More Lies, Rumours and FUD in the Internet

I'm not talking about Yaacob or Ravi Philemon lying or spreading rumours. Since both are from political parties, naturally the things they say about each other would be ahem, based on PAP or NSP agenda and creative use of FUD and facts to make each other look bad. Fuck lah, that's politics so fair game. Ravi would act innocent, Yaacob would act victim. One mat, one mama, both party wayang. Yawn.

However, Yaacob was right about some bullshit in the Internet that should not be tolerated. Bullshit rumours in the Internet spread by retards is common so no big bother there e.g during GE 2011, some cock people were saying that they received flyers addressed to them as voters in their letterbox by PAP to vote PAP. Dumbasses said that it was PAP intimidation tactics, but were ignorant that all parties contesting had access to the voter info in their constituencies. These retards were in fact spreading the fear that there was no voting secrecy, and scaring people to vote PAP instead! Facepalm. The fucking irony and damage they did.

Bullshit rumours spread by cocksters knowing it is bullshit is another lame game altogether. According to the government, one such lameness was the guy who doctored the image of a NEA PSI 393 reading and then spread it around that NEA covered up that record. Still, the leader of the crap pack is TRS e.g. cooked up an MP Irene Ng letter to TRS, lied that Tiong flags were hoisted at Marina Bay.

In the end, how can we tell the rumours are bullshit or not? I bet when Noah said the big rains were coming, people thought he was spreading bullshit rumours. On the other hand, some people might argue that the Noah story is bullshit altogether. So we want to believe what we like to believe. Some believe that the PAP is the only hope for Singapore still. Yeah right. Others would believe it is NSP, or WP or horror of horrors, SDP! We like rumours and lies as it makes news interesting and rumours of government cover-ups make fake news more real e.g. "Oh did you read about X? We don't get more details as there is a cover-up for the cock-up!" LOL that storyline never gets stale.

The thing about TRS and its fake news production line to draw visits and earn ad money, it cries wolf so often, even if one day it gets a real scoop, nobody would believe it any more.

Yaacob defends naming of blogger and website over haze rumours
By Goh Chin Lian
Singapolitics
Thursday, Jul 11, 2013

Minister of Communications and Information Yaacob Ibrahim said on Wednesday night that his naming of a blogger and a website for circulating online rumours during the recent haze was to be fair to the majority of the online community.

Otherwise, they may be inadvertently associated with spreading rumours, he added in a posting on Facebook.

In Parliament on Monday, the minister had cited many examples of Singaporeans pulling together and using the Internet to do good and clarify doubts.

But he also warned that some mischievous individuals had set out to spread rumours and cause unnecessary anxiety.

The five examples he cited included The Real Singapore putting up an article falsely attributed to Tampines GRC MP Irene Ng.

Another was blogger Ravi Philemon, who posted online that the public would not be able to access a fresh supply of masks that were arriving in Singapore.

Dr Yaacob recounted the sequence of events in his Facebook post.

On June 21, the Government announced that 1 million N95 masks would be distributed to 200,000 low-income households for free, and that the Singapore Armed Forces will help give out the masks.

The next day, on June 22, Mr Philemon posted an unnamed friend's claim that the supply would be strictly controlled by the Government, Dr Yaacob noted.

The minister said: "The upshot of Ravi's post is that the Government announcement the day before is not true. But what is his basis for suggesting so? The truth is, he had no basis for his assertion."

As to Mr Philemon saying later that he went to Johor Baru to buy N95 masks when they were sold out at pharmacies here, to give to others, Dr Yaacob said he was "happy to learn" that the blogger had distributed some masks to the community.

"But let's be clear," he added, "doing good offline does not mean one is excused from acting responsibly online."

Time Out Between WP and Hawkers, and PAP

The storm in a teacup that made WP look mean and niao. You bet the PAP, with the help of its papers and TV, would look for other little things to chip away at WP's credibility soon, regardless of what achievements underdog WP made or obstacles it faces.

Make no mistake, this AHPETC hawker misunderstanding is a small WP slip, nothing like its FMSS pie in the face. Now that was a serious WP blowback, which was so AIM-like in the poor corporate governance and town council money going from right pocket to left pocket. LOL

BTW what blogger black out today? Why should the PAP tell us what to read and what is objectionable, and bloggers to tell us what they think is objectionable and that they are the blogs to read more as they stood up to PAP? Riiight.

AHPETC, NEA and hawkers agree on cleaning schedule
By Elgin Toh
Singapolitics
Thursday, Jun 06, 2013

SINGAPORE - The Aljunied-Hougang-Punggol East Town Council (AHPETC) has agreed to bring forward the annual spring cleaning of two Bedok hawker centres from the end of the year to "within a month".

This latest compromise in the three-month-old spat over hawker centre cleaning was announced after a meeting on Thursday afternoon between the National Environment Agency (NEA), AHPETC and hawker representatives.

Hawkers coming out of the meeting told reporters they were happy with the outcome.

Mr Chan Kheng Heng, secretary of the hawkers' association at Block 511 said: "Everything is resolved and we are satisfied."

On Monday, AHPETC had announced a cleaning schedule which said the hawker centres - at Block 511 in Bedok North Street 3 and Block 630 in Bedok Reservoir Road - would be cleaned in October or November.

But the National Environment Agency rejected the proposal on hygiene grounds and called for cleaning for Block 511 to take place in June as originally scheduled.

WP and PAP, FMSS and AIM, Who Cornering Whom?

Oh oh did PAP anyhow count to anyhow whack WP?

"MND’s latest response of 14 May 2013 claims that our media release earlier that day showing that the increase was only 4.16% gave an incomplete picture. MND stated that they compute the MA rate by dividing the MA tender rate by the total number of residential and commercial units. However, even adopting MND’s methodology of including both residential and commercial units, we find that the rate difference should only be 4.55% and not 20%"

WP Statement

First PAP bring up FMSS say it lacks corporate governance. Hey AIM also like lack corporate governance? Then PAP said FMSS created without tender. Hey but AIM was PAP's scorched earth policy and FMSS was urgently set up to prevent that, to protect residents? Then PAP said FMSS was filled with WP supporters? Hey isn't AIM made up of PAP members?

Now the last straw, PAP then claimed WP's managing agent's rate 20% more than before but WP said they calculated left, right, centre, inside, outside also at most, the increase is 4.55%, understanding that FMSS does not enjoy the economies of scale compared to CPG? Facepalm.

