From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
This article needs additional citations for verification. Please help improve this article by adding reliable references. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (September 2007)
For other uses, see Banana republic (disambiguation).
Banana Republic is a pejorative term for a small country that is politically unstable, dependent on limited agriculture (e.g. bananas), and ruled by a small, self-elected, wealthy, and corrupt clique.[1] It is most commonly used for countries in Central America such as El Salvador, Belize, Nicaragua, Honduras, and Guatemala.
In some cases, these nations have kept the government structures that were modeled after the colonial Spanish ruling clique, with a small, largely leisure class on the top,and a large, poorly educated and poorly paid working class of peons, though it might have the (fake) trappings of modernity (such as styling itself a republic with a president etc.)
Frequently the subject of mockery and humour, and usually presided over by a dictatorial military junta that exaggerates its own power and importance—"the epaulettes of a banana republic generalissimo" are proverbially of considerable size, usually portrayed in satire with a pair of mops—a banana republic also typically has large wealth inequities, poor infrastructure, poor schools, a "backward" economy, low capital spending, a reliance on foreign capital and money printing, budget deficits, and a weakening currency. Banana republics are typically also highly prone to revolutions and coups.
usage
Canada
In 2008, with the minority government threatened to be toppled by the opposition, whose goal was to form a new coalition government without an intermediary election, Fen Thompson, director of the Norman Paterson School of International Affairs at Ottawa's Carleton University remarked that the crisis would turn the nation into a "banana republic with snowflakes."
12.13.2008
12.06.2008
How did Thai protesters manage it?
By Jonathan Head
BBC News, Bangkok
Claiming victory, the yellow-clad hordes from the People's Alliance for Democracy (PAD) rolled up their mats and sleeping bags.
They queued for souvenir autographed scarves - yellow of course - from the leaders who had taken them into this astonishing act of insurrection, and boarded buses and pick-up trucks for the ride home.
An army of cleaners, technicians and security personnel moved in behind them to get Bangkok's $4bn (£2.7bn) state-of-the-art airport back into operation.
Within a few days the mass sit-in will just be a surreal memory.
But the questions their actions have raised about the state of Thailand will continue long after the last plastic hand-clapper is picked up and disposed of.
How could a country as advanced and as dependent on exports and tourism as Thailand allow such a vital transport hub to be stormed by a mob that never numbered more than a few thousand?
What is the PAD, and what gives the movement the confidence to commit its dramatic acts of economic sabotage without fearing any legal sanction?
Weak police
The airport sit-in shows the PAD's skill at pulling off bold and unexpected stunts.
When the first PAD convoys approached the airport last Tuesday, they said they were only going to protest against then-Prime Minister Somchai Wongsawat, who was due to arrive back from the Apec summit in Peru.
The government had a strategy of avoiding confrontation - it did not want a repeat of the disastrous events in October, when several PAD supporters were seriously injured in clashes with the police.
The police were under orders not to use force and retreated.
No-one thought the PAD would try to take over one of the world's biggest and busiest airport terminals.
In fact, PAD organisers told the BBC they had carefully planned the seizure of the airport weeks before.
The weakness of Thailand's police is also important.
They have proved no match for this determined and organised movement. They are poorly trained in riot control, and lack the status of the army.
When it became clear that the PAD was set on taking over the airport, the local governor asked the army for assistance. None came.
As throughout this year, the army's refusal to help contain the PAD has left the government with no means of resisting this insurgency.
The police are up against an organisation of considerable logistical strength.
It is a remarkably well-trained and well-funded movement.
Logistical efficiency
One of the many retired generals supporting its occupation at the airport observed that it should be seen as a military, not a civilian organisation.
Behind the "aunties with clappers" and well-groomed young women clutching lap-dogs that are the public face of the movement are squads of hoodlums, armed with batons, metal spikes and hand-guns who man the barricades and hunt down intruders.
One morning I followed them as they dragged an alleged government spy off to an undisclosed location, kicking and punching him.
I was unable to find out his fate. Some of these thugs are members of private armies run by retired generals.
The PAD's logistical efficiency is impressive.
Within hours of occupying the airport it had ample supplies of food, water, blankets and medicines for the thousands of supporters who joined the sit-in.
The food never ran out. You could get your mobile phone charged, or have a massage. PAD cleaners were brought in to keep the floors and toilets in order. The duty-free and check-in areas were sealed off and vigilantly protected by PAD guards.
