PM Yingluck Forced To Speak To Virtually Empty Seminar Room

[z12]

Darn. Those 500 baht "horse face" was too drunk at 10am.

Next time, tell them to pay after, not before.

They must have raised their fee.

Edited February 2, 2012 by z12

[animatic]

The worst part is even her own people shunned her, "Deputy Prime Minister and Finance Minister Kittirat Na Ranong refused to attend the event, claiming he had an important meeting with the SME Association." Looks like they are treating the window dressing with due respect, doesnt bode well for her future.

Maybe bad wording by the journalist, maybe a bad translation: I don't know why the word "refused" is used. Not every minister is required to attend every event the PM goes to. It would be rather inefficient. And he had to attend another meeting. Doesn't sound like shunning to me.

Your clutching at straw there with conjecture and imagination, its entirely possible that the word refused is used because they actually refused to attend. Consider that the PM gives a speech on financial issues and the "Deputy Prime Minister and Finance Minister Kittirat Na Ranong refused to attend the event". In addition reporter and business leader fail to show. An area that should be of intense interest to the all, sounds like a big shun to me.

The wording was intentional because this is a propaganda piece translated by one PAD "news" agency from a piece done by another PAD "news" agency. It is just PAD trying to stick it to the gov't which they do on a regular basis. It's not a big deal.

The real journalists present actually reported on the speech's content.

Regardless of the choice of word, he was expected by the hosts and turned down, decided not, made other plans, etc etc, Bottom line he didn't show when he was expected too, apparently as with several hundred more business and government leaders.

Yes someone SHOULD have gotten her into a smaller room ASAP,

they could have lied and blamed the hotel fro providing the wrong room etc...

but they didn't, and compounded the issue.

Bottom line:

At an national promoted Ecconomic Reporters meeting,

Where the PM is supposed to read her Economic Forecast for the Year Ahead

Her Chief Minister of Finance for economic matters didn't show up when expected to.

And went to talk to small business people instead.

On so many levels, with no help whatsoever from Sondhi et all,

this is a massive political cock-up. No getting around it.

[gopnarak]

Ouch, ouch and ouch!!!!

Still, this article is far from perfect..... 2001 Constitution? Is that some kind of a compromise between the 1997 and 2007 versions?

Looks like Sondi's team is working overtime. Go PAD! Go!

Actually its the constitution of year 2540 and the constitution of year 2550.

The year 2544 general elections were the first election that were hold under the 2540 constitution and so was the parliament of 2544 the first one under the 2540 constitution. so you could say the key innovation and important changes of the year 2540 constitution were finally installed in year 2544.

Such mistakes as pointed out above can be a result of a translation error to match the dates of the Thai calender with the Christian calender but of course also a bit lax handling with the correct dates at the original Thai language article, but even that is understandable (see 2544 changes).

So i think there is no reason to be that pedantic with the 1997/2001 mistake.

The article itself contains many other points to argue about, if you think its worth to bother.

[Buchholz]

I wouldn't be surprised if the press secretary is shown to an inactive post somewhere in Chiang Rai.

Joining Yingluck's Facebook Team on the fired list:

[tombkk]

Well, lots of speculation in this thread. This how how things work:

An organisation plans a PR event and invites a VIP as the guest speaker.

The VIP's secretary wants to know how many people are expected, and what kind of people (press, business leaders, etc) these are, and where the event will take place.

This is done months in advance, as the VIP has a full schedule.

The VIP agrees, and the PR machine is set in motion to make sure these people do attend the event. That is the job of the host, i.e. the organisation that first contacted the VIP's office.

I have attended quite a number of such events with Thai Prime Ministers as the guest speakers (i.e. the VIP) but I never heard about this particular event. Not saying that I expect an invitation to each event the Thai PM attends, but if the host/organigser does not get enough confirmations, they should widen their target audience.

I think the major failure here is on the side of the host. Yes, the PM lost face in the press, and I think the result of that will be that no Thai PM will accept an invitation from this organisation any more. I don't think the speaker can be blamed for the failure of the organiser to fill the room.