The only thing that PAP made sense is that town councils are political. Let's not kid ourselves.

PAP Out, WP In

The facts speak for itself and Punggol East voted with their hearts! WP won and won big! WP grabbed 54.52% and PAP clutched only 43.71%.

More than 10% difference! More showing of the re-alignment of the political stars in future and WP's ascendency, is comparison with the Aljunied GRC contest, the other big battle that could go either way. In that epic 2011 battle, WP had 54.72% and PAP had 45.28%. From comparing the results yesterday and in 2011, PAP's was less popular than before while WP maintained prestige more or less.

Despite all the criticisms against WP, some fair, some unfair, some serious, some trivial, WP won by about 10% over the incumbent PAP despite a multi-party fight. Yes it was a by-election and chance of WP winning are much higher, coupled with the unpopularity of PAP in housing, inflation, transport and what not, PAP had skid marks and crashed into the wall.

Congratulations to WP, a win is a win and that is all that matters in politics. And it is also a win for Singapore truth be told as after all, it is not any party like SDP, but WP. LOL Will there be AIM-like problems when WP tries to take over the town council, especially when Punggol East town council is under the PAP GRC? Scratch head.

WP's Lee sets out immediate priorities for Punggol East
By Hetty Musfirah | Posted: 27 January 2013 1122 hrs

SINGAPORE: Member of Parliament-elect for Punggol East, Lee Li Lian, said her immediate priorities are the town council and meet-the-people sessions (MPS) in the ward.

The Workers' Party (WP) candidate told reporters after a thank-you parade on Sunday morning that she will be working on the logistics for the MPS.

She said volunteers from the single-member ward of Hougang and the group representation constituency of Aljunied, which are held by WP, will help out during the transition period.

As for the town council, Ms Lee said WP will give details on the handover some time next week.

For now, she will work closely with the relevant parties and ensure a problem-free transition.

Turning to Parliament, Ms Lee said she hopes to highlight issues raised during her by-election campaign.

She also hopes her win will spur more women and younger people to come forward in the political arena.

Is Alex Au Sue-Proof?

 Alex dodges another one.

Lao gay Alex Au got another warning letter about his recent blog post on AIM which insinuated that some PAP members, including the PM himself, were corrupt. The warning was delivered by famous PAP attack legal pit bull, Davinder Singh. Alex Au, as usual to save his own skin which is the natural thing to do for any of us, apologised reluctantly and took down his blog post. Nevertheless, Chee Soon Juan or the late JBJ would not have backed down though and relished the chance of being political martyrs. Alex has more sense, just like Vincent Wijeysingha who apologised to Tan Chuan-Jin for some other defamatory comments.

This is not the first time lao Au got into trouble. Actually the 3rd time since last year - 1st was his blog post that had fleeting mention of Shanmugam's affair, the 2nd was his comments that the courts protected plastic-looking Woffles Wu. I would think this would be the last chance for Alex Au before the insecure powers that be castrate him as Alex seems bent on doing what he does best. 

Really, Alex Au whether you like his postings or not, his SDP politics or not, is an insightful blogger to agree or disagree with. But to cow him into silence and make him apologise, this style cannot work anymore and is going to boomerang hard on the PAP, especially when there is a SMC By-E coming close. Alex is not The Real Singapore or that type of blogger which deserve to be slapped back by the PAP for stupid rumour-mongering or just simply, stupidity.

Making Alex gulp and swallow his own words does not make him wrong in the first place in today's thinking. Maybe our parents' and grandparents' generation might think that sort of truism. The new truism is that we just think that Alex was bullied into shutting up instead and that maybe he was on the right track hence the need for him to be warned legally for crossing the line. Nonetheless, for the PAP, it is damned if they do or don't as if they sit on their fat butts and not threaten to sue, it also means to the PAP critic that their silence meant their guilt. Anyway, IMHO the threat to sue, is worse than the remaining silent and nonchalant in an age where we are easily intolerant of any high-handedness by the ruling party. Good job PAP on screwing youself again, and hope you lose in the By-E! Bye bye!

Blogger Au to remove post after PM Lee takes legal action
Website founder served letter of demand, will post apology for parts of blog post on PAP town council deals that defamed PM
04:45 AM Jan 05, 2013
by Ng Jing Yng

SINGAPORE - Exactly two weeks after he wrote a blog post on the sale of computer systems used by town councils, the founder of the popular Yawning Bread website, Mr Alex Au, has been served with a legal warning by Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong to take it down or face legal action.

Senior Counsel Davinder Singh of the law firm Drew & Napier, acting on behalf of PM Lee, sent the letter of demand to Mr Au yesterday. It is the third time in the past 11 months that Mr Au has been taken to task over his blog posts.

In the letter, Mr Singh said the article, headlined "PAP mis-AIMed, faces blowback", taken together with 21 other comments posted by readers, can be taken to suggest that Mr Lee is guilty of corruption in relation to the transaction between the PAP town councils and the company Action Information Management (AIM).

It added that the post could be intended to mean that the Prime Minister would "abuse his powers to cover up the matter or prevent any investigation into (Mr Lee's) corruption".

"These are false and baseless allegations," Mr Singh charged, and demanded that the article be taken down immediately. He further demanded that Mr Au publish an apology and an undertaking not to make further allegations of a similar nature on his website.

Mr Singh noted that PM Lee has suffered damage to his reputation and incurred costs as a result of the article. However, he said Mr Lee would not claim damages and costs if Mr Au apologised and removed the post, in keeping with his stand on a similar incident on Feb 19 last year involving the Temasek Review Emeritus (TRE) website. In that episode, TRE removed and apologised for an article which had, among other things, questioned Madam Ho Ching's position in Temasek Holdings, after being served with a similar letter of demand.

Contacted yesterday, Mr Au acknowledged the defamatory nature of the blog post and comments, and said he would remove them.

However, he added: "This should not distract from the issue of the sale of town council software to Action Information Management."

"From what has been disclosed so far, reasonable people would have many questions, and while news of me getting a lawyer's letter might be temporarily more 'newsy', it is more important for Singapore that these questions be answered, not avoided."

The article in question, written on Dec 21, relates to the ongoing exchange of words between the Coordinating Chairman of the PAP town councils, Mr Teo Ho Pin, and Aljunied-Hougang Town Council (AHTC) Chairman Sylvia Lim over computer systems used to manage PAP town councils. It began when a Town Council Management Report released on Dec 14 flagged AHTC's less-than-stellar performance in management of Service & Conservancy Charge arrears, and that it did not complete its submission for the new Corporate Governance indicator.

