民進黨被蔡英文偷走了嗎？

自由廣場》（金恆煒專欄）民進黨被蔡英文偷走了嗎？ 2022/01/27 05:30 民進黨主席、總統蔡英文參加「經國七海文化園區」開幕，大肆讚揚蔣經國，引發了綠營強烈抨擊。凍未條的「知情者」對外透露，府內親近幕僚強力反對蔡英文出席，蔡堅持要去；當日講稿總共改了十多次，在幕僚強硬主張下雖勉強塞入「抗中保台」的概念，但林宅血案、陳文成命案等轉型正義個案及對馬英九喊話等內容，即使力爭，蔡英文仍嚴拒。 蔡英文悍然出席，是蔣經國基金會董事長錢復透過總統府秘書長李大維操作，據報導：「所有的前置作業都是李大維負責」。原來李大維才是蔡英文’private kitchen’的主廚，幕僚群不過是府內跑堂而已。蔡英文如此重用李大維，揭露的謎底之一是，過去幕僚擬好的建議講稿，蔡英文常推翻拿出另個版本。原來是有故事的。揭露謎底之二，無論黨內對李大維多麼不信任，綠營對李大維多麼攻訐，李大維老神在在。原來是有內幕的。 李大維與國民黨有血脈相連關係，當年外交部長錢復是李大維的直屬長官，馬英九又重用李大維出任駐美副大使，那麼蔡英文為什麼非李大維不可就有玄機了，原來可做裡通國民黨之用；適才適性，剛好。開幕當天蔡英文與前總統馬英九、前副總統連戰、前台北市長郝龍斌、國民黨主席朱立倫、親民黨主席宋楚瑜、蔣經國嫡長孫蔣友松、國民黨立委蔣萬安等人都一起現身會場，「朝野罕見同框」。值得觀察的是，除台北市長柯文哲外，清一色是國民黨權貴，民進黨沒有一人參加。你說奇怪不奇怪？ 蔡英文稱揚蔣經國，簡單表白四個字：「反共保台」。行政院長蘇貞昌被問到怎麼看蔡英文總統出席七海文化園區和蔣經國的歷史定位，蘇貞昌回答：不會忘記獨裁者過往的滿手血腥云云。這是閣揆的反應，或代表民進黨的意見，可能也代表許多綠色選民心聲。蔡英文想用一人權力妄圖替蔣經國塗脂抹粉，註定失敗。別的不說，前心腹文膽姚人多表示：「總統，你錯了！」並強力批判「轉型正義的總統，最後變成獨裁者的傳人。」蔣王朝的問題是獨裁，兩蔣到死都沒有放鬆一絲權力，史蹟班班可考；「反共保台」又怎樣？何況所謂「反」、「保」都是為自己的政權，兩蔣的「反共」在「殺朱拔毛」、「保台」是把台灣當成反攻大陸的「跳板」。其徒子徒孫現在同樣是為政權，民主、選票下失去政權，不惜投靠「共匪」。 台灣人／民進黨人追求的是民主、自由、人權、法治；「反共」是為普世價值，「保台」則是天職，不必喊什麼口號。蔣經國的「反共保台」與我們哪有「共識」?! 蔡英文出身黨國，與李登輝有兩代交情，如果沒有陳水扁總統的拉拔，不可能進入綠營。問題出在她從沒有為綠色價值打拼過一天，「威權時期不是大家都選擇服從嗎」正如實反映了蔡英文此人。「轉型正義」也好、「司法改革」也好、「特赦陳水扁」也好，是蔡英文取得權力的門票，形同攻陷特洛伊的木馬 ，難怪大位到手，全棄之如敝屣。 當蔡英文高舉蔣經國「神主牌」那一刻，圖窮匕見，民進黨的黨魂被掏空，民進黨被蔡英文偷走了。倒要看看民進黨人如何反應？究竟他們屬哪根蔥、哪根蒜！ （作者金恒煒為政治評論者；http://wenichin.blogspot.tw/）