Your description of the flow of events is quite clear, but you seem to still be missing the main point here. If the speaker were somebody actually important such as the prime minister of a country that had just come through some epic events (let's say like great floods or the like), or if the speaker was someone with either direct power or strong influence over something important sucn as the economic destiny of a nation, well then the host would have to do nothing but announce the event and the room would be full. For example, let's say God was going to make an appearance for even five minutes to give his thoughts about the future of Thailand (or even the future of a single horse race coming up next month). Do you think there would be an empty seat in the house? Hell no! The point of this embarassing story is that with or without paid full-time staff working to dig up attendees for the presentation, if the PM or her opinions were seen as having any real consequence, the room would have been full. It wasn't.

The room would have been full (I am sure of that) if the target audience had known about the event.

[gopnarak]

The worst part is even her own people shunned her, "Deputy Prime Minister and Finance Minister Kittirat Na Ranong refused to attend the event, claiming he had an important meeting with the SME Association." Looks like they are treating the window dressing with due respect, doesnt bode well for her future.

Maybe bad wording by the journalist, maybe a bad translation: I don't know why the word "refused" is used. Not every minister is required to attend every event the PM goes to. It would be rather inefficient. And he had to attend another meeting. Doesn't sound like shunning to me.

If this was supposedly set up Months In Advance,

then her finance mister could have scheduled the SME

Small and Medium Enterprise meeting for later or another day, well in advance.

Getting a confirmation of attendees 'well in advance' also

doesn't mean they will show, just that they said they would at the time.

Things change, and if the people just don't show, then the host is

left in the lurch, but not nearly as much as the speaker they

no longer had interest in listening to.

It is the job of the host to bring in the people.

The PM was just invited as guest speaker, it isn't her job or that of the Finance Minister to promote the event and invite guests.

You could also say an event "organised" and hosted by the Economic Reporters Association (ERA) failed to raised any interests in the business community and the large community of Thailands economic journalists. Almost nobody showed up at their “Decoding GDP 2012” seminar.

To expect a crowd of more than 400 participants, consisting of economic reporters and business leaders turned out to be just a pipe dream of the organizers.

If you twist the story to "more than 400 participants, consisting of economic reporters and business leaders weren't bothered to listen to speech by the PM" then you are on the pipe too.

[tombkk]

Maybe bad wording by the journalist, maybe a bad translation: I don't know why the word "refused" is used. Not every minister is required to attend every event the PM goes to. It would be rather inefficient. And he had to attend another meeting. Doesn't sound like shunning to me.

Well made point.The other paper has an article on the front page this morning making it clear that most of the comments made earlier on this thread were largely misplaced,some generated I suspect by the malice and bile that sadly has come to be associated with a few haters on this forum.I would have thought for opponents of this government there was enough to criticise on performance and policy grounds.Still I suppose the consolation is they are just playing loony tunes to each other:nobody else takes much notice.

Incidentally it's common practice for a speaker to ask an audience in a partly filled hall to move up to the front.

I can confirm the last sentence, as I have experienced this often enough.(As an attendee.)

In any case, I still believe that the room would have been full had the target audience been aware of the event.

[tombkk]

The worst part is even her own people shunned her, "Deputy Prime Minister and Finance Minister Kittirat Na Ranong refused to attend the event, claiming he had an important meeting with the SME Association." Looks like they are treating the window dressing with due respect, doesnt bode well for her future.

Maybe bad wording by the journalist, maybe a bad translation: I don't know why the word "refused" is used. Not every minister is required to attend every event the PM goes to. It would be rather inefficient. And he had to attend another meeting. Doesn't sound like shunning to me.

Your clutching at straw there with conjecture and imagination, its entirely possible that the word refused is used because they actually refused to attend. Consider that the PM gives a speech on financial issues and the "Deputy Prime Minister and Finance Minister Kittirat Na Ranong refused to attend the event". In addition reporter and business leader fail to show. An area that should be of intense interest to the all, sounds like a big shun to me.

I think the word that was used might have been ปฏิเสธ. This can be translated as "declined" (as in: The Finance Minister said that he had to respectfully decline his attendance, as he was...) but of course can also be translated as "refused". Let's see the whole comment of the Finance Minister in Thai before we jump to any conclusions, shall we?

[tombkk]

The worst part is even her own people shunned her, "Deputy Prime Minister and Finance Minister Kittirat Na Ranong refused to attend the event, claiming he had an important meeting with the SME Association." Looks like they are treating the window dressing with due respect, doesnt bode well for her future.

