Someone as shockingly unqualified as her with no hidden talent could have never emerged in any mature democracy, that's for sure.

Bush, Reagen, Obama, Nixon, etc.

Do we see a trend in useless mouthpieces here?

Comparing Reagen to Yingluck. Night and day. Useless mouthpieces?

Note that a similar screen name "ludicrous" is more appropriate.

Being PM is not as easy as it looks and if she ever has to do a tv debate with Abihsit she will wish she never took the job at all.

Being PM is not as easy as it looks and if she ever has to do a tv debate with Abihsit she will wish she never took the job at all.

It's written on her face and in her speech and body actions that she already wishes she hadn't. Might be the first lesson she ever learned in her smug little bubble that was previously unscathed from real everyday life and people. She's what the locals call "the frog in the coconut shell." Sorry, life is not all flash, glit, glam and mulberry boots!

Being PM is not as easy as it looks and if she ever has to do a tv debate with Abihsit she will wish she never took the job at all.

It's written on her face and in her speech and body actions that she already wishes she hadn't. Might be the first lesson she ever learned in her smug little bubble that was previously unscathed from real everyday life and people. She's what the locals call "the frog in the coconut shell." Sorry, life is not all flash, glit, glam and mulberry boots!

You're jealous of her, aren't you.

It must be difficult running the country from Dubai? Think of logistics of this and the chains of communication required? Thats why the running of this government is turning into a shambles.

Whilst I am used by now to the ridicule that some members of this forum constantly direct at Yingluck, some of which is deserved, some is simply because this is Thailand and that's how things happen in Thailand. What bothers me is what are the alternatives, Abhisit is a failure, Sondhi is a joke, you could even make a case for the return of Thaksin, he at least knew his head from his feet.

Does he now since this is his puppet, selected because of family( less likely to turn on dear brother), lack of political experience, and selected really who knows why.

And family members on high posts.

Over the top personal insults against a public figure were removed. Those unnessesarily quoting it went as well.

Looks like 12 years is not enough then.

Says the Man who seemingly knows everything

Anyone caught red handed in my office reading "the manager" will no longer be "a manager" and gets fired.

Yay for Red Democracy!

.

Being PM is not as easy as it looks and if she ever has to do a tv debate with Abihsit she will wish she never took the job at all.

It's written on her face and in her speech and body actions that she already wishes she hadn't. Might be the first lesson she ever learned in her smug little bubble that was previously unscathed from real everyday life and people. She's what the locals call "the frog in the coconut shell." Sorry, life is not all flash, glit, glam and mulberry boots!

Right.

Anything that doesn't kill her

makes her brother stronger.

Anyone caught red handed in my office reading "the manager" will no longer be "a manager" and gets fired.

Yay for Red Democracy!

.

Freedom of speech, freedom of thought, and the right to read as you see fit

is not allowed in the Tragic Kingdom.

Maybe that is what makes it such a tragedy?

Wouldn't that be 'Caught Yellow Handed'?

Edited February 4, 201214 yr by animatic

Wow, Yingluck and George Bush II have something in common!

Yes!!! He is a 'dope-on-a-rope' and she is a-'puppet-on-a-string' simply repeating what their masters tell them to say. Only the ventriloquists differ!!!!!.

Nonsense troll post removed.

It must be difficult running the country from Dubai? Think of logistics of this and the chains of communication required? Thats why the running of this government is turning into a shambles.

'Turning'?????? It was a shambles right from 'the off' and it gets worse every day!!!!!!

Yes it is propaganda but there is some truth in it.

Can most people really disagree with this sentiment? I mean the part that she is a pretty show puppet with no there there in the brain department?

Her speech was so poorly received with her political opponents saying she was better equipped to participate in a fashion show rather than sharing her vision.

I can't really disagree with how the Pm is perceived. She has been surrounded with faces of fools at best.

I still hold out that their plans in the shadows fail, that some good will come to all the Thai people in regards to their pledges during the election. That they will legally and democratically be eradicated from the Thai political scene permanently. The most important hope is the Thai people elect a person with clear visions for the good of the Thai people.

Nonsense troll post removed.

Whilst I am used by now to the ridicule that some members of this forum constantly direct at Yingluck, some of which is deserved, some is simply because this is Thailand and that's how things happen in Thailand. What bothers me is what are the alternatives, Abhisit is a failure, Sondhi is a joke, you could even make a case for the return of Thaksin, he at least knew his head from his feet.

What you?! Making a case for Thaksin?! I'm shocked! Right out of left field that one.

