台灣須要英明領導者

[Eunice Lin (林)劉金蓮]

諸位賢達們﹐大家平安﹗

 

台灣須要英明領導者﹐請閱讀陳清池教授在Taipei Times發表的精闢政論文

http://www.taipeitimes.com/News/editorials/archives/2011/03/08/2003497638

 Taiwan can lead region by electing a woman  By Chen Ching-chih 陳清池

 

請大家「好康鬥相報」﹐將此論文廣傳給更多人閱讀。謝謝﹗

 

劉金蓮  敬上

[Luby Liao]

謝謝金蓮分享陳清池教授大作.  同時讀到曹長青批評蔡英文的文章:

蔡英文會輸給馬英九的三原因   ◎ 曹長青

......
第一個因素，是蔡英文的政治理念不清晰，對台灣是否要走一條成為正常國家的路，沒有任何明確的表述。理念不清晰堅定，就難以調動起台灣南部的綠營支持者的激情。沒有南部的火熱激情，就無法最大程度地贏得南部選票，來平衡和抵消台北中國城的國民黨選票，也就無法打敗馬英九。

第二個，蔡英文缺乏辯論能力。... 蔡英文跟馬英九曾有過電視辯論，是關於ECFA即艾克法問題，那場辯論，我在網上看了，平心而論，蔡英文完全是輸家。辯論後的第二天，台灣預測政局的「未來事件交易所」上的蔡英文作為總統候選人的股票價值，大跌了七美元。說明大家的看法是一樣的。

第三個，蔡英文的女性身份，在台灣這個深受日本和中國的大男人主義文化影響的社會，恐怕也很難當上總統。...蔡英文在選新北市時，得到的女性票，沒有對手朱立倫多。選前的民調，蔡英文拿到的女性票，比朱立倫竟然少十個百分點以上。只是從這一點來看，和馬英九對陣的時候，蔡英文搶女性的票，能否搶過馬英九，我可沒有信心。......

 

我建議大家把陳清池教授和曹長青的文章對照著讀.

Bill Huang 贊賞曹長青説:

曹先生講的第一個和第二個原因, 我完全同意; 有空我也想申論一下我的看法呢! 他講的第三個原因對我來說則是一個新的想法.

曹長青:

第二個，蔡英文缺乏辯論能力。... 蔡英文跟馬英九曾有過電視辯論，是關於ECFA即艾克法問題，那場辯論，我在網上看了，平心而論，蔡英文完全是輸家。辯論後的第二天，台灣預測政局的「未來事件交易所」上的蔡英文作為總統候選人的股票價值，大跌了七美元。說明大家的看法是一樣的。

我希望
曹長青解釋為什麽蔡英文完全是輸家,
Bill Huang解釋為什麽他完全同意.

我在TVBS替馬英九戴上皇冠宣布他是辯論的得勝者後寫了一首詩, 翻成中文如下:

TVBS替馬英九戴上皇冠, 宣布他是辯論的得勝者
因為他躲閃對手蔡英文所有問題
  及不節制地使用輕浮的髒話

全場躲閃, 而後被擊倒在地的拳手 今被封為拳王
水蛭於今在水中稱王
蟑螂, 老鼠和白蟻統治著大地
蝙蝠和禿鷹遮蔽了天空
台灣人則窒息在聯合中時TVBS的指鹿為馬

誰輸誰嬴的歷史記錄, 包括全程錄影及文字記載can be found here: Tsai set great example for all humans during her ECFA debate with Ma

曹長青:

第一個因素，是蔡英文的政治理念不清晰，對台灣是否要走一條成為正常國家的路，沒有任何明確的表述。

這跟他兩年前對蔡英文的評價一樣.  請看曹長青 2009-04-05 的大作: 蔡英文要把民進黨帶到哪裡？

曹長青:

自去年總統大選慘敗之後，綠營就一直處於群龍無首、士氣低落、軟弱無力的狀態。造成這種狀況的因素很多，但其中一個明顯原因，是現任黨主席蔡英文沒有領導能力。這雖然和蔡本人缺乏領袖魅力的個人氣質有關，但更由於她對民進黨的前途、綠營的方向不清楚。...

我同一天就寫了下面的批判.  希望曹長青和 Bill Huang 能夠賜教.  Cheers, Luby

曹長青: 蔡英文要把民進黨帶到哪裡？ A critique

曹長青's conclusion is serious:

綠營的五百萬基本盤，尤其民進黨的幾十萬黨員，難道就眼睜睜地看著這個局面，而不發出「改變」的呼聲嗎？

This calls for overthrowing 蔡英文. I will show that his arguments do not support the conclusion. I will comment in place.

