atans1

Posts Tagged ‘Presidency’

When a ceremonial president goes “rogue”

In Political governance, Public Administration on 15/08/2017 at 7:18 am

Nothing much any government can do if it wants to avoid a public row.

This piece tries to explain why die die PAP must get the president PAP wants. And why even then there can be problems. Remember our first elected president?

A look at the relations between India’s ceremonial president (He is the head of the state, and is required by the constitution to act on the advice of ministers) and the governments of the day show how difficult it is to control a president who goes “rogue” ie refuses to act on the advice of ministers even when the constitution says he must.

Our president is more than a ceremonial figure. He is supposed to be a figurehead with some chief jaga duties primarily centred around protecting our reserves. It’s a mixture of ceremonial and custodial functions, thanks to one Harry Lee.

The ceremonial role aspect of our president, a figurehead, is based on the Indian model: he is the head of the state, and is required by the constitution to act on the advice of ministers.

An Indian president is supposedly

a mere figurehead who, in the words of former prime minister Jawaharlal Nehru, is a “head that neither reigns nor governs”, and holds a position of “authority or dignity” more than anything else?

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-india-40772945

But as a BBC article tells us http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-india-40772945, the so- called “figurehead” can cause the govt of the day a lot of problems.

The seventh president, Giani Zail Singh … had a stormy relationship with the then prime minister Rajiv Gandhi.

In 1987, he withheld assent from a controversial bill passed by the parliament. (The bill was later withdrawn.) There were reports that Mr Singh, who died in 1994 , had even considered sacking Mr Gandhi’s government over an arms purchasing scandal.

The ninth incumbent Shankar Dayal Sharma returned two executive orders to the cabinet in 1996 because they had been “inappropriately” issued before a general election.

And his successor, KR Narayanan, a London School of Economics-educated former diplomat and Dalit (formerly known as “untouchable”), was arguably one of India’s most assertive presidents. He delivered speeches which many believed were not vetted by the government and, in a surprising break from protocol, even gave an interview to a senior journalist.

Mr Narayanan also sent back a proposal to impose direct rule in the northern state of Uttar Pradesh to the cabinet, asking the ministers to reconsider it. He bluntly said: “I am not a rubber stamp.”

And he angered many in the government and the media for chiding visiting US president Bill Clinton at a state banquet, provoking the New York Times to comment that “the tensions inherent in forging an Indian-American friendship surfaced with Mr Narayanan’s speech”.

Then there was the previous president

Prof Manor believes Mr Kovind’s predecessor, Pranab Mukherjee, a veteran Congress party leader and a former senior minister, was “more assertive than nearly all previous presidents”.

Although he rejected a record 28 mercy pleas of death row convicts during his tenure, Mr Mukherjee defied the advice of the government and commuted the death sentences of four convicts in January.

“Mr Mukherjee had the right to refer those cases back to ministers for reconsideration once, but when they reiterated the advice, he is required to accept it. He refused to do so,” explains Prof Manor.

“That was potentially explosive politically, and might have led to a constitutional crisis. But the prime minister and cabinet apparently decided not to make an issue of it – because Mr Mukherjee’s term was soon to end, and because a confrontation would have prevented them from doing other important things.”

So one can understand why the ruling party in a de facto one-party state wants to ensure that the presidency is held by someone who will not go “rogue”, especially given that the job has chief jaga duties.  Remember Ong Teng Cheong?

And just to make sure after the rows with Ong, the chief  jaga can be over-ridden: If the President goes against the advice of the majority of the Council of Presidential Advisers and exercises his veto power, Parliament can override such a veto with a two-thirds majority.

——————————————

Ownself check ownself check ownself: Paradox of the PAP presidency.

——————————————

Whatever, there’s something the PAP cannot avoid: a “rogue” president has the power to publicise via the alternative, new or social media his views when he rows with the PAP administration. So all the more important to make sure kaki lung gets in.

Coming back to Harry Lee who devised the system. He wanted to fix a non-PAP government but ended up tying the PAP administration in knots. The latest twist is a Malay president whose i/c says “Indian”.

Even if she’s really a Malay. 

Oh what a tanled web we weave …

Continue to Pak PAP, but not Pak Halimah

In Political governance on 02/08/2017 at 6:56 am

Yesterday, I promised to explain why this is unfair to Hali and her mum and the Malay community.

(Terry Lim’s photos)

The cybernut who did the above, conveniently left out the inconvenient fact that none of the three “Indian” PAPpies had the misfortune of their “Indian” father dying when they were young children.

Halimah had the misfortune (OK, OK, it later turned out to be a winning lottery ticket) of her Indian-Muslim dad dying when she was eight. It was her widowed Malay mum that then brought Halimah (and her siblings) up with the support of her Malay relatives and the wider Malay community.

Halimah was not brought up in the Indian-Muslim community as an Indian-Muslim; but among the Malays as a Malay. No racists, the Malays: if a widowed Malay mother in a mixed race marriage wants to bring up her children as Malays, they support her. Truly tolerant, truly S’poreans. Really Mendaki should reflect this tolerant attitude: not that only i/c matters (See above link) as to who is a Malay.

And as I’ve written before, when she was NUS Law school, she was tot of as a Malay. Even then she wore a tudung, which then wasn’t hip. Btw, an Indian who knows the other female PAPpy Indian says she only started wearing saris when she became a junior minister.

A senior lawyer posted on FB that “the test in the Presidential Elections Act is not a race test, it’s a community acceptance test”. He’s right but the PM framed the need and importance of a Malay president in racial terms: “multi-racialism” to be precise.

So

S’poreans are right to ask to be talking about the issue because the next presidency is reserved for a Malay.  And one of the candidates is “Pakistani” (i/c says so leh) and the other while his i/c says “Malay” has Malays complaining that he’s really Indian because he can’t speak proper Malay.

The view among S’poreans of all races that what is on one’s i/c is a lot of bull* when it comes to whether someone is a Malay is becoming a major problem for the PAP.

By playing the “race” card albeit in the name of “multi-racialism”, the PM created a rod for his back and that of the PAP.

Image may contain: 2 people, people smiling, text

So let us continue to “Pak PM, Pak PAP” on the unreality of Muslim-Indians becoming Malays when the presidency is reserved for a Malay. Good clean fun. And best of all, the PAPpies started the conversation, not us.

But let’s remember Hali’s a decent person that could (and should) have become president on her own merits. She doesn’t really deserve this rubbish both from the PAP and the cybernuts, even though as a PAP Speaker she’s crying all the way to the bank. Wonder if she too has a monthly CPF statement, like Zorro Lim?

———————————-

*Even PAP MP Zainal Sapari says i/c is irrelevant in deciding whether one is a Malay. He’s not expected to stand at next GE.

 

Another photo of president Hali

In Uncategorized on 31/07/2017 at 6:12 am

Further to this

Image may contain: text

Halimah standing in presidential jeep

In Uncategorized on 30/07/2017 at 4:00 pm

No not a fake photo but a photo taken at the lastest NDP parade rehersal  (from TRE). If u think it’s a coincidence she’s standing in for Tony Tan, then u’ll believe she’s making up her mind. And I got a investment juz for u.

Halimah not BSing that she got to consult further

In Political governance on 21/07/2017 at 5:17 am

But first

Image may contain: 2 people, people smiling, text

(Happy to attribute if I know whom to attribute this to)

Back to Halimah

Speaking to reporters after a community event at her Marsiling ward, Mdm Yacob said she has been asked this question many times and felt honored and humbled by the support, but she needed more time to consult with her family and colleagues further.

Heard an interesting story from the usually unreliable sources. Though I hear while he’s happy for wife to be president (Who wouldn’t like to will the Toto top prize?), he’s not happy about  becoming the first First Man doing the traditional First Lady duties like being patron of women’s charities and hosting tea parties for women social workers. He’s no male chauvinist but I’m told he doesn’t fancy doing the things Mrs Tan does and Mrs Nathan did.