Note my use of the word "even". Basically whilst I accept Yingluck's faults, I cannot see anyone better, in any party. Actually I am permanently puzzled as to how so many patently incompetent people can be so successfully corrupt.

Because the vast majority of Thais accept a certain amount of corruption in politics. Result of a growing new democracy that is unique to the Thai peoples. Thaskin is a great example of this. Whilst he line is pockets and that of his friends (that we see now) and withholding his Northeast rice scheme and loan policies he did some good as well. That is why things are as they are in Thai politics. Change is coming for these types of politicians. In any growing democracy the youth play a huge part in changing the policies of their country. Thailand needs it's youth to have a voice.

Whilst I am used by now to the ridicule that some members of this forum constantly direct at Yingluck, some of which is deserved, some is simply because this is Thailand and that's how things happen in Thailand. What bothers me is what are the alternatives, Abhisit is a failure, Sondhi is a joke, you could even make a case for the return of Thaksin, he at least knew his head from his feet.

I would agree that there is a shortage of alternatives, I think many who might serve their country are put off by the current standards, and thus the dinosaur-era feudal-politicians continue to have way too much influence. Only time will take care of their generation.

But I can't agree that "Abhisit is a failure", I think he showed that coalition-governments force compromises, and did quite well given the constraints he had to work under. Yingluck has the same opportunity to perform right now, and with a small overall-majority of PTP MPs, more might be looked-for from her. Perhaps she'll grow into the job, if she's allowed to, the signs aren't that good IMO.

Thaksin showed that old-fashioned 'Asian values' are still alive & kicking, and wasted a terrific opportunity a decade ago, but did make the votes of the poor more-important. I don't think any party would now hope to govern, without at least promising to help the poor, which is probably progress, however we're seeing currently that "only election promises" need to be matched afterwards by effective-actions.

I don't see how the return of Thaksin now could represent progress, the world has moved-on from the early-2000s, and so must Thailand, hopefully new leaders will foster this delicate-democracy & improve freedom-of-speech, perhaps the poor will be allowed to earn (not be given) a better standard-of-living. If not then other ASEAN countries will continue to surge past Thailand.

I agree with your assessment, however I don't think I will live long enough to see any "real" leaders emerge.

Whilst I am used by now to the ridicule that some members of this forum constantly direct at Yingluck, some of which is deserved, some is simply because this is Thailand and that's how things happen in Thailand. What bothers me is what are the alternatives, Abhisit is a failure, Sondhi is a joke, you could even make a case for the return of Thaksin, he at least knew his head from his feet.

What you?! Making a case for Thaksin?! I'm shocked! Right out of left field that one.

Note my use of the word "even". Basically whilst I accept Yingluck's faults, I cannot see anyone better, in any party. Actually I am permanently puzzled as to how so many patently incompetent people can be so successfully corrupt.

Because the vast majority of Thais accept a certain amount of corruption in politics. Result of a growing new democracy that is unique to the Thai peoples. Thaskin is a great example of this. Whilst he line is pockets and that of his friends (that we see now) and withholding his Northeast rice scheme and loan policies he did some good as well. That is why things are as they are in Thai politics. Change is coming for these types of politicians. In any growing democracy the youth play a huge part in changing the policies of their country. Thailand needs it's youth to have a voice.

The point I was making was that in my society, to be successfully corrupt, you have to be quite clever to get away with it. The typical Thai politician is as thick as two short planks, so how do they manage to be successfully corrupt?

The point I was making was that in my society, to be successfully corrupt, you have to be quite clever to get away with it. The typical Thai politician is as thick as two short planks, so how do they manage to be successfully corrupt?

Because so many people accept it, and so many people are part of it.

The point I was making was that in my society, to be successfully corrupt, you have to be quite clever to get away with it. The typical Thai politician is as thick as two short planks, so how do they manage to be successfully corrupt?

Because relatively speaking, here, everyone is corrupt, to some degree or another, so who is going to stand in your way?

Here, greasing palms can make virtually any problem go away. I don't imagine the same is true in your society.

The point I was making was that in my society, to be successfully corrupt, you have to be quite clever to get away with it. The typical Thai politician is as thick as two short planks, so how do they manage to be successfully corrupt?

Because so many people accept it, and so many people are part of it.

Whilst this is true, I think it is also the case of the "one eyed in King in the land of the blind". Thai politicians get away with corruption because the electorate is even more stupid than them.

The point I was making was that in my society, to be successfully corrupt, you have to be quite clever to get away with it. The typical Thai politician is as thick as two short planks, so how do they manage to be successfully corrupt?

Because so many people accept it, and so many people are part of it.