Explaining the poor performance, Ms Lim said AIM had terminated its contract with AHTC to provide IT services in August 2011. As a result, she said, the town council had to develop its own system.

In subsequent exchanges, Ms Lim questioned why the rights to the software were sold to AIM, which is owned by the PAP, and if this was in the public interest. Mr Teo followed with a detailed explanation of the sale, and said the deal was done to benefit all 14 town councils.

Mr Au has been served with legal warnings in the past over his blog posts. In February last year, Law Minister K Shanmugam sent him a lawyer's letter demanding that he remove a post containing allegedly defamatory comments about the minister's personal conduct. Mr Au complied and removed the article.

Five months later, in July, he wrote a post alleging that plastic surgeon Woffles Wu had received special treatment over a speeding offence. The post was deemed to be in contempt of court, and Mr Au subsequently apologised.
Taking blogs and websites to task

The lawyer's letter served yesterday by Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong on blogger Alex Au is the fourth instance in less than a year where political leaders here have taken blogs or websites to task for putting up allegedly defamatory statements.

February, 2012: On Feb 14, Law Minister K Shanmugam's lawyers issued a letter to blogger Alex Au, asking him to remove a Feb 8 post containing allegedly defamatory personal allegations about the minister. Mr Au complied.

Five days later, Temasek Review Emeritus Editor Richard Wan was served a lawyer's by PM Lee. Mr Lee's lawyers wanted Mr Wan to retract a Feb 16 post containing allegedly defamatory remarks and to publish an apology on the website. The post had, among other things, questioned Madam Ho Ching's position in Temasek Holdings. The website removed the post and apologised.

November, 2012: The Real Singapore website was asked to apologise twice over a defamatory post concerning Defence Minister Ng Eng Hen. The website had reposted a letter published on Temasek Review Emeritus - which asked for the National Service disruption list that Dr Ng had said would be made public - and added a defamatory headline. Dr Ng's lawyers rejected the first apology which was "not sincere or unqualified".

PAP Scorched Earth at Aljunied GRC!

What we suspected, but now confirm and double confirmed!

Recently, MND gave a report that WP's Aljunied GRC team CMI - WP got a red card for their late audit / management report. Ooooooh eyes on WP for being lame and giving excuses. Yes WP cannot excuse that away. However, as more bits and pieces came out about AIM, the financial services company that was holding WP Aljunied Town Concil hostage by putting admin obstacles in front of WP's management report to MND, then the blame and shame game on WP turned into one on PAP's scorched earth policy. Not new, this PAP denial of the political enemy access to infrastructure, like how WP had trouble with use of common space in Hougang because MND and PA were politically motivated in their decisions. Ooooooh

Lau gay Alex Au was half right to say that AIM is a stay-behind sabo party - right because AIM is actually owned by former PAP MPs and I think still PAP members, not so right as AIM took over the financial and computer systems of the PAP town councils before GE 2011 in January last year, and not just before handover of Aljunied to WP. How was the tender process that AIM won, we are very curious!

Tessa Wong, one of the few ST journalists who covered opposition news objectively, nudged readers to think about who should fingers be pointing at, and for WP Pritam Singh to copy it lock stock and barrel into his Facebook note, he endorsed the finger taichi implied! Ohoh, would nation-building press ST warn Pritam Singh about blatant copyright infringement by copying the entire ST article into his Facebook? LOL

AIM, the Tessa Wong report also said its directors and former PAP members don't want to comment, like MIA!

Palmergate in Pictures

Some of the funnier grabs from the Internet. Still no naked pictures of Palmer and his fling. Half-naked ones also don't have!

The Sketch Times

WP to start the year, PAP to end the year and it has been a fucking great year! Woohoo.

Cartoon Press 

It's all about how to own up and milking the rhetoric, without letting people know you are milking the rhetoric otherwise it just curdles quickly and yucks. PAP did a good job by pressuring Palmer take one for the team and resign. But they overdid it in their spinning.

EDMW 

Karma, and revenge is a dish of big sweet mangoes. WP's rhetoic was sublime, and Low's display of gracious understanding pat on Palmer's back, good showmanship. They sat back and watched the parade.

Xiaxue

Xiaxue unloads a splendid point and wins the wife votes, and the hubbies next to them as the hubbies must nod and openly agree with the wives here if they are smart. Politicians should have high moral standards, or at least as high as possible. Or least don't be stupid to get found out even if have low moral standards.

Good Game, Michael Palmer

Who is Palmer?

He is the former Speaker in parliament, former MP in Punngol East SMC, former PAP member and man who screwed Laura Ong, someone from PA. Didn't everybody say PAP and PA are bedfellows! Wonder if she is prettier than the woman that former WP MP bonked!

Still, one thing about this Palmer, this guy had balls. Balls to stand alone in a SMC in the last GE when all his other PAP comrades hide with the big boys in GRCs. Balls to bonk around after the Yaw Shin Leong scandal earlier this year that led to the Hougang by-election. Facepalmer!

Obviously didn't learn that lesson from Low Thia Khiang's protege that these sort of private sordid things cannot be kept under the covers for long when one is a political figure with enemies of all colours. Private tho affairs may be, the game is to make it public interest when one is a politician. Stupid cockhead, also not thinking ahead!

And to match and even surpass WP's standards of transparency set a few months ago, the PAP is putting Palmer on a donkey cart, parading him around town with a self-flagellating press conference and even naming the woman who led to his fall, outdoing WP in openness and decisiveness on who can shame its own more. Karma is an equal opportunity bitch who just squeezed PAP's balls after the PAP preached about MPs setting high moral standards a few months ago. LOL

You know what,? While we snigger about Palmer and make snide remarks about PAP's karma, Low Thia Khiang is ever the graceful politician-gentleman in his comments about Palmer. He did not kick mud into Palmer's face like what the PAP did when Yaw was crawling away in the mud. Low Thia Khiang has class.

Michael Palmer's resignation 'unfortunate': Low Thia Khiang
Updated 09:58 PM Dec 12, 2012

SINGAPORE - Workers' Party (WP) chief Low Thia Khiang today said it is "unfortunate" that Mr Michael Palmer has resigned as Speaker of Parliament.