Hence the delay in his wife declaring that she wants to be president. His role has yet to be defined to his satisfaction.

Doubtless a fair and reasonable solution will be worked out for him a real gentleman, as his friends and ex-collegues describe him. I’m told he’s retired.

Btw, he’s Malay-Arab.

Can a true blue Malay (no cross breeds pls) from the Malaya Archiplego pls stand up.

The term Malaya Archiplego

was derived from the European concept of a Malay race,[4]which referred to the people who inhabited what is now Brunei,Singapore, Malaysia, Indonesia (excluding Western New Guinea), the Philippinesand East Timor. The racial concept was proposed by European explorers based on their observations of the influence of the ethnic Malay empire, Srivijaya, which was based on the island of Sumatra, Indonesia.[7]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malay_Archipelago

Are our “Khans” “Pakistanis” or “Indians”?

In Political governance, Public Administration on 19/07/2017 at 10:20 am

Here I said that the Pakistani wannabe president’s i/c states he is “Indian”. I was wrong. It does say “Pakistani”. But I do know other “Khans”, some really hard-drinking ones, whose i/cs say “Indian” much to their unhappiness. Worse these “Indians” belong to Sinda automatically: cannot opt out. They are not impressed having to belong to what they consider a Hindoo controlled body.

Why liddat?

Well it all seems to depend on whether the Khan in question or his ancestor came here before British India split into Pakistan and India in 1947. If said Khan came before the split, say in the 19th century or the early 2oth century or in 1946, when the Khan or his descendent became a S’pore citizen, he’d he classified as Indian as would his children.

If the Khan came here from Pakistan he’d be “Pakistani”.

Sounds logical.

Btw it’s no fun being classified as Pakistani if you need help: Neither Sinda or Mendaki would help you. https://sg.news.yahoo.com/comment-malay-enough-next-president-093246327.html

Call Pakistan embassy leh? Btw, reading the Yahoo article one gets the impression that there are those who think that Muslim= Malay, something that the PAP administration rejects because it has refused to change the constitution despite requests that S’pore follows the M’sian definition of “Malay”. This requires, among other things, being Muslim.

 

 

 

 

Academic talking cock/ Got such thing as “Malay” race meh?

In Uncategorized on 17/07/2017 at 11:41 am

A really moronic statement from someone who makes moronic statements when he’s trying to justify that the “PAP is always right”

… felt that voters should not be overly-fixated with a candidate’s ethnicity – albeit being an election reserved for a particular race – as it would “detract from the raison d’être of the elected presidency and of the elected president as a symbol of our multiracialism”, as Singapore Management University law don Eugene Tan put it …

Assoc Prof Tan said the reserved election “inevitably puts race up front and centre”. However, it is “imperative that we do not get too hung up over the race” of a presidential hopeful, he said.

http://www.todayonline.com/singapore/reserved-presidential-election-casts-spotlight-malayness

WTF. How not to think a lot about racial identity when the election is reserved for a “Malay” president especially given that it seems that being a “Malay” is a cultural issue, not an ethnic (ie racial) issue.

The constructive, nation-building press quotes two experts on “Malayness” who seem to imply that there really isn’t such a thing as a Malay race:

Malay-Muslim self-help group Yayasan Mendaki has a set of criteria for its financial assistance schemes for students administered on behalf of the Government. Among other things, the recipients “must be of Malay descent” as stated in their identity cards. It spells out a list of what it considers to be “Malay descent”, and this includes 22 ethnicities including Acehnese, Javanese, Boyanese, Sumatran, Sundanese and Bugis. Students with “double-barrelled” race are eligible if the first race is listed on the identity cards as Malay, said a Mendaki spokesman. For example, a student who is Malay-Arab would qualify for the schemes but an Arab-Malay student would not, he added.

However, for the Presidential Election, Association of Muslim Professionals chairman Abdul Hamid Abdullah stressed the need for a “wider definition of a Malay” in Singapore’s context. A narrow definition would be restrictive and could disqualify potential candidates who have been “accepted” as a member of the Malay community, he added. “It is better to be inclusive. Otherwise, (it) may lead to divisiveness in the Malay community,” he said.

http://www.todayonline.com/singapore/reserved-presidential-election-casts-spotlight-malayness

So my take that Chinese can be Malay is a real possibility isit based on the second expert? Heck, let’s juz say that Indian blood is necessary to be president. Or better still, that from now on, the president must be the result of a mixed marriage. Halimah can set the precedent of the president as a symbol of our multiracialism.

 

Indian blood required to be Prez isit?

In Political governance, Public Administration on 13/07/2017 at 10:21 am

I didn’t know that it’s a constitutional requirement that being Indian or having Indian blood is a must to be the president. Did you? When was this change made? Wah really trying to make sure that Dr Tan Cheng Bock can’t be president.

Seriously, so another Indian (He says he’s “Pakistani but his i/c says “Mama” “Indian”, my sources tell me ) wants to be president:

Mr Farid Khan bin Kaim Khan, 62, has officially announced his intention to stand as a candidate in the upcoming Presidential election reserved for Malay candidates.

… who describes himself as a caring person is of Pakistani descent and his wife is of Arabic descent. He regards his family as part of a larger Malay community as his family speak Malay and practice the Malay culture. He has two children, a 24-year-old daughter, and an 18-year-old son.

TOC

Then there’s guy from Second Chance. Yes, I know his i/c says “Malay” but I know many Malays consider him to be “Indian”. These same Malays say “Yaacob’s ‘Arab'”.


Lines very blurred

Actually lines between the Malay community and some Muslim Indian communities are very blurred. As I explained once, in the 80s there was a really good senior MFA official who was always complaining that he was wrongly classified as Indian, not Malay.  This is what a very senior MFA official (Indian Muslim) said to me (and others) in the early 80s: “How do I answer my young daughter when she asks me why she’s Indian but her cousin’s Malay?”. He was always grousing that being classified as Indian hurt his career (he could have been a minister) because of the “quota” system for Indians and Malays. He had to compete with clever Hindus and not Malays.

——————————–

And juz wondering? What does Halimah Yacob’s i/c say given that dad was Indian Muslim? To be fair to her and the PAP, the Malays community does consider her “Malay”, no matter what her i/c may say. When she was in NJUS Law School (mid 70s), her cohort knew her as a “tudung” wearing Malay.

Whatever, Indians rule OK. There’s Devan Nair, Nathan (two terms) and then the next one too (even if it’s a “reserved” one for Malays). No wonder the Indians are uppity about their place in S’pore’s caste system.

Whatever, again, Khan’s case seems to show that Muslims are beginning to think that being Muslim makes them Malay.

What next? A Muslim Chinese can be a Malay? When the day comes when a Chinese Muslim is considered by the Malay community to be a Malay, then the PAP will have to rethink its Hard Truth that all politics are race-based, with a tinge of sectarianism.

Oxley, AG & DAG-gates: Anti-PAP 30% got a lot to answer for

In Political governance on 10/07/2017 at 12:12 pm

They shouldn’t blame the PAP or the 70% who voted for the PAP. It’s all their fault that the PAP can suka suka do what it likes.

Recent developments have shown that a president Tan Cheng Bock could have made sure things were done differently, things that the usual suspects like Mad Dog Chee, Jeannette Chong (In two GEs, she was a candidate for two different parties. juz like Tan Jee Say) and Goh Meng Seng (three different parties in three GEs: Parachutist Extraordinaire), and cybernut friends and allies are upset about, and KPKBing about.

Jedi, Terry Xu, updated this https://www.theonlinecitizen.com/2016/10/10/amendments-to-the-elected-presidency-how-pap-stop-at-nothing-to-avoid-checks-and-balance-on-itself/  he wrote last yr to reflect recent developments.

