立法會補選引起連塲街頭罵戰, 有名咀激動不巳, 辱罵葉劉淑儀當年為官時捍衛廿三條; 有助選人員被推撞受傷, 据報警方實行三不管政策; 也有殖民地時代激進左派份子漠視會議常規, 立法會內人身攻擊陳方安生乃官生的; 地鉄TV廣播有記者報導被斬浴血; 還不斷播某人在台灣失踪,某人在英國失踪的事件. 究竟代表甚麼,發生了甚麼事？
官員變政客, 但政客"從今日開始"不為政府, 而為市民辦事, 這還可以嗎? 有文化的辯論是否比給人家扣帽子更好呢? 立法會沒有會議常規的嗎? 警方是否必要真正維持一下選舉秩序? 報章都彷似沒以前的勇往直前, 還有哪些報章有不拍馬屁,不自我監察的可讀性呢? 這一篇還算好看.
Amidst the recent election of legislator, there were series of verbal attacks at the candidates. Regina Yip was annoyed at being asked why she supported enactment of Article 23 when she worked as a government official years ago. Anson Chan was scolded by former extreme leftist to have represented the British government in colonial period. Despite the existence of sporadic violence and bullying in the election scene, the police was blamed not having performed their duty to stop the aggressors. The MTR has its TV broadcast about the bloodshed of a reporter; while it continually broadcasts news on disappearance of people in Taiwan and UK. What does it mean then?
Why do people keep chasing after the history of politician? Does it matter if politician works for the people but not the government starting from today? Could there be more civilized debate than personal attack? Aren't there any rules in Legislative Council? There was indeed an incident of breach of peace. Should the police stay idle from the disorder? Hardly can we find a newspaper now which does not keep close censorship but one here.