Describing Mr Palmer as a "well balanced Speaker", Mr Low said Mr Palmer "managed Parliamentary affairs very well and very efficiently".

"He's well balanced giving both front and back benchers sufficient time to debate. He also has given members of the Opposition sufficient time to engage the front bench, said Mr Low. "Personally I quite like him as a Speaker so it's unfortunate that he has resigned."

Mr Low was speaking to the media at the sidelines of his Meet the People Session this evening.

Mr Palmer, who was Member of Parliament (MP) for Punggol East SMC, today announced his resignation as Speaker and as a member of the People's Action Party (PAP) after admitting to having a relationship with a member of the People's Association staff.

Asked about what this episode showed about the PAP and its selection process for candidates, Mr Low said that no selection process is foolproof.

Declining to compare this with the WP's experience earlier this year - when then WP MP for Hougang SMC Mr Yaw Shin Leong's infidelity was revealed - Mr Low said it would not be fair to do so as "every case is unique". Mr Yaw was subsequently sacked from the party.

He said, however, that he hoped the people "who have been critical of the Workers' Party", including the media, would "display fairness and integrity in their comments and their sincerity in what they have said during the episode of Yaw Shin Leong".

"I think we have done our part and my conscience is clear. Other than that, it's always unpleasant to know, to learn of such things happen(ing) whether it's in the Opposition or the PAP. We hope to have a good public service," he said.

Earlier today, the WP issued a press release urging the Prime Minister to call a by-election in the Punggol East constituency as soon as possible. The party said it was ready to offer a choice to the voters of Punggol East SMC again in the by-election.

Asked who the party would field as a candidate, Mr Low said it was "premature" to speculate on the candidate. During the General Election last year, the WP fielded Ms Lee Lilian.

PAP Almost Sue TOC!

Wow. Throwing law suits used to be only at SDP, now letters of demand are hurled at keyboard warriors too. It did not stop at the old gay Alex (did not deserve it) but went on to TRS (deserve it), now TRE (deserve it) and TOC (did not deserve it).  This is PAP's new media strategy.

What was it all about this time. About gay SDP Vincent Wijeysingha's SMRT strike Facebook note that SMRT drivers who are unhappy can quit and join SBS. Firstly, Vincent's note was a wall of text and I did not even know Vasoo was mentioned inside it. Some good points were made by Vincent like unions CMI and the Tiong drivers complained before and still no action. The rest was pure political grandstanding like the Tiongs had the right to an illegal strike, since Vincent is SDP and opposition what, so a bit of rhetoric is expected.

PAP lawyer hitman Davinder Singh then sent letters of demand left, right, centre. Making the issue even bigger, making people even more interested in what happened between Vasoo and Chee, making people think more that Vincent must be right for the PAP to want to silence him. PAP, you are so funny and you bring weekend entertainment to all of us. Thank you.

Did TOC pwn PAP, or PAP pwn TOC? You guess!

The National CONversation!

WTF! This makes me laugh until sides pain. The national PAP CON I mean the national PAP CONversation is a big great joke! Opposition members are not allowed to take part in the conversation? Never mind, don't involve PAP members to be fair. Want to involve and plant PAP members in the group? Never mind, don't get caught! With pants down and KKJ exposed! Ooops!

PAP is So Screwed

This By-E is quite horrible. All smears, little style, even less substance, hmm unless substance and style relates to how the PAP tries to undermine WP and, how the WP walked into PAP's traps the past few days.

Firstly, it stinks that the PAP is going on, and on, and on about alleged WP dishonesty over Ah Huat's NCMP jostling. There is nothing dishonest. If there is anything, he is a blur fuck to be caught in this distraction. Is there anything wrong that he is against the NCMP scheme? Does it mean he thinks lesser of Sylvia Lim who took up the NCMP post in 2006? No and no. I hope I don't sound like a prissy girl who presses her thighs close together on a first date.

The NCMP nonsense is just political fart. One should just pinch one's nose, frown and walk quickly away. It bears no real relevance to the Hougang By-E, albeit the Secret Squirrel leak by a disgruntled former or current CEC bloke was quite entertaining for a while. Political fart, unless one is a complete idiot more interested in such bullshit and smears than about covered walkways, LUP, selective intake of foreigners as talent and as scholars blablabla. Read Choo Zheng Xi's TOC article (finally, a TOC article worth reading after all the apologetic WP crap by the WP Internet army during this period). BTW, if one is interested in bullshit politics and rumours, just watch the coming Malaysian elections. Its an art up north ever since they brought in the mattress into court, almost like the smearing in US politics. Or if you can't wait that long for an idiot fix, just read Temasek Times and Temasek Review. Remember, remember, whether Ah Huat's was WP's first or last choice as a NCMP in 2011, whether Ah Huat supports or slams the NCMP system, it does not fucking mean shit except that it is PAP distraction in the style of Gomez in 2006.

Secondly, why did WP go there waiting to be pounced by the PAP. Why? Don't go there, don't bother. WP probably saw that it would be damned if they do, damned if they don't respond to the PAP. If they don't respond, the PAP hounds would yelp and bark that WP is trying to hide by being silent. If they do respond, then, they would be dancing to PAP's tune as PAP would nitpick WP's explanations, finding a strawman here and there.

OK maybe a response was expected as there are lots of dumb Singaporeans who think it is a big deal - the same dumb Singaporeans who think YSL or some PAP ministers fucking around has anything to do with their abilities in office, or think that Nicole Seah is much more than a shallow drama diva. Don't dignify the PAP with such a response by the Sec-Gen. Ok, maybe a response by the Chairman (chairperson, power to feministspeak!) someone high up but not that high. Just smile, move on and focus on whatever humdrum local or highbrow national policy debates you think Hougang voters like to hear. If WP has to resort to such explanations on why how what the WP NCMP selection process is about and blur fuck Ah Huat talking about ballot this and ballot that, it is just wasting speech air time. LTK wasted his Tuesday rally time on this NCMP bullshit. Many, me included, know too well the PAP, jealous of WP's popularity and support in Hougang, is just trying to derail WP's already less-than-smooth rallying so far.

I pity Desmond. Not only is he going to lose, his probably genuine claims of a clean fight is being rubbished as his PAP comrades are dirtying the contest for him - using distraction and insinuations. After TCH moves on come 28 May Monday, Desmond is stuck there in Hougang as he promised to and the residents would blame him for the smears his party carried out in his name.