He wrote

A president with Dr Tan Cheng Bock’s character would mean that many questionable requests — not to give clemency to death row inmates, withdrawal of reserves for “welfare policies” and etc — will be made public and having the president to be vocal about controversial policies and appointment of positions by the PAP administration.

One such example of controversial appointments that a person like Dr Tan will find issues with, would be the appointment of Mr Lucien Wong as Attorney-General in November 2016 to succeed Mr V K Rajah S.C for a 3-year term with effect from 14 January 2017. Mr Wong at the age of 63, was succeeding Mr Rajah who is retiring at the age of 60.

On 14 June 2017 in the joint statement of Dr Lee Weiling and Mr Lee Hsien Yang, it is made known that Mr Wong has acted as PM Lee’s personal lawyer on matters concerning 38 Oxley Road from 2015, and unknown when his commercial interest with PM Lee ended, or ended at all. No one knew Mr Wong was PM Lee’s personal lawyer when he was appointed, even when the Minister of Law and Home Affairs addressed concerns over Mr Wong’s appointment in Parliament, he made no mention of the matter to the Members of Parliament.

While PM Lee has stated that he had cleared Mr Wong’s appointment with the cabinet, CPA and the President during his closing statement on 4 July 2017, but this does not make the appointment of Mr Wong anymore justified. Any layman would ask if there is no better lawyer in Singapore who is younger and free of conflict of interest in order to carry out his or her duties as an independent individual to advise the government on legal matters. Despite PM Lee and Ms Indranee Rajah’s praise for Mr Wong’s exemplary performance as a lawyer, many would believe there are quite a number of lawyers who can also be up to the task.

The appointment of PAP’s former MP for Bishan-Toa Payoh GRC, Mr Hri Kumar Nair as Deputy Attorney General, is also no more different when it comes to conflict of interest or the lack of public appearance of impartiality.

Plenty of anti-PAP cybernuts KPKB on TOC FB’s wall after “reading” the piece.

My FB avatar commented

How many of those commenting voted for Tan Jee Say or Tan Kin Lian? The 30% who voted for these two should juz sit down and shut up. They had the chance to give the PAP a bloody nose. What did they do? Voted to ensure PAP controlled the presidency.

There was silence.

Seriously, there should be a new exhibit at Haw Par Villa:

 

Image result for ten courts hell haw par villa

A 11th court in Hell for Tan Jee Say, Tan Kin Lian, Goh Meng Seng (he prodded TKL into running and was his election adviser); people like Mad Dog, Jeannette Chong and Nicole Seah (remember her?) who openly* supported TJS; and the cybernuts. What were all these people thinking when they were effectively voting for the PAP’s preferred candidate.

With enemies like these, the PAP doesn’t need friends. Roll on, PAP hegemony. The PAP doesn’t need that house.


*Mad Dog did not publicly endorse him (unlike the other two) but he had plenty of help from SDP activists, help that could come if Mad Dog had approved of TJS.

Paradox of the PAP presidency

In Political governance on 13/06/2017 at 7:20 am

I pointed out  here that our CPF could be returned tomorrow (if the govt of the day was willing to do so).

I also said that in an alternative universe when Dr Chee became PM, with a two-thirds majority in parly, he could tell president Yaacob to allow him to draw on the reserves and return our CPF. He would tell President Halimah

I have the mandate of the people. What do u have? How many S’poreans voted for u? None because u won by default.”

Sign or I’ll pee on u and let the mob into the Istana.

Seriously, this is the paradox. How can a president that entered office via a walk-over have the moral authority to resist a newly elected govt that is different from the one that “chose” the “right’ president?

Where does the will of people reside?

Ownself fix ownself

I commend this post where a law professor points out that Nathan was never elected”: he was an unelected president, same like Devan Nair etc. Only Ong Teng Cheong (another cybernut hero) was the real deal.  Within is a video where he points out that the presidency is problematic for the PAP when the PAP is the govt in power. Watch the video to understand how “Ownself sabo ownself”.

This post on the presidential council describes how the PAP tries to solve the problem posed by the professor.

“Oh! What A Tangled Web We Weave” which continues “When First We Practice To Deceive”.

Elected President: Oh, what a tangled web we weave cont’d

In Political governance on 28/04/2017 at 7:12 am

Further to this on “Ownself veto ownself” procedures on vetoing the president’s decision, if he refuses to make the “right” decision, I reflected further on

Oh, what a tangled web we weave

when via the u/m I double confirmed that the presumptive Malay president’s father was an Indian Muslim.

(Btw, pls read my analysis of this FB post which follows the post)

Facebook post by We want Minister Grace Fu to resign.

In 2013, when Halimah Yacob was selected to be the new Speaker of Parliament after the former one, Michael Palmer, resigned from politics due to his marital affair with a PA woman, ST wrote an article to feature Halimah (‘A strong advocate for workers, women and minorities‘, Jan 2013):

Mdm Halimah Yacob

In the article, it was revealed that her father is an Indian of Muslim faith. He passed away when Halimah was 8 years old. She studied hard and later graduated with a law degree from NUS. Her first job was as a legal officer with NTUC.

PAP invited her to join politics in 2001. Ten years later, she was promoted to become a Minister of State.

When Palmer’s affair surfaced and he was forced to resign, PM Lee nominated Halimah to become the new Speaker on 8 Jan 2013. Six days later, she became the first woman Speaker of Parliament of Singapore.

In fact, news of Halimah becoming Singapore’s first woman speaker also made its way to India. The Hindu described her as an “Indian-origin politician” (‘Indian-origin politician to be Singapore’s first woman speaker‘):

Next President to be a Malay

Last Nov, PM Lee announced to Singaporeans that the next Presidential Election will bereserved for Malay candidates:

This is based on the “hiatus-triggered model”, the PM said.

He also said that the first President who exercised the powers of the Elected Presidency was Wee Kim Wee when everyone thinks it should be Ong Teng Cheong.

“This would be our first after more than 46 years, since our first (Malay) President Encik Yusof Ishak,” PM Lee said. “I look forward to this.”

In any case, since Halimah’s father is an Indian Muslim, it follows that she would also be an Indian Muslim too. That means she would not be able to participate in this year’s Presidential Election, assuming if she wants to or was asked to.

Actually the last para while logically correct is wrong because article 19B (5) of the Con says:

“person belonging to the Malay community” means any person, whether of the Malay race or otherwise, who considers himself to be a member of the Malay community and who is generally accepted as a member of the Malay community by that community;

And to be fair to the Indian Muslim and Malay communities, the lines between the two communities are legal lines, not community lines. I’ll go into this one of these days.

But as a taster, this is what a very senior MFA official (Indian Muslim) said to me (and others) in the early 80s: “How do I answer my young daughter when she asks me why she’s Indian but her cousin’s Malay?”. He was always grousing that being classified as Indian hurt his career (he could have been a minister) because of the “quota” system for Indians and Malays. He had to compete with clever Hindus and not Malays.

Trumpets pls: I said in early 2016 Halimah would be president.

Elected President: Oh, what a tangled web we weave.

In Political governance on 27/04/2017 at 10:30 am

I tot of the above when I read about changes in parliamentary procedures which will take effect if the President goes against the advice of the majority of the Council of Presidential Advisers and exercises his veto power.

Parliament can override such a veto with a two-thirds majority.

So now as a FB pal says:

Elected President – Yes Man
Council of Elderly Men in Suits – Yes Men
2/3 of Parliament – Yes Men

So much checks and balances against anyone who may suddenly stop being a Yes Man.

Election for what, waste time and money, may as well revert previous system.

