SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
South Korean President Park Geun-hye has been impeached:
South Korea's Parliament voted on Friday to impeach President Park Geun-hye, an aloof conservative who took a hard line against North Korea and rose to power with strong support from those who revered her father, the military dictator Park Chung-hee. The vote against Ms. Park, the nation's first female leader, followed weeks of damaging disclosures in a corruption scandal that has all but paralyzed the government and produced the largest street protests in the nation's history. Her powers will now be suspended as the Constitutional Court considers whether to remove her from office.
Ms. Park has been accused of allowing a shadowy confidante, the daughter of a religious sect leader, to exercise remarkable influence on matters ranging from choosing top government officials to her wardrobe, and of helping her extort tens of millions of dollars from South Korean companies. The scandal, which gained national attention less than two months ago, has cast a harsh light on collusion between the presidency and big business in one of Asia's most dynamic economies.
Parliament's motion for impeachment, accusing Ms. Park of "extensive and serious violations of the Constitution and the law," will now be taken up by the Constitutional Court, which has six months to decide whether the charges are true and merit her ouster.
The impeachment bill passed 234-56.
Also at BBC, DW, and the Washington Post.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday December 09 2016, @08:13AM
Koreans are brave enough to impeach a woman, unlike Americans who are not brave enough to elect a woman.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday December 09 2016, @08:21AM
About 51 % of Americans voted for a woman president
(Score: 3, Informative) by butthurt on Friday December 09 2016, @08:41AM
I make it to be 20.1%: 64,156,255 voted for Ms. Clinton and 1,207,141 for Ms. Stein out of a total population of 324,954,000.
sources:
http://www.snopes.com/2016/11/13/who-won-the-popular-vote/ [snopes.com]
http://heavy.com/news/2016/11/how-many-votes-electoral-did-jill-stein-get-in-the-presidential-election/ [heavy.com]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_the_United_States [wikipedia.org]
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday December 09 2016, @08:54AM
thanks for the numbers, but I think you should have compared the votes to the total number of eligible voters, not total population.
(i.e. don't count those under 18). That will probably raise the percentage to something like 30.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday December 09 2016, @08:59AM
*NEITHER* first party candidate won the election with even a greater than 50 percent VOTER MAJORITY.
We're supposed to trust someone who had a less than 50 percent acceptance rate to act as mostly-figurehead for 100 percent of the populace?
And that is really the cornerstone of what is wrong with America.
(Score: 2) by tangomargarine on Friday December 09 2016, @03:09PM
Australia has compulsory voting for everybody, but that causes other problems. They do have a "None of the Above" option, though.
"Is that really true?" "I just spent the last hour telling you to think for yourself! Didn't you hear anything I said?"
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday December 10 2016, @05:14AM
We're supposed to trust someone who had a less than 50 percent acceptance rate to act as mostly-figurehead for 100 percent of the populace?
This is more visible in systems that allow for many parties, but it's still present in two-party systems like ours, just hidden. Voting for someone doesn't mean you truly support them, especially if you're voting for them simply because you believe them to be the lesser evil.
With that said, what else can be done? I'm not sure how to fix the problem of someone who received less than 50 percent of the population's support getting power over everyone.
(Score: 2) by butthurt on Saturday December 10 2016, @04:18AM
Around 30%, yes. Estimates from 2014 put the population aged 18 and up at 239.9 million, of which 219.9 million were citizens and 142.2 million were registered to vote—the latter represents a minority of the total population. Sad!
http://www.census.gov/content/dam/Census/library/publications/2015/demo/p20-577.pdf [census.gov]
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday December 10 2016, @05:10AM
thanks for the numbers, but I think you should have compared the votes to the total number of eligible voters, not total population.
This is what was said: "About 51 % of Americans voted for a woman president" It didn't say "eligible voters".
(Score: 2) by Kunasou on Friday December 09 2016, @08:45AM
> Vote me because I'm a woman.
In my country we have/had really bad presidents but at least they tried to lie better.
(Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Friday December 09 2016, @08:51AM
I think hillary clinton is a woman. she may be lying about everything else, I've no idea...
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday December 09 2016, @08:54AM
She's a reptilian.