Well, I was initially confident of Desmond's defeat but surprisingly getting 45-40% of the votes. However, with some PAP members thinking it worthwhile to bring up YSL and now hang the NCMP mess around Ah Huat's neck, the rebel scum at Hougang would again be defiant and vote in spite and resistance in favour of Ah Huat. Nevertheless, there is one day more and the last chance for redemption by the PAP, and for spurting ahead instead of losing ground by the WP before cooling off day.

Poor Silly Choo, Can Change Carrots Can?

Sad silly Desmond Choo, still talking about promises to upgrade Hougang. The very fact that he keeps talking about Hougang needing upgrading means that Hougang has been neglected for upgrading for a very long time already! Self-pwn!

Just yesterday the WP keep parroting the same boring rallying cry that Hougang is not for sale and Hougang residents cannot be bought. Yes, since the more PAP threatenedHougang, the more Hougang resisted and voted for WP instead. They would even vote for Ah Huat, HUAT AH, who does not seem like a strong performer. If he goes to parliament, he sure gets eaten alive as he is not witty like Low Thia Khiang, brains like Sylvia Lim or Chen Show Mao, or articulate like Pritam Singh. But he represents WP and if WP picked him, that means he is OK? OK.

Choo still has not realised that he needs to change tactics. Or maybe he has but people like PM or other old timers like that Rear Admiral told him to play tough, not to act soft like the porridge he is giving out, apparently the Hokkien porridge and not the Teochew muei according to the WP Internet Brigade.

Choo, Choo, tsk tsk, please don't always talk about upgrading and hard concrete and metal facilities for Hougang. It is the soft services that Hougang people can be bought over. Free legal clinic is actually an excellent idea as a start. Free TCM. Free tuition for underprivileged children, although other loyal PAP wards would rightly complain that rebel Hougang got these goodies first instead of them! These are PAP services, not HDB so these types of pork-barrel politics are easier to package and sell. Did you and your PAP grassroots listen to the people when you do your market walks or house visits? Probably not. The PAP just talks, hears but does not discuss, listen.

Choo to lobby for more facilities in Hougang
Published on May 20, 2012

The lack of covered linkways and drop-off points is a source of major inconvenience to Hougang residents and PAP candidate Desmond Choo intends to 'fight very hard' to secure these facilities for them.

Mr Choo, 34, said residents' feedback on the lack of such facilities struck a chord with him.

'If you walk the ground, you will find that a lot of residents are hampered by the fact that there are no linkways, no sheltered drop-off points, really insufficient coverage, causing inconvenience not only to the elderly but young families with kids. 'Try pushing a pram and carrying an umbrella at the same time. It is not easy,' he said.

Mr Choo is also lobbying for a new market to be built in Hougang Avenue 3, to replace the one torn down five years ago. On Saturday, he said he was waiting to hear from the Ministry of National Development on the matter.

The Boring By-Election is (Finally) Here

While M Ravi and his woman puppet or proxy waiting for court to give expert legal advice on when a by-election for Hougang SMC is to be held according to the constitution, the government went ahead earlier to announce a by-election on 26 May. What would lawyer M Ravi and cleaner Vellama say proudly while eating prata supper to celebrate? They were the ones who pressured the PAP to call for a by-election! Yawn. Yeah, right, you win. Like a boss.

Is it a two-corner fight in the Teochew kampung? PAP Desmond Choo from PAP vs whoever WP wants to send into the ring? SDP and NSP have chickened out of this round. SDP said already they would not play but NSP wanted to hint earlier that they might. SPP and SDA might join in still, but they are the weakest. SPP could have stood a good chance as the 3rd party if not for the recent resignations of its stronger members. Hougang is seen as WP territory and nobody from another opposition party dares to go in and get a bad reputation from Singaporeans. However, in the name of democracy, why should WP hog, and PAP try to hog Hougang? Maybe the residents there want to choose someone else? From the PE, we voters can already get the sense that politics is more real and more representative if as many candidates as possible put their bets on the table.

Who else dares to go in if the other parties dare not? The independents might be the ones as they don't need to kowtow to a party secretary-general. However, who could it be. Tan Kian Lian was BBQed in the last PE and learnt his lesson. Andrew Kuan has been a no show for some time. Tan Cheng Bock also seemed quiet since August last year after his disappointing defeat. Only Tan Jee Say might be deluded enough to try it as he was so egoistically optimistic about his chances in 2011 and then became shocked over his defeat. He already set up shop in high rental Dhoby Ghaut - where he got his money from and why he must open up his political office in an elitist central area instead of a heartland is a mystery.

So one unknown is whether independents want to jump inside the pool. The other unknown is how big PAP's defeat would be.  Of course WP would win as this is a WP heartland being contested. Desmond Choo might be good, can speak better Teochew and prepare the best oh-ni to win over the Hougang uncles and aunties, but he would never be good enough for Hougang because he is White, and Hougang since 1991 likes light Blue. In May 2011, horny WP YSL gathered 64.8% and PAP snatched only 35.2%. If PAP gets more than 35.2% this time, it is a WP victory, but also symbolically, a PAP victory.

One Year After GE 2011, So What?

If only we can throw all the parliamentarians into the bin!

Last year, the opposition finally won a GRC since the GRC ploy was conceived in 1988. Since then, we placed lots of hope on the WP really shoving the PAP aside in parliament. There was some shoving, but more like the PAP shoving the new WP MPs and NCMPs around. There were accusations of plagiarism (Pritam Singh and Chen Show Mao) and unsubstantiated facts in speeches (Gerald Giam). PAP bullies! - The WP crowd would shout.However, that's life in politics, that's life in parliament. WP to their credit, took it standing up and did not cry like pussies. The experienced WP members Low Thia Khiang and Sylvia Lim didn't face the problems their newer guys did. The worst WP fracas was actually outside parliament. Hougang slipped into a by-election mode because its horny new MP Yaw screwed around and got kicked out of WP and therefore lost his MP seat. WTF. Should we thank him for a by-election and another public holiday? Yes, unless you are a Hougang resident as it is just a waste of your time. Anyway, the new WP cadres in parliament are just not as smart as we hoped they are and I bet Low Thia Khiang and Sylvia Lim are smacking their fellow MPs and NCMPs to shape them up to avoid another self-pwn that the PAP would take advantage of. One year on, WP still has promise but it is not up there yet. If they keep this shoddy performance up, they might lose their GRC in the next round.