The PAD's propaganda arm is equally impressive.
It runs its own television station, ASTV, which is widely broadcast and pours vitriol on the government.
Everywhere the movement goes it takes mobile stages, on the back of trucks, which blare out speeches and music from dawn until the small hours of the following morning.
The message is simple: Former Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra is evil, stole the people's money and will destroy the country. The poor rural people who voted for his party were all bribed, and unable to think for themselves.
Some of those taking part in the airport occupation had been listening to these firebrand speeches for months, without a break.
They all passionately believed their actions were worth the cost to the country, to see Thailand's politics cleaned up.
The question of who is behind the PAD is a subject of intense speculation in Thailand.
I met a lot of ethnic Chinese entrepreneurs at the airport who were helping keep the PAD supplied.
But much bigger Thai businesses are widely believed to be financing the movement, including at least two national banks.
Royal support?
Thaksin Shinawatra made a lot of powerful enemies while he was in office with his aggressive efforts to re-shape the country.
These are now using the PAD militants to get back at his party.
There are also plenty of former military commanders offering their help to the PAD - people like General Pathompong Kesornsuk, who has openly urged the army to launch a coup against the government.
One of the top PAD leaders is Chamlong Srimuang, a former general with close ties to Gen Prem Tinsulanonda, the king's most senior advisor.
Then there is the most sensitive question of all - the royal connection.
The PAD has justified its actions as being in defence of the monarchy, and the king's portrait has been displayed prominently during all its protests.
Senior figures close to the palace have openly supported the movement.
When the queen offered to preside over the funeral last month of a PAD protestor killed during clashes with the police, it appeared to be a tacit blessing for the movement.
Some in the government even believe the revered king may be backing the movement, although at the age of almost 81 this seems unlikely.
Hard evidence is difficult to come by. But people's actions in Thailand are now being driven as much by what they believe as what they know to be true.
The government and its rural followers believe there is a palace-army-elite conspiracy to rob them of their electoral mandate.
The PAD and its middle-class followers believe the pro-Thaksin camp intends to turn Thailand into a republic, and overthrow the existing social order.
With so much believed to be at stake, compromise between the two sides is almost impossible.
BBC News, Bangkok
Claiming victory, the yellow-clad hordes from the People's Alliance for Democracy (PAD) rolled up their mats and sleeping bags.
They queued for souvenir autographed scarves - yellow of course - from the leaders who had taken them into this astonishing act of insurrection, and boarded buses and pick-up trucks for the ride home.
An army of cleaners, technicians and security personnel moved in behind them to get Bangkok's $4bn (£2.7bn) state-of-the-art airport back into operation.
Within a few days the mass sit-in will just be a surreal memory.
But the questions their actions have raised about the state of Thailand will continue long after the last plastic hand-clapper is picked up and disposed of.
How could a country as advanced and as dependent on exports and tourism as Thailand allow such a vital transport hub to be stormed by a mob that never numbered more than a few thousand?
What is the PAD, and what gives the movement the confidence to commit its dramatic acts of economic sabotage without fearing any legal sanction?
Weak police
The airport sit-in shows the PAD's skill at pulling off bold and unexpected stunts.
When the first PAD convoys approached the airport last Tuesday, they said they were only going to protest against then-Prime Minister Somchai Wongsawat, who was due to arrive back from the Apec summit in Peru.
The government had a strategy of avoiding confrontation - it did not want a repeat of the disastrous events in October, when several PAD supporters were seriously injured in clashes with the police.
The police were under orders not to use force and retreated.
No-one thought the PAD would try to take over one of the world's biggest and busiest airport terminals.
In fact, PAD organisers told the BBC they had carefully planned the seizure of the airport weeks before.
The weakness of Thailand's police is also important.
They have proved no match for this determined and organised movement. They are poorly trained in riot control, and lack the status of the army.
When it became clear that the PAD was set on taking over the airport, the local governor asked the army for assistance. None came.
As throughout this year, the army's refusal to help contain the PAD has left the government with no means of resisting this insurgency.
The police are up against an organisation of considerable logistical strength.
It is a remarkably well-trained and well-funded movement.
Logistical efficiency
One of the many retired generals supporting its occupation at the airport observed that it should be seen as a military, not a civilian organisation.
