Not even the car accident the day before could stop her. Lee Jung-hee of the left-wing Unified Progressive Party was back in her recalcitrant form on Monday night’s presidential debate.

But this time, the 42-year-old Seoul National University-educated labor lawyer added more targets to her hit list.

“Above the president exists the constitution, and above the constitution exist Lee Kun-hee and Chung Mong-koo,” Lee said in her opening statement, referring to the chairman of Samsung Electronics and Hyundai Motor Group, respectively.

“By engaging in gimmicks, breaking the law, and lobbying the National Assembly, they stand above the Constitution and stare down at the people, laughing.”

The pre-selected topics in the second presidential debate were economic democratization, job creation, and the welfare system. Lee drew her ammunition from the plight of the poor and temporary workers while portraying family-owned large conglomerates, or chaebol, as the primary culprit behind the growing economic inequality.

In her opening statement, Lee mentioned a female worker in a Samsung-owned computer chip factory who died from leukemia and a worker at a Hyundai car plant staging a strike on top of a construction crane.

“The biggest crisis facing the nation is the crisis of the common people,” she said, proceeding to highlight the luxurious houses Saenuri Party candidate Park Geun-hye has lived in since leaving Cheong Wa Dae after her father, late President Park Chung-hee, was assassinated in 1979.

“How has candidate Park lived?” she asked, staring straight into the camera, with Park just feet away from her.

“She lived in a house larger than 300 pyeong (991 square meters), with grass lawns.”

But it was clear that Park had learned from last week’s presidential debate, in which Lee caught Park off guard with her verbal rampage that included reminding viewers of the pro-Japanese past of Park’s father.

“You come to a debate and ask me questions as if you’re playing a game of 20 questions, hoping to embarrass me if I happen not to know something. Such way of questioning is not a desirable way of debating,” Park said while responding to a question by Lee asking if she knew the minimum wage, which Park answered correctly.

“I feel as if a school teacher is prodding her student with questions while checking homework. But presidential debates should include discussions on how to lay out a big vision for the future that can provide hope to the people.”

Park’s pointed response and implied accusations of bad manners successfully framed Lee as the smartest kid in the class who raised her hands all the time, even when the teacher was speaking.

Indeed, Lee raised a few eyebrows as she spoke out of turn, often interrupting Park when she was responding, which prompted the moderator to ask the candidates to respect the rules of the debate.


By Samuel Songhoon Lee
(songhoon@heraldcorp.com)