rainbow-davie

I know tongtong is a 仆街, but barking in the council cannot help anything, right?
chunsh 發表於 2009-3-30 12:31

better than those members who didn't say, didn't care, didnt bark, didn't do anything..

chunsh

that's why I fxxk most of the governments.
rainbow-davie 發表於 2009-3-30 13:53

too bad, all government is the same
why dont u go to some place that without government.

chunsh

better than those members who didn't say, didn't care, didnt bark, didn't do anything..
rainbow-davie 發表於 2009-3-30 13:54

if the hk gov is really very very bad, there will be another 500000 protesting organized by hk ppl, no mad dog is needed

peter236

better than those members who didn't say, didn't care, didnt bark, didn't do anything..
rainbow-davie 發表於 2009-3-30 13:54

Are you saying members of parliaments in the world should bark in the legislature? Most governments in the world are quite inept. You are just making excuse for mad dog Wong and long hair guy.

matt72178

你同政府講斯文唔會做到野出黎。生果金單野就係一個例子。政府越高調打壓社民連, 就中正癲狗下懷。下屆社民連除了癲狗, 長毛, 大舊繼續高票當選。陶君行亦會入局(癲狗對拒期望好高)。
長毛公民抗命已預左坐監(已有幾單官司), 申請司法覆核欠到週身債, 為了邊個? 如果長毛唔值得尊重, 成個立法會都係廢物。

MoiRhapsody

Are you saying members of parliaments in the world should bark in the legislature? Most governments in the world are quite inept. You are just making excuse for mad dog Wong and long hair guy.
peter236 發表於 2009-3-30 14:29

吓........???????
你到底有冇睇過parliament？？？

rainbow-davie

too bad, all government is the same
why dont u go to some place that without government.
chunsh 發表於 2009-3-30 14:09

I want. if I am very wealth, I will buy an island and establish a state that has limited # of rules.    I called it Evil Island. or Freedom Island.  you want to join in?

rainbow-davie

Are you saying members of parliaments in the world should bark in the legislature? Most governments in the world are quite inept. You are just making excuse for mad dog Wong and long hair guy.
peter236 發表於 2009-3-30 14:29

hahahaha  have you ever watched the Canadian parliment discussion live? haaha Of course, no fxxk.. but BS ar..etc  or VERY VERY loud interruption is not abnormal.
Same as Jap.  open your eyes la.  Don't blindly believe what you believe in.

rainbow-davie

It is a very meaningful article I want to share.  From Ming Pao:


李克賢﹕社民連粗暴行為 對港政局的啟示          2009年3月31日
廣 告

【明報專訊】社民連立法會議員的粗暴行為計有向政府官員「擲蕉」，搶奪財政司長曾俊華的文件，最近又以粗言穢語辱罵政府官員。香港社會普遍難以接受社民連過於激烈的行為，特別是在議會內。因為一場場鬧劇只會干擾到會議的進行，對於監察政府及爭取民主可說是沒有任何幫助。

何以會獲部分選民支持？

當初社民連參選的時候，就以「沒有抗爭，哪有改變」為口號。很明顯，社民連所爭取的票源是一些激進的人士。將「抗爭」帶入議會，自然是社民連繼續爭取票源的做法。在批評社民連的時候，我們有否想到，何以一個政黨需要用粗暴或嘩眾取寵的行為來爭取選票，又何以這樣的行為會獲得部分選民支持呢？

問題正在於香港的政治制度。香港的政黨在立法會內的權力有多大，角色有多重，相信大家都很清楚。各政黨幾乎是被排除於制定政策的機制之外，香港政黨沒有可能用政策來吸引選民的支持。現下不論民主派或建制派，都覑眼發展地區網絡，提供地區服務。社民連的激進行動之所以有市場，不就是反映了部分選民對現時政治制度的不滿嗎？

再講，就是社民連不搞事，會議順利進行，亦不見得立法會議員可有效反映民意，制衡政府。政府出台的政策表面上是要經立法會審批，但議員的議價能力在行政主導的體制下畢竟有限，加上特首對政黨的親疏有別政策，很多市民的訴求根本沒有完全地反映於立法會內。各黨派議員進入議會後亦需要為自己的支持度及票源設想，既然無法改變政府的政策，就只好召集市民到立法會門外請願抗議，或以「出位」的言論向政府官員責備一番，向選民展示出一個已盡力而為的困境，算是有所交代。其實社民連的粗暴行為與其他政黨所做的是如出一轍，只不過是手段不同而已。

憂社會看不見港政制缺陷

現時筆者最擔心的是，香港社會只看到社民連的錯，而看不見香港政治制度的缺陷。特別是政府官員是受害者的形象已深入民心，社民連的錯很容易被理解為個別的立法會議員行為不端，就此了事。更甚者，社民連的粗暴行為可能會被建制或保守派人士用作藉口，指普選所有立法會議員或擴大民主只會出現更多類似社民連的政黨或議員，為香港帶來麻煩。又或者是，從社民連的事件可以看出香港根本未有成熟的條件進行普選云云。

選票，個人或政黨的支持度似乎是社民連屢次發難的原因，但背後隱藏覑的是一個結構問題。站在道德高地的特首及政府官員除了對議員的粗暴行為採取「零容忍」的政策外，又是否可以向北京爭取全面開放政治制度，從根本地改善政府與議員之間的矛盾呢？

rainbow-davie

I totall agree with that the 結構問題 is the Hong Kong's biggest problem which is the root of all the problems of HK.  not just inside 立法會.  That's also my conclusion too.

As long as HK cannot resolve the fundamental structural problem, it will never take off again.  sigh..