Behind the "aunties with clappers" and well-groomed young women clutching lap-dogs that are the public face of the movement are squads of hoodlums, armed with batons, metal spikes and hand-guns who man the barricades and hunt down intruders.
One morning I followed them as they dragged an alleged government spy off to an undisclosed location, kicking and punching him.
I was unable to find out his fate. Some of these thugs are members of private armies run by retired generals.
The PAD's logistical efficiency is impressive.
Within hours of occupying the airport it had ample supplies of food, water, blankets and medicines for the thousands of supporters who joined the sit-in.
The food never ran out. You could get your mobile phone charged, or have a massage. PAD cleaners were brought in to keep the floors and toilets in order. The duty-free and check-in areas were sealed off and vigilantly protected by PAD guards.
The PAD's propaganda arm is equally impressive.
It runs its own television station, ASTV, which is widely broadcast and pours vitriol on the government.
Everywhere the movement goes it takes mobile stages, on the back of trucks, which blare out speeches and music from dawn until the small hours of the following morning.
The message is simple: Former Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra is evil, stole the people's money and will destroy the country. The poor rural people who voted for his party were all bribed, and unable to think for themselves.
Some of those taking part in the airport occupation had been listening to these firebrand speeches for months, without a break.
They all passionately believed their actions were worth the cost to the country, to see Thailand's politics cleaned up.
The question of who is behind the PAD is a subject of intense speculation in Thailand.
I met a lot of ethnic Chinese entrepreneurs at the airport who were helping keep the PAD supplied.
But much bigger Thai businesses are widely believed to be financing the movement, including at least two national banks.
Royal support?