Maybe bad wording by the journalist, maybe a bad translation: I don't know why the word "refused" is used. Not every minister is required to attend every event the PM goes to. It would be rather inefficient. And he had to attend another meeting. Doesn't sound like shunning to me.

If this was supposedly set up Months In Advance,

then her finance mister could have scheduled the SME

Small and Medium Enterprise meeting for later or another day, well in advance.

Getting a confirmation of attendees 'well in advance' also

doesn't mean they will show, just that they said they would at the time.

Things change, and if the people just don't show, then the host is

left in the lurch, but not nearly as much as the speaker they

no longer had interest in listening to.

Attendees usually pay a participation fee, which covers the cost and creates some income for the organiser. But even this this event was for free, and there are always a few no-shows, I doubt that the organiser had a full house of booked seats.

[tombkk]

Maybe bad wording by the journalist, maybe a bad translation: I don't know why the word "refused" is used. Not every minister is required to attend every event the PM goes to. It would be rather inefficient. And he had to attend another meeting. Doesn't sound like shunning to me.

Your clutching at straw there with conjecture and imagination, its entirely possible that the word refused is used because they actually refused to attend. Consider that the PM gives a speech on financial issues and the "Deputy Prime Minister and Finance Minister Kittirat Na Ranong refused to attend the event". In addition reporter and business leader fail to show. An area that should be of intense interest to the all, sounds like a big shun to me.

The wording was intentional because this is a propaganda piece translated by one PAD "news" agency from a piece done by another PAD "news" agency. It is just PAD trying to stick it to the gov't which they do on a regular basis. It's not a big deal.

The real journalists present actually reported on the speech's content.

Regardless of the choice of word, he was expected by the hosts and turned down, decided not, made other plans, etc etc, Bottom line he didn't show when he was expected too, apparently as with several hundred more business and government leaders.

Yes someone SHOULD have gotten her into a smaller room ASAP,

they could have lied and blamed the hotel fro providing the wrong room etc...

but they didn't, and compounded the issue.

Bottom line:

At an national promoted Ecconomic Reporters meeting,

Where the PM is supposed to read her Economic Forecast for the Year Ahead

Her Chief Minister of Finance for economic matters didn't show up when expected to.

And went to talk to small business people instead.

On so many levels, with no help whatsoever from Sondhi et all,

this is a massive political cock-up. No getting around it.

OK. Please send a copy of the "national promotion" you seem to have witnessed. I for one didn't receive it.

Then post a link to some credible source that said the Minister of Finance (please explain the word "Chief") was expected to show up.

[gopnarak]

I wouldn't be surprised if the press secretary is shown to an inactive post somewhere in Chiang Rai.

Joining Yingluck's Facebook Team on the fired list:

http://www.thaivisa....ost__p__4896287

not "her" team. but an outsourced team the government hired from a private organizer.

I expect that here in this case the host will put the blame on a contracted event management agency, and this agency will say they it were some temporary employees who messed that up.

[Mosha]

PM Forced to Speak to Virtually Empty Seminar Room

accompanying photo to the OP article

My isn't that strange, Buchholz helpfully provides the "accompanying photo to the OP article" - Except there isn't one

http://www.tannetwor...?DataID=1052188

And suprise, suprise guess where this photo originated, yes that good old photobucket album, rightie1.

Who is supplying your photo database, Buchholz?

While waiting for Buchholz to respond, let's have another example of Yingluck's shining diplomatic and reasoning skills in action during a public forum:

Days could be spent studying the many layers in her response...

My Thai educated wife speaks better English, I'm working on her Tyke dialect.

[MikeOboe57]

It is the job of the host to bring in the people.

The PM was just invited as guest speaker, it isn't her job or that of the Finance Minister to promote the event and invite guests.

You could also say an event "organised" and hosted by the Economic Reporters Association (ERA) failed to raised any interests in the business community and the large community of Thailands economic journalists. Almost nobody showed up at their “Decoding GDP 2012” seminar.

To expect a crowd of more than 400 participants, consisting of economic reporters and business leaders turned out to be just a pipe dream of the organizers.