And

Who watches the watchmen who watches the watchmen who watches the watchmen ad nauseum.

to which the reply was

THE MOB SHALL WATCH EVERYONE

http://i1.kym-cdn.com/…/048/burn_house._beat_mother..png

Btw, the above line from Marmiom continues:
When first we practise to deceive!

Surrealism and religious harmony: The PAP way

In Political governance on 07/04/2017 at 6:32 am

PAP Minister Masagos Zulkifli’s criticism of WP MP Faisal Manap for repeatedly raising the tudung issue in Parliament and causing division in S’pore, had me in stitches about the surrealism of the scene in Parly when he said it. I mean criticising  Faisal Manap for repeatedly raising the tudung issue in Parliament and causing division in S’pore in front of a tudung wearing Speaker (and assumptive president come September)

sounds so Alice-in-Wonderland

It also reminded me that I had written this sometime back

Religious harmony: PAP’s, Putin’s way

Mr Putin said Russia had been far ahead of its European rivals in establishing a model for co-existence between faiths. In a way, that is true. But co-existence under a common, imperial regime – one that punishes “blasphemers” of all kinds, including those who challenge the regime itself, and colludes with religious authorities to maintain social control – is different from the liberal model of co-existence, where no religion is protected and each must argue its case in an open market-place of ideas.

http://www.economist.com/blogs/erasmus/2015/01/empire-islam-and-russia

Now doesn’t the Russian way sound very much like the S’porean way? Interestingly both are the products of 19th century European imperialism. In the case of Russia, the imperialism of the tsars. In the case of S’pore, British colonalism.

The British and the Russian tsars ruled multi-racial, multi-ethnic and multi-cultural empires and needed to keep the natives from killing one another or their masters.

So when Harry the axe man became PM, the laws he (and we) inherited from the British suited him to the T: in response to this on the murder of cartoonists in Paris, a reader pointed out rightly in my view,

During LKY’s time he will come out on TV to gloat that this is why we have sedition act and ISD and why he will string you up by the balls anyone who breaks his hard truths and make you wish you had been just simply killed by terrorists.

I’ll end with Chen Jiaxi Bernard‘s FB tots. (He’s a WP member will balls and brains. The “Worthless” or “Wanker” cape doesn’t fit him.)

Quite clear (if it was not already clear enough) who will be our next President. A woman Malay-Muslim president who dons a tudang will indeed show how progressive we are as an inclusive nation. The progress we have made to support the aspirations of women in this country, symbolises by the highest office in the land.

And so we have her, the appointment (the electoral walkover) of Mdm Halimah Yaccob. In an open election, Mdm Halimah will be able to hold her own against any potential candidate*. Wait, it’s reserved for members of her community. Come on, she can stand on her own and win comfortably. I am confident that she will receive more votes (across all ethnic groups) than President Tan in 2011.

Either the PAP has no confidence in their own Speaker or they really have zilch trust that Singaporeans value merit over a person’s race.

The election of Mdm Halimah come September 2017 will be a sad day for Singapore. 50 years of nation building and the ideals taught to students in school surrendered to the narrow and tribal politics of the ruling party. Hypocrisy at the highest level. Sad.

On the day when the ruling party will hail progress, they have blatantly plunged a mortal stab into the social contract that defined Singapore as a nation, regardless of race, language and religion

The biggest loser even in the context of a walkover: Singapore.

One day when our children stopped believing in the “Majulah” in Majulah Singapore and our national pledge, point them to this government and this Prime Minister, the son of our founding Prime Minister. The irony, the utter hypocrisy.


*Trumpets pls. I said this early last yr.  A later post.

 

Wrong reason for LKY turning in his grave

In Political governance on 22/12/2016 at 2:21 pm

After parliament allowed racial discrimination in favour of Malays, a WP supporter came out with this on Facebook. I’m surprised I didn’t see it on Terry’s Online Channel

Jee Say is a cybernut?

In Political governance on 13/12/2016 at 5:37 am

Here’s part of a FB post by TSJ that shows he’s gone over to the nutty side.

It is vitally important that we elect a strong President, not a token one, next year to ensure that our reserves are used to benefit ordinary people, rather than provide life support to “natural aristocrats” and their cronies.

TJS must be deluded to think we’ll get the chance to vote for the next president. LOL. But then TJS tot he had the votes to become MP and then president and then MP. The whipping his ass got (three times in row) must have affected his brains which doesn’t seem to reside in his skull.

I mean, the conventional wisdom among the thinking anti-PAP activists and cyberwarriors is that we’ll not get the chance to vote at the next PE.

So what’s he going on about voting for a strong president?

But to be fair, maybe he posted after smoking medicinal weed. I mean the pains from three whippings of his ass must be terrible for someone with his oversized ego.

——– ——

This is what he posted

“Singapore, the new sick man of Asia”

1. “Some economists call Singapore the new sick man of Asia, supplanting the Philippines, whose economy is now growing almost four times faster.” (according to this Reuters piece.)

2. While the Singapore economy deteriorates in 2016, PM Lee was obsessed the whole year with politicizing the Elected Presidency. He has got his priority wrong. It’s the economy, stupid, as Bill Clinton would say.

3. PAP will “raid” our national reserves to save themselves in the next few years.

4. It is vitally important that we elect a strong President, not a token one, next year to ensure that our reserves are used to benefit ordinary people, rather than provide life support to “natural aristocrats” and their cronies.

TJS


If you think I’m being nasty to TJS, here are nastier FB posts

Hurray TJS, the sick man of Singapore strike again.
Yes, it must be sickening to fail in GE, PE and GE again.
Yes it must be sickening to fail in the financial arena and in the civil service.
More to the points raised now….
it should be expected that the Philippine economy should be registering reasonably better growth coming from such a low base compared to that of spore. We should be happy for our neighbours’ growth.
As for raiding the nation’s reserves, Spore must be fortunate that someone like you is nowhere near the till.
And yes, its the economy STUPID, and not the politiking.

And

Are you seriously trying to compare a US$55,182 GDP per capita country against a US$2765 per capita one? The Philippines is growing no doubt, but a cooling economy does not a sick man make.

Halimah deserves better

In Political governance on 05/12/2016 at 4:32 am

Halimah Yacob was featured in a full-page spread in the inaugural edition of the revamped (now free) TNP last week. And that feature featured in last Friday’s ST. And known and rapid PAPpies are publicising the TNP feature on Facebook.

Starting the spin ahead of PE next year?

Actually I’d really be disappointed if she’s the chosen one.

She deserves better. IMHO she could have whipped Tan Cheng Bok’s ass in a straight fight. I’d have voted for her despite voting for TCB, and never ever voting PAP.

I wrote this in March this year

I pointed out that there was one Malay PAPpy who could thrash Dr Tan and that he and I would vote for that person: he had commended her in the past.

Yes the person in Halimah Yacob. Going by her credentials, she’d sew up the union, core PAP vote (“Any donkey so long as he or she is a PAP preferred donkey”) and wimmin vote. And because she’s such an intelligent nice, no-airs, capable and compassionate person, she’d get a big share of the swing vote. Ftr, we attended the same law postgraduate class in 1978.

My friend could only sputter, “Malay men won’t vote for her.” I said, “So what? The Malay wimmin, all wimmin, NTUC members, hard-core PAPPy voters and many swing voters will.” I added that I tot she could get more than 59% of the popular vote (i.e. more than Ong Teng Cheong in 1993)

Malay PAPpy that can thrash Chin Bock

She’s also onsistent in her values. Examples: I think she was wearing the tudung in the late 70s (not hip then) when we were in the same post grad law course. And she toiled away in NTUC for many, many yrs before being talent spotted.

I mean PAP and NTUC so cock that they didn’t identify her earlier. I mean I was near early retirement when she was “spotted”.

I know, I know she sucks as a Speaker, openly campaigning for PAP candidates and is reported to discriminate against WP MPs. But let’s face it, she may be a good person but she’s a PAPpy running dog all the same.