Thaksin Shinawatra made a lot of powerful enemies while he was in office with his aggressive efforts to re-shape the country.
These are now using the PAD militants to get back at his party.
There are also plenty of former military commanders offering their help to the PAD - people like General Pathompong Kesornsuk, who has openly urged the army to launch a coup against the government.
One of the top PAD leaders is Chamlong Srimuang, a former general with close ties to Gen Prem Tinsulanonda, the king's most senior advisor.
Then there is the most sensitive question of all - the royal connection.
The PAD has justified its actions as being in defence of the monarchy, and the king's portrait has been displayed prominently during all its protests.
Senior figures close to the palace have openly supported the movement.
When the queen offered to preside over the funeral last month of a PAD protestor killed during clashes with the police, it appeared to be a tacit blessing for the movement.
Some in the government even believe the revered king may be backing the movement, although at the age of almost 81 this seems unlikely.
Hard evidence is difficult to come by. But people's actions in Thailand are now being driven as much by what they believe as what they know to be true.
The government and its rural followers believe there is a palace-army-elite conspiracy to rob them of their electoral mandate.
The PAD and its middle-class followers believe the pro-Thaksin camp intends to turn Thailand into a republic, and overthrow the existing social order.
With so much believed to be at stake, compromise between the two sides is almost impossible.
11.25.2008
Guts
我會這麼說，guts不是壞事，但也不是那麼值得表揚。我很容易擁有它，因為我一個人，我沒有家庭需要奉養，也沒有需索無度的父母親，或在外面闖禍的兄弟姐妹。我又沒有小孩，我要去做這些決定，比一般人容易太多了。
做自己喜歡做的事，讓自己覺得easy，對我來講很重要。每個階段對這件事的定義不一樣，每個年齡層要的東西也不一樣。
明星愛做的事我都不愛做，何況我不是明星已經很久了，為了宣傳《囧男孩》，現在我又開始過這樣的日子，又開始想：這件衣服已經穿過3次該怎麼辦？喔，天哪。快崩潰了。你問我現在要什麼？我現在要的就是宣傳期趕快結束，讓我恢復原來的生活（笑）！
***********************************
李烈：活到50歲，我只剩下guts
‧Cheers 2008/11/25