揭鎮瀾宮組織章程 林楚茵︰顏清標非法擔任董事長

揭鎮瀾宮組織章程 林楚茵︰顏清標非法擔任董事長

顏清標非法出任鎮瀾宮董事長

自由廣場》（金恆煒專欄）顏清標非法出任鎮瀾宮董事長 2022/01/20 05:30 據傳「財團法人大甲鎮瀾宮」要改選董事了，到底是四月還是五月？哪一天？矇差差。一個財團法人的董事改選都罩在迷霧中，最基本的組織章程祕而不宣，疑竇重重，沒有不法及黑幕才怪。黑道出身的老大顏清標出任董事長垂廿三年之久，黑道與慈悲結合在ㄧ起，好奇怪喔。顏清標還會不會繼續佔下去？憑什麼能夠當萬年董事長？難道藉助他指定的「萬年董事」們？ 顏清標與鎮瀾宮的勾勾纏是一直傳說的老故事，誰都對他沒辦法。幸虧台中二選區的立委罷免及改選，逼迫大家非正視不可。顏清標如何成為鎮瀾宮董事長？又如何能夠霸佔宮廟如私囊？這些種種都需要公權力介入調查才能大白於天下。改選期間，信徒代表易錦隆做了多項指控：一是依鎮瀾宮組織章程規定，董監事成員必須設籍大甲、大安、外埔、后里，但顏自一九九九年擔任董事長後，戶籍長年在沙鹿，去年才遷到大甲，明顯違反規定；一個是顏修改組織章程，增加四十位董事，都是指派的。因此向台中市政府民政局遞狀檢舉顏清標的鎮瀾宮董事長當選無效。內政部次長陳宗彥接受記者訪問說，顏清標是否違法要看鎮瀾宮組織章程規定，又表示台中市議會曾向台中市政府調取大甲鎮瀾宮的組織章程，但市府未提供云云。 易錦隆的抨擊，台中市府民政局全不回應，中央出手後，局長吳世瑋才召開記者會，表示組織章程並未明定董監事一定要設籍在何處。問題來了。那麼組織章程究竟如何規定呢？吳世瑋引了〈「政府資訊公開法〉十八條說，章程有涉及宮廟隱私、工商秘密，原則上可拒絕提供。胡說。十八條固有「政府資訊公開之限制」，不過重點在第三項：「但對公益有必要者，得公開或提供之。」第九項一字不易再強調一次 ；完全相同的兩條「但書 」重複出現，顯示：重要、重要、重要。鎮瀾宮章程當然屬「對公益有必要者」，自不在「限制」之內。 再依媒體報導：「一月九日中二選區立委補選投票日，顏清標未出面投票，外界本來以為他是因為住院不便去投票，後來才得知因大甲鎮瀾宮今年五月將改選董監事，顏清標去年將戶籍遷至大甲區。」如果吳世瑋所說「章程未規定董監事一定要設籍在何處 」屬實，顏清標為何要脫褲子放屁搬到大甲去？更何況搬了戶籍，形同放棄「本地」地盤，也無法投票給兒子顏寬恆！顏清標會那麼笨？吳世瑋亂掰法條，第一個罪，顏清標用遷籍行動拆穿謊言，第二個罪。證實市府一路包庇顏家。 歸根究柢，其實顏清標根本沒有資格出任財團法人大甲鎮瀾宮的董、監事，遑論董事長！〈財團法人法 〉第四十二條明文規定：「曾犯組織犯罪防制條例規定之罪，經有罪判決確定」的 ，「不得充任民間捐助之財團法人董事長、代理董事長及監察人，其已充任者，當然解任……。」顏清標一九八七年因組織犯罪被管訓三年，即使接受媒體訪問顏清標也承認自己出身黑道。「章程」有無規範及如何規範？都不重要，反正市府再也包庇不了。顏清標只剩「當然解任」 一途，沒有二話。（作者金恒煒為政治評論者；http://wenichin.blogspot.tw/）