蔡英文要把民進黨帶到哪裡？

自去年總統大選慘敗之後，綠營就一直處於群龍無首、士氣低落、軟弱無力的狀態。造成這種狀況的因素很多，但其中一個明顯原因，是現任黨主席蔡英文沒有領導能力。這雖然和蔡本人缺乏領袖魅力的個人氣質有關，但更由於她對民進黨的前途、綠營的方向不清楚。最近蔡英文發表在《中國時報》上的「以新本土觀捍衛台灣 」一文中的表現，則是雪上加霜，無法不令人對民進黨的前景更加擔憂。

首先，該文說「民進黨跟國民黨的區隔就在理想性」。如此不靠譜（離譜、不沾邊、極端外行）的話，出自民進黨主席，實令人震驚。首先，蔡主席居然不知道（或者故意迴避）民進黨和國民黨的根本區隔在國家認同上，這是不可原諒的。其次，哪個政黨沒有理想性？共產黨是人類有史以來最有「美好理想」的政黨，一個高舉共產主義天堂的偉大理想，把人們推進地獄的政黨。理想性是一個空洞到天邊的、毫無意義的詞。

KMT and CCP are evil. They have no ethics and ideals. They freely use double standards. I suppose it is difficult for 蔡英文 to bluntly say that KMT is evil. But it is correct to say that KMT has no ideals and DPP has ideals.

民進黨找不到方向了？

在台灣，國民黨的理想是中國，民進黨的理想是台灣，這難道還有爭議嗎？馬政府上台後，毫不掩飾地快速邁向「統一」大業的目標。反觀民進黨，不僅連「台灣中國，一邊一國」都不敢再提，現在連黨主席都不知道和對手黨的區別在哪裡了。這到底是說明國民黨的理想性遠超過民進黨，還是說明民進黨已經找不到方向了？

• Hopefully a DPP's ideal is not Taiwan, but a democratic Taiwan.
• Don't say 統一, say annexation.
• 國民黨 has NO 理想. Thus it is impossible for 國民黨的理想性遠超過民進黨.

其次，蔡英文反省民進黨的八年執政，認為主要錯誤是「我們用政治對抗的方式來凝聚支持的力量」。這恰恰與事實相反。在綠營首次執政後，不僅沒有跟國民黨政治對抗，反而對藍營做出太多的讓步和妥協，理念上讓步到「四不一沒有」，行政上妥協到國防、外交、司法等許多重要官位仍留給了國民黨人。更嚴重的是，陳水扁政府對國民黨的獨裁體制沒有進行理直氣壯、大刀闊斧的政治改革和民主轉型。沒有立法院多數固然艱難，但行政可發揮的餘地並沒有被充分利用。其結果不僅使千瘡百孔的舊體制繼續存活，陳總統本人也成為該體制的犧牲品。

之所以發生這種情形，其根本原因是在某些民進黨高層，對國民黨的本性認識不清：這個黨根本不是一個正常的民主政黨，而是一個曾長期獨裁統治、患有嚴重專制後遺症、時刻準備復辟，並要聯共制台，剝奪台灣人民選擇權的舊勢力。其次是陳水扁先生本人，曾對國民黨抱有太多幻想。正如達賴喇嘛對中共曾有過多善良的願望，其結果是，西藏遭到更殘酷的鎮壓，達賴喇嘛被更惡毒地痛斥和醜化；陳水扁則被他曾真誠地稱為「英九兄」和國民黨玩於股掌的「私刑」進行政治凌遲。

民進黨要「包容」統一嗎？

今天，在國民黨明火執仗地要國共合作，完成「高級外省人」統一大業、台灣處於風雨飄搖的危機之際，蔡英文似乎對國民黨的本質仍毫無觀點。

This is the same as saying 蔡英文 is an idiot.

這就是為什麼她在上述文章中提出一個更荒唐的概念：「民進黨最核心的本土價值，也必須重新詮釋」。詮釋成什麼呢？ 「詮釋為一個包容性的觀念」。包容什麼呢？「要統要獨，必須是我們自己的選擇。重點不在選什麼，重點在，選擇權是我們自己的。」

This is called self-determination. What is wrong with it?

在這段文字中，蔡英文的三點荒唐必須指出：其一，把包容作為一個政黨的核心價值，簡直是政壇奇觀。

Inclusiveness is good. That is how Obama, a black, can become US president. DPP will not exclude 曹長青 because of his birth place or his political belief.

在全世界誰能找到第二個政黨，把「包容」作為黨的理念和目標？尊重民主選舉結果，絕不等於包容政敵理念。正如美國共和黨接受民主選舉的歐巴瑪政府執政，但絕不接受民主黨的理念，更反對其滑向社會主義的大政府政策，明確地要和歐巴瑪政府對抗。

其二，台灣人民接受民選的馬英九政府執政，但對其邁向統一的政策不可接受、不可包容。因為今天的中國是獨裁中國，接受和中國統一，不是尊重民主價值，而是和獨裁統一，接受專制統治。如果民進黨連「統一」也可以包容、接受（蔡英文明說，要統要獨，重點不在選什麼），那民進黨和國民黨還有什麼本質區別？

• Stop saying 統一.
• 民進黨和國民黨還有什麼本質區別? KMT is evil. DPP is not evil. There is no moral KMT member, because there is no moral evil. But there are many ethical DPP members. KMT denies Taiwanese self-determination; DPP pursuits it for Taiwanese.

其三，在中國人自己都沒有選擇權的情況下，今天「統」過去，明天選擇權就不在你手中了！

今天的台灣和西方正常民主國家的選擇是有根本性不同的。它不是正常民主體制下的左和右的選擇，而是民主和獨裁的選擇，是走向文明和墮落到野蠻的選擇！

綠營需要「改變」的呼聲

該文另一個既本末倒置、更與事實不符的觀點是：「選票來自政黨的包容性」。這等於說，選票來自降低自己的理念、來自寬容並接受對方的理念；也就是說，蔡英文不是為實現理念而爭選票，卻是為贏選票而彈性操作理念。且不說這是錯誤的，在操作上也是行不通的：民進黨中那些妥協理念、熱中走中間路線的，統統都在選舉中慘敗。例子數不勝數，從段宜康選立委，到羅文嘉選台北縣長，到謝長廷選總統。蔡英文還需要民進黨再輸多少次才汲取教訓？

在台灣局勢如此嚴重的情況下，綠營的一號領導人居然沒有最基本的政治常識。自蔡英文上台之後，民進黨簡直沒有理念可循了。綠營的五百萬基本盤，尤其民進黨的幾十萬黨員，難道就眼睜睜地看著這個局面，而不發出「改變」的呼聲嗎？

What is most crucial is for people to wise up and vote and support Taiwan. No Taiwanese should ever vote KMT which has enslaved Taiwanese for the past 60 years. People not casting votes are indirectly supporting KMT.

=====

2011/3/8 Eunice Lin (林)劉金蓮

--
請隨時 造訪我們的網站 http://groups.google.com/group/i_love_taiwan
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/i_love_taiwan
 
若要退訂此論壇，請送電子郵件給 i_love_taiwa...@googlegroups.com 標題及本文空白就可.
To unsubscribe from this group, please send email to i_love_taiwa...@googlegroups.com
You can leave Subject and Body blank.

[Peter Chow]

Luby :

The three points that Cao attacked Ing-Wen Tsai were groundless. I suggested that you send your E-mail to the Taiwanus.net because that website posted several critiques on it. The E-mail address is : Taiw...@hotmail.com.

I would like to add the following ;

1. On Taiwan sovereignty, Tsai skillfully defended it well in her capacities. Do you recall when Abain accepted the New York Times interview in 2000, Abian seemed to lead to accept "92 共識 "( on top of the 4 No's. one not) ?? 誰出來開記者會否認紐約時報的報導, 她當4年陸委會主委, 在主權上有任何讓步嗎?

2. Tsai refused to debate with Eric Chu because she was leading in the polls at that time. No need to debate with a apparent loser. Tsai lost the New Taipei city not because of her refusal to debate.

3. Tsai acted as a college professor with abundant infromation when she debated with Ma on ECFA . Ma took the populist approach to avoid her challenge- ostrich.

Of course, Tsai would need ajust her poise in the future debates-more colloquial, less acdaemic.

Peter Chow
Dept. of Economics
The City College - CUNY
Convent Ave. & 138th St.
New York, NY 10031
Tel: (212)650-8268, 650-6206
Fax: (212)650-8287, 650-6341

--- On Tue, 3/8/11, Luby Liao <luby...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Taiwan.Don't say 統一,

> say
> annexation.
> 國民黨
> has NO 理想. Thus it is impossible for
> 國民黨的理想性遠超過民進黨.
> 其次，蔡英文反省民進黨的八年執政，認為主要錯誤是「我們用政治對抗的方式來凝聚支持的力量」。這恰恰與事實相反。在綠營首次執政後，不僅沒有跟國民黨政治對抗，反而對藍營做出太多的讓步和妥協，理念上讓步到「四不一沒有」，行政上妥協到國防、外交、司法等許多重要官位仍留給了國民黨人。更嚴重的是，陳水扁政府對國民黨的獨裁體制沒有進行理直氣壯、大刀闊斧的政治改革和民主轉型。沒有立法院多數固然艱難，但行政可發揮的餘地並沒有被充分利用。其結果不僅使千瘡百孔的舊體制繼續存活，陳總統本人也成為該體制的犧牲品。
>
> 之所以發生這種情形，其根本原因是在某些民進黨高層，對國民黨的本性認識不清：這個黨根本不是一個正常的民主政黨，而是一個曾長期獨裁統治、患有嚴重專制後遺症、時刻準備復辟，並要聯共制台，剝奪台灣人民選擇權的舊勢力。其次是陳水扁先生本人，曾對國民黨抱有太多幻想。正如達賴喇嘛對中共曾有過多善良的願望，其結果是，西藏遭到更殘酷的鎮壓，達賴喇嘛被更惡毒地痛斥和醜化；陳水扁則被他曾真誠地稱為「英九兄」和國民黨玩於股掌的「私刑」進行政治凌遲。
>
> 民進黨要「包容」統一嗎？
>
> 今天，在國民黨明火執仗地要國共合作，完成「高級外省人」統一大業、台灣處於風雨飄搖的危機之際，蔡英文似乎對國民黨的本質仍毫無觀點。
>
> This is the same as saying 蔡英文
> is an idiot.
> 這就是為什麼她在上述文章中提出一個更荒唐的概念：「民進黨最核心的本土價值，也必須重新詮釋」。詮釋成什麼呢？
> 「詮釋為一個包容性的觀念」。包容什麼呢？「要統要獨，必須是我們自己的選擇。重點不在選什麼，重點在，選擇權是我們自己的。」
>
> This is called self-determination.
> What is wrong with it?
> 在這段文字中，蔡英文的三點荒唐必須指出：其一，把包容作為一個政黨的核心價值，簡直是政壇奇觀。
>
> Inclusiveness
> is good. That is how Obama, a black, can become US
> president. DPP
> will not exclude 曹長青 because of his birth place or
> his political

> belief.在全世界誰能找到第二個政黨，把「包容」作為黨的理念和目標？尊重民主選舉結果，絕不等於包容政敵理念。正如美國共和黨接受民主選舉的歐巴瑪政府執政，但絕不接受民主黨的理念，更反對其滑向社會主義的大政府政策，明確地要和歐巴瑪政府對抗。

[Luby Liao]

謝謝周教授的支持.  I copy this to Taiw...@hotmail.com as you advised.  Cheers,  Luby

2011/3/8 Peter Chow

Luby :


The three points that Cao attacked Ing-Wen Tsai were groundless. I suggested that you send your E-mail to the Taiwanus.net because that website posted several critiques on it. The E-mail address is : Taiw...@hotmail.com.


I would like to add the following ;

1. On Taiwan sovereignty, Tsai skillfully defended it well in her capacities. Do you recall when Abain accepted the New York Times interview in 2000, Abian seemed to lead to accept "92 共識 "( on top of the 4  No's. one not) ?? 誰出來開記者會否認紐約時報的報導, 她當4年陸委會主委, 在主權上有任何讓步嗎?

2. Tsai refused to debate with Eric Chu because she was leading in the polls at that time. No need to debate with a apparent loser. Tsai lost the New Taipei city not because of her refusal to debate.

3. Tsai acted as a college professor with abundant infromation when she debated with Ma on ECFA . Ma took the populist approach to avoid her challenge- ostrich.

Of course, Tsai would need ajust her poise in the future debates-more colloquial, less acdaemic.






Peter Chow
Dept. of Economics
The City College - CUNY
Convent Ave. & 138th St.
New York, NY 10031
Tel: (212)650-8268, 650-6206
Fax: (212)650-8287, 650-6341

• Stop saying 統一.
• 民進黨和國民黨還有什麼本質區別? KMT is evil. DPP is not evil. There is no moral KMT member, because there is no moral evil. But there are many ethical DPP members. KMT denies Taiwanese self-determination; DPP pursuits it for Taiwanese.

其三，在中國人自己都沒有選擇權的情況下，今天「統」過去，明天選擇權就不在你手中了！

今天的台灣和西方正常民主國家的選擇是有根本性不同的。它不是正常民主體制下的左和右的選擇，而是民主和獨裁的選擇，是走向文明和墮落到野蠻的選擇！

綠營需要「改變」的呼聲

該文另一個既本末倒置、更與事實不符的觀點是：「選票來自政黨的包容性」。這等於說，選票來自降低自己的理念、來自寬容並接受對方的理念；也就是說，蔡英文不是為實現理念而爭選票，卻是為贏選票而彈性操作理念。且不說這是錯誤的，在操作上也是行不通的：民進黨中那些妥協理念、熱中走中間路線的，統統都在選舉中慘敗。例子數不勝數，從段宜康選立委，到羅文嘉選台北縣長，到謝長廷選總統。蔡英文還需要民進黨再輸多少次才汲取教訓？

在台灣局勢如此嚴重的情況下，綠營的一號領導人居然沒有最基本的政治常識。自蔡英文上台之後，民進黨簡直沒有理念可循了。綠營的五百萬基本盤，尤其民進黨的幾十萬黨員，難道就眼睜睜地看著這個局面，而不發出「改變」的呼聲嗎？

What is most crucial is for people to wise up and vote and support Taiwan. No Taiwanese should ever vote KMT which has enslaved Taiwanese for the past 60 years. People not casting votes are indirectly supporting KMT.

=====
2011/3/8 Eunice Lin (林)劉金蓮

諸位賢達們﹐大家平安﹗

 

台灣須要英明領導者﹐請閱讀陳清池教授在Taipei Times發表的精闢政論文

http://www.taipeitimes.com/News/editorials/archives/2011/03/08/2003497638

 Taiwan can lead region by electing a woman  By Chen Ching-chih 陳清池

 

請大家「好康鬥相報」﹐將此論文廣傳給更多人閱讀。謝謝﹗

 

劉金蓮  敬上

 

> 若要退訂此論壇，請送電子郵件給

[Peter Chow]

Luby :   Thanks. Pleasse call me Peter from now on.

Peter Chow Dept. of Economics The City College - CUNY Convent Ave. & 138th St. New York, NY 10031 Tel: (212)650-8268, 650-6206 Fax: (212)650-8287, 650-6341

--- On Tue, 3/8/11, Luby Liao <luby...@gmail.com> wrote:

From: Luby Liao <luby...@gmail.com> Subject: Re: [I Love Taiwan] 台灣須要英明領導者

[chingchih chen]

Peter,

Thanks for the excellent points. 

Let me add:  It is crystal clear to all, except the dwindling followers of Cao
Changqing, that Tsai truly cares about Taiwan and its people, particularly the
disadvantaged ones.   Taiwan's sovereity is very important, but so are the
welfare of the people.  Taiwan's future is to be determined by the people not by
a few famous pens and mouths.

And, maybe it's time that we help to promote Tsai's views and ideas. 

CCC

[Peter Chow]

Ching Chi:   I would like to echo with you on your advocate to explose Ing-Wen Tsai's views to the general public. Tsai does have her own newspaper, and even Formosan TV and the Liberty Times are not so friendly to her either.     You probably have read my long time good froend Dr. Joesph Kuo's article at the Taiwanus.net alreay.  Kuo's points well express her vision of Taiwan.   Here is a reply from my query to a prominent correspondent on his perceptions about Ing-wen Tsai. He used to work for the Far Eastern Economic Review and is very knowledge TAiwan. Let's see how foreigners' views on Tsai Ing-wen . Please also note what he meant by this side of the Pacific ;   "Hi Peter, In re-reading Dr. Tsai's speech, I confess to being a little puzzled by this expression, too. Perhaps it works better in Chinese than in English.....和而不同、和而求同. Either way, it''s one of those linguistic attempts to describe a relationship that is both distinct in its two sides but contradictory in definitions, comfortably familiar but at the same time unsettling. But I wouldn't put too much emphasis on this. In the main, the outline of Dr. Tsai's plans for a policy research arm for the party were admirably laid out. And most especially her placing cross-strait relations in an international framework with broad strategic considerations -- and not in a bi-lateral straightjacket designed by the KMT's comrades in the CCP, as Ma & Co. have done. This is the only way forward and it's visionary, if indeed it can be kept in mind in the months and years ahead. Of course, the media and the KMT will resist it all the way. DPP officials and supporters will need to affirm and reaffirm this as they dig their way out of the corner that Ma has put Taiwan in. And more work will be needed on this side of the Pacific as well, since there are so many China hands who endorse, implicitly or otherwise, Beijing's terms of reference on Taiwan. Indeed, they have become Washington's terms of referrence, too (at least much of the time). So overall, I'm greatly encouraged by her remarks, despite the mysteries of the phrase you asked about! *******