說到李烈，五年級生記憶中浮現的，或許是她在電視劇《天長地久》、《一翦梅》中的動人身影；六年級生印象最深刻的，可能是她跟歌手羅大佑愛情長跑12年、步入禮堂後卻只維持1年的短暫婚姻；而七年級生、甚至八年級生回答這個問題，未來一定離不開這3個字：「囧男孩」。
【文／盧智芳；攝影／杜志剛】
女明星的「好歸宿」總不脫嫁作商人婦，但李烈顯然走了條另類的路。
演員、獨立製作人李烈
李烈，1958年生，世界新聞專科學校（今世新大學前身）畢業，演員、製作人。演出作品包括電視劇《一翦梅》、《含羞草》、《天長地久》、《又見夕陽紅》……；電影《海灘的一天》、《小城故事》、《早安台北》、《你那好冷的小手》等數十部。第一部擔任製作人的電視劇為《Mr..COM之死》，第一部監製的電影為《囧男孩》。
說到李烈，五年級生記憶中浮現的，或許是她在電視劇《天長地久》、《一翦梅》中的動人身影；六年級生印象最深刻的，可能是她跟歌手羅大佑愛情長跑12年、步入禮堂後卻只維持1年的短暫婚姻；而七年級生、甚至八年級生回答這個問題，未來一定離不開這3個字：「囧男孩」。
18歲進入演藝圈是無心插柳的結果，50歲時晉身電影製作人，卻是李烈一圓人生夢的里程碑。為了催生電影《囧男孩》，李烈抵押了媽媽的房子，貸款1千萬元。完全沒有大卡司的《囧男孩》，除了吸引日本NHK電視台主動購買日本版權，導演楊雅吉吉更以此奪下2008年台北電影節最佳導演獎。
女明星的「好歸宿」總不脫嫁作商人婦，但李烈顯然走了條另類的路。她最好的朋友包括已逝舞蹈家羅曼菲、北京奧美廣告集團董事長莊淑芬、資深媒體人徐璐，4個人被暱稱為「四姊妺」，都是個性鮮明的率性女子。
絢爛、沉潛到再出發，李烈的生涯跟她演過的角色一樣，充滿了戲劇性的轉折與張力……。
我18歲就開始演電影，但我從來沒有製作過電影。最近因為《囧男孩》的關係，我們班（李烈畢業於世界新專）辦了一次同學會，有個同學很感慨地對我說：「妳還記不記得，有次我們去澎湖玩，妳那時就說：妳想要做一部電影。十幾年過去，妳已經實現妳的夢想，我還在原地踏步。」我才發現，原來那時候已經有了這個想法，但我自己完全不記得。
從念新聞到演戲，我是在一種「無知」的狀況下進入演藝圈的。人家一開始找我演戲時，我的想法很單純，演戲賺錢比寒暑假去打工快多了。當時拍兩集電視劇就等於在外面打工一個月的薪水，為什麼不？我的想法是，現在拍拍，偶爾拍拍，最後還是要回到做新聞記者這行業上。
但第一次演戲，我就發現我完全不害怕表演。機器讓我有安全感，你表現出來多少，它就呈現多少，不會扣分也不會加分。你有沒有用功、盡力，它就是如實呈現。所以對我來說，面對攝影機比面對人更舒服。因為不害怕，所以我很放鬆，很容易就冒出來。後來紅太快了，我才發現，我回不去了，不可能回去做記者了。怎麼可能你去採訪人家時，你比人家還要紅？
不好玩，我就離開
我對表演的興趣跟喜好，是踏入這個行業後，在一個作品跟一個作品間，自己慢慢培養的。剛開始用「不害怕」來表演，但到了一個階段後，這就不夠，我開始懂得去思考技巧或解釋角色，看身邊其他演員的工作方式來影響自己。
比較幸運的是，入行時，我跟的人是對的。帶我進這行的是黃以功導演，另外一位是李行導演，他們兩位一在電視、一在電影，都是本身對工作很要求、堅持的人。因為我第一次拍電視、電影是跟他們合作，為我打了很好的基礎。
待了十幾年後，我開始覺得厭煩，演來演去都是同樣的角色，我是生產線，每天生產一樣的產品。工作量最大時，我曾經1個月拍3部電影，最高紀錄是4天3夜沒睡覺，那種狀況下能演出什麼好戲？我完全受不了，當然要離開，因為已經被搾乾了。
對我來講，當生活的方式不好玩，我不想玩，我就離開。我一向都這樣子。我是個很任性的人。
我想去玩另外一個角色，所以去做了一個我沒做過的事情，我去做生意。我離開台灣，跑到大陸去投資成衣。當然，那次的任性讓我一身是傷。我把自己身上所有錢都賠光了，離開大陸。
人生已經幫我調整心情
1995年離開後，我沉潛了滿久一段時間，大概有兩、三年，整個人處在一種非常down的狀態，做任何事都提不起勁。我覺得自己付出很大的心血、時間，結果得到這樣的回饋，這讓我非常非常的depress（沮喪）。我花了兩、三年才讓自己慢慢修復。
因為太久沒工作就會想要工作。我第一步踏出去做的是所謂的金鐘劇（編按：《Mr..COM之死》），因為成績滿好的，入圍9項，獎也拿到4項，所以跨出去第一步是成功的。
如果講製作人需要的sense，我的演員工作對我一定有幫助。18歲開始入行，演了那麼多電視劇跟電影，它一定讓我在讀劇本上的判斷力比別人好。長期在那樣的工作環境，也很清楚怎麼去deal（處理）這些工作人員、怎麼跟他們相處，反而是別的行業我不了解。
另外就是人生的歷練。別人最常問我：從演員跳到製作人，你怎麼調整心情？我說我不需要。因為我的人生已經幫我調整心情了。在我從演員到製作人這條路上，我的人生已經大起大落過，我已經在人生路上狠狠跌過一大跤，我不需要再調整什麼心情。