國民黨走得出殘山剩水嗎？

自由廣場》（金恒煒專欄）國民黨走得出殘山剩水嗎？ 2022/01/13 05:30 國民黨強推四大公投案，自吞惡果，飲恨收場。罷免基進黨立委陳柏惟固然得逞，補選結果反讓民進黨林靜儀上壘。民進黨終於吃下過去可望不可及的台中二選區，意義上與守住萬華的林昶佐迥異，涉及的不是一席、兩席，而是民進黨的權力版圖在中台灣拓展；終結的不只是國民黨的腹心而是盤據山頭的顏家黑勢力。 顏清標是國民黨「恩庇侍從」政策下的產物，不僅「嶸螈選區」令人觸目，黨國製造的「紅黑」派系共治台中，使得黑派顏家縱橫海線達三十年之久！顏清標的黑道背景，連當時的黨主席李登輝也不諱言。顏清標挾黑道暴力、政治力、綁架鎮瀾宮鯨吞蠶食台中，地皮受害最大；難怪有人稱他們是土豪劣紳。這樣的腫瘤不割，台灣民主難望深化。 天可憐見，基進黨的陳柏惟悍不畏死敢於挑戰顏寬恒，僥倖勝出。要不是顏家那麼迫不及待的要收復「在地」地盤，無視合理與否、不顧吃相難看，進行「罷免 - 補選」工程而敗北，不然，二○二四年，顏家再戰陳柏惟，「海線子弟八萬票，捲土重來未可知。」現在好啦，黑派被殲滅，連紅派的霧峰區也失守，市長盧秀燕紅黑護法斷一臂，紅派立委江啟臣陷入腹背受敵的險境。民進黨陸空並進，發動所謂的「國家機器」，贏的豈只區區一席？林靜儀日後深耕「在地」，繼續追打顏家不法，讓鎮瀾宮回歸正道；黑天變綠地，台中「轉型正義」可期。 兩波選戰攻防，受傷最重而仆街的是國民黨主席朱立倫，他不智的把穩固黨主席寶座押在公投的伎倆上，罷免、補選順序而出，朱大主席的機關算盡，四個字「過猶不及」最能形容：說「過」，指他見獵心喜，一股腦兒將四大公投招攬在一身，結果全槓龜；「不及」則是罷免、重選輸到脫褲，朱大主席「三十六計，走為上策」，連記者會都不出現面對。試想，公投案一馬當先，身先士卒，一敗塗地的吃到苦頭後，對罷免、補選斂手縮腳，六連敗下，忙把責任丟給江啟臣，歸咎是前主席的「政治框架與任務」，喪失黨主席作為。前倨後畏，活脫脫孬種。想當初接主席時，立馬城下，挑出戰旗，上寫兩個大字：「倒閣」，彼時氣吞萬里如虎，如今呢？「倒閣」不成反陷入自家「倒台」的難堪。報應來得這麽快，也屬僅見。 朱立倫使出「躲」字訣，雖弱智但還算「知恥近乎勇」。打出「戰鬥藍」的趙少康反令人忍俊不禁。趙少康否認「秦兵敗了」，他說：罷昶案，國民黨算是小贏，顏寬恒則是小輸。趙名嘴的黑白說固然荒唐，卻贏得中國的掌聲，《環球時報》立刻唱和，宣稱民進黨是「慘勝」。中國自古以來沒有實行過民主一天，懂什麼選舉？選戰可不是「槍桿子出政權」那套；選贏就是贏，「慘勝」、「險敗」毫無實質意義。老共被老趙唬弄了，好笑。 「殘山夢最真」，國民黨中常委號召要開「黨是會議」；煞有介事，聽聽就好。李登輝被國民黨開除後，黨國形同開除自己的台籍，如此而已。解決國民黨的「黨是」很簡單，問題在能不能、敢不敢，也是如此而已。 （作者金恒煒為政治評論者；http://wenichin.blogspot.tw/）

DPP, KMT playing cat and mouse

Home Editorials Sat, Jan 08, 2022 page8 DPP, KMT playing cat and mouse By Chin Heng-wei 金恒煒 Recent events suggest that the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) is getting better at playing the political game of cat and mouse at the Legislative Yuan, as it makes calculated moves and watches the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) play into its game. Following the results of the four referendums last month, which all went its way, the DPP has wasted no time, bypassing a series of committee reviews and forwarding the government’s budget for fiscal 2022 to a second reading at the legislature. The move was met with outrage from the KMT, which had been holding up the review process. Caught off guard, it called the move a “degeneration of the legislature” and a “foul move entailing six mistakes.” It is amusing that while the DPP seemed to be taking a step back by engaging in interparty negotiations with the KMT before the gavel on the matter was brought down, it has, in return, made the KMT lift its embargo by proposing to send the budget bill back for committee review. The budget might now clear the legislative process in an extraordinary session ahead of the Lunar New Year holiday later this month. The DPP’s ingenious sleight of hand “disarmed” the KMT, removing all impediments standing in the way of the review. After its first taste of success, the DPP used the same ploy to submit a draft amendment to the Local Government Act (地方制度法) to a second reading, causing KMT lawmakers to occupy the legislative speaker’s podium in protest and Legislative Speaker You Si-kun (游錫堃) to adjourn the session. Similar to the budget bill, the draft amendment is to be sent back for committee review after interparty negotiations. DPP caucus whip Ker Chien-ming (柯建銘) even said that if his party really wanted to push for the second reading, it could have rallied its caucus and pushed it through, as members have already been taking shifts at the Legislative Yuan for three nights in a row. Separately, Hsinchu Mayor Lin Chih-chien (林智堅) proposed merging Hsinchu city and county to create a special municipality, but later made the surprising announcement that he would not run for “Greater Hsinchu” mayor. The unexpected move has silenced the KMT’s criticisms that the DPP is seeking the merger to further its interests. However, some senior KMT members, such as Hsinchu County Commissioner Yang Wen-ke (楊文科) and Broadcasting Corp of China chairman Jaw Shaw-kong (趙少康), have since kept on insisting that the merger proposal is a ploy to further Lin’s career — a logic that is a slap in their own faces. Changhua County Commissioner Wang Hui-mei (王惠美) also promptly sent a proposal to upgrade Changhua to a special municipality to the Ministry of the Interior, a classic act of the KMT keeping the governing party busy while hatching another scheme. Nevertheless, Wang’s move has only served to showcase the necessity of amending the Local Government Act. The reason for the DPP daring to bypass committee reviews and push for two second readings in a row has legal muscle behind it. Article 8, Section 2 of the Act Governing the Legislative Yuan’s Power (立法院職權行使法) states that a bill can be sent directly to the second reading if it is proposed by committee members in attendance and more than 20 lawmakers sponsor it. Being in charge of the executive branch, controlling more than half the seats in the legislature and getting the results it wanted in the four referendums, the DPP has amassed a certain degree of dominion. It has crushed the KMT in significant ways; the KMT and its chairman have suffered severe blows. After being absent from the political stage for some years, People First Party Chairman James Soong (宋楚瑜) has taken to Facebook to express his opinions on some recent events. After the uproar of the budget review, Soong said that the DPP had finally acquiesced to reconsider the budget after excoriation by the opposition party and the media, but he did not seem to understand that it was a trick pulled by the DPP. Soong also commented on Taipei Mayor Ko Wen-je’s (柯文哲) attempt to cut the funding earmarked for the elderly on the Double Ninth Festival, a move that was rejected by the Taipei City Council twice — the second time after it was sent back to the council for reconsideration — and is now with the Executive Yuan, where Ko seeks to have the rejection declared invalid. Soong said that the “conventional way of taking political responsibility” for the rejection in a democratic regime is either “to accept the verdict or resign.” According to the — long abolished — self-government code of municipal cities (直轄市自治法), Ko’s resignation would be unnecessary and filing complaints would be futile, leaving Ko with no choice but to accept the verdict. In the post, Soong also focused his ire on the passing of a bill recommending the government change the name of the country from “the Republic of China” to “the Republic of Taiwan.” Soong found it infuriating that the motion was proposed by Tainan City Councilor Tsai Yu-hui (蔡育輝) of the KMT and, even worse, that the party was trying to speak up for him, saying: “We understand where he is coming from.” Soong said the proposal was a “cardinal mistake.” However, real democracy is when city councilors have the freedom to say and vote at will in the council, without needing to “bear responsibilities” for their decisions and statements when outside it. The connection between the KMT’s party-state mindset and democracy remains blurry. When Soong and former vice president Lien Chan (連戰) lost in the 2004 presidential election, their instigation of the public to seek an annulment of the election was a real act of anti-democracy. By using words like “commitment and goal of democracy,” Soong showed that his concept of democracy has long been out of date. Acadmics such as Joseph Schumpeter, Robert Dahl and Samuel Huntington have formulated more timely concepts. Democracy has transcended rationalism, utopianism and idealism, and has entered the realm of simple general knowledge. Taiwan’s democracy bears witness to this. Chin Heng-wei is a political commentator.