If you twist the story to "more than 400 participants, consisting of economic reporters and business leaders weren't bothered to listen to speech by the PM" then you are on the pipe too.

Perhaps after her "stunning success" in Davos the organizers thought that having the PM as speaker would attract a huge audience. In any other country the Head of Government attending would have filled every seat.

No matter how you turn and twist the story, the fact remains that no one bothered to listen to the Thai PM talking about "Decoding GDP 2012" - as everybody knows she has no clue. Even her Finance Minister did not want to witness this disaster.

Maybe next time they should have YS as surprise guest - and as a precautionary measure lock all exits.

[gopnarak]

Well, lots of speculation in this thread. This how how things work:

An organisation plans a PR event and invites a VIP as the guest speaker.

The VIP's secretary wants to know how many people are expected, and what kind of people (press, business leaders, etc) these are, and where the event will take place.

This is done months in advance, as the VIP has a full schedule.

The VIP agrees, and the PR machine is set in motion to make sure these people do attend the event. That is the job of the host, i.e. the organisation that first contacted the VIP's office.

I have attended quite a number of such events with Thai Prime Ministers as the guest speakers (i.e. the VIP) but I never heard about this particular event. Not saying that I expect an invitation to each event the Thai PM attends, but if the host/organigser does not get enough confirmations, they should widen their target audience.

I think the major failure here is on the side of the host. Yes, the PM lost face in the press, and I think the result of that will be that no Thai PM will accept an invitation from this organisation any more. I don't think the speaker can be blamed for the failure of the organiser to fill the room.

Your description of the flow of events is quite clear, but you seem to still be missing the main point here. If the speaker were somebody actually important such as the prime minister of a country that had just come through some epic events (let's say like great floods or the like), or if the speaker was someone with either direct power or strong influence over something important sucn as the economic destiny of a nation, well then the host would have to do nothing but announce the event and the room would be full. For example, let's say God was going to make an appearance for even five minutes to give his thoughts about the future of Thailand (or even the future of a single horse race coming up next month). Do you think there would be an empty seat in the house? Hell no! The point of this embarassing story is that with or without paid full-time staff working to dig up attendees for the presentation, if the PM or her opinions were seen as having any real consequence, the room would have been full. It wasn't.

The room would have been full (I am sure of that) if the target audience had known about the event.

That sums it up in one sentence.

I agree with you that the host is here to blame.

The host, the organizers messed it up - deliberately or not? Hanlon's razor says: Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity.

[gl555]

Well, lots of speculation in this thread. This how how things work:

An organisation plans a PR event and invites a VIP as the guest speaker.

The VIP's secretary wants to know how many people are expected, and what kind of people (press, business leaders, etc) these are, and where the event will take place.

This is done months in advance, as the VIP has a full schedule.

The VIP agrees, and the PR machine is set in motion to make sure these people do attend the event. That is the job of the host, i.e. the organisation that first contacted the VIP's office.

I have attended quite a number of such events with Thai Prime Ministers as the guest speakers (i.e. the VIP) but I never heard about this particular event. Not saying that I expect an invitation to each event the Thai PM attends, but if the host/organigser does not get enough confirmations, they should widen their target audience.

I think the major failure here is on the side of the host. Yes, the PM lost face in the press, and I think the result of that will be that no Thai PM will accept an invitation from this organisation any more. I don't think the speaker can be blamed for the failure of the organiser to fill the room.

Your description of the flow of events is quite clear, but you seem to still be missing the main point here. If the speaker were somebody actually important such as the prime minister of a country that had just come through some epic events (let's say like great floods or the like), or if the speaker was someone with either direct power or strong influence over something important sucn as the economic destiny of a nation, well then the host would have to do nothing but announce the event and the room would be full. For example, let's say God was going to make an appearance for even five minutes to give his thoughts about the future of Thailand (or even the future of a single horse race coming up next month). Do you think there would be an empty seat in the house? Hell no! The point of this embarassing story is that with or without paid full-time staff working to dig up attendees for the presentation, if the PM or her opinions were seen as having any real consequence, the room would have been full. It wasn't.

The room would have been full (I am sure of that) if the target audience had known about the event.

That sums it up in one sentence.

I agree with you that the host is here to blame.

The host, the organizers messed it up - deliberately or not? Hanlon's razor says: Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity.

I doubt it.

[tombkk]

It is the job of the host to bring in the people.

The PM was just invited as guest speaker, it isn't her job or that of the Finance Minister to promote the event and invite guests.

You could also say an event "organised" and hosted by the Economic Reporters Association (ERA) failed to raised any interests in the business community and the large community of Thailands economic journalists. Almost nobody showed up at their “Decoding GDP 2012” seminar.

To expect a crowd of more than 400 participants, consisting of economic reporters and business leaders turned out to be just a pipe dream of the organizers.

If you twist the story to "more than 400 participants, consisting of economic reporters and business leaders weren't bothered to listen to speech by the PM" then you are on the pipe too.

Perhaps after her "stunning success" in Davos the organizers thought that having the PM as speaker would attract a huge audience. In any other country the Head of Government attending would have filled every seat.

No matter how you turn and twist the story, the fact remains that no one bothered to listen to the Thai PM talking about "Decoding GDP 2012" - as everybody knows she has no clue. Even her Finance Minister did not want to witness this disaster.

Maybe next time they should have YS as surprise guest - and as a precautionary measure lock all exits.

No matter how you turn and twist the story, the fact remains that the target audience wasn't informed. They would have listened had they only known that she was going to talk.

[TAWP]

So now the apologists claim that the event was under-attended due to no-one being informed of it in advance. Ri-ight...

[MikeOboe57]

No matter how you turn and twist the story, the fact remains that the target audience wasn't informed. They would have listened had they only known that she was going to talk.

Are you suggesting that the organizers landed the coup of getting the PM as speaker and didn't bother to send an email to their attendees, who are most probably 24/7 online on their iphones, blackberries etc., especially if they were unsure of attracting enough participants.

And don't tell me that Yinglucks appearance was a last minute change of the agenda.

[tombkk]

No matter how you turn and twist the story, the fact remains that the target audience wasn't informed. They would have listened had they only known that she was going to talk.

Are you suggesting that the organizers landed the coup of getting the PM as speaker and didn't bother to send an email to their attendees, who are most probably 24/7 online on their iphones, blackberries etc., especially if they were unsure of attracting enough participants.

Yes. Major PR failure by the organiser.

And don't tell me that Yinglucks appearance was a last minute change of the agenda.

I am not aware of the schedule of those people. I just think they didn't do their job, which was to fill the hall.

[gopnarak]

It is the job of the host to bring in the people.

The PM was just invited as guest speaker, it isn't her job or that of the Finance Minister to promote the event and invite guests.

You could also say an event "organised" and hosted by the Economic Reporters Association (ERA) failed to raised any interests in the business community and the large community of Thailands economic journalists. Almost nobody showed up at their “Decoding GDP 2012” seminar.

To expect a crowd of more than 400 participants, consisting of economic reporters and business leaders turned out to be just a pipe dream of the organizers.

If you twist the story to "more than 400 participants, consisting of economic reporters and business leaders weren't bothered to listen to speech by the PM" then you are on the pipe too.

Perhaps after her "stunning success" in Davos the organizers thought that having the PM as speaker would attract a huge audience. In any other country the Head of Government attending would have filled every seat.

No matter how you turn and twist the story, the fact remains that no one bothered to listen to the Thai PM talking about "Decoding GDP 2012" - as everybody knows she has no clue. Even her Finance Minister did not want to witness this disaster.

Maybe next time they should have YS as surprise guest - and as a precautionary measure lock all exits.

1. What happened in Davos doesn't matter - its a flawed argument someone else brought up.

2. YS has no clue - That might be true or not. But it is not the reason why nobody showed up there.

3. Like a blind test? Do events by the Economic Reporters Association usually draw a crowd of more than 400 participants, consisting of economic reporters and business leaders? Or did these people showed up after Yingluck delivered her speech. As i understand it was a seminar and the PM only scheduled to hold a 20 minute opening speech but not to run the show for the rest of the day.

[tlansford]

So now the apologists claim that the event was under-attended due to no-one being informed of it in advance. Ri-ight...

I do not personally know tombkk, but he looks to be less an apologist and more an informed person on this particular subject living in bkk.

But his response makes more sense than the TAN information - a source known for simply making up their "facts".

[TAWP]

So now the apologists claim that the event was under-attended due to no-one being informed of it in advance. Ri-ight...

I do not personally know tombkk, but he looks to be less an apologist and more an informed person on this particular subject living in bkk.

But his response makes more sense than the TAN information - a source known for simply making up their "facts".

You are tiresome.

Please substantiate your allegations that TAN is a PAD mouth-piece and is known for making up their facts - or go away.

[animatic]

'tombkk' timestamp='1328151272' post='5022835'

Maybe bad wording by the journalist, maybe a bad translation: I don't know why the word "refused" is used. Not every minister is required to attend every event the PM goes to. It would be rather inefficient. And he had to attend another meeting. Doesn't sound like shunning to me.

Your clutching at straw there with conjecture and imagination, its entirely possible that the word refused is used because they actually refused to attend. Consider that the PM gives a speech on financial issues and the "Deputy Prime Minister and Finance Minister Kittirat Na Ranong refused to attend the event". In addition reporter and business leader fail to show. An area that should be of intense interest to the all, sounds like a big shun to me.

The wording was intentional because this is a propaganda piece translated by one PAD "news" agency from a piece done by another PAD "news" agency. It is just PAD trying to stick it to the gov't which they do on a regular basis. It's not a big deal.

The real journalists present actually reported on the speech's content.

Regardless of the choice of word, he was expected by the hosts and turned down, decided not, made other plans, etc etc, Bottom line he didn't show when he was expected too, apparently as with several hundred more business and government leaders.

Yes someone SHOULD have gotten her into a smaller room ASAP,

they could have lied and blamed the hotel fro providing the wrong room etc...

but they didn't, and compounded the issue.

Bottom line:

At an national promoted Ecconomic Reporters meeting,

Where the PM is supposed to read her Economic Forecast for the Year Ahead

Her Chief Minister of Finance for economic matters didn't show up when expected to.

And went to talk to small business people instead.

On so many levels, with no help whatsoever from Sondhi et all,

this is a massive political cock-up. No getting around it.

OK. Please send a copy of the "national promotion" you seem to have witnessed. I for one didn't receive it.

Then post a link to some credible source that said the Minister of Finance (please explain the word "Chief") was expected to show up.

As pointed out there are not enough economic reporters out there,

and the country is not that large they would HAVE TO promote it nationally,

even if you were not part of their demographic.

------------------------------------------------

The OP says the Finance Minister was expected but didn't show.

The Finance minister MUST be the chief as in 1st, top, financial minister.

" The prime minister unwillingly took the stage and gave her speech at 10:30 AM.

Deputy Prime Minister and Finance Minister Kittirat Na Ranong

refused to attend the event,

claiming he had an important meeting with the SME Association."

--------------------------------------------------

You're writing like Jayboy now...

so I won't play.

No matter how you slice it, after getting the Davos treatment,

she must have been mortified to do this next at home.

Edited February 2, 2012 by animatic

[tlansford]

So now the apologists claim that the event was under-attended due to no-one being informed of it in advance. Ri-ight...

I do not personally know tombkk, but he looks to be less an apologist and more an informed person on this particular subject living in bkk.

But his response makes more sense than the TAN information - a source known for simply making up their "facts".

You are tiresome.

Please substantiate your allegations that TAN is a PAD mouth-piece and is known for making up their facts - or go away.

you must be joking, ... or trolling.

[Rammstein]

Wow she is a slow learner, she should of taken a leaf from her brothers book and a had a few Morons outside handing money out for people to attend, place would of been packed with idiots waving flags and clapping amazing what 500 baht can buy still buy you here

[cdnvic]

Guys, stop taking shots at each other. Just debate the issue or go to bed. You're all getting a bit cranky.

[rixalex]

So tell me, why should I waste more time on "constructive criticism" of this article?

Well for what it is worth, i found that response much more interesting to read than your usual one-line "more propaganda crap" response, so hopefully not a total waste of your time.

I appreciate that. Seriously, not meaning to offend, but it seems like you could have already figured out these things since you know as much or more than I do about Sondi and his media outlets.

Take care - Tom

I think you misunderstand. You didn't figure anything out for me. It was just good to hear you supply a bit of reasoning to your argument for once, even if i didn't agree with it.

The truth is, regarding this story, it is something and nothing. So the PM was to give a speech, and few attended. Probably as much to do with bad organising as anything, but, at the end of the day, it does look very bad and if the same thing were to happen in my country, the political satirists would absolutely have a field day - not only with the one man and his dog audience, but with things like the video clip of Yingluck at the debate in which she gave just about one of the most jumbled nonsensical speeches you are ever likely to hear from a politician, and nobody would be crying "that's not fair" or "that's just propoganda", people would have a chuckle and call it a normal bit of media piss taking out of people who tend to take themselves a bit too seriously.

For someone who claims to not support Yingluck or Thaksin or the red movement, don't you ever wonder to yourself why your reflex reaction to any negative story concerning them, is to whinge about the PAD? I do.

[z12]

So tell me, why should I waste more time on "constructive criticism" of this article?

Well for what it is worth, i found that response much more interesting to read than your usual one-line "more propaganda crap" response, so hopefully not a total waste of your time.

I appreciate that. Seriously, not meaning to offend, but it seems like you could have already figured out these things since you know as much or more than I do about Sondi and his media outlets.

Take care - Tom

I think you misunderstand. You didn't figure anything out for me. It was just good to hear you supply a bit of reasoning to your argument for once, even if i didn't agree with it.

The truth is, regarding this story, it is something and nothing. So the PM was to give a speech, and few attended. Probably as much to do with bad organising as anything, but, at the end of the day, it does look very bad and if the same thing were to happen in my country, the political satirists would absolutely have a field day - not only with the one man and his dog audience, but with things like the video clip of Yingluck at the debate in which she gave just about one of the most jumbled nonsensical speeches you are ever likely to hear from a politician, and nobody would be crying "that's not fair" or "that's just propoganda", people would have a chuckle and call it a normal bit of media piss taking out of people who tend to take themselves a bit too seriously.

For someone who claims to not support Yingluck or Thaksin or the red movement, don't you ever wonder to yourself why your reflex reaction to any negative story concerning them, is to whinge about the PAD? I do.

The terms Koolaid Drinking barking moonbat seem to apply.

Koolaid Drinker:

People who believe anything they are told. people who refuse to change there minds when confronted with facts.

a koolaid drinker is the liberal democrat who is liberal because they are told they should be. they have made no attempt to decide why the are liberal.

often a koolaid "drinker" simply wants to hate anything a republican does good or bad.

koolaid people are the vocal howard dean wing of the democrat party.

koolaid drinkers are the ones that went first when jim jones said drink.

barking moonbat:

An unthinking or insane leftist -- in other words, most modern leftists.

Moonbat can also be used as an adjective, e.g. a moonbat professor. According to the Wikipedia entry for moonbat, the word was coined in 2002 by the Editor of Samizdata, Perry de Havilland, and was a variation on the name of radical British activist and columnist George Monbiot.

Originally, the term "moonbat" was intended to be more politically neutral, and described wackos on the left and the right, but it quickly acquired its current usage of being applied almost exclusively to those on the left.

The term also references the moon much in the same way that "lunatic" refers to the insanity-causing powers of the full moon (luna = moon). Bloggers occasionally analyze the behavior patterns of various moonbat "species" as if they were actual animals, and even give them satirical Linnaean taxonomical names, such as "moonbattus berkeleyensis".

The entry in the Samizdata glossary indicates that Perry originally coined the full phrase "barking moonbat"; apparently "moonbat" is just a subsequent shortened version of "barking moonbat," rather than being a pre-existing term that was lengthened to barking moonbat.

Edited February 3, 2012 by z12

[animatic]

Clearly she wasn't a draw for their demographic.

The desperate attempts to spin this away from

her lack of drawing power in the business community are not working.

And that is the main story, not their missmanagement.

No doubt all registered or expected attendees got emails

noting her august presents on the dias. Still didn't show.

[Moruya]

The bottom line is that if the PM were to give a speech on thermonuclear particle physics, very few would feel that they would learn anything from her.

Similarly I doubt many people would feel that they would benefit from hearing her talk about the Thai economy when she has shown on several occasions that she's not a very good orator and when it comes to the subject matter, she has difficulty putting the proverbial cup and saucer together.