But some running dogs have better attributes than others. Think Tharman the pedigree running dog as against the pariahs.

So I’ll still vote for her against TCB. After all he too was a running dog in his prime.

All PAP running dogs are to be despised, but some are to be despised less than others. I’d put Tharman, Haliman and Dr Tan among the less desposed.

Today the presidency, tomorrow yr CPF

In Political governance on 16/11/2016 at 7:49 am

This is what happens when voters keep on giving the PAP a two-thirds (and counting) majority in Parly: PM said in Parliament on 8 Nov that the government is intending to amend the Presidential Elections Act next January to ensure that the next President would come from a minority race:

“Every citizen, Chinese, Malay, Indian, or some other race, should know that someone of his community can become President, and in fact from time to time, does become President.”

He could say that government is intending to amend the legistation because the governing party has a two-thirds majority.

Today the presidency: tomorrow the age of CPF withdrawal goes up to 75 and then the lease of the pigeon loft in sky is cut to 55 yrs from 99? Yes, yes I know that CPF and HDB leases are not in the constitution, so there’s no need for a two-thirds majority.

My point is that allowing any party the power to suka suka amend the constitution is asking for trouble, serious trouble because with a two-thirds majority (and more) can give the government the confidence that really unpopular and unfair measures can be rammed through because come the next general election, with a GRC system and the PM in charge of the redrawing of electoral boundaries, the damage to the governing party can be contained, if the voters hadn’t been bribed off in the mean time, or if memories are short.

 

Some people never grateful/ Left out the “gragoes”

In Political governance on 09/11/2016 at 4:57 am

TOC shared this FB KPKBing.

Khan Osman Sulaiman
6 hrs ·
My community raised the issue of discrimination of Malays in RSAF.

My community raised the issue of allowing school children to wear the tudung.

My community raised the issue of allowing Hijabs in uniformed groups.

My community raised the issue of having a ‘halal kitchen’ in the navy ships.

My community raised the issue of having an independent MUIS.

My community raised the issue to legislate some form of discrimination laws.

Having a Malay president isnt the most pressing issue but yeah, it will be ‘given’ as though it’s what we need the most.

We can now celebrate the magnanimous gesture by the Gov.

Seriously, the post explains why the PAP administration had to give the Malays something even if it was only a peanut. Otherwise, they’d think the community was being marginalised.

And here’s another good FB post

Felix Cheong
I hope, at some point in our alternate universe of democracy, there will be a reserved presidential election for:

– Malay woman
– Chinese single-parent gay man
– Caucasian hot male

He left out the Eurasians. And Schooling won an Olympic gold medal for S’pore.

But then Eurasians don’t riot to misquote BG Yeo who said that of Christians. Anyway too few of them to form a rioting mob. Most left for Perth a long time ago

“People are unsatisfied, but we’re afraid of change”

In Political governance on 25/09/2016 at 5:33 am

True here too? Especially the bits about “Power and the state … are one and the same,” and “And any citizens’ participation in politics is not expected.”

Think of waz happening to the post of elected president here? The voters use a presidential election when there is one to cock a snook at the PAP administration. In return, the PAP has drawn up more convoluted fixes (think Nathan) rules, and tied itself in knots or avoiding the issues raised when arguing the case for changes in the qualifications to be a candidate.*

MARINA, a middle-aged Muscovite with dark hair and piercing eyes, is unhappy—about rising prices, rampant corruption and even Russia’s confrontation with the West. But she is not ready for a change of course. “People are unsatisfied, but we’re afraid of change,” she declares. “Gorbachev had some nice ideas, but see how that turned out? I don’t want Russia to be destroyed.” So it comes as no surprise that Marina, and most of her compatriots, voted for more of the same when they took to the polls on September 18th for elections to the Duma, the national parliament.

http://www.economist.com/news/europe/21707388-reshuffle-russias-security-services-may-follow-parliamentary-elections-vladimir-putins

And

Many complain of rising prices and falling wages. “You go into the store and your money gets you nothing,” says Marina (who declined to state her last name, quipping, “Tomorrow they’ll burn my car”). 

Doesn’t this reflect what many S’poreans in the 70% that voted for the PAP feel?

And

The new ministry and United Russia’s dominance of the Duma ought to end any illusion that the Russian system could allow resistance from within, argues Oleg Kashin, a prominent columnist. “Power and the state in Russia are one and the same,” he writes. “And any citizens’ participation in politics is not expected.”

Think of waz happening to the post of elected president here?

——————————————————————————–

*U/m quotes from the constructive, nation-building MediaCorp whose website suspiciously looks similar to N Korea’s internet: http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-37426725

The Minister for Pets said:

The commission highlighted the “tension” between the President’s two roles and suggested that an appointed body of experts could take over the custodial functions, while Parliament could appoint a President to serve as a unifying symbolic figure. But Mr Shanmugam pointed out: “If you look at the commission’s report, the commission recognise that if a person or body is not elected then they cannot really say no and block the Government.”

Among other recommendations, the commission recommended that the President be obliged to consult the Council of Presidential Advisers (CPA) before exercising his discretion on all fiscal matters. Nevertheless, the Parliament can override the President’s decision, with the level of CPA support making a difference to the Parliament majority needed. Referring to the CPA, Mr Shanmugam reiterated that the commission recognised that “this body of experts, because they are unelected, the best (they) can (do is) only delay (the decision) and Parliament can still override”. He added: “If you want to give real power then they have to be elected as the commission itself recognise”.

In his letter to the commission, Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong had said he appreciated the commission’s reasons for making the suggestion to consider reverting to a President elected by Parliament. But he stressed that “it would be difficult for a President to exercise custodial powers over the reserves and public service appointments, and veto proposals by the Government, without an electoral mandate”.

… also responded to critics who claimed that the EP changes were politically motivated. “All sorts of statements can be made but (I think they should) get back to basics and look at logic,” he said …

He said that people can disagree with the report, including whether elections are needed to choose a President. If there is a need for elections, it would be sensible to put in requirements for the candidates because the President will have to make important decisions that involve huge sums of money, for instance, he noted. “If you agree that there should be qualifications, I think most people will agree (the Government) should also review the criteria, so the debate and discussion will become better if we deal with the specific issues and questions that I have asked,”..,

Ong Yee Kung said:

“In the end, I think whether the president is (considered to be chosen based on merit) and seen to (have done a) good job has to be judged after he has done the job – and not before he is elected.”

Huh? What cock is this?

Queen Jos said

that the President plays a “hugely important role” in being a custodian of the reserves. “He needs to have the financial oversight and decision-making ability, That is the basic criteria he must fulfill,” she said. His ability to command respect still depends on the people’s mandate, she said. She noted the role of former President S R Nathan – who died last month – during the 2008 global financial crisis. Mr Nathan agreed to the Government’s request to draw funds from the reserves to help companies. The decision ultimately helped “save many rice bowls”, she noted. “When it comes to crucial times like this, he has to make a critical decision, and to answer to the people.

What has this to do the changes, Jos never said.

 

 

Why the PAP fears Dr Tan Cheng Bock

In Political governance on 11/09/2016 at 1:12 pm

The guy is shrewd, classy with a great sense of PR: see below.

Ada standard as a natural aristocrat and as a president.

With him as an elected president, the PAP administration will have to take account of his views, no matter what the legal position is on the powers of the president. He’ll signal his unhappiness or displeasure even when he has to follow the advice of the cabinet.

Well those who voted for Tan Jee Say and Tan Kin Lian, I hope you are repenting for doing the PAP’s dirty work for them. Each of you didn’t even get yr thirty pieces of silver.

And Tan Jee Say and Tan Kin Lian were the rewards of preventing him from becoming president worth it?

