While the internet is buzzing with comments on Tony Tan & Son, the WP is being like the mainstream, constructive, nation-building media: silent as if there are no issues about the NS of a presedential candidate. Actually a bit unfair on MSM. They did carry Tony Tan’s version of what happened.
When the WP asked us for our votes so that they could co-drive with the PAP and give the PAP a “tight slap” if the PAP did something wrong, we delivered Aljunied, and almost East Coast and Joo Chiat. Looks as if WP is not happy with us.
Pritam Singh is regularly, publicly mentally masturbating about the WP forming a coalition with the PAP. So that the WP is allowed to put a finger on the steering wheel? But we only get silence on what the WP thinks abt the NS deferment for 13 yrs for the Patrician’s son, and related issues.
The two “People’s Voicess” are also silent.
As we know, TKL has a public position on almost every topical topic. But his megaphone is muted when it comes to the issues surrounding Patrick and Tony Tan. He expects us to believe he will be our public voice on other “sensitive” matters?
And that self-proclaimed silent “Voice of the People” remains silent. If we elect Tan Cheng Bock as president, we will have silence from him for six years. He tells us to trust him that he will speak out privately. But why should we trust him? On his track record of speaking his mind publicly, he says. But thaz the problem. He is asking us to make a leap of faith. Where once there was evidence, now there will be no evidence.
And what abt the SDP, NSP and SPP? Kinda silent on this “hot” topic? The silence of the RP and SDA are understandable. They are the walking dead.
And what abt LKY? The man who tells us that people like him get “an extra egg”, discounts because of who they are. What does he think? Is Tony Tan one of these people entitled to discounts? And is it OK for Mindef to give “an extra egg”?
Thoughts of a Cynical Investor 
The WP have stated in their manifesto (2006 and 2011) that they do not support the concept of the Elected Presidency and want the office to return to its previous ceremonial character. So, their silence on this matter is entirely in line with their official position.
As I see it, as long as the current elites are in power, no one will seriously touch on the sustainability of National Service or question the mindset of the minds which require Singaporeans to commit the bulk of our budget to equipping and fielding over 400,000 citizen soldiers and feeding the beast that is the local military industrial complex.
Together with HDB and CPF, these three combine to form the third rail of Singapore politics. If one day we see political parties questioning the status quo of these three pillars of the Singapore social contract, it would be a true sign of change.
When public voice is so loud and clear, there is no need for anyone to speak on its behalf.
As posted earlier in TRE if Father and Son can provide resonable answers readers and citizens should accept. Even though the PAP have not justify us Singaporeans for so many years we still accept and tolerate until recently than all starts to sound out their displeasure. We just hope he can and will give back to SOCIETY
@”And that self-proclaimed silent “Voice of the People” remains silent.”
LOL…ridiculous…one day U R asking TKL to shut up and be an MP…next day you want him to be “Voice of the People”.
Head U win, tail he loses?
No, I juz asking him to be consistent. with his megaphone style. The people are very loud on this issue. So he should be too.
Partially agree with you. But I would rather the co-drivers (of the few opposition parties) speak out on issues pertaining to the Constitution of PE for example, than to make their public stand/support for any of the candidates.
If they stick to core issues (could derive out of campaigns or its candidates eg Graduates schemes, FT/local scholarships, NS deferment etc) that concern Singaporeans then I think is good indications. It would also give electorate a feel and understanding of the Parties’ thinking/positions on such crucial matters. Yet, I agree their leadership can be more forthcoming as the netizens are the ones that are most vocal to date.
However, it could also be that too much noise on candidates (whose qualifications may/may not be approved) will be too premature. You could be giving away your game plan too early.
I think it’s better that the other potential candidates and political parties refrain from commenting on the individual potential candidates. Let them comment on the role of the EP and related topics such as the reserves. Once the eligible candidates are known, then let the gloves come off.
In any case, I think the TT/PT issue has taken a life of its own.
What does irk me is TT’s “special audiences”, eg with 500 union leaders. The BT article today claimed it was in response to demand from the unionists themselves to hear him speak and NTUC would arrange for other candidates to speak if their members asked. SIGH.
Let’s be honest here. Tony Tan is getting smeared, and it is silly for any public figure to stick their hands in and get dirty in the process, especially when it has turned quite self sustaining without any need for further stirring.
TKL has requested this campaign be clean, with no smearing, so he is at least being consistent. In fact, I dont think any of the PE candidates wants to turn this campaign into a witchhunt of their ancestors and offsprings.
With WP, PE is supposed to be above party politics, and WP sticking their hand in will lead to unnecessary complications.
Anyway, anybody can stir shit. You dont need an MP seat to do that. In fact, as a resident of Aljunied GRC, I’d rather they place their attention on where it matters to me, their voter, like Meet The People sessions and running the town council, rather than stirring shit over a ceremonial post.
Looking back, remember Vivian B question Vincent W if he is gay? That this issue was brought up is no surprise. The surprise is that a minister will choose to dirty his own hands instead of handing this dirty job to someone else.
As much as I am frustrated with WP with their general inaction over many issues, this time round, I think they are doing the right thing.
WP should be addressing the NS issue.
As to TT being smeared, he has only himself and his team to blame. I think he and Patrick have a decent narrative but if they can’t be bothered, thaz their problem.
http://young-pap.blogspot.com/2011/08/no-ns-deferement-for-postgrad-degree.html
This is why people are really upset. Double standards by the PAP. One rule for the PAP and another for the rest of Singapore.
[…] A Vote For Change – Thoughts of a Cynial Investor: The silence of the co-driver etc […]
There is always the tendency for co-drivers to snooze off more than the driver, in any case, the passengers(people) who pay the drivers for the ride should be more conscious of how the drivers do their works. Not only the passengers pay for the ride, their(passengers) safeties and well-beings are in the hands of the drivers.
Oh yes! the drivers know that they are in control of the fates of the passengers and can actually hold them(passengers) to ransom as well. So, take care yourselves passengers!
You simply cannot just rely on the driver, co-driver or spare drivers.
Just in case people are wondering where are the comments from WP, all I can harbour a guess is that they are busy meeting people every first Wednesday of the month (at least for Aljunied GRC), and actually tending to their problems.
Not promoting WP, but relating eye-witness accounts because MPS for WP is held right below my void deck and they “close shop” at around 12-1am every session.
I find that WP not commenting on Patrick Tan’s super long disruption is the right thing to do.
WP is voted in to be the alternative voice in Parliament, and it is only debate in Parliament that will yield any form of results.
If WP opens their mouth publicly on this issue, it will be no difference from ‘noise’. WP words will be of no higher value than any individual or group, in goving such a comment.
We want WP to be a responsible co-driver who will set things right when the driver screws up, but there is a time and a place to do the right things. And the right place is during parliamentary debate, not public debate.