Thaksin Kicks Off Election Campaign In New Phone-In

[Nisa]

I agree that people shouldn't be calling for other's death but lets not pretend that Thaksin is not directly responsible for the majority of hatred and divide that exist between Thais politically.

The Thai Rak Thai Party was the first political party in Thailand to have been represented by more than half of the Members of the House of Representatives. In the 2005 legislative election, the party's candidates were elected to occupy 376 seats of the 500 seats in the House of Representatives, defeating the largest opposition party, the Democrat Party. It won 96 seats (WiKi)

Could you please explain Nisa when the hatred and divide actually started?

Edit: Spelling

Since it is no longer 2005 and I didn't say anything about who started what ... I like to leave arguments about who started what to the kids.

[MaiChai]

Lookup the wikipedia definition for 'banana republic'; sounds familiar?

[473geo]

I agree that people shouldn't be calling for other's death but lets not pretend that Thaksin is not directly responsible for the majority of hatred and divide that exist between Thais politically.

The Thai Rak Thai Party was the first political party in Thailand to have been represented by more than half of the Members of the House of Representatives. In the 2005 legislative election, the party's candidates were elected to occupy 376 seats of the 500 seats in the House of Representatives, defeating the largest opposition party, the Democrat Party. It won 96 seats (WiKi)

Could you please explain Nisa when the hatred and divide actually started?

Edit: Spelling

Since it is no longer 2005 and I didn't say anything about who started what ... I like to leave arguments about who started what to the kids.

I have made my point, and as yet no reasonable unbiased person has disagreed with my view...the coup left its mark, and on this occasion has in my opinion proved to be very divisive........if only in the fact it directly or indirectly garnered support for Thaksin

[Buchholz]

Thai Rak Thai (Thai: ไทยรักไทย, lit. Thais Love Thais; TRT) was a political party in Thailand that was officially banned^[1] on May 30, 2007, by the Constitutional Court of Thailand due to violations of electoral laws during the 2006 legislative elections.

Thanks for highlighting the absurdity of the Thaksin regime.

Even in a situation where they were fairly certain to win the election, the TRT still decided to commit electoral fraud and thus snatch defeat from the jaws of victory by doing so.

No problem Buchho.....(incorrect spelling) would you like me to get hold of a Thaksin signed photo and sent it to you? There are a lot about you know........

Edit: source Geo and spelling but not (incorrect spelling) correction

Could you edit it once more so that the above makes sense?

[473geo]

He cited Wiki, but you never pasted it over....

He edited in "wiki" later (wiki requires a link for citations/fair usage), I wasn't (and am still not) going to go google the article to find the rest of the mistakes in it, the history, and the talk. He posted 3 (partial?) sentences from it and one had a glaring flaw .. enough for me

oooops and his edit says he changed the article as written ... tsk tsk

Careful JD these could well be dismissed as the ramblings of a desperate man........of course that could not possibly be the case.....

No. They are comments on citations required for fair usage and posting. Like I said in just the three partial sentences you posted there was a glaring lie. The fact that you changed the article is another no no

edit --- perhaps you are unfamiliar with Wiki and don't realize that ANYONE can change it. Meaning without a link Wiki itself is useless. With a link anyone interested may look at the history of the article and the citations in the article as well as the contributors' comments.

Ok in order not to derail the thread I have let it go, but you seem determined to humiliate yourself....................I did not change the quote......but my comment....look at your initial reply and then the edited version......

[jdinasia]

I have made my point, and as yet no reasonable unbiased person has disagreed with my view...the coup left its mark, and on this occasion has in my opinion proved to be very divisive........if only in the fact it directly or indirectly garnered support for Thaksin

Your opinion on what you have achieved is certainly arguable. Thaksin caused the coup because he was so divisive. The man's ego left him thinking that he was above reproach and with the state of democracy in Thailand under Thaksin he almost was. You keep leaving out facts like HE was the one that dissolved parliament years early and that his action led to a constitutional crisis that left him as caretaker-PM after the time allowed had expired. You ignore the facts of the damage he did to the checks and balances required for a functioning democracy. You quote wiki articles that are flawed and you don't properly cite them.

Your post above is about equal to "I say I am right, therefore I am!" Which of course does remind me of a notable figure from Thai politics

[473geo]

Thai Rak Thai (Thai: ไทยรักไทย, lit. Thais Love Thais; TRT) was a political party in Thailand that was officially banned^[1] on May 30, 2007, by the Constitutional Court of Thailand due to violations of electoral laws during the 2006 legislative elections.

Thanks for highlighting the absurdity of the Thaksin regime.

Even in a situation where they were fairly certain to win the election, the TRT still decided to commit electoral fraud and thus snatch defeat from the jaws of victory by doing so.

No problem Buchho.....(incorrect spelling) would you like me to get hold of a Thaksin signed photo and sent it to you? There are a lot about you know........

Edit: source Geo and spelling but not (incorrect spelling) correction

Could you edit it once more so that the above makes sense?

I am overwhelmed by the interest of you Buchho and JD in the construction of my posts............

edited for clarity

Edited April 3, 2011 by 473geo

[jdinasia]

Ok in order not to derail the thread I have let it go, but you seem determined to humiliate yourself....................I did not change the quote......but my comment....look at your initial reply and then the edited version......

Edit: added source and changed is to was to reference party as past tense

Since you never cited your source ......... I am stuck with this If I made the wrong assumption then mea culpa ! However, you still have not cited that source properly nor addressed the lie that was in it Then again ... You already have made a statement that I paraphrased as "I say I am right, therefore I am right"

[473geo]

I have made my point, and as yet no reasonable unbiased person has disagreed with my view...the coup left its mark, and on this occasion has in my opinion proved to be very divisive........if only in the fact it directly or indirectly garnered support for Thaksin

Your opinion on what you have achieved is certainly arguable. Thaksin caused the coup because he was so divisive. The man's ego left him thinking that he was above reproach and with the state of democracy in Thailand under Thaksin he almost was. You keep leaving out facts like HE was the one that dissolved parliament years early and that his action led to a constitutional crisis that left him as caretaker-PM after the time allowed had expired. You ignore the facts of the damage he did to the checks and balances required for a functioning democracy. You quote wiki articles that are flawed and you don't properly cite them.

Your post above is about equal to "I say I am right, therefore I am!" Which of course does remind me of a notable figure from Thai politics

My point is, I buy a truck, and it serves me ok, even though it regularly breaks down, then you come along and tell me it is dangerous and take it away.........

Like it or not, I overlook the truck breaking down......and I am pissed that you took it........and then if you come along later and give me another truck telling me it is just as good or better.........

Well this new truck had better waste no time in proving that, and better not break down and piss me off.......because otherwise I will be wanting my old truck back....which in my mind is now more reliable and a better option.......

But if I decide to change my truck........different ball game.......

You are continually overlooking human nature.....

[jdinasia]

My point is, I buy a truck, and it serves me ok, even though it regularly breaks down, then you come along and tell me it is dangerous and take it away.........

Like it or not, I overlook the truck breaking down......and I am pissed that you took it........and then if you come along later and give me another truck telling me it is just as good or better.........

Well this new truck had better waste no time in proving that, and better not break down and piss me off.......because otherwise I will be wanting my old truck back....which in my mind is now more reliable and a better option.......

But if I decide to change my truck........different ball game.......

You are continually overlooking human nature.....

I guess you have never been warned about argument by analogy.

Your argument used against you.

You buy a truck. Your truck is defective and dangerous to everyone around you when you drive. You are warned that your truck is a public safety hazard but do not fix the problem. Your truck is condemned and removed from the road. Instead of fixing the truck, you go and buy an identical truck and that too is removed from the road because to operate that truck on the road defies public safety. You blame anyone but yourself or the manufacturer of the truck. Taking the analogy further, the manufacturer of the truck, which happens not to be a local company any more starts broadcasting lies and lies and lies. They say the truck is safe, but of course they don't ride in a truck like that! You get even more upset because you don't look at the reality of the safety record and instead just listen to the manufacturer.

I am seeing human nature clearly. There are reasons for some rules and laws that do not please everyone. Sometimes they do not even please the majority but are in place to protect the minority from the tyranny of oppression. Your "like it or not" statement is a GREAT example of why the checks and balances must be maintained in a democracy.

[Skywalker69]

His "followers" would beleive him if he said he cold wolk on water.

[473geo]

My point is, I buy a truck, and it serves me ok, even though it regularly breaks down, then you come along and tell me it is dangerous and take it away.........

Like it or not, I overlook the truck breaking down......and I am pissed that you took it........and then if you come along later and give me another truck telling me it is just as good or better.........

Well this new truck had better waste no time in proving that, and better not break down and piss me off.......because otherwise I will be wanting my old truck back....which in my mind is now more reliable and a better option.......

But if I decide to change my truck........different ball game.......

You are continually overlooking human nature.....

I guess you have never been warned about argument by analogy.

Your argument used against you.

You buy a truck. Your truck is defective and dangerous to everyone around you when you drive. You are warned that your truck is a public safety hazard but do not fix the problem. Your truck is condemned and removed from the road. Instead of fixing the truck, you go and buy an identical truck and that too is removed from the road because to operate that truck on the road defies public safety. You blame anyone but yourself or the manufacturer of the truck. Taking the analogy further, the manufacturer of the truck, which happens not to be a local company any more starts broadcasting lies and lies and lies. They say the truck is safe, but of course they don't ride in a truck like that! You get even more upset because you don't look at the reality of the safety record and instead just listen to the manufacturer.

I am seeing human nature clearly. There are reasons for some rules and laws that do not please everyone. Sometimes they do not even please the majority but are in place to protect the minority from the tyranny of oppression. Your "like it or not" statement is a GREAT example of why the checks and balances must be maintained in a democracy.

What great example of simple truth versus the complicated contrived dialogue of justification.........many thanks.........

again you miss out an important human element........most people do not read after the first few lines...... .

As for my like it or not statement..(most people will not read this) ( except now they will ) By all means elevate your perception of your influence if you wish to do so. My comments are those of an anonymous contributor on Thai Visa, I expect there will always be those that like (enjoy) my posts and those that do not. I am surprised you have an issue with that.

[ETatBKK]

although it is already 160++ posts here, I still don't understand this Thai politics in my non-Thai head

[Nisa]

It really doesn't matter what happened a number of years ago. What matters is currently there is a fugitive banned from politics that continues to stir things up with untruths who also does what he can to inflame and divide the people of Thailand.

Regardless of the circumstances regarding Thaksin's ouster the fact remains he lost and was not only ousted but fled the country to avoid prosecution. Talking about the votes he received before losing is meaningless. Since we are loving analogies it would be like a baseball team having the best record of the season but losing in the world series but continuing to show up the other teams press conferences and parades to say they are the real champs. This does nothing but inflame and divide people. THE BOTTOM LINE IS IN THE END THAKSIN LOST and I doubt anything in the future is going to see these circumstances change.

It is time for him to stop interfering in Thai politics and get more involved with those of Montenegro where he is now a citizen ... either that or come back and face the justice system. Certainly with all his money and resources he has much more of the ability to defend himself in court than the many people killed during his war on drugs.

** Sorry for the baseball analogy but am American and don't know much about soccer and didn't want to confuse anybody by talking about football (American)

[jdinasia]

You are missing the script again ...

"like it or not" was coming from the guy that bought the truck (in your analogy the electorate from some parts of Thailand), the checks and balances system that MUST be in place for a democracy to function are there simply to stop the idea of "like it or not" from any of the three sections of government OR the electorate. If the majority of ethnic Thais wanted to change the laws to restrict the rights of other ethnic groups that are Thai citizens it simply wouldn't matter that the majority wanted it. (Not the case in a Thaksin argument). The concept of a democracy includes protection against tyranny, it also has checks and balances to prevent tyranny by the government.

I didn't miss the human element at all. You (like you consistently have) just weaved and bobbed. You never address the checks and balances that Thaksin destroyed. You never address the fact that Thaksin is the one that dissolved parliament years early and failed to get a legal election certified. You never address the fact that Thaksin has been busted and given a legitimate jail term thus making him ineligible for running for office. You never address the damage done to the checks and balances under the Thaksin regime. I personally hate the concept of a nanny state but democracy does have rules and in a democracy those rules are enforced in many different ways. Just because you WANT to drive your truck doesn't mean you get to. If your truck isn't road legal it has to go. You can try and change the law to make it road legal, but that is a difficult process and if it endangers the public safety it is impossible.

I warned you against argument by analogy. The truck owners desires are not inviolate when the general good of the people is at risk and it doesn't matter how much they like the truck

edit to add --- this is to geo in response to post 162. Sorry geo but your truck owner analogy failed. You might try to address the issues instead. Head on. Like why Thaksin dissolved parliament and called new elections YEARS before they were due. Why a convicted felon deserves ANY special attention no matter how well liked he is. Like I said before he's another Boss Tweed and deserves the same fate.

Edited April 3, 2011 by jdinasia

[473geo]

His "followers" would beleive him if he said he cold wolk on water.

We are not back to the 12 'disciples' of Buchho are we?

[jdinasia]

His "followers" would beleive him if he said he cold wolk on water.

We are not back to the 12 'disciples' of Buchho are we?

Congrats for going for cheap personal shots yet again

[473geo]

You are missing the script again ...

"like it or not" was coming from the guy that bought the truck (in your analogy the electorate from some parts of Thailand), the checks and balances system that MUST be in place for a democracy to function are there simply to stop the idea of "like it or not" from any of the three sections of government OR the electorate. If the majority of ethnic Thais wanted to change the laws to restrict the rights of other ethnic groups that are Thai citizens it simply wouldn't matter that the majority wanted it. (Not the case in a Thaksin argument). The concept of a democracy includes protection against tyranny, it also has checks and balances to prevent tyranny by the government.

I didn't miss the human element at all. You (like you consistently have) just weaved and bobbed. You never address the checks and balances that Thaksin destroyed. You never address the fact that Thaksin is the one that dissolved parliament years early and failed to get a legal election certified. You never address the fact that Thaksin has been busted and given a legitimate jail term thus making him ineligible for running for office. You never address the damage done to the checks and balances under the Thaksin regime. I personally hate the concept of a nanny state but democracy does have rules and in a democracy those rules are enforced in many different ways. Just because you WANT to drive your truck doesn't mean you get to. If your truck isn't road legal it has to go. You can try and change the law to make it road legal, but that is a difficult process and if it endangers the public safety it is impossible.

I warned you against argument by analogy. The truck owners desires are not inviolate when the general good of the people is at risk and it doesn't matter how much they like the truck

edit to add --- this is to geo in response to post 162. Sorry geo but your truck owner analogy failed. You might try to address the issues instead. Head on. Like why Thaksin dissolved parliament and called new elections YEARS before they were due. Why a convicted felon deserves ANY special attention no matter how well liked he is. Like I said before he's another Boss Tweed and deserves the same fate.

Why should I address any issues surrounding Thaksin, you listen to him, disect and criticise his remarks, comment, rake over his past convictions and crimes, you have in depth knowledge of the history of Thaksin. I myself have no reason to defend Thaksin, why would I?

It is you who constantly elevate him into the limelight on Tvisa so you can vent , as others have noted he gets to you guys every time

Take my truck analogy.......it is simple comment on the workings of the human mind.

You are so obsessed you thought it was some sort of political statement, you desperately penned a politically motivated response which you thought would somehow turn the analogy to a comment against Thaksin.......why?

I am neither obsessed by Thai politics or Thaksin, but I am allowed an opinion on this forum however shallow you deem that opinion to be. Like it or not.

[473geo]

His "followers" would beleive him if he said he cold wolk on water.

We are not back to the 12 'disciples' of Buchho are we?

Congrats for going for cheap personal shots yet again

Et tu brute

[473geo]

Double post - wouldn't wish to get into the habit of repeating myself......

Edited April 3, 2011 by 473geo

[Buchholz]

Thanks for highlighting the absurdity of the Thaksin regime.

Even in a situation where they were fairly certain to win the election, the TRT still decided to commit electoral fraud and thus snatch defeat from the jaws of victory by doing so.

No problem Buchho.....(incorrect spelling) would you like me to get hold of a Thaksin signed photo and sent it to you? There are a lot about you know........

Edit: source Geo and spelling but not (incorrect spelling) correction

Could you edit it once more so that the above makes sense?

I am overwhelmed by the interest of you Buchho and JD in the construction of my posts............

edited for clarity

Just trying to understand what it is you're saying... but I guess that's a mistake.

Oh well, whatever it is your drinking tonight, I'll pass on it.

[473geo]

It really doesn't matter what happened a number of years ago. What matters is currently there is a fugitive banned from politics that continues to stir things up with untruths who also does what he can to inflame and divide the people of Thailand.

Regardless of the circumstances regarding Thaksin's ouster the fact remains he lost and was not only ousted but fled the country to avoid prosecution. Talking about the votes he received before losing is meaningless. Since we are loving analogies it would be like a baseball team having the best record of the season but losing in the world series but continuing to show up the other teams press conferences and parades to say they are the real champs. This does nothing but inflame and divide people. THE BOTTOM LINE IS IN THE END THAKSIN LOST and I doubt anything in the future is going to see these circumstances change.

It is time for him to stop interfering in Thai politics and get more involved with those of Montenegro where he is now a citizen ... either that or come back and face the justice system. Certainly with all his money and resources he has much more of the ability to defend himself in court than the many people killed during his war on drugs.

** Sorry for the baseball analogy but am American and don't know much about soccer and didn't want to confuse anybody by talking about football (American)

I guess you lose when the other team take the ball home........

As Thaksin can take no further part in Thai politics then we know now the election will not be about Thaksin......right?

So the outcome will be fair.......right?

Let us see if the current government can do enough in the interests of the majority of Thai voters to lay the ghost of Thaksin...........

Because 'like it or not' that is probably the only feasible way of reconciling Thailand

Think they are up to it?

[473geo]

Could you edit it once more so that the above makes sense?

I am overwhelmed by the interest of you Buchho and JD in the construction of my posts............

edited for clarity

Just trying to understand what it is you're saying... but I guess that's a mistake.

Oh well, whatever it is your drinking tonight, I'll pass on it.

I accept your attempt at humour Buchho, you can have a drink if you wish ......you will only understand when you take the blinkers off........

[Buchholz]

Could you edit it once more so that the above makes sense?

I am overwhelmed by the interest of you Buchho and JD in the construction of my posts............

edited for clarity

Just trying to understand what it is you're saying... but I guess that's a mistake.

Oh well, whatever it is your drinking tonight, I'll pass on it.

I accept your attempt at humour Buchho, you can have a drink if you wish ......you will only understand when you take the blinkers off........

Not an attempt at humor. With your nonsensical blathering and intentional misspellings (whatever on Earth that's supposed to indicate), I just presumed you were drinking heavily.

If you're like this and have not been drinking, well then, good luck to ya.

[473geo]

I am overwhelmed by the interest of you Buchho and JD in the construction of my posts............

edited for clarity

Just trying to understand what it is you're saying... but I guess that's a mistake.

Oh well, whatever it is your drinking tonight, I'll pass on it.

I accept your attempt at humour Buchho, you can have a drink if you wish ......you will only understand when you take the blinkers off........

Not an attempt at humor. With your nonsensical blathering and intentional misspellings (whatever on Earth that's supposed to indicate), I just presumed you were drinking heavily.

If you're like this and have not been drinking, well then, good luck to ya.

You mean I'm not in the pub forum?.......you mean I should take the comments of you, JD, and Nisa seriously?

and you are sober?...... .

[MaiChai]

Its amazing that one man can have so much control over Thai politics. A combination of a huge meglomanic ego and alot of money. In the end all that matters in Thailand is the money. Lets not kid ourselves; its about nothing else. Align yourself with whoever offers the largest amount. Very sad state of affairs.

[Buchholz]

Just trying to understand what it is you're saying... but I guess that's a mistake.

Oh well, whatever it is your drinking tonight, I'll pass on it.

I accept your attempt at humour Buchho, you can have a drink if you wish ......you will only understand when you take the blinkers off........

Not an attempt at humor. With your nonsensical blathering and intentional misspellings (whatever on Earth that's supposed to indicate), I just presumed you were drinking heavily.

If you're like this and have not been drinking, well then, good luck to ya.

You mean I'm not in the pub forum?.......you mean I should take the comments of you, JD, and Nisa seriously?

and you are sober?...... .

Take my comments as you wish. They were said seriously, but you've had 5 replies of gobbledygook now, so it's easy to see who is serious.

Enjoy your buzz...

[473geo]

I think you need either a greater understanding, or a new PC Buchho..........neither of which I can supply........

I'm an actualist Buchho..........I don't need alcohol..........Good night......

Oh and about the deliberate mis spelling....I just wondered if you would, as I suspected, make an issue of such a minor thing when you made the usual attempt to discredit me..........

you did........sweet dreams Buchho

Edited April 3, 2011 by 473geo

[Buchholz]

Good riddance.

[TAWP]

So geriatrickid, you don't see a problem that Thailands version of Palin (i.e. Thaksin), with the same inane statements of how to fix things and lack of worldly knowledge, is being pushed as the foremost choice by a large group of people?

The large group of people are Thai electors - the same Thai electors who will most probably vote Phuea Thai into power. What's your problem with that?

So what you are saying is that if Palin was elected President you would not have any issues with it nor post any objections against it?

Why would I have? I'm not American and have no right to criticise the American electorate no matter who they vote into power. It's their country so they can vote for anybody they like to be president. By the same token you do not have any right to criticise the Thai electorate if they want Phuea Thai to be the next government of Thailand - It's called democracy.

On the opposite, since I don't support a fascist or authoritarian system I believe is is the right of every human to protest against any government they feel is unfair, even if they are not allowed to vote for or against it.

What you are saying is that women or people of color had no right protesting politicians or the laws during the 19th century. How enlightened of you. With that attitude they would still not have any right to vote.