韓國瑜與于北辰的雙響砲

自由廣場》（金恒煒專欄）韓國瑜與于北辰的雙響砲 2022/01/06 05:30 被超高票罷黜的高雄前市長韓國瑜與退役少將于北辰，在開年前後不約而同的出招，一個是重出江湖，一個是宣佈退黨；兩個「偶然」碰在一起，不是孤立現象。「偶然」在歷史研究上一直是討論的課題，但學者間迄無定論，政治攻防上更難有偶然的機率。兩人都選在國民黨四大公投全軍覆沒之後出手，時間點才是觀察靶心。 韓國瑜號稱的新書發表會在元月二日，但去年十二月二日書即上市，按照一般慣例，出版面世的當天舉行新書發表會；韓國瑜選在公投後才辦新書「見面」會，可見志在人不在書。于北辰高調退出國民黨，也挑在公投半個月之後的年底。巧合嗎？不然。 兩個人的大動作在在代表對國民黨公投慘敗效應的判斷。相同的是，都知道國民黨「沒救了」，不同的是，韓國瑜強調「國家有難就會跳出來！」于北辰則表示「走自己的路，做自己正確的判斷。」放在國民黨的權力版圖來看，四公投碾壓國民黨：主席朱立倫圖霸不成，名嘴趙少康戰鬥不藍，侯友宜自顧不暇，國民黨形同權力真空。 韓國瑜沉寂一年半復出，口說「國家有難」，其實是「黨國有難」，國民黨的難局給了韓國瑜重出的機會與口實。跟韓國瑜相比，于北辰當然是小咖，從被拔去副主委的黨官到退黨也有一年四個月之久，把原因歸咎於「九二共識」，歸咎於國民黨「不反共」，那是藉口。「九二共識」是馬英九與中國唱和瞎掰出來的「一中」代替品，那時候于北辰為什麼不反？在韓流衝天時，于北辰不正是在一旁吶喊「忠誠挺韓」、「狂熱挺韓」嗎？韓國瑜投中比馬英九還熱切、還不避人目，于北辰為什麼不反？于北辰說自己反共，或許，說支持中華民國台灣，也可能，與國民黨漸行漸遠則是事實。兩人選在四公投大敗之後，一個號召韓流，一個使出「一刀斷流」，哪可能是偶然的巧合？ 于北辰沒有韓國瑜的人氣，他的政治決斷是放一把火燒掉自己託命半生的黨國世界，為表示與過去徹底決裂，不惜表態支持民進黨台中補選的立委林靜儀。韓國瑜此時此刻挺身而出，無論是主動還是情勢逼迫，有斯人不出豈奈黨國何的力道；黨內既已無領袖，投入刧灰殘燼中重燃自己，是韓國瑜的「時也命也」，也是國民黨的「時也命也」。 韓國瑜趁機復出與于北辰飲刀成一快相映成趣，都活生生的凸顯了國民黨「托遺響於悲風」的況味。于北辰冷眼揮別國民黨、韓國瑜生龍活虎笑傲韓粉，兩人的唱作，絕對是國民黨「四大皆空」結局的反映。 于北辰退黨，國民黨只能罵一聲「叛徒」、「漢奸」。至於韓國瑜，問題的大條不在韓國瑜此人，在國民黨竟然只剩廖化！現在黨內還有人寄望他選二〇二四，這可是民進黨額手稱慶的第二次；第一次就是二〇二〇年大選，韓慘輸三百萬。韓國瑜披褂再選，保證民進黨有望成為日本自民黨第二。（作者金恒煒為政治評論者；http://wenichin.blogspot.tw/） 不用抽 不用搶 現在用APP看新聞 保證天天中獎　 點我下載APP　 按我看活動辦法