This appeared on Facebook

Message to my friends and supporters

Many Singaporeans including Netizens, have expressed their concern that the Constitutional Commission’s report has excluded me from the 2017 Presidential Election.

I have been kept busy assuring them that the Constitutional Commission Report will be tabled in Parliament in the form of a White Paper on 15th Sept.

Parliament will debate it, make amendments, support it, or even reject it.

We should not jump into conclusion that the whole exercise was to prevent me from running.
After all, the people in charge are men of virtue and integrity and would not resort to doing this.

Let us wait for the coming debate before jumping into conclusion. 

 

Why some ex-presidents are more equal than others

In Political governance on 27/08/2016 at 1:15 pm

What’s going viral? People are wondering why some ex-Presidents get state funerals and some don’t.

(TMG’s attempt to get eyeballs http://themiddleground.sg/2016/08/23/viral-views-why-a-state-funeral-for-one-ex-president-and-not-another/)

Possible answers?

Maybe it depends on whether someone was offended or disappointed?

When Ong Teng Cheong died in 2002, remember one LKY was silent on Ong as president, only praising Ong as NTUC leader: “Ong Teng Cheong’s greatest service to Singapore was as Secretary-General of the NTUC. At a critical time, he renewed the leadership and infused new energy into the organisation. He also broadened the objectives of the trade union movement beyond industrial issues by adding a social dimension to NTUC activities, providing union members with a wide range of leisure and recreational facilities, so that they do not lag behind the middle-class Singaporeans who were upgrading their leisure pursuits. He made a difference.”

And maybe or also whether the president in question was a true believer? Someone who knew his place in the scheme of things? Not a questioner of authourity?

Image result for Napoleon is always right

DSC_0029

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

“Only minorities need apply” presidency is “2 steps back”

In Political governance on 25/08/2016 at 5:03 am

I’m sure you’ve seen Alfian Sa’at tots on whether there’s really a need for a Malay president.

In a FB conversation on the piece, someome said: A President is supposed to represent ALL the races. He is supposed to be a UNIFYING figure.

This got a totful response on the presidency in general and the issue that “only minorities need apply” in some years. (Note I’ve reparagraphed rhe piece to make it easier on the eye.)

Sadly IMHO the office of president is NOT a unifying figure in any way shape or form but someone who is respected nonetheless but as figurehead much like we respect royalty (but to a much lesser degree as its a fairly new institution.)

However some presidents are distinguished Singaporeans in their own right before they ascended to the throne so to speak. That figurehead rubberstamp role could have changed if a non PAP or PAP appointed candidate was elected who would not be so biased towards to the ruling party but alas that did not happen yet.

Why can’t a minority head of state improve the lives of minority as any help would be appreciated. It’s not a job role. No one needs to be specifically in Mendaki or CDAC or Sinda to try to do that. Look at how Barack Obama sometimes goes against certain institutions to highlight black issues through his speeches and influence on social media. It’s not his job per say. [This paeagraph doesn’t sound quite right. The second and last sentence should be removed?]

Inclusivity is not just what we are after but more fairness and less racism. Lots of racial profiling and racial biasness and what have you goes on all over the world – Singapore included.

Alfian got this spot on IMHO. And many others have called this bluff long time ago – nothing new in what he said but just awesome that he said out loud.

Singapore should aim higher for colourblindness though it’s hard and we can start but not electing figurehead tokens like a Malay or Indian president just because it would look nice on paper. This brings 2 steps back ..

Cina president: Fixed our minorities?

In Political governance on 18/03/2016 at 5:36 am

When TRE republished this piece on the Malay PAPPy that can thrash Dr Tan Cheng Bock (I called him “Chin Bock” in the piece: can’t remember why, “An honest mistake?”), it provoked the usual nuts. But there was a totful response which contains an explanation of the “unwritten understanding” between the natural aristocracy and the serfs from the minority races, which really I should have blogged about.

harold:
March 18, 2016 at 12:53 am (Quote)
Singaporeans need to get this clear.

At Independence, the leaders then came to the agreement that the President shall always be appointed from a minority group, because it was assumed – and not wrongly – that the Prime Minister, being an elected position, would more likely than not be a Chinese.

So far, all Prime Ministers have indeed been Chinese.

That alone shows that given the opportunity to vote for their leader, Singaporeans do in fact vote along racial lines.

The elected presidency reneged on the promise made at Independence. Thus if the rules are changed so as to allow for minorities as president – and by that I mean QUALIFIED – minorities, and I say this because it is more often than not assumed that minorities are NEVER AS QUALIFIED as any Chinese, which is RACISM – then all the government would be doing is returning to the promise made at Independence.

To the poster who made the claim that Halimah Yaacob is not even qualified for the presidency (see what I mean about the racism?): She is.

The Speaker is equivalent to a cabinet minister, which then qualifies her as President.

I would fully support a President Halimah Yaacob.

Two good insights on the PAP’s “divide and rule” the races:

dusky landspace lordess:

Change We Must:
PAP is a divisive party, why brought up the issue of races. We are all Singaporeans.

Always felt the policies were along racial lines. The help groups are also along racial lines. Hiring policies are also along racial lines. Political candidates are also along racial lines etc …

But must put me at the top of the list when wealth distribution is done.

It cannot be along racial lines as fancied.

I will come and take my rightful share.

And here’s a good dig about that opportunist extraordinaire, TJS,

jojo:

TCB would be the current President had it not for the stupid Tan Jee Say. He was a bloody spoiler. He doesn’t know what he wants in Politics. Where is he and what is he doing now, by the way?

Have a good weekend.

Malay PAPpy that can thrash Chin Bock

In Political governance on 13/03/2016 at 4:15 pm

So Dr Tan Chin Bock wants to be president (For the record, Ftr, I voted for him in 2011.). He obviously hasn’t been reading PM’s lips: that the next president will be a Malay and that the choice of candidates for president will be limited to Malays.

———————————

Yes, yes, I know a nine-member Constitutional Commission led by Chief Justice Sundaresh Menon is reviewing eligibility criteria for candidates, the role of the Council of Presidential Advisers, and steps to ensure minority candidates have a chance to be elected from time to time. Still hasn’t PM stated his govt’s preferences? And for the commission to go against the elected govt’s mandate (more than two-thirds of voters)  is to show disrespect to the govt and the voters.

——————————————–

Fair is fair as there has been no Malay PM since the first president (Ftr again, his widow lives a few houses down the street). Btw, wonder if PM means Malay-Muslim or juz Malay? Unlike in M’sia there is no legal requirement for a Malay to be a Muslim in S’pore.

The thinking behind any restriction is that us Cina would prefer any Chinese to any Malay or Indian, even if it’s someone like Tan Kin Lian who lost his deposit at the last PE. And if the Chinese man is Dr Chin Bock (a compassionate, intelligent,  generous, gentleman) even Indians and Malays will vote for him.

But this Hard Truth is false because there’s one Malay who can beat Dr Chin Bock. with very little effort.

Last December, an anti-PAP paper warrior and I discussed who could beat Dr Tan.

————————–

He so hates the PAP that even when he uses SingHealth, he KPKBs that he must wait: he expects no waiting at polyclinic. I asked him why he uses SingHealth given his KPKBing and hatred of the PAP administration. He says thru gritted teeth, “Cheap” but quickly adds that PAP made him poor so he kanna use SingHealth. Ftr, he owns a landed property and drives a car: poor indeed.

—————————

He of course said, “No-one”. I pointed out that there was one Malay PAPpy who could thrash Dr Tan and that he and I would vote for that person: he had commended her in the past.

Yes the person in Halimah Yacob. Going by her credentials, she’d sew up the union, core PAP vote (“Any donkey so long as he or she is a PAP preferred donkey”) and wimmin vote. And because she’s such an intelligent nice, no-airs, capable and compassionate person, she’d get a big share of the swing vote. Ftr, we attended the same law postgraduate class in 1978.