The PAP are just as bad as usual. Vikram Nair is the curly haired bad boy and he can sure bite, making parliament interesting at the very least. His infamous comment that Chen Show Mao's welfare and empowerment of the needy was like a Nigerian scam promised to make parliament more exciting and biting.  However, the thin-skinned folks in the internet want PAP to play nice, especially with specky nice guy Chen Show Mao. Frankly I want to see Pritam Singh and Vikram Nair go head to head. Nothing like seeing stereotypical eloquent Indians fencing with each other and accusing each other of political swindling and scams. Politics without the bitching rhetoric is just boring! One year on, the PAP still prefers to belittle and intimidate whenever they can. Sure, they have not sued anyone yet for defamation, but that bullying style does not sit well with the pussy Singaporean crowd who think that politics is made up of nice sincere smiles and cute bunnies with floppy years. Bring on the knuckledusters! - I can hear old Harry whispering and lifting feebly his two fists into the air, boxing style.

One year after the GE and promise of good times ahead, the PAP is still doing a shit job of most things. The optimistic exception for the moment is housing as Khaw Boon Wan is cranking up supply with new flats etc and cooling demand with ABSD. Right on top of my complaint list, the MRT system is literally falling apart, and PAP is going to give bus companies a jab to improve the public transport system. I don't know whether the jab is in the arm is to boost the bus companies or a jab into the eyes of taxpayers.

That is the biggest fuckshitbrains PAP policy in the past 12 months. Transport is the main pain in the ass and don't get me foaming at mouth about COE yet, not foreigners, not healthcare with means testing, not the cost of new flats. The government is still not deregulating public transport and allowing the re-entry of small private (pirate-like) bus companies to compete and complement the existing MRT and bus systems. Instead, they want to use taxpayers money and hand it over to shareholders of SMRT and SBS, no doubt some of them are retail investors like some of us but so what it just does not make sense. IMHO, now that is the ultimate PAP-fuck-you-you-voted-for-us salute. They want to show they are doing something, but in the end it still stinks because they are doing a shitty job of it.

One Event, Office Politics, Many Versions of Truth

Ok this interesting incident at NYC is not entirely related to Singapore politics, or is it?

An executive director at Goldman Sachs resigned on a bad note and shot out a stinker of a public explanation about how Goldman Sachs was an evil empire and the usual bad mouthing. Consequently, there was a Bloomberg editorial response, a funny cynical one, giving the hard truth impression that the Goldman Sachs quitter was just not cut out for the job. What we did not hear were the views from Goldman Sachs management on their reasons behind the bitter resignation. Were they being proper gentlemen not wanting to be drawn into the fight directly, or silence was guilt. Who is telling the truth? Everybody! Nobody! This thus leads me to talk about people who left their organisation after some years of loyal service, and then like suddenly spun around to ominously explain that they left because the organisation is not what it used to be.

Former PAP MP turned presidential candidate Tan Cheng Bock is one example. Bringing back a past issue, what were the exact nature of his departure such that instead of quietly fading away like other PAP MPs, he beat his own drum and waved his own flag to challenge the PAP in some ways during the election?

Why I am leaving Goldman Sachs
The failure of belief in doing right by the client is the most serious threat to its survival
by Greg Smith
04:45 AM Mar 16, 2012
Today is my last day at Goldman Sachs.

After almost 12 years at the firm - first as a summer intern while at Stanford, then in New York for 10 years, and now in London - I believe I have worked here long enough to understand the trajectory of its culture, its people and its identity. And I can honestly say that the environment now is as toxic and destructive as I have ever seen it.

To put the problem in the simplest terms, the interests of the client continue to be sidelined in the way the firm operates and thinks about making money.

Goldman Sachs is one of the world's largest and most important investment banks and it is too integral to global finance to continue to act this way. The firm has veered so far from the place I joined right out of college that I can no longer in good conscience say that I identify with what it stands for.

It might sound surprising to a sceptical public, but culture was always a vital part of Goldman Sachs' success. It revolved around teamwork, integrity, a spirit of humility, and always doing right by our clients.

The culture was the secret sauce that made this place great and allowed us to earn our clients' trust for 143 years. It wasn't just about making money; this alone will not sustain a firm for so long. It had something to do with pride and belief in the organisation.

I am sad to say that I look around today and see virtually no trace of the culture that made me love working for this firm for many years. I no longer have the pride, or the belief.

DECLINE IN MORAL FIBRE

But this was not always the case. For more than a decade I recruited and mentored candidates through our gruelling interview process. I was selected as one of 10 people (out of a firm of more than 30,000) to appear on our recruiting video, which is played on every college campus we visit around the world.

In 2006 I managed the summer intern programme in sales and trading in New York for the 80 college students who made the cut, out of the thousands who applied.

I knew it was time to leave when I realized I could no longer look students in the eye and tell them what a great place this was to work.

When the history books are written about Goldman Sachs, they may reflect that the current chief executive officer, Mr Lloyd C Blankfein, and the president, Mr Gary D Cohn, lost hold of the firm's culture on their watch. I truly believe that this decline in the firm's moral fibre represents the single most serious threat to its long-run survival.

Over the course of my career I have had the privilege of advising two of the largest hedge funds on the planet, five of the largest asset managers in the United States, and three of the most prominent sovereign wealth funds in the Middle East and Asia.

My clients have a total asset base of more than a trillion dollars. I have always taken a lot of pride in advising my clients to do what I believe is right for them, even if it means less money for the firm.

This view is becoming increasingly unpopular at Goldman Sachs. Another sign that it was time to leave.

ALL ABOUT THE MONEY

How did we get here? The firm changed the way it thought about leadership.

Leadership used to be about ideas, setting an example and doing the right thing. Today, if you make enough money for the firm (and are not currently an ax murderer) you will be promoted into a position of influence.

What are three quick ways to become a leader?

(a) Execute on the firm's "axes", which is Goldman-speak for persuading your clients to invest in the stocks or other products that we are trying to get rid of because they are not seen as having a lot of potential profit.

(b) "Hunt Elephants." In English: Get your clients - some of whom are sophisticated, and some of whom aren't - to trade whatever will bring the biggest profit to Goldman. Call me old-fashioned, but I don't like selling my clients a product that is wrong for them.

(c) Find yourself sitting in a seat where your job is to trade any illiquid, opaque product with a three-letter acronym.