Whilst this is true, I think it is also the case of the "one eyed in King in the land of the blind". Thai politicians get away with corruption because the electorate is even more stupid than them.

No, I don't think it has anything to do with stupidity. It has more to do with getting their cut.

The Thai culture has a lot about "if you're rich, you must be smart and must be respected". The poor people aren't stupid. They simply aren't in a position to stop rich people from being corrupt, and the only way for them to get ahead is to join in. The only time someone is turned in for being corrupt is when someone above them isn't getting their cut. The people below them can't do anything about it.

btw, the quote is "In the land of the blind, the one eyed man is the king".

I can't see too many people disagreeing with my view that the PM couldn't run a bath, let alone a country.

And even if she could, the cabinet lacks the organisational skills to let the water out even if they turned up at the bathroom when summoned. They're all far too busy running around contradicting each other and telling the world they've got the bigest willy.

I can't see too many people disagreeing with my view that the PM couldn't run a bath, let alone a country.

And even if she could, the cabinet lacks the organisational skills to let the water out even if they turned up at the bathroom when summoned. They're all far too busy running around contradicting each other and telling the world they've got the bigest willy.

So it would appear.

Edited February 4, 201214 yr by wxyz

Anyone caught red handed in my office reading "the manager" will no longer be "a manager" and gets fired.

Yay for Red Democracy!

.

Freedom of speech, freedom of thought, and the right to read as you see fit

is not allowed in the Tragic Kingdom.

Maybe that is what makes it such a tragedy?

Wouldn't that be 'Caught Yellow Handed'?

It's fine to needle Tragic, and, the point you (and he) make is the truth.

Inside a corporation, there is no democracy, nor freedom of speech. There is no right to privacy, and everything belongs to the corporation.

Inside a corporation, there is no relationship with democracy, red, yellow, or otherwise. Cross the boss... hit the road...

Edited February 4, 201214 yr by tlansford

It's fine to needle Tragic, and, the point you (and he) make is the truth.

Inside a corporation, there is no democracy, nor freedom of speech. There is no right to privacy, and everything belongs to the corporation.

Inside a corporation, there is no relationship with democracy, red, yellow, or otherwise. Cross the boss... hit the road...

Even within the workplace people have rights you know, but supposing they didn't and supposing tragickingdom really was the boss of some big corporation in Thailand, what sort of an ass would he be to start dictating to staff what paper they choose to read in their lunch break? A big one is the answer.

It's fine to needle Tragic, and, the point you (and he) make is the truth.

Inside a corporation, there is no democracy, nor freedom of speech. There is no right to privacy, and everything belongs to the corporation.

Inside a corporation, there is no relationship with democracy, red, yellow, or otherwise. Cross the boss... hit the road...

Even within the workplace people have rights you know, but supposing they didn't and supposing tragickingdom really was the boss of some big corporation in Thailand, what sort of an ass would he be to start dictating to staff what paper they choose to read in their lunch break? A big one is the answer.

Tragickingdom can speak for himself, but I read his comment to mean that reading the manager would be indicative of the employees intelligence & judgment, not that he would literally fire someone based on their choice of reading material. But maybe ...

I once worked for a private company of around 150 people. The co-owner brothers were extremely religious and this religious was a key part of the culture. Clearly, people who did not follow along or at least keep their mouth closed were shunned. You can be fired in a company for many reasons, regardless of the official reason given.

Yes, you do have rights as provided by the government, but again, a company is not a democracy, nor do you truly have a right to free speech. More than one person has been fired for speaking their mind at the wrong time.

Interesting that TAN publishes this laughably skewed trash from Manager, organ of Sondhi and the quasi fascist PAD.Perhaps they also publish articles from the Redshirt propaganda sheets - but I haven't seen them

Well TAN is from Sondhi. While they act pretty independent of course the lean to one side. If it is an opinion and marked as opinion it is OK. I would say PAD is very monarchist but not fascist, some leader come from the Socialist-Communist area. It is a "Thaksin get out"-movement with extreme left wing, middle and extreme right wing, but most of the people are just middle class average.

That is also the reason why they can't have a future as party.

The point I was making was that in my society, to be successfully corrupt, you have to be quite clever to get away with it. The typical Thai politician is as thick as two short planks, so how do they manage to be successfully corrupt?

Because so many people accept it, and so many people are part of it.

Yes, much like the war on drugs or the war on terrorism. The populace just wag their heads like good little sheeple and go back to what is important in their lives. Like feeding their families, putting a roof over their heads and trying to improve their lot in live. To most people, government is supposed to improve the quality of life and provide basic security for it's citizens, not instill fear and provide inept leadership, which seems to be the status quo and not the exception of late.