(Score: 1) by kurenai.tsubasa on Friday December 09 2016, @02:36PM
As far as I can tell from the 2009 documentary V, the lizard people have 3 genders, but only two are required for reproduction unlike that one species in ST:ENT that required all 3.
Hillary is a queen, and typically queens are only capable of laying one other queen egg (Chelsea in this case—I haven't overthought this at all!). Then there are the warriors the queen mates with, which are an important source of phosphorus. The mating ritual typically concludes with the queen consuming the warrior she mates with since even her fully developed mating skin does not contain enough phosphorus for egg production. Despite being only able to lay one queen egg, the queen seems to have some control over what portion of her eggs become warriors or the third gender.
The third gender is the worker gender. Unlike warriors, workers have the full intellectual capability of a queen but they are unable to reproduce through natural means.
When encountering a bigendered species such as humans, the lizard people generally use the following system to assign gendered human “skins.” The queens (there may be 3 or 4 generations present in any given invasion fleet) are given woman suits, the warriors are given male skins, and the workers are evenly assigned either gender from the host species.
One will also note that queens are capable of mating with human males who have been specially prepared. Typically a segment of their DNA is removed, and the male's mother must be given phosphorus supplements while she's pregnant with him. Again, the mating ritual concludes with consuming the mate for his phosphorus.
In that sense, one could argue that Hillary is both a woman and a lizard person.
(Score: 2) by quintessence on Friday December 09 2016, @08:35AM
That's more to do with American inability to conceive of being fucked by a woman. I mean how does that even work? Is there lube involved? Do I bend over? How dirty will I feel after the fact?
I mean sure, it's theoretically possible, but the logistics?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday December 09 2016, @09:04AM
Being fucked by a woman with a huge strap-on. It also lets them avoid the majority of STDs and fuck you longer and harder without the lack of lube affecting their senses.
I mean hey, if you're trying to rape someone it works much better if it hurts them without hurting you, right?
(Score: 2) by quintessence on Friday December 09 2016, @09:24AM
Yeah, I've always been a bit askance at the whole strap-on/pegging bit.
I mean unless there are sensors that connect directly to a neural pathway, it's just a piece of plastic. More like factory work really; Put it in, pull it out, put it in, pull it out.
You ever hear of someone fantasizing about working a factory line? Me neither.
(Score: 2) by bob_super on Friday December 09 2016, @07:23PM
There's a reason why women wear strap-ons the way they do, and many versions include features designed for the wearer.
Holding a dildo in your hand would otherwise provide better control for less effort.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday December 09 2016, @09:25AM
My favorite politician is a woman (Margaret Thatcher) and I would never have voted for Clinton.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday December 09 2016, @09:37AM
Oh come on! You know she doesn't count.
Privileged white lady who hit the glass ceiling of being ruler of one of the most powerful nations on earth. If it wasn't for all the sexism she endured, she would have risen to the level of Galactic Master, where the real power resides.
Without affirmative action, she never would have gotten so far as a secretary of the local counsel.
Feminism made that woman. She is standing on the broken backs of all the women's studies that came before her.
(Score: 2) by janrinok on Friday December 09 2016, @03:21PM
I think that you will find she was only the Prime Minister - HM Queen is the ruler, although that is a rather more decorative title than practical one.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday December 09 2016, @03:48PM
We the Queen can send troops, talk to me.
(Score: 2) by janrinok on Friday December 09 2016, @06:34PM
Not without direction from Parliament she can't. The military oath of allegiance in the UK is:
The Queen however, does not give any direct orders: they are directed by Parliament (normally the Cabinet) to the Ministry of Defence (the Chiefs of Staff).
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday December 09 2016, @06:37PM
> HM Queen is the ruler,
No, the queen is the queen. In other countries queen might be synonymous with ruler, but not in the UK. Not any more.
Yours is he worst kind of semantic hairsplitting, even if it were technically correct it would not reveal any new insight (<== which is par for semantic hairsplitting) and its not even technically correct (<== which hairsplitters at least usually get right).
(Score: 2) by hemocyanin on Friday December 09 2016, @04:51PM
Or maybe Americans are smart enough to nip things in the bud. You know, Palin, Hillary -- neither should be near power and their anatomy has no bearing on that fact.