My friend could only sputter, “Malay men won’t vote for her.” I said, “So what? The Malay wimmin, all wimmin, NTUC members, hard-core PAPPy voters and many swing voters will.” I added that I tot she could get more than 59% of the popular vote (i.e. more than Ong Teng Cheong in 1993)

He kept quiet. Or rather he switched topics: to the persecution of Amos the Fantastic.

But as elections are no sure things, I doubt that we’d get the chance to vote in a Halimah Yacob versus Dr Tan fight. Sad because if I’m right and she wins, it’d  kill forever the Hard Truth that Chinese will only vote Chinese even if the better candidate is non-Chinese. But maybe the PAP doesnt want to show that this Hard Truth has feet of clay?

——————————

Origin of “feet of clay”

Thou, O king, sawest, and behold a great image. This great image, whose brightness was excellent, stood before thee; and the form thereof was terrible.
This image’s head was of fine gold, his breast and his arms of silver, his belly and his thighs of brass,
His legs of iron, his feet part of iron and part of clay. (Daniel 2:31-33)

And whereas thou sawest the feet and toes, part of potters’ clay, and part of iron, the kingdom shall be divided; but there shall be in it of the strength of the iron, forasmuch as thou sawest the iron mixed with miry clay.
And as the toes of the feet were part of iron, and part of clay, so the kingdom shall be partly strong, and partly broken.
And whereas thou sawest iron mixed with miry clay, they shall mingle themselves with the seed of men: but they shall not cleave one to another, even as iron is not mixed with clay. (Daniel 2:41-43)

——————————

Better for the PAP to play games on racial, cultural matters with the aim of perpetuating its hegemonic rule.

I end by commending this post where a law professor points out that Nathan was never elected” he was an unelected president, same like Devan Nair etc. Only Ong Teng Cheong was the real deal.

The truth about Nathan’s presidency

In Political governance on 13/03/2016 at 4:23 am

He was never elected.

“Tan also argued that in the case of SR Nathan’s Presidency, he had absolutely no moral mandate as he ran uncontested. An exercise of public affirmation was not undertaken either. Tan shared with the audience about a conversation he once had with SR Nathan at the Istana.

SR Nathan: This man (Kevin Tan) says that I wasn’t properly elected.

Prof Kevin: Sir, I never did say that you were not properly elected. I only said that you were not elected”

 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DCqlTuqdj6k&feature=youtu.be&t=29m45s
Embedded inside http://www.theonlinecitizen.com/2016/03/highlights-forum-elected-presidency/

Easy way of avoiding rogue presidents

In Political governance on 25/02/2016 at 1:31 pm

No need to change the constitution. Juz no preferred candidates who were NTUC secretary-generals.

The two presidents that disgraced the presidency were ex-PAP leaders who were NTUC leaders. Devan was drunk when he fondled the Chief Minister’s of Sarawak’s wife in Sarawak at an official dinner.

Ong had an unhealthy obsession about the extent of his powers as jaga in chief. I’ve always tot that he was wasting everybody’s time on the issue of immovable assets and the sale of POSB to DBS. One of these days, I’ll blog on his obsession about keeping the reserves locked up from S’poreans. He wanted us to starve while looking at the gold, noses pressed onto the reinforced plate-glass? See no touch isit?

Tony Tan is an ex-PAP leader and was a leading member of the cabinet. He is doing what the president should do. and (touch wood) he’ll end his presidency on a high note, making the PAP and S’poreans proud that we had an ex-PAP leader who dignified the office, not degraded it, something Ong and Devan did.

They may have been part of the nation-building team of the PAP but they ended their public careers on a really low note esp Devan. Perhaps they went mad in their NTUC days, trying to manage their role as the champion of the workers with their role as senior managers in Harry’s city?

As to the other presidents, non-politicians all, they all upheld the dignity of the office, performing their duties quietly without getting drunk, fondling women or picking fights with the government that had no legal basis. For the last,  there are others who can do the job. There was JBJ, and today there are s/o JBJ, M Ravi, Roy Ngerng and New Citizen and FT Han Hui Hui.

Nathan’s maihum moment cont’d

In Uncategorized on 17/02/2016 at 2:07 pm

Don’t sing Majullah Singapura is the suggestion of a reader of this piece of mine when the president takes the salute. juz play Majullah Singapura.

But before reading his reasoning, here’s another great comment by another reader

Remember Pinkie and his meal of MeeSiam MaiHum?

Well, this is Prata’s maihum moment!

Back to why Majullah Singapura should not be sung when the president takes the salute on National Day:

I think all this STUPIDITY coIuld have been avoided if no one has to sing the national anthem when the president make his appearance at all ceremonies and occasions he attends. In fact, it is only appropriate that the anthem be sung at the end of an occasion, such as the NDP, when everyone including the VIPs and VVIPs would rise and sing it. No exception. The band plays the anthem when the president arrives simply because he symbolizes/represents the nation, not because of he (Nathan, Tony Tan or anyone else) the man.

I have NEVER heard the US national anthem, The Stars And Stripes, being sung when the President of the US arrives. Have you? For want of a better way to describe it, a country’s anthem should only be sang either at as part of a group performance, eg. at a concert or on very special occasions, such as at the end of the NDP or when national sportsmen and sportswomen received their medals on the winners’ rostrum in an international meet like the Olympics.

I agree that “God, Save The Queen’ is different. For one, the lyrics clearly referred to the British monarch in person. For those who are unaware, it was ‘God Save The KING’ when QE2 father was on the British throne. It was changed to the now, ‘God Save The Queen’ when QE2 took over from her father, King Geroge the… (you known, the King’s Speech, fella). Whereas, in ‘Majullah Singapura’, there is NO mention of the president, in fact, the lyrics is meant to spur and galvanize, at least in theory, the people and country forward (see English translation below) and compare it with the British anthem below it.

I hope it would shut the mouth up of the PAP acolytes who tried to defend the indefensible egoistic and ignorant blooper made by SN Nathan*. We can see how truly ignorant and arrogant the PAP ba***carrier can become.

Majullah Singapura (English translation):

Come, fellow Singaporeans
Let us progress towards happiness together
May our noble aspiration bring
Singapore success

Come, let us unite
In a new spirit
Together we proclaim
Onward Singapore
Onward Singapore

Come, let us unite
In a new spirit
Together we proclaim
Onward Singapore
Onward Singapore

British National Anthem – God Save the Queen

God save our gracious Queen!
Long live our noble Queen!
God save the Queen!
Send her victorious,
Happy and glorious,
Long to reign over us,
God save the Queen.

Thy choicest gifts in store
On her be pleased to pour,
Long may she reign.
May she defend our laws,
And ever give us cause,
To sing with heart and voice,
God save the Queen.
(From the official website of the British Monarchy –
http://www.royal.gov.uk/MonarchUK/Symbols/NationalAnthem.

——

*Steady brudder. I may mock him but I’m inclined to think he was telling a joke. Bit like Income and Rebecca Lim.

 

 

PAPpies defend D T Nathan

In Humour on 15/02/2016 at 12:17 pm

US has its Donald Trump, a billionaire with a big ego,

Well we have S R Nathan, a man who in his 12 yrs as president earned S$16m++ for being Jaga in Chief and Chief Baby Ksser. His ego is bigger than that of Trump despite the Donald being richer than he is (and hence by the warped thinking of the PAP more worthy of respect).

In a recent interview [Link] which was published on 31 Jan by ST, former President S R (Sure not Donald Trump?) Nathan repeatedly refused to be drawn into commenting about the various aspects of the Elected Presidency, which the Government wants to review.

