18 minutes ago, bamnutsak said:

That's probably between them and the person they swore an oath to when they were installed.

 

According to the Constitution (Sec. 159), they have a role to play, unfortunately.

 

 

What do YOU think is the right thing to do?

 

1. respect election

2. ignore election

9 minutes ago, MrMojoRisin said:

What do YOU think is the right thing to do?

 

1. respect election

2. ignore election

I only get two choices? Heck there were 67-ish choices on the Purple ballot. ????

 

 

The "right" thing? As a single Senator? Or can I tell all of them what to do? I'm not qualified to answer, but I'll take a run anway, assuming one vote only I'd cast for the coalition, as I consider that the only option so it is an up/down vote, and a down vote is not really a vote for anything. It'd be a vote for nothing.

 

 

Good, Chuwit is adding to pressure on the Senators: listen to the people, not your nominal masters.

1 hour ago, NanLaew said:

OK, thanks.

 

So a bit of a storm in a tea thrown coffee cup.

And bringing it up in response to Chuwit’s statements is ad hominem. 

Edited May 17, 20233 yr by fusion58

10 minutes ago, fusion58 said:

And bringing it up in response to Chuwit’s statements is ad hominem. 

If it was in response to the statements, possibly yes, but this isn't how it was used.  The users were discussing Chuwit's behaviour and character.

 

In order to be an ad hominem, the user would need to be saying something like we shouldn't listen to what he said/it isn't true due to something about him personally.

Edited May 17, 20233 yr by BangkokReady

Interesting stuff here no matter what you think of him. He is right the 250 should have no say as the 27 million voters against the military have spoken. As for "inspire" I just think this is a poor choice of word. Maybe motivates or encourages would fit better.

Edited May 17, 20233 yr by dinsdale

28 minutes ago, dinsdale said:

As for "inspire" I just think this is a poor choice of word. Maybe motivates or encourages would fit better.

Well any of the adjectives would be fine, it just needs to be prefixed with something like "sets out to"

 

ie "Chewit sets out to inspire/encourage/motivate..."

To those that say they require more experience, I have worked for bosses who claim to have 50 years experience. The only problem is they have had 0ne years experience 50 times rather than 50 years of experience, just like many politicians.

8 hours ago, webfact said:

When they choose to dismiss the true mandate of the people, represented by 27 million votes, and consider the power of 250 senators as superior, it raises a serious issue.

They don't care one bit.

 

Arise Sir Chuwit and strike them down call out the corrupted the electorate have woke up and spoken ????

5 hours ago, BangkokReady said:

If it was in response to the statements, possibly yes, but this isn't how it was used.

Yes, it was.

 

Instead of arguing the merits of his statement, several forum members simply attacked his character.

2 minutes ago, fusion58 said:

Yes, it was.

 

Instead of arguing the merits of his statement, several forum members simply attacked his character.

after his actions the other day his character and words now carry 0 value. 

11 hours ago, seajae said:

the only inexperience the move forward party has is taking graft from those that want to run the country  like the current lot do, they are scared of losing their source of wealth because MF want the graft to stop.

Do you have proof or is this wishful thinking?

Frankly, I'd expect an "inexperience" political party like MFP as you define it to fail at losing their graft simply because it has not ever been in power to "take" graft. 

Unlike PTP, Democrats, and the various junta/pro-military parties essentially being in sole power of the government since 1932!

11 hours ago, Toolong said:

My goodness, I was recently beginning to just get annoyed by Chuwit's continuous theatrical bleating & showboating, but what he says here cancels that annoyance out at a stroke, and my regard for him has now (for the moment anyway!) U-turned upward immeasurably.

 

Whatever else he is, he is a man of influence and lots of media exposure. His message is the most vitally important, much-needed thing to be said at this time.

 

Right now, I'd even buy him a beer. Maybe two even. ????????

This sounds like the case of a broken clock can still be correct twice a day. The clock needs to be replaced for it to have any creditability.

7 minutes ago, Srikcir said:

This sounds like the case of a broken clock can still be correct twice a day. The clock needs to be replaced for it to have any creditability.

I know the saying and its meaning, but don't quite get how you intend it to fit here. Not saying you're wrong, or that it can't fit...just that I don't get it right now (but I've had a long day and I'm pretty thick anyway as well, so.....????)

If it is in some way critical of what I said, then fair enough, that's ok. We can leave it there. ???? 

 

All efforts must be made by the people to call out these heathens, and shame them and their families, in whatever way possible. The people will not tolerate you blocking a fair and just election. An attempt to subvert democracy again, will not be tolerated. 

 

Get out of the way. You just don't understand the havoc and the fire you are playing with. 

All efforts must be made by the people to call out these heathens, and shame them and their families, in whatever way possible. The people will not tolerate you blocking a fair and just election. An attempt to subvert democracy again, will not be tolerated. 

 

On 5/17/2023 at 10:52 AM, seajae said:

the only inexperience the move forward party has is taking graft from those that want to run the country  like the current lot do, they are scared of losing their source of wealth because MF want the graft to stop.

My thoughts too. This man is hardly a role model for anything. 

OK now go dig up some dirt on the senators.

On 5/17/2023 at 7:47 AM, BangkokReady said:

I don't see any evidence of this in the article.

Perhaps you did not want to see any evidence.

 

WHY should 250 UNELECTED people have a bigger say than 27 million?

Edited May 18, 20233 yr by billd766
corrected some bad spelling

21 hours ago, stoner said:

after his actions the other day his character and words now carry 0 value. 

And what value would you put on the statements of 250 UNELECTED people, against 27 million legal electors?

1 minute ago, billd766 said:

And what value would you put on the statements of 250 UNELECTED people, against 27 million legal electors?

let's see if they listen. i don't see them giving up without a big fight. TIT .....all normal rules are not applicable. 

3 hours ago, billd766 said:

Perhaps you did not want to see any evidence.

Can you point it out to me please?

 

3 hours ago, billd766 said:

WHY should 250 UNELECTED people have a bigger say than 27 million?

Personally, I don't think they should.  Certainly as things are now.