觀 ─ 適合我們任務的就用，不適合我們任務的就換掉。施明德、許信良等，都曾經對我們的理想「有用」過，但現在不是壞掉就是過時。我們必須換掉這些壞工具，才不會影響工作的進度。

對過去的「工具」這樣看待，對現在與未來的「工具」，也不妨這樣看待。

台灣沒有「不要跟誰談統一」的問題 ─── 解析李瑞木的「不反中」論述 (1)

 
台獨前輩李瑞木(Raymond Lee)在最近一系列文章中對台派提出「反共不反中」的建議。我將試著針對其論述提出我的看法。此文由話題背景談到他的整個系列的一個最重要的根據。

經過幾十年的民主奮鬥，台灣現在已經有絕大部分人具有台灣意識。近幾年所有民調顯示，多數台灣人認為台灣跟中國是不同的兩個國家，而且台灣人不願意當中國人。但這個成熟的台灣意識並沒有反映在台派選舉的得票率上，造成一個「多數台灣人不願意當中國人，但卻寧可讓親中政客來管理他們」的荒謬現象。

幾位作者，包括 Raymond、李中志^[2]與筆者^[3]，針對這個問題提出：台派必須放棄以前那種鄙視或敵視非泛綠選民的態度，才有可能吸引更多非泛綠選民。Raymond 的系列文章則更進一步將其推展到「不必反中國人、中國文化以及中國這個國家」，認為這樣可以讓台派得到更多非泛綠的支持。

他首先在「北京話與臺灣的中間選民」一文中^[1]，以北京話為例說明語言敵視態度的不必要。我認同該文的主旨（亦即，不必排斥中文），但不認同該文的前提：

臺灣有 80% 以上的人並不願與中國共產黨談統一，很多人也並不支持國民黨。可是為什麼民進黨的得票率只能在 35 – 45% 之間徘徊？其中一個重要原因之一是：有不少台灣河洛人對外省人、中國人、中國(漢)文化、或北京話的敵視有關。

這前提出現在 Raymond 這一系列文章作為每篇文章起頭，有時甚至同一文中出現兩次，甚至在回應讀者反應中重複，可知這段話是 Raymond 整個思考架構的最重要前提。

然而，這最重要的前提的開頭第一句話就大有問題，因為它暗示了：「台灣人不是不想與中國統一，只是不想與共產黨談而已」。

前面提過，多數台灣人不想當中國人，也認為台灣跟中國是兩個國家，亦即，台灣人根本不願與中國統一。在這方面的民調，據我所知並沒有（或絕大部分沒有）問台灣人「是不是願意與共產黨談統一」這個問題。

台灣人既然拒絕統一，就不可能有「談統一」的意願；既然連談的意願都沒有，就更談不上「跟誰談」。因此，「台灣人不願與共產黨談統一」的說法只能是個主觀的想像，而非忠實地描述多數台灣人「根本不願統一」的意願。以脫離現實的主張作為前提，往後推論與結論是否還能合邏輯，值得進一步分析。

讀者若參考李中志與筆者的說法（比較畫線的部分），對我所說就可以了然於胸：

李中志：『據近年可信的民調，台灣有85％以上的人並不願與中國統一，也有很強的台灣意識，可是以維護台灣主權為最高指導原則的民進黨，為什麼得票率只能在35％到45％之間徘徊？』

Echo:『現在民調顯示，已經有八成的民眾認定台灣跟中國不是同一國（台灣人民既不愚蠢也沒有不覺醒！），但是這些「認定台灣是有別於中國的獨立國家」的民眾，投票時恐怕有一大半不會投給台灣派的候選人。』

參考文章：

[1] 北京話與臺灣的中間選民 (李瑞木）
[2] 綠營得票障礙在綠營（李中志）
[3] 台派知識份子的責任：建構一個「屬於所有台灣住民」的全民台灣 (Echo)