The title of a Yahoo! article released on March 25, 2012 is “Ex-PROPERTY CONSULTANT wins Hong Kong election” (Web-site/URL: http://news.yahoo.com/hong-kong-election-under-way-amid-protests-031001914.html).
“Self-made MILLIONAIRE property consultant Leung Chun-ying won Hong Kong’s leadership election on Sunday (March 25, 2012) after the most divisive vote since the city reverted to Chinese rule in 1997″. “millionaire” is the latest word implying/suggesting that Leung is the latest POLITICIAN who is likely to be OUT OF TOUCH with the rest of society.
“He promised to “REUNITE” Hong Kong and protect its “rights and freedoms” following an election which split the city’s establishment camp and forced Beijing to HEED POPULAR OPINION AS NEVER BEFORE“. There are two things to note here. First, all POLITICIANS “promise to reunite” and UNITE. This sounds really good in theory, but in PRACTICE/REALITY, it’s often a COMPLETELY different story. Hey, let’s look at it this way. BARACK OBAMA promised to “unite” all Americans and the results have been MIXED at best. DONALD TSANG promised to do it and he ended up SUCKING UP to China on an unprecedented scale with his “Resolute pragmatic action” circus (Web-site/URL: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Donald_Tsang). Tsang put forward a proposal (“blueprint”) and when that was voted down, Tsang basically WENT CRAZY. This guy went on more “duty visits” than what was reasonable. As far as “heed popular opinion as never before”, this is definitely a step FORWARD, however small. People need to be responsible and ACCOUNTABLE for their actions. “Now that the contest is over, it is time to REUNITE“. IS THIS POSSIBLE? “With ONE heart and ONE vision, we can turn Hong Kong into a more PROSPEROUS, more RIGHTEOUS and more PROGRESSIVE (?) society“, acknowledging “DEEP-ROOTED PROBLEMS” such as HIGH PROPERTY PRICES and A YAWNING WEALTH GAP“ obviously. “one heart and one dream?” WE’RE MORE DIVIDED THAN EVER BEFORE now. “progressive?” This term is usually associated with people like OBAMA, RUSS FEINGOLD and DENNIS KUCINICH. Can we say this about a CHINA LOYALIST? “He also pledged to “pave the way for ENHANCED democracy with an OPEN and FAIR (?) election system in 2017, when BEIJING has promised ALL citizens will be entitled to vote for a chief executive from a vetted group of candidates”. CAN WE TRUST Beijing, given the fact that they basically OVERLOADED the election with TWO pro-China candidates, with the third candidate (ALBERT HO) basically having no shot. THIS IS NO DIFFERENT FROM A RIGGED ELECTION. Rigged elections, of course, ARE NOT “open and fair” . The outcome has been PRE-SET/PRE-DETERMINED. In this case, CHINA wanted LEUNG.
“China congratulated Leung and said the election respected Hong Kong’s constitution UNDER MAINLAND RULE, Xinhua news agency quoted a Chinese official in Hong Kong as saying”. Key Phrase: “under mainland rule”. Again, mainland China is making this ALL ABOUT THEM.
“In office, Leung “WILL DEFINITELY (?) lead the government of the Special Administrative Region to unite ALL circles of society“, the unidentified official said”. “will definitely?” How does this “official” know this? This is the latest example of Chinese government PROPAGANDA.
“Pro-democracy candidate Albert Ho trailed with 76 votes and he condemned the result as a “DISGUSTING” display of “BLATANT INTERFERENCE” from China”. Again, we SHOULDN’T be surprised. This is relatively mild if we think about what “Long Hair” LEUNG KWOK-HUNG might say/have said.
“Radical lawmaker Leung Kwok-hung arrived in a yellow emperor suit, a pig-wolf mask and holding a papier-mache Chinese tank, shouting “I AM THE KING AND KINGMAKER“, in a theatrical parody of the election process”. Well, “Long Hair” Leung is a freak as well and we know that HE MEANT to mock this election.
“Hundreds more marched on mainland China’s Hong Kong liaison office, where they passed out “HELL MONEY” for the dead, symbolising the death of local democracy in the city of seven million people”. So IT’S NOT ONLY “Long Hair” who is angry about the third “small circle” election in Hong Kong’s history. The first, of course, was in 1997, when TUNG CHEE-HWA was APPOINTED (not elected) and we can say the same thing about DONALD TSANG in 2005 (as “ACTING Chief Executive”) and 2007 (when Tsang was elected to a full term). TUNG basically did nothing for 8 years, presenting himself as FEEBLE and INEPT, while TSANG presented himself as an ULTRA-Chinese loyalist.
According to 37-year-old social worker Tiny Wong, “NOBODY is representing THE GRASSROOTS, which is the majority of Hong Kong society”. This is yet another expression of DISSATISFACTION/ANGER/DISGUST.
“Leung’s HUMBLE ORIGINS as a policeman’s son stand in stark contrast to (former Financial & Chief Secretary Henry) Tang’s background as HEIR TO A TEXTILE FORTUNE, but both men are considered PRO-BEIJING, ESTABLISHMENT figures” obviously. There is also quite a contrast between “humble origins” and “heir to a…FORTUNE“.
“Leung was considered AN OUTSIDER at the start of the race in contrast to the WELL-CONNECTED Tang”. Leung was EXCO CONVENOR. THAT’S ALSO a “well-connected” post.
“But Tang’s campaign faltered with the discovery of a huge illegal entertainment suite in his home and an admission of MARITAL INFEDILITY“. Tang’s “infidelity” should be the latest chapter in BARBARA WALTERS documentary “Sex and the Political Wife” (Web-site/URL: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rTmbgMkYUWE).
“Tang’s WEALTHY backers were forced to reconsider their positions, leading to an unprecedented split in the establishment camp”. Well, LEUNG has “wealthy backers” too.
Finally, “Outgoing leader Tsang and his predecessor, Tung Chee-hwa, the city’s first post-handover leader, were by contrast elected virtually unopposed after receiving THE CLEAR BACKING of Beijing”. Tung was elected with 82.47% support in 1996 and UNOPPOSED in 2002 (Web-site/URL: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tung_Chee_Hwa), but resigned under SUSPICIOUS CIRCUMSTANCES – did he TRULY have “health problems?” while TSANG was UNOPPOSED in 2005 and was re-elected with 84.07% support in 2007 (Web-site/URL: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Donald_Tsang). The concern now is: “in 2017, BEIJING has promised ALL citizens will be entitled to vote for a chief executive from a vetted group of candidates“. We have to doubt TWO things. First, will Beijing keep its promise? This is VERY MUCH in doubt. Secondly, EVEN IF there is universal suffrage in Hong Kong in 2017, this “group of candidates” will still be “vetted” by BEIJING. So CHINA is still running this freak show, implying that unfortunately, HONG KONG’S POLITICAL SITUATION WILL BE CHAOTIC FOR A LONG TIME TO COME.