Today, many of these leaders display a Goldman Sachs culture quotient of exactly 0 per cent. I attend derivatives sales meetings where not one single minute is spent asking questions about how we can help clients. It's purely about how we can make the most possible money off of them.

If you were an alien from Mars and sat in on one of these meetings, you would believe that a client's success or progress was not part of the thought process at all.

It makes me ill how callously people talk about ripping their clients off. Over the last 12 months I have seen five different managing directors refer to their own clients as "muppets", sometimes over internal email.

Integrity? It is eroding. I don't know of any illegal behaviour, but will people push the envelope and pitch lucrative and complicated products to clients even if they are not the simplest investments or the ones most directly aligned with the client's goals? Absolutely. Every day, in fact.

It astounds me how little senior management gets a basic truth: If clients don't trust you they will eventually stop doing business with you. It doesn't matter how smart you are.

A WAKE-UP CALL

These days, the most common question I get from junior analysts about derivatives is: "How much money did we make off the client?" It bothers me every time I hear it, because it is a clear reflection of what they are observing from their leaders about the way they should behave.

Now project 10 years into the future: You don't have to be a rocket scientist to figure out that the junior analyst sitting quietly in the corner of the room hearing about "muppets", "ripping eyeballs out" and "getting paid" doesn't exactly turn into a model citizen.

When I was a first-year analyst I didn't know where the bathroom was, or how to tie my shoelaces. I was taught to be concerned with learning the ropes, finding out what a derivative was, understanding finance, getting to know our clients and what motivated them, learning how they defined success and what we could do to help them get there.

My proudest moments in life - getting a full scholarship to go from South Africa to Stanford University, being selected as a Rhodes Scholar national finalist, winning a bronze medal for table tennis at the Maccabiah Games in Israel, known as the Jewish Olympics - have all come through hard work, with no shortcuts.

Goldman Sachs today has become too much about shortcuts and not enough about achievement. It just doesn't feel right to me anymore.

I hope this can be a wake-up call to the board of directors. Make the client the focal point of your business again. Without clients you will not make money. In fact, you will not exist.

Weed out the morally bankrupt people, no matter how much money they make for the firm. And get the culture right again, so people want to work here for the right reasons.

People who care only about making money will not sustain this firm - or the trust of its clients - for very much longer.

Greg Smith resigned on Wednesday as a Goldman Sachs executive director and head of the firm's United States equity derivatives business in Europe, the Middle East and Africa.

Yes, Mr Smith, Goldman Sachs is about making money
by BLOOMBERG EDITORIAL
04:45 AM Mar 16, 2012

Apparently, when Mr Greg Smith arrived at Goldman Sachs almost 12 years ago, the legendary investment firm was something like the Make-A-Wish Foundation - existing only to bring light and peace and happiness to the world.

Mr Smith, who was executive director and head of the firm's United States equity derivatives business in Europe, the Middle East and Africa, does not go into details in his already notorious op-ed article in Wednesday's New York Times, Why I Am Leaving Goldman Sachs. But one imagines Goldman bankers spending their days delivering fresh flowers to elderly shut-ins and providing shelters for abandoned cats.

Serving clients was paramount. "It wasn't just about making money," Mr Smith writes. "It had something to do with pride and belief in the organisation."

It must have been a terrible shock when Mr Smith concluded that Goldman actually was primarily about making money. He spares us the sordid details, but apparently it took more than a decade for the scales to finally fall from his eyes.

He says that Goldman's culture has changed. "It revolved around teamwork, integrity, a spirit of humility, and always doing right by our clients."

And he warns: "Without clients you will not make money. In fact, you will not exist." It's tragic that Goldman is losing an employee who realizes that you need customers to stay in business.

We have some advice for Mr Smith, as well as the thousands of college students who apply to work at Goldman Sachs each year: If you want to dedicate your life to serving humanity, do not go to work for Goldman Sachs. That's not its function, and it never will be.

Go to work for Goldman Sachs if you wish to work hard and get paid more than you deserve even so. (Or if you want to make your living selling derivatives but don't know what a derivative is, as Smith concedes in passing that he didn't at first.)

Goldman and other investment banks do perform an important role in our economy, and Goldman bankers - most of them, at least - can hold their heads up high. But it is not charity work. Goldman's clients are mostly very well-off. Mr Smith's lament that the bank no longer serves their needs above and beyond its own does not tug at our heartstrings. BLOOMBERG

Younger Singaporeans and Tax Burdens

Shanmugam is the law minister and also foreign affairs minister, and he is out of his depth outside of these areas. Recently, he is like me and most of us, he talked a lot of cock regarding income and tax. A $1,000 household income is enough to afford a BTO HDB flat after factoring housing grants. Of course one who knows his plebeian lot in life and is not fussy about a life-long mortgage can afford a 2-room BTO in some corner of Singapore with no MRT within walking distance, but not enough for food, transport, utilities for the family perhaps. Then a few days ago he said younger Singaporeans should not be burdened with taxes. Which is good in intention and I almost thumped my chest with my fist in affirmation to his ideals.

However, the law minister was talking specifically about Singapore's income tax, which is truly among the lowest in the world, and along with low corporate tax is part of the PAP's golden plan to bring in FDI and talents into Singapore. Nevertheless, Singaporeans young and old, are taxed in other ways. Tax by other names.

Consumption tax like the GST is one and it is especially hurting in its current form as there is only one level of tax for essential or luxury goods and services. True the current 7% GST is low compared to other developed nations e.g. the roughly 20% in Nordic countries, but GST is regressive taxation and the lower income are relatively taxed more than the higher income. Still the PAP assured that they would not raise taxes until at least 5 more years as part of an election vote-winner, so good thing there. BTW you know if we assume younger Singaporeans because they just entered the workforce and don't earn as much compared to those who worked longer, all things equal, GST means they are arguably taxed more even!

When the younger Singaporean buys a home. He is also taxed. The last I know stamp duty aka tax when one buys HDB or private property, is age-blind for first property owners. Stamp duty is progressive and can be hefty. As far as I know, there is no discount for "younger Singaporeans" who just bought their new home. Whether they should get a discount in stamp duty if they buy a BTO vs a resale HDB vs a private property is a different complex social-economic manipulation altogether. But the bottom line is, younger generation, lets say those below 30 or 35, are taxed as much as those who upgraded their property (excluding investment property owners where there are various market-cooling stamp duties). BTW it is the same with property tax. I didn't know there was relief for "younger Singaporeans".

