這種把自己祖墳視為包袱的孝子

再怎麼譏笑外省人也不會成為台灣人

朱天心在〈想我眷村的兄弟們〉曾反省過，為什麼外省人不認同台灣這塊土地，可以輕易「去去去去美國」，因為「清明時節，他們無墳可上」。

沒有包袱，所以攻擊對手也也不用擔心自己有把柄！

http://blog.udn.com/article/trackback.jsp?uid=ganghu999&aid=5671156

原來除了兩個鄉公所的公有地，連宣稱為自有地也是租的，這真是絕了！

邱毅當然不是啥好心，如樓下所言，真好心在蘇嘉全被提出前，就該揭露了，準此，蘇嘉全絕對要選到底，要刨祖墳，遷農舍的選到底，

這才像個漢子！
 
 
  
 
路過
  
  
有理走遍天下
 2011/09/24 21:43
何必等以後？要選上，民進黨蘇先生現在就應該把對手不合法的墳刨出來，蔡主席更應該把領18%的不公不義講清楚。 
jun5238(jun5238) 於 2011-09-25 05:52 回覆： 
噗，選上才有黑資料..

我還以為這是常識(^^)
 

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

一般農舍土地租用買賣不是黑秘密，版主這句話才是抹黑之作，沒知識也沒常識。邱毅當然不存好心，好心的是一天巡 12次邏的，還有自動續租約的。做個漢子還要分選舉，還真是個漢子呢，噗......

請參

http://news.msn.com.tw/news2339313.aspx

18%是國民黨領的絕大多數，國民黨當然不會主動提，但民進黨又礙於蔡主席有領，只有閉嘴，當初如果是蘇貞昌先生出來選，就不會有18%了(或祖墳問題)，只怪當初那個墳地巡邏簽到箱，幫了倒忙，又或是，如果一開頭就遵守法律規定就不用投鼠忌器了。

你就別替蘇打抱不平了

民進黨檯面上這些出頭的高級臺灣人

忘了出身 忘了普羅大眾

ㄌㄢ\

請問版主：蘇父的墳是合法還是違法？是否可像蔡主席一樣用繳錢來處理？

Theoretically and ideally, a politician should learn from the voting result whether changes are demanded by the voters. Unfortunatedly, this seldom happen in reality. I suspect the possible reasons being that the voters themselves are not serious about their votes and cast ballots on a whim, old habit, mood of the day or ideological bias. Honestly, how many people are willing to spend time and energy studying the issues and a candidate's qualification and his stand or track record on these issues? I believe most of them would rather invest more resources on researching certain restaurants, TV games or the latest electronic gadgets. Why should any politician give a damn about what voters want when he knows well that they have poor memories, are easily manipulated, prefer sugar pills to true medicine? Too often the election is the choice of the less evil and voters have themselves to blame for lack of quality candidates. When we are so stingy about giving credit and quick to pile up blame on elected officials based on perception and not facts, is it any wonder we find the choices limited and not to our liking? Yes you can excercise your voting power and still you get what you pay for-you give little, you get little.