我根本不會再把做明星的一切當成光環，那對我來講已經是long long time ago（很久以前）的事。我反而更戰戰兢兢，因為我現在一無所有。
選擇做監製，當然也有現實的考量，回去做演員嗎？我當時已40出頭了，演什麼？台灣的環境沒有40歲以上的女演員空間。除非我不挑劇本，找我就演，可是這不是我要的。當初離開，就是因為我不想演這些角色，怎麼可以回來後，反而去把這些我不想演的角色撿回來。我還是願意表演，但一定要有選擇，挑選我真的有感覺的東西。
演員不能做，那我能幹嘛？導演，我沒有天分；攝影、燈光又不能半路出家，能做的只有製片了。
很多時候，我都是自己選擇我想做的東西，我比較lucky（幸運），但這lucky也要付出代價。相對來說，我的物質欲望不能太強，看到人家開好車、買豪宅、穿名牌，能夠完全不心動。賺得少少的，或甚至不賺錢，也可以簡單的過日子。
看完《囧男孩》劇本，我就知道它是好電影，那是一種直覺。它很輕易地把我很多童年、自己全部忘光的事情叫回來，我知道如果這劇本拍成影像，力量一定會更強大。
所以後來我跟我自己講，即便賠錢，也不會賠太多，不曉得為什麼，我一直有這樣的信心在；然後，我還有兩隻手、兩隻腳，再去賺就是了。
活到50歲，我只剩下guts，ok？
明星愛做的事我都不愛做
我會這麼說，guts不是壞事，但也不是那麼值得表揚。我很容易擁有它，因為我一個人，我沒有家庭需要奉養，也沒有需索無度的父母親，或在外面闖禍的兄弟姐妹。我又沒有小孩，我要去做這些決定，比一般人容易太多了。
做自己喜歡做的事，讓自己覺得easy，對我來講很重要。每個階段對這件事的定義不一樣，每個年齡層要的東西也不一樣。
明星愛做的事我都不愛做，何況我不是明星已經很久了，為了宣傳《囧男孩》，現在我又開始過這樣的日子，又開始想：這件衣服已經穿過3次該怎麼辦？喔，天哪。快崩潰了。你問我現在要什麼？我現在要的就是宣傳期趕快結束，讓我恢復原來的生活（笑）！
政治與搞笑
台灣來鴻
BBC中文網特約記者 林楠森
台灣在民主化近二十年來，媒體上出現了各種觀點的政治評論節目，這些節目有些人視為言論自言的象徵，有些人則視為加大社會分裂的亂源﹔而近年來一種新興的模仿節目，由喜劇演員結合了政治評論與搞笑，風格獨特。
台灣電視上每天都有例常性的評論節目，這些節目多數是在電視新聞台，找來一些時事評論員與政界人士對時事發表評論與爭辯，許多節目並設立熱線接聽民眾的意見。
異軍突起的"全民最大黨"，則以一種獨特風格結合時事與搞笑，這個每天例常播出的節目，由搞笑演員化妝成知名政治人物，並對時事進行挖苦嘲諷。
娛樂性質
節目中欄目之一是海協會記者會，由喜劇演員邰智源扮演海協會副會長"張明清"舉行新聞發佈會，他在打扮與腔調上模仿張銘清，並往往用一種誇張的語調大聲斥責記者提問。
以張明清記者會這個欄目來說，全民最大黨往往結合了一些時事，並且由扮演張銘清的演員狀似正經八百的回答，內容雖然旨在博君一笑。不過這樣的節目也不僅是搞笑。
台灣政治大學傳播學院副教授陳百齡指出，這個節目表面上是娛樂性節目，但其結合真人時事，因此在實質上並不全然是娛樂性質，這種節目顛覆了過去那種新聞性節目，娛樂性節目的分類。
陳百齡表示，人們對於政治性時事有很多猜想，但新聞性節目受制於媒體常規比較一板一眼，而這類的節目把人們的想像表現出來，這是用一種軟性的包裝，反映出當代人們對政治議題的一些看法。
這個每天例常性的搞笑節目，早期模仿電視上的一個知名熱線節目，其後則逐漸演變成由劇中的演員扮演台灣知名人物，這些搞笑演員通過化裝與口音的模仿，模擬台灣政治人物對時事的反應。
模仿人物
以本周台灣的熱點話題：政府將發放全民消費券刺激消費來說，搞笑演員就模仿了行政院長劉兆玄與民進黨立委的對話。節目也例常性的模仿前總統陳水扁與他的家人，並對他有很多批判嘲諷。
在節目中例常性被模仿的除了台灣社會上的一些話題人物，也包括了美國總統布什與日本前首相小泉。
中國海協會副會長張銘清，從他擔任國台辦發言人時期就例常性地在節目中被模仿，一個經常性的段子，是他斥責日本記者並高呼打倒日本軍國主義口號。
張銘清在擔任國台辦發言人期間，就表示注意到這個模仿他的節目，他其後也與模仿他的搞笑演員邰智源見面。
除了張銘清外，許多台灣政治人物也與模仿他們的搞笑演員會面，甚至請這些搞笑演員為他們助選。
這些政治名人似乎沒有因為在節目中被開涮，而與這些搞笑演員站在對立面。政大傳播學院的陳百齡說，其實在這樣的節目是遊走在邊緣，人們也不全然地把演員的表演當成對特定政治人物的想法。
這類節目的言論批判力度有時大過於常規的政論節目，但卻甚少涉及譭謗官司﹔據陳百齡的觀察，政治人物不會笨到自己"對號入座"，很多內容就節目製作來說是一種為了達到娛樂的想像，就譭謗問題來說這種節目是在一種灰色空間中，並且有其生存的位置。
BBC中文網特約記者 林楠森