Keeping an eye on the ball, younger Singaporeans are already burdened with tax, just the same, if not more, than older Singaporeans. And Shanmugam.defended that younger Singaporeans should not shoulder a bigger tax burden for the less privileged in Singapore. Of course not, They should't. The more well-off should shoulder that burden instead.

Younger S'poreans should not be burdened with taxes: K Shanmugam
By Dylan Loh | Posted: 11 March 2012 1827 hrs

SINGAPORE: Law and Foreign Affairs Minister K Shanmugam said that the government does not want younger Singaporeans to be saddled with tax burdens, even as the elderly are looked after.

He said it's important to balance the country's revenue and expenditure.

Mr Shanmugam was responding to the recently concluded Budget Debate in Parliament, at the sidelines of a community event at the Nee Soon Group Representation Constituency.

Mr Shanmugam said the government wants a society which looks after one another, especially those who can't help themselves.

"There's a lot of debate on whether you can survive in Singapore on S$1,000 or S$850. We don't want anyone to earn that amount, which is why we give opportunities for people to upgrade themselves. And education is made, literally free, for those who can't afford to pay for it," he said.

This year's doubling of health care spending and help for the low income as well as disabled, all point towards an inclusive approach.

But at the same time, the accounts do not go unchecked.

Mr Shanmugam said: "When I talk to my grassroots leaders, I just did a walkabout in my constituency, we also have to send another message, which is that, only about 50 per cent of Singaporeans pay taxes.

"And you look at all the other fees and everything else that's collected, in terms of what the government gets, and what it spends, it's all in the book.

"And today if you look at it in those terms, in terms of the revenue and expenditure, it is something the government has to be careful about."

Mr Shanmugam said currently a significant part of taxes are paid by foreigners who are easily mobile, and by the better-off.

But the government also ensures that tax rates in Singapore remain competitive.

And rather than increasing taxes, he noted that the government would rather people keep their money and support those in need, for a truly inclusive society.

He said: "We keep our tax rates competitive, 20 per cent at the top rate. Hong Kong is 15 per cent. If you go to UK, US, you know what their tax rates are?

"You're talking about 40 per cent, 50 per cent, people are talking about even higher. We don't want those kind of rates.

"We rather people keep their money and spend it as they like, buy insurance for their health and at the same time the government supports those who despite all the help, still need further help. So inclusive society."

WP Chen Show Mao Bruised and Battered, Not in Kansas Anymore

Mr Mao Mr Chen, You're Not in Kansas Anymore!

WP Chen Show Mao was the star catch in last year's GE rallies, almost like Sylvia Lim was the star in the 2006 GE. He swooped in from somewhere, rapidly built up a cult personality around himself with his astounding credentials that would fit jolly well among the candidates in white, except that his colours were blue. Chen Show Mao could do no wrong it seemed. His GE rally speeches were above-average but neither awesome nor awful, not that witty as Low Thia Khiang, not that scarily rousing like facist-seeming Pritam Singh.

Recently, his speeches and his credibility have suffered an even greater dip as he was accused of plagiarism. Sharp guys who probably agreed with the former Davis Polk & Wardwell  corporate raider, pointed out that Chen Show Mao's politicised ideas on government spending and economics were borrowed or stolen from this other guy, Donald Low, point by point, without attribution and credit given to the source. Those against the WP manned the guns and started firing at Mr Chen. WP defenders also jumped into their trenches and shelled back. Frankly, no big crap that Mr Chen copy/paste but some attribution was necessary since he is a big blue target for WP's critics. He should be street smart enough to avoid such ambushes. Maybe he is just not street smart as Low Thia Khiang, that's why.

The hypocrisy of those blindly propping Chen Show Mao up is laughable and predictable. Sometimes you wonder where the anti-PAP or anti-WP idiots come from. So much for our education system. If it was Vikram Nair that borrowed or stole ideas from Donald Low, you bet these same fellows defending the WP MP would hammer Nair senseless. Donald Low might do an 180 turn and instead of saying it is ok now, might insinuate ("insinuate" because if say outright he would get sued by PAP until no pants even) intellectual property piracy, the anti-PAP rabble would accuse the Sembawang PAP MP of zero originality at best and a thief at worst. Such is life!

It is not one year since the 2011 GE and already the internet rabble is excited that they can take shots at WP as well as the PAP. Mon-Tue-Wed-Thu, scream at PAP. Fri-Sat, shout at WP. Sun-rabble sabbath and rest day.

Politics is becoming more fascinating as people are beginning to realise that all parties in parliament are fair game. The fun and responsibilities of a cynical populace. The burden of the enlightened electorate! The PAP would get most of the slime since they control most of the seats in parliament, but some shit is also proportionately reserved just for WP as they are not the small underdogs that they used to be anymore. The bigger they grow, the more shit they would get. Justly so.

Update
Pritam Singh also accused of plagiarism since his parliament speech was based on a blogger's article and there was no attribution. Facepalm.

PAP Internet Brigade is Back!???

The PAP is presumably back again with another epic fail attempt to vindicate themselves! Retards. If it is not the PAP's invisible hand behind this, then for the PAP, who needs enemies when they have friends like those who created that FB?  I just love it when the more they try to get up, the more the slip and fall down. Let's give these retards a big hand! Clap clap clap clap.

The Elected Presidency and the Candidates. BAH!!!!

What a load of crap from the PE candidates during the TOC circus. Most of the audience, an attempt to have a cross-section of Singapore presumably, and half the candidates don't know fuck about what the president can do or not based on the constitution. (To be honest though, some of the usual suspects in the audience asked good informed and relevant questions). With that drunken cocktail of political ignorance and optimistic naivety, vote extortion and candidates' self-righteousness, it is a splendid formula for a SNL skit when TOC uploaded their videos for all to gawk, clasp hands in idol worship or facepalm last weekend.

Tan Cheng Bock was clueless, kept repeating himself. He said some good points, like his past record and he dared to say what he felt he had to say for the good of Singaporeans, but enough already as he kept saying them over and over again. Yeah, I don't doubt his grandfatherly patronising sincerity, but he sounded like a chauvinist pig and that joke about wives asking their husband's permission to enter politics is so going to hit  him like a rolling pin into his balls by the women voters. His idea of the annual report from the Istana is nice nonetheless and raises the bar. Still, saying his name TCB makes me giggle though.. kekeke CB! The CