How Long Can Yingluck Hide From The Big Tough Issues?

[webfact]

EDITORIAL

How long can she hide from the big tough issues?

By The Nation

Yingluck has to confront the topic of an amnesty and reconciliation soon

We have seen first glimpses of what a public debate between Abhisit Vejjajiva and Yingluck Shinawatra would be like. The two-day TV showdown between the Democrat Party's Chamni Sakdiseth and Nutthawut Saikua of the Pheu Thai Party has confirmed what the upcoming July 3 election is all about. Economic policies have been a virtual non-issue so far in the campaign, with divided voters hell-bent on casting ballots for the parties they support regardless of what they plan to do economically. Social welfare has become a battleground for a bidding war. At least the Democrat and Pheu Thai parties agree that Thailand's poor need help, and they are vowing to spend big to improve the grassroots' quality of life, although few measures seem to reflect long-term visions.

The Chamni-Nutthawut debate was emotionally charged and highly political. The first day was spent on the issue of who should be entitled to form the new government. Nutthawut said that, in principle, the "winning" party should be given the mandate. He compared the election as a duel between two gunmen, with the winner taking all. Chamni argued that if the charter writers had wanted the election to be like a gun duel, they would have written so in the 2007 Constitution. The charter, Chamni said, was clear about how the prime minister is elected - he or she must be the one getting the most support in the House of Representatives.

The second day of debate touched upon a more acrimonious subject. The two men were asked about reconciliation and the Pheu Thai Party's pledge to issue a blanket amnesty for everyone involved in "political cases" since the 2006 coup. Emotions flared and each man became ambiguous when his side's "weak" spots were concerned. While insisting that the amnesty would benefit everyone, not just Thaksin Shinawatra, he would not go as far as vowing absolution for people in the current government whom the red shirts blamed for the death of protesters last year. Being on the government's side, Chamni would not dwell on the subject of the crackdown, either.

A lot of time was spent on debating who should handle reconciliation and an amnesty in the future. Chamni was adamant that the Abhisit government had got going with the Kanit na Nakhon Commission, which was tasked with investigating the political losses and finding ways to heal the wounds. Nutthawut, on the other hand, reiterated that if Pheu Thai became the new government, it would set up a new committee. Each man used the same logic to rebut the other, asking how fair it would be if a reconciliation panel consisted of only people from one side of the conflict.

These issues are crucial for Thailand's political future, but they are also very complicated, which makes it totally understandable why Yingluck has sought to avoid a public debate with Abhisit. Being a first-time politician and, more importantly, Thaksin's sister, Yingluck will put herself under harsh public scrutiny if those issues surface during an encounter with the Democrat leader. The Pheu Thai camp obviously knows this, which is why her only response to the question of a face-to-face debate with Abhisit has been "When the time is right."

Nutthawut and Jatuporn Promphan led the red-shirt uprising in Bangkok last year and they also are among those named as party-list candidates of Pheu Thai. This will add another complication to any future amnesty plan. Can lawmakers enact new laws, whether with blanket effects or not, that would benefit themselves? Such questions have not been asked, but they will be - and loudly as well.

No matter how she and her party try, Yingluck will have to confront the reconciliation-amnesty issue sooner or later. By then she may not need to face Abhisit in a duel. That, however, doesn't mean things will get any easier.

-- The Nation 2011-06-06

[maewrocks]

Typical Nation biased piece. She hasn't had a debate yet, but is doing wonderfully well in the polls. Why change things? Certainly not for the sake of her critics, who are the ones vociferously calling for it. Go Yingluck, you're doing just fine.

[patjem]

Typical Nation biased piece. She hasn't had a debate yet, but is doing wonderfully well in the polls. Why change things? Certainly not for the sake of her critics, who are the ones vociferously calling for it. Go Yingluck, you're doing just fine.

What's biased in pointing out a very poignant fact? Let's see a live debate, see what she's really made of, and whether she's truly cut out for the role or not.

[koosdeboer]

Typical Nation biased piece. She hasn't had a debate yet, but is doing wonderfully well in the polls. Why change things? Certainly not for the sake of her critics, who are the ones vociferously calling for it. Go Yingluck, you're doing just fine.

You didn't see yingluck's interview with ABC. She didn't do wonderful well. Please read this report http://www.abc.net.au/correspondents/content/2011/s3235619.htm and give a not biased comment please.

[Buchholz]

Nutthawut and Jatuporn Promphan led the red-shirt uprising in Bangkok last year and they also are among those named as party-list candidates of Pheu Thai. This will add another complication to any future amnesty plan. Can lawmakers enact new laws, whether with blanket effects or not, that would benefit themselves? Such questions have not been asked, but they will be - and loudly as well.

An overlooked aspect to this quagmire of PTP directed amnesty.

These criminal suspects, that are currently out on bail, will be writing into law, an amnesty for themselves.

Difficult to imagine a bigger conflict of interest.

[timekeeper]

Typical Nation biased piece. She hasn't had a debate yet, but is doing wonderfully well in the polls. Why change things? Certainly not for the sake of her critics, who are the ones vociferously calling for it. Go Yingluck, you're doing just fine.

she may be doing well in the polls but its all style over substance

she knows it, so does her puppetmasters, thats why they are not going to let her debate

people who saw the ABC interview might be shocked that anyone would think that Yunglick is anything more than town hall admin material never mind PM.......

[jonclark]

Typical Nation biased piece. She hasn't had a debate yet, but is doing wonderfully well in the polls. Why change things? Certainly not for the sake of her critics, who are the ones vociferously calling for it. Go Yingluck, you're doing just fine.

What's biased in pointing out a very poignant fact? Let's see a live debate, see what she's really made of, and whether she's truly cut out for the role or not.

Agreed - She wants to be leader of the country - so lets she how she if she cuts the mustard, After all do we want a potentially weak leader?

[whybother]

Typical Nation biased piece. She hasn't had a debate yet, but is doing wonderfully well in the polls. Why change things? Certainly not for the sake of her critics, who are the ones vociferously calling for it. Go Yingluck, you're doing just fine.

Don't you think that politicians should explain to the people how their policies are going to work ... before they are elected? Don't you think they should be questioned on their policies ... before they are elected?

[LomSak27]

How long can she hide from the big tough issues?

Most likely just as long as PM Abhisit and the Dems can

[Crushdepth]

Nutthawut said that, in principle, the "winning" party should be given the mandate.

What a joke. These guys are just unbelievable.

[scorecard]

Typical Nation biased piece. She hasn't had a debate yet, but is doing wonderfully well in the polls. Why change things? Certainly not for the sake of her critics, who are the ones vociferously calling for it. Go Yingluck, you're doing just fine.

What's biased in pointing out a very poignant fact? Let's see a live debate, see what she's really made of, and whether she's truly cut out for the role or not.

So maewrocks, you say she's doing fine, would you please share some examples of her dialogue which shows deep insight and future vision.

[hanuman1]

Nutthawut and Jatuporn Promphan led the red-shirt uprising in Bangkok last year and they also are among those named as party-list candidates of Pheu Thai. This will add another complication to any future amnesty plan. Can lawmakers enact new laws, whether with blanket effects or not, that would benefit themselves? Such questions have not been asked, but they will be - and loudly as well.

An overlooked aspect to this quagmire of PTP directed amnesty.

These criminal suspects, that are currently out on bail, will be writing into law, an amnesty for themselves.

Difficult to imagine a bigger conflict of interest.

Whatever these criminal suspects do if they win power, they will do with an electoral mandate.

If you wanted to get picky, their mandate is explicitly to govern. Governing implies having the power to change laws. Whilst one may deride those who vote for them as ignorant or uneducated, the idea that those mandated to govern can change laws is not lost on them, I'm fairly sure.

[maewrocks]

Typical Nation biased piece. She hasn't had a debate yet, but is doing wonderfully well in the polls. Why change things? Certainly not for the sake of her critics, who are the ones vociferously calling for it. Go Yingluck, you're doing just fine.

What's biased in pointing out a very poignant fact? Let's see a live debate, see what she's really made of, and whether she's truly cut out for the role or not.

So maewrocks, you say she's doing fine, would you please share some examples of her dialogue which shows deep insight and future vision.

Politically, she is doing very well. If she wins without having a debate, so what??. People on ThaksinVengeance.com will not be satisfied? Well, bad luck, do you think she or Thaksin give a dam_n about you. The Dems are calling for a debate, others are asking for the truth on the 91 deaths, but it looks like neither party is replying, because they both know it's the best thing to do for their chances in the election. Can't blame them.

[koosdeboer]

Typical Nation biased piece. She hasn't had a debate yet, but is doing wonderfully well in the polls. Why change things? Certainly not for the sake of her critics, who are the ones vociferously calling for it. Go Yingluck, you're doing just fine.

What's biased in pointing out a very poignant fact? Let's see a live debate, see what she's really made of, and whether she's truly cut out for the role or not.

So maewrocks, you say she's doing fine, would you please share some examples of her dialogue which shows deep insight and future vision.

Politically, she is doing very well. If she wins without having a debate, so what??. People on ThaksinVengeance.com will not be satisfied? Well, bad luck, do you think she or Thaksin give a dam_n about you. The Dems are calling for a debate, others are asking for the truth on the 91 deaths, but it looks like neither party is replying, because they both know it's the best thing to do for their chances in the election. Can't blame them.

I also ask for the truth on the 91 deaths , especially from Thaksin and the redshirts. Maybe you put some responsibility with them also. Or do you think that they have nothing to do with man in black and a part of this 91 deaths, the soldiers?

[LindsayBKK]

Typical Nation biased piece. She hasn't had a debate yet, but is doing wonderfully well in the polls. Why change things? Certainly not for the sake of her critics, who are the ones vociferously calling for it. Go Yingluck, you're doing just fine.

I haven't heard her say anything new so how can you judge anything good about her.

She is related to Thaksin so that's all you care about I know.

You should read more before making your decision honey.

Acting Chief Executive Officer, Executive President, Secretary, Director, Chairman of Executive Committee and Member of Corporate Governance & Social & Environmental Responsibility Committee, SC Asset Corporation Public Company Limited.

Yingluck’s bank account was among other 86 bank accounts, that were accused for funding support the Red Shirt protesters during their demonstration in 2010.

Based on the investigation of Department for Special Investigation, during 28 April 2009 – May 2010, around 317 million baht flowed in her account.

150 baht was deposited while 166 million baht was withdrawn. Especially on 28 April 2010, 144 million baht was withdrawn.

Yingluck was said to have helped her brother, Thaksin Shinawatra and sister in-law conceal their wealth. Yingluck received 0.68% of Shin Corp. shares out of the 46.87% that Thaksin and his wife hold in 1999. Assets Examination Committee (AEC) claimed that Yingluck had made up false transaction and that “there were no real payments for each Ample Rich Co.,Ltd shares sold” and “the transactions were made at a cost basis of par value in order to avoid income taxes, and all the dividends paid out by Shin to those people were transferred to Potjaman's bank accounts”.

[yeeowww]

What's biased in pointing out a very poignant fact? Let's see a live debate, see what she's really made of, and whether she's truly cut out for the role or not.

So maewrocks, you say she's doing fine, would you please share some examples of her dialogue which shows deep insight and future vision.

Politically, she is doing very well. If she wins without having a debate, so what??. People on ThaksinVengeance.com will not be satisfied? Well, bad luck, do you think she or Thaksin give a dam_n about you. The Dems are calling for a debate, others are asking for the truth on the 91 deaths, but it looks like neither party is replying, because they both know it's the best thing to do for their chances in the election. Can't blame them.

I also ask for the truth on the 91 deaths , especially from Thaksin and the redshirts. Maybe you put some responsibility with them also. Or do you think that they have nothing to do with man in black and a part of this 91 deaths, the soldiers?

Maew... head in the clouds like the rest of the Red Lovers. Absolutely nothing that came out of her mouth made any sense nor addressed the questions put to her! And if she wins without a debate "so what"?!!! Are you serious?! Don't you want to know what she's going to accomplish if elected or specific plans for addressing the pressing issues and problems?! Typical hollow, blind follower statement from yet another of the mass hypnotized.

And the Takki Shinegra haters have very good reason to hate him... he's brought all the massive disgust on himself. He's a very despiseable despot who is merely reaping what he has sown. So let's take a little trip down memory lane here for all you nostalgic folk and Red lovers. Gee... ain't our fearless leader wonderful! Doesn't his humanitarianism just bring fuzzy warm tears of love and joy to your eyes? This guy deserves nothing but quick oblivion and anyone buying into his pie-in-the-sky horsesh*-*t, I hate to tell ya... but there ain't no Santa Clause, Easter Bunny or Leprechauns. He doesn't love you... his only love is himself, money and power. This madman is a terror and a maniacal sociopath who would throw you and your children under the truck in a heartbeat to save his own skin.

[Pi Sek]

Yinglak it seems is doing well. Well done to her. I'm not sure why she's doing well - it might be her looks, it might be the fact that she's related to Thaksin, it might be her "policies" (which still haven't been explained properly - exactly what this debate thing is about). Maybe those who support her can offer further reasoning.

The thing is that she will continue to lose popularity - as I have noticed even over the last week (although maybe that's because I have raised the question with some who intend to vote Peua Thai, and now they are starting to wonder) - as long as she does not explain her "policies". She is being asked to explain each time she is interviewed, but she answers a different question. Each time she does this, it will raise doubt in those listening to her. To the extent that, with some prompting from me, I can now confirm that one voter who planned to vote PT has now decided to put in a "No Vote", because she was uncomfortable placing faith blindly in Yinglak. Who ever said Thais never listened to a farang's political views?

This time the same question was put to another TV member, who claimed to be a political science professor at a leading Thai university (I notice he's now banned). I know it's an uncomfortable question, but it's a really important one that needs to be addressed:

If you are Thai, I urge you to use your obvious intelligence in deciding whether Thaksin or Peua Thai have any practical solutions and a plan of execution in the upcoming election because, for me, only a fool would cast their vote based on unsubstantiated claims from a politician. If you are a Peua Thai member or supporter, please do your own party representatives a favour and ask them to prepare information to their constituencies of how they plan to perform all these magical acts. Frankly, I do not believe they can.

what would PTP offer to improve things and, most importantly, what is their plan of execution? Where are the funds coming from? Where are cuts going to be made? These are important questions that any PTP member or supporter should be able to answer in an instant... but it seems none of them can.

Also, the same question again: any idea of PTP's executable plan to improve things where they say Abhisit fails? It's an important question because I have put it to everyone sympathetic to Peua Thai and I have not received a single answer. Even the PTP MPs themselves seem to dodge the question!

I did see one response saying to look on the Peua Thai Web site for their policies, but I'm afraid this isn't far from what the criticism about Yinglak is going on about. The PT Web site has a bulleted list of "policies" but the explanations of how exactly this is going to be implemented are extremely vague at best, if not absent altogether. This is understandable - you don't want to put your business plan on your Web site - but Yinglak should have at least a few answers on hand for when she is being interviewed.

I think even the Yinglak fans understand that her responses demonstrate the importance she holds in actually implementing these policies to some degree. My gut reaction, which is based on her non-responses, is that PT have no intention of fulfilling their promises transparently. Everyone might well have more cash in their pockets in 6 months... but I suspect they will also have levels of debt that they will never be able to pay back without selling off the little assets they have that could improve their lot in the longer term. We've already seen this - that's why there are lots of people, especially farmers, with a truck 5-10 year old top of the range Hilux but no money to put fuel in it. Coincidence?

Anyway, if I missed the PT policies' explanation on their Web site as to how they will be implemented, could someone provide any direction? I'd genuinely like to see it. Maybe they have a plan... I just haven't seen or heard any evidence that they do have one.

edit - policy-implentation-question quotes put into chronological order

Edited June 6, 2011 by Pi Sek

[yeeowww]

For those who missed her inspired, brilliant, thought provoking interview... here you go. No wonder they don't want her to debate, she'd be eaten alive.

Video News - ABC News interview

http://www.abc.net.a.../01/3233091.htm

[ianbaggie]

How long can she hide from the big tough issues?

Most likely just as long as PM Abhisit and the Dems can

You may not have noticed but PM Abhisit and the dems as you call them HAVE been running the country and have proved they can deal with all Thailands problems - including exile enforced terrorism - Yingluck- if she wasnt just a puppet to bring back her brother I might be worried about her running the country

[animatic]

Nutthawut and Jatuporn Promphan led the red-shirt uprising in Bangkok last year and they also are among those named as party-list candidates of Pheu Thai. This will add another complication to any future amnesty plan. Can lawmakers enact new laws, whether with blanket effects or not, that would benefit themselves? Such questions have not been asked, but they will be - and loudly as well.

An overlooked aspect to this quagmire of PTP directed amnesty.

These criminal suspects, that are currently out on bail, will be writing into law, an amnesty for themselves.

Difficult to imagine a bigger conflict of interest.

Whatever these criminal suspects do if they win power, they will do with an electoral mandate.

If you wanted to get picky, their mandate is explicitly to govern. Governing implies having the power to change laws. Whilst one may deride those who vote for them as ignorant or uneducated, the idea that those mandated to govern can change laws is not lost on them, I'm fairly sure.

Sorry H, but an electoral mandate does NOT in any sense remove one

from criminal culpability in existing cases BEFORE they were elected.

Many politicians world wide wide get removed from office for criminal conduct in office or before.

Some have immunity while IN office that ends later, like Jaques Chirac and Jatuporn. Chirac wasn't charged for the Paris Mayor graft charges till he was President, which is why he had to wait to be charged. Jatupron was charged AFTER his immunity expired and before he won a new one.

There is nothing to say previously existing charges get stopped when someone is elected. And in MOST countries, there is impeachment while in office by your legislative peers and them removal of immunity.

A mandate means the people have asked them to act on public matters, it is NOT carte blanche to go free from, previous or in office, criminal conduct, passes.

And the Court for Political Office Holders might take a dim view of the blatant conflict of interest of politicians on party lists setting themselves free for crimes committed BEFORE they are politicians.

Not to mention this is corruption of the highest order,

and lowest morality possibly.

Edited June 6, 2011 by animatic

[ianbaggie]

"Well, bad luck, do you think she or Thaksin give a dam_n about you."

and there you have it folks - a truth from your friendly neighbourhood red shirt mouthpiece...................democracy at its best - alongside a caring - help all red policy as long as the bangkok elite foot the bill - just get us into power!!!!!!!!!!1

[animatic]

For those who missed her inspired, brilliant, thought provoking interview... here you go. No wonder they don't want her to debate, she'd be eaten alive.

Video News - ABC News interview

http://www.abc.net.a.../01/3233091.htm

Hard to imagine she graduated from a University in USA...

english language skills are not so hot.

But language aside, she is not connecting ideas together all that well,

which would be assembled in her Thai brain before translating to speak in english.

Are you qualified?

"Well I think people will give me a chance."

I have " handled more than 20 million customers.."

Completely ignored the subject.

So pushing papers for telephone service is enough experience to make her an international decision maker?

She exchanges ideas with her big brother,

and he taught her to think with his logic.

Oh wonderful.

Edited June 6, 2011 by animatic

[ozzieovaseas]

It is pretty much a tried and tested MO for capaigners the world over. When it comes to policies you keep your trap shut until the last possible moment. Aussie pollies are experts at this.

In Yinlucks case, she claims her business sense comes from years of "training" from her brother. Indeed if she has been listening to him for that long she would be well aware of "foot in mouth" syndrome and know its best to shut up for as long as possible.

[ianbaggie]

It is pretty much a tried and tested MO for capaigners the world over. When it comes to policies you keep your trap shut until the last possible moment. Aussie pollies are experts at this.

In Yinlucks case, she claims her business sense comes from years of "training" from her brother. Indeed if she has been listening to him for that long she would be well aware of "foot in mouth" syndrome and know its best to shut up for as long as possible.

Quite the contrary, the electorates of many countries expect their potential governments to set out their policies at the START of the election and defend them - certainly British and American electorates expect what basis to give their vote on. How can you vote for someone when you dont know what youre voting for?

[yeeowww]

"Well, bad luck, do you think she or Thaksin give a dam_n about you."

and there you have it folks - a truth from your friendly neighbourhood red shirt mouthpiece...................democracy at its best - alongside a caring - help all red policy as long as the bangkok elite foot the bill - just get us into power!!!!!!!!!!1

And here to back up that statement & for your entertainment pleasure is video of PTP's most endeared support group. This is who they are and what they're about. Such a classy lot...

Edited June 6, 2011 by yeeowww

[lungmi]

Nutthawut and Jatuporn Promphan led the red-shirt uprising in Bangkok last year and they also are among those named as party-list candidates of Pheu Thai. This will add another complication to any future amnesty plan. Can lawmakers enact new laws, whether with blanket effects or not, that would benefit themselves? Such questions have not been asked, but they will be - and loudly as well.

An overlooked aspect to this quagmire of PTP directed amnesty.

These criminal suspects, that are currently out on bail, will be writing into law, an amnesty for themselves.

Difficult to imagine a bigger conflict of interest.

Whatever these criminal suspects do if they win power, they will do with an electoral mandate.

If you wanted to get picky, their mandate is explicitly to govern. Governing implies having the power to change laws. Whilst one may deride those who vote for them as ignorant or uneducated, the idea that those mandated to govern can change laws is not lost on them, I'm fairly sure.

Sorry H, but an electoral mandate does NOT in any sense remove one

from criminal culpability in existing cases BEFORE they were elected.

Many politicians world wide wide get removed from office for criminal conduct in office or before.

Some have immunity while IN office that ends later, like Jaques Chirac and Jatuporn. Chirac wasn't charged for the Paris Mayor graft charges till he was President, which is why he had to wait to be charged. Jatupron was charged AFTER his immunity expired and before he won a new one.

There is nothing to say previously existing charges get stopped when someone is elected. And in MOST countries, there is impeachment while in office by your legislative peers and them removal of immunity.

A mandate means the people have asked them to act on public matters, it is NOT carte blanche to go free from, previous or in office, criminal conduct, passes.

And the Court for Political Office Holders might take a dim view of the blatant conflict of interest of politicians on party lists setting themselves free for crimes committed BEFORE they are politicians.

Not to mention this is corruption of the highest order,

and lowest morality possibly.

In Germany we had a Minister who was forced to step down for his copied PHD thesis, Berlusconi of Italy tried to control the Jurisdiction by making new laws to his benefits. With some success. But now he is falling deep. Even his fellows try to put him in the garbage of history.

He will meet Thaksin.

[OzMick]

Nutthawut and Jatuporn Promphan led the red-shirt uprising in Bangkok last year and they also are among those named as party-list candidates of Pheu Thai. This will add another complication to any future amnesty plan. Can lawmakers enact new laws, whether with blanket effects or not, that would benefit themselves? Such questions have not been asked, but they will be - and loudly as well.

An overlooked aspect to this quagmire of PTP directed amnesty.

These criminal suspects, that are currently out on bail, will be writing into law, an amnesty for themselves.

Difficult to imagine a bigger conflict of interest.

Whatever these criminal suspects do if they win power, they will do with an electoral mandate.

If you wanted to get picky, their mandate is explicitly to govern. Governing implies having the power to change laws. Whilst one may deride those who vote for them as ignorant or uneducated, the idea that those mandated to govern can change laws is not lost on them, I'm fairly sure.

Having a mandate to govern does not give the right to vote on issues where a conflict of interest arises - though it never seemed to bother khun Thaksin, in multiple occasions some of which were downright criminal, even in Thailand. In any serious democracy, those caught out are expected to resign either a cabinet position, or in more serious matters, from parliament.

The problem is that if the UDD members recused themselves, the PTP would possibly not have enough votes to carry the motion (an accurate way of describing it), and if they dont\'t recuse, they could(?)/should be expelled.

[KKvampire]

YingLuck One big Female Puppet. Empty and used, All the Criminals attached to HER party are waiting their chance, amnesty for serious crimes. Imagine if it were to happen? POWDERKEG. Lets see her debate the issues. Not prancing around among her PTP supporters

[letitbe]

So maewrocks, you say she's doing fine, would you please share some examples of her dialogue which shows deep insight and future vision.

come on shes brilliant as are all her parties ideas. To bring thailand into future of course every child should have a computer and to stop brain drain all graduates should get at least 15,000 baht and why should only rich people have credit cards. Of course all thai teachers know how to teach using computers and all children will immediately be transformed into highly articulate individuals. With all extra money the graduates get this will improve the economy enormously and once Thailand gets its rightful polititians back they will like last time totally solve drug problem.

Come on give poor a break

And on top of that at a recent rally they promised the gold price would go back to when Mr T was around and so everyone could get more affordable gold.

[OzMick]

come on shes brilliant as are all her parties ideas. To bring thailand into future of course every child should have a computer and to stop brain drain all graduates should get at least 15,000 baht and why should only rich people have credit cards. Of course all thai teachers know how to teach using computers and all children will immediately be transformed into highly articulate individuals. With all extra money the graduates get this will improve the economy enormously and once Thailand gets its rightful polititians back they will like last time totally solve drug problem.

Come on give poor a break

And on top of that at a recent rally they promised the gold price would go back to when Mr T was around and so everyone could get more affordable gold.

Just told the red-leaning girlfriend that PTP plans to reduce the value of her gold by about half (without mentioning that it was a total wank) - they just lost 1 vote!