But he did say, “So I often get asked why I keep quiet when everybody is singing Majulah Singapura on National Day,” he quipped. “I reply, ‘Yes, they are singing to me. I’m standing there! This is symbolic of the country. I don’t expect to sing to myself!’”

S’poreans have in my view rightly mocked his pretentions and huge ego. Or if they tot he was telling a joke, his bad joke.

Whatever. The office of president is not the British monarch. The British are technically the monarch’s subjects. While the nuts of TRELand may think we are the subjects of Harry’s family and the PAP, no S’porean thinks that we are the subjects of the president: except perhaps Nathan?

When a lawyer who I’m told is a card carrying member of the PAP (anyway I know he believes in hanging, not helping the elderly poor, or sick: his taxes should go to ministerial salaries) wrote the u/m, you know even the PAPpies cannot really justify Nathan Trupm the Donald.

Many mock President Nathan for saying that people are singing the national anthem to him at the National Day Parade fail to grasp the sequence of events:

a. Parade commander calls parade to attention
b. President arrives and is led to dais
c. Parade commander calls parade to salute president by presenting arms
d. National anthem is played as part of the salute
e. Parade commander calls parade back to attention from present arms position

Since the national anthem is played as part of the salute to the President, it is not incorrect* to say that the national anthem is being sung to him IN THE CONTEXT OF NATIONAL DAY PARADE.

My friend the troll: Nathan failed to distinguish beteen S R Nathan the man and S R Nathan the president. The singing and respect paid is to the president (who juz happens to Nathan) not Nathan. A M’sian financier who advised successive M’sian ministers of finance in the 80s and 90s despite them belonging to rival factions, told me: “I’ ll advise a donkey so long as he holds the post of Finance Minister.”

The PAP lawyer said my friend was trying hard to find fault, which was a fair comment even if it sounded rich coming from someone trying really very hard to justify an ass of a comment.

But another PAPpy Ashok Sharma  wanted to pick a fight perhaps its just you and your kind that failed to understand when the then President, SR Nathan made the comment he meant him as the President and not him as S R Nathan the man? The analogy, by the way, is most inappropriate at least, to me.

To which my friend replied

Nathan used the word “me”. That is not the correct word or term to use if he were referring to Nathan the president. He also dumb as Trump in addition to being as arrogant as the Donald isit? Sounds like it. LOL

And
If Nathan had not said: //‘Yes, they are singing to me// and.//I don’t expect to sing to myself// I’d not have passed comment. But he did. He could have juz said, “I’m the symbol of the country, so it’s right that I keep silent”. But he didn’t did he? Let’s not try to twist his words to attack “just you and yr kind”.
Ashok Sharma** went on to lose his cool calling the troll names. PAPpies all like that isit?
Ashok Sharma tried again at midnight: for the sake of completeness and to avoid any doubt that may have arisen, I reiterate…. There’s really no shortage of idiots who’d complain about everything..
To which my friend replied the next morning. Yup very true of a brown-nosing, emotiomal fool who complains about others who complain about Donald Nathan our very own Donald Trump even he’s worth a lot less. This fool even resorts to name calling when he runs out arguments. Can’t agree with you more..on someone like him There is no point in engaging with these fools who only want to brown nose. They should learn from people like [ ] who can keep their cool when arguing.
It made the troll’s day when the founder of the conservative group he belongs to “Liked” his comment. The PAPpy ASs sat down and shut up.
And here’s another reason why we should sing and play Majullah Jaga Besar when the president takes the salute on National Day. This will show that we understand and appreciate the role of El Presdiente as custodian of the reserves etc. He is more than the ceremonial head of state who must take off his pants in public if the cabinet “advises” him to do so.
—————–

*Why doesn’t he say “it is correct”? He doesn’t because it ain’t correct? Juz not incorrect.

**AS. Add another “s” and it becomes ASs. Delaration of interest. I’m getting a lunch at u/m place for naming and shaming the ASs.

Where to eat buffet in Singapore? Come celebrate Singapore’s classic days at Feast@East Buffet Restaurant where a Heritage Feast awaits those who cross the threshold of our famous Peranakan Hotel Buffet, located on the third level of Hotel Grand Mercure Singapore Roxy!
 
Offering a great selection of classic Singaporean and delightful Peranakan cuisine to delight your nostalgic taste buds and lead you to fond memories of the past, it is the ideal place to get together with family and friends for a nice meal where you can relax and take your time to enjoy the entire buffet selection repeatedly at your desired pace.
 
Every day is a different day at Feast@East Buffet Restaurant as the menu constantly varies to ensure guests will always be pampered with a delicious buffet selection. All-time favourites such as the restaurant’s signature Singapore Laksa and famous Durian Paste are available every day, lunch and dinner.
Highly commended and senior citizens ask for yr discount if you go there. Even though I have white hair, no-one asked if I was an oldie, and as I forgot to ask for discount, I paid the full price. Still worth it.
 

Play Majullah Jaga Besar on National Day

In Humour on 14/02/2016 at 3:09 pm

I refer to this: http://themiddleground.sg/2016/02/12/god-save-the-key/

Middle Ground is ang moh tua kee isit?

Why can’t we just sing Majulah Kunchi (same tune and lyrics as Majulah Singapura with “Kunchi”, the Malay word for “key” for “Singapura” when the command Hormat (i.e. Salute) Presidente is given at the National Day parade?

Better still, we can use “Jaga Besar” (“Chief Watchman”) instead of “Kunchi”.

Mari kita rakyat Jaga Besar
sama-sama menuju bahagia;
Cita-cita kita yang mulia,
berjaya Jaga Besar.

Marilah kita bersatu
dengan semangat yang baru;
Semua kita berseru,
Majulah Jaga Besar,
Majulah Jaga Besar!

Marilah kita bersatu
dengan semangat yang baru;
Semua kita berseru,
Majulah Jaga Besar ,
Majulah Jaga Besar!

We can sing Majullah Singapura on other occasions.

Australian protocol is to play and sing God Saves the Queen when the Queen is present in person, followed by the national anthem. The national anthem is Advance Australia Fair and is played at other times. I think NZ has the same practice.

Tomorrow, I’ll post on why Nathan is wrong to equate himself with the Queen of the United Kingdom.

The Silence of the President

In Political governance on 09/06/2011 at 8:22 pm

(Responding to this. The author feels that the president should be free to speak out on things that the president thinks the government is doing wrong. I had said the president has to remain silent on many things.)

Singapore had a constitutional presidency. The president was S’pore’s equivalent to the monarch in the UK. The monarch has no discretion and must act in accordance with the advice of the cabinet. There would be a constitutional crisis if the monarch fails or declines to act on the advice of the cabinet.

Executive power lies with the elected government of the day. The monarch is above politics. The monarch is a figurehead performing ceremonial functions, but does not exercise political power. This power ultimately resides in the parliament, because the elected government rules only if it is able to command the support of the majority in the parliament.

Substitute the word “monarch” with the word “president” in the preceding two paragraphs and you had, in a nutshell, the legal position of the president.

But this changed with the Elected Presidency amendments in 1991. They introduced a rojak approach. The president was to be elected, with some veto powers over executive decisions. These veto powers may be exercised by the president in his sole discretion, i.e. he does not need to follow the advice of the cabinet on such matters.

But on all other matters, the president continues to be bound by the advice of the cabinet. In this ceremonial or figurehead role, the president, like the monarch, has no discretion. Because they have no discretion, they are above politics. Whatever they do on advice, they cannot be criticised because they are only doing their duty.

By extension, because the monarch is above criticism, the monarch does not give her views on government policies actions, or decisions; or anything faintly political. Have you heard the monarch give her views on anything that could be controversial?

One way of looking at it is as follows: Since she cannot be criticised, the monarch should not put herself in a position where she can be criticised. Another way of looking at it: The monarch cannot have any independent view when she is carrying out a ceremonial function.

Read the rest of this entry »