Peter Chow Dept. of Economics The City College - CUNY Convent Ave. & 138th St. New York, NY 10031 Tel: (212)650-8268, 650-6206 Fax: (212)650-8287, 650-6341

--- On Tue, 3/8/11, chingchih chen <ching...@yahoo.com> wrote:

> 若要退訂此論壇，請送電子郵件給 i_love_taiwan+unsub...@googlegroups.com

>    標題及本文空白就可. > > To unsubscribe from this group, please send email to

>i_love_taiwan+unsub...@googlegroups.com

> > You can leave Subject and Body blank. > > > > > > > -- > > 請隨時 造訪我們的網站 http://groups.google.com/group/i_love_taiwan > > For more options, visit this group at >http://groups.google.com/group/i_love_taiwan > >   > > 若要退訂此論壇，請送電子郵件給

> i_love_taiwan+unsub...@googlegroups.com

> 標題及本文空白就可. > > To unsubscribe from this group, please send email to

> i_love_taiwan+unsub...@googlegroups.com

> > You can leave Subject and Body blank. > >       -- 請隨時 造訪我們的網站 http://groups.google.com/group/i_love_taiwan For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/i_love_taiwan

若要退訂此論壇，請送電子郵件給 i_love_taiwan+unsub...@googlegroups.com    標題及本文空白就可.

To unsubscribe from this group, please send email to

i_love_taiwan+unsub...@googlegroups.com

[chingchih chen]

Peter,

 

Yes, I did read 建立台灣主體的國家認同
從兩個文件看蔡英文的格局與高度
郭正昭  2/24/2011.

 

and subsequently (yesterday) forwarded it to both ILT and NATPA Forum.  It's very good.  All, particularly Cao Changqing and his followers, should read. 

 

My reading of Tsai's "和而不同、和而求同"

is "和而不合 (併)".

 

CCC

 

 

---

From: Peter Chow <chow...@yahoo.com>
To: i_love_taiwan <i_love...@googlegroups.com>; po...@posterous.com; bu...@gmail.com; luby...@gmail.com; chingchih chen <ching...@yahoo.com>
Sent: Tue, March 8, 2011 11:04:53 AM

若要退訂此論壇，請送電子郵件給 i_love_taiwa...@googlegroups.com 標題及本文空白就可.
To unsubscribe from this group, please send email to i_love_taiwa...@googlegroups.com

[Taiwan_Echo]

"And most especially her placing cross-strait relations in an international framework with broad strategic considerations"

The above description is about a strength about Tsai which seems not to be recognized fully until recently. But if we trace back Tsai's numerous statements, articles, speeches, etc in the past, even in the debate with Mr. Ma, we would find that it's something she has been trying to emphasize all along.

I always think that Tsai's approach to Taiwan politics is in a direction of "macro --> micro", that is, she thinks Taiwan starting from a macro (global) view (starting from her involvement of “special state-to-state dictum” which deals with Taiwan's international position), then gradually, with her increased involvement in local politics, she got closer to local details. That's the main reason that she could always put Taiwan in an international framework.

This is in exact opposite to almost all politicians in Taiwan, who can only follow a "micro --> macro" approach, an approach that has its limit when trying to expand. The resulted thinking pattern is often fragmented and/or short-sighted.

This is one of her many strengths that is so valuable. I'm particularly grateful to see the statements from 黃昭堂 and 許世楷, which obviously show their recognition of her macro view -- or at least, the importance of a macro view. After seeing so many attacks from the pro-TI camp - some very malicious - against her, WUFI's recognition of her strength is a huge huge break-through.

In my opinion, the injection of her global/macro view on Taiwan -- followed by a broader recognition of it -- could bring a tremendous impact - an impact that could raise the perception of all Taiwanese to a new level in the near future.


Echo

2011/3/8 chingchih chen <ching...@yahoo.com>

--
==================================================  
  .-.  http://echotaiwan.blogspot.com
 / ^|  http://michaelturton.blogspot.com
| ^ |  http://taiwanmatters.blogspot.com
 \ ^/  http://www.taiwanus.net/
  \|   http://www.taipeitimes.com
http://groups.google.com/group/i_love_taiwan?hl=en     
==================================================