台灣在民主化近二十年來，媒體上出現了各種觀點的政治評論節目，這些節目有些人視為言論自言的象徵，有些人則視為加大社會分裂的亂源﹔而近年來一種新興的模仿節目，由喜劇演員結合了政治評論與搞笑，風格獨特。
台灣電視上每天都有例常性的評論節目，這些節目多數是在電視新聞台，找來一些時事評論員與政界人士對時事發表評論與爭辯，許多節目並設立熱線接聽民眾的意見。
異軍突起的"全民最大黨"，則以一種獨特風格結合時事與搞笑，這個每天例常播出的節目，由搞笑演員化妝成知名政治人物，並對時事進行挖苦嘲諷。
娛樂性質
節目中欄目之一是海協會記者會，由喜劇演員邰智源扮演海協會副會長"張明清"舉行新聞發佈會，他在打扮與腔調上模仿張銘清，並往往用一種誇張的語調大聲斥責記者提問。
以張明清記者會這個欄目來說，全民最大黨往往結合了一些時事，並且由扮演張銘清的演員狀似正經八百的回答，內容雖然旨在博君一笑。不過這樣的節目也不僅是搞笑。
台灣政治大學傳播學院副教授陳百齡指出，這個節目表面上是娛樂性節目，但其結合真人時事，因此在實質上並不全然是娛樂性質，這種節目顛覆了過去那種新聞性節目，娛樂性節目的分類。
陳百齡表示，人們對於政治性時事有很多猜想，但新聞性節目受制於媒體常規比較一板一眼，而這類的節目把人們的想像表現出來，這是用一種軟性的包裝，反映出當代人們對政治議題的一些看法。
這個每天例常性的搞笑節目，早期模仿電視上的一個知名熱線節目，其後則逐漸演變成由劇中的演員扮演台灣知名人物，這些搞笑演員通過化裝與口音的模仿，模擬台灣政治人物對時事的反應。
模仿人物
以本周台灣的熱點話題：政府將發放全民消費券刺激消費來說，搞笑演員就模仿了行政院長劉兆玄與民進黨立委的對話。節目也例常性的模仿前總統陳水扁與他的家人，並對他有很多批判嘲諷。
在節目中例常性被模仿的除了台灣社會上的一些話題人物，也包括了美國總統布什與日本前首相小泉。
中國海協會副會長張銘清，從他擔任國台辦發言人時期就例常性地在節目中被模仿，一個經常性的段子，是他斥責日本記者並高呼打倒日本軍國主義口號。
張銘清在擔任國台辦發言人期間，就表示注意到這個模仿他的節目，他其後也與模仿他的搞笑演員邰智源見面。
除了張銘清外，許多台灣政治人物也與模仿他們的搞笑演員會面，甚至請這些搞笑演員為他們助選。
這些政治名人似乎沒有因為在節目中被開涮，而與這些搞笑演員站在對立面。政大傳播學院的陳百齡說，其實在這樣的節目是遊走在邊緣，人們也不全然地把演員的表演當成對特定政治人物的想法。
這類節目的言論批判力度有時大過於常規的政論節目，但卻甚少涉及譭謗官司﹔據陳百齡的觀察，政治人物不會笨到自己"對號入座"，很多內容就節目製作來說是一種為了達到娛樂的想像，就譭謗問題來說這種節目是在一種灰色空間中，並且有其生存的位置。
11.01.2008
一針見血
http://blog.udn.com/taipeicoco/2345470
民進黨的金主，是深綠舊地主資產階級，台獨親日皇民草地人派，淺綠是本土自我意識本位中產階級派，小蔡不敢切割陳水扁，怕失去重要金援，而淺綠在經済蕭條後也無力捐輸，向深綠靠攏謀取血源而不敢切割。不切割陳又將失去淺綠大版圖的人氣和選票，明年的選舉不用玩了。
台聯黨要換路線中間，向左靠攏。用意不錯，但是問題在李登輝身上，沒有淺綠要聽他的。弄了半天，還是深綠，明年選舉也將是全軍復沒，等著關門打烊。
馬英九已經掌握群眾，不冒進。利用電視專訪，低姿態解析政事，偶而為之，效果甚於天天說教，百姓傾耳仔細聽講。在不干撓司法獨立，讓証据說話，公正公平的辦下去，對深綠更是打擊，馬英九的軟中帶硬的道功，將會一步步施展，無聲無影掌控一切。
小蔡能再玩下去嗎？要錢？要人？政治是兩種皆要的「權力」啊！軍無餉則士不來，軍無賞則士不往，有錢能使鬼推磨。對中產階級，希望理想最重要。小蔡妳能拿出來嗎？
蔡英文好好哭吧！哭完後擦乾眼淚，一腳一步從基層從新做起，深綠是神，尊而不親。妳的戰場是在淺綠啊！
民進黨的金主，是深綠舊地主資產階級，台獨親日皇民草地人派，淺綠是本土自我意識本位中產階級派，小蔡不敢切割陳水扁，怕失去重要金援，而淺綠在經済蕭條後也無力捐輸，向深綠靠攏謀取血源而不敢切割。不切割陳又將失去淺綠大版圖的人氣和選票，明年的選舉不用玩了。
台聯黨要換路線中間，向左靠攏。用意不錯，但是問題在李登輝身上，沒有淺綠要聽他的。弄了半天，還是深綠，明年選舉也將是全軍復沒，等著關門打烊。
馬英九已經掌握群眾，不冒進。利用電視專訪，低姿態解析政事，偶而為之，效果甚於天天說教，百姓傾耳仔細聽講。在不干撓司法獨立，讓証据說話，公正公平的辦下去，對深綠更是打擊，馬英九的軟中帶硬的道功，將會一步步施展，無聲無影掌控一切。
小蔡能再玩下去嗎？要錢？要人？政治是兩種皆要的「權力」啊！軍無餉則士不來，軍無賞則士不往，有錢能使鬼推磨。對中產階級，希望理想最重要。小蔡妳能拿出來嗎？
蔡英文好好哭吧！哭完後擦乾眼淚，一腳一步從基層從新做起，深綠是神，尊而不親。妳的戰場是在淺綠啊！
訂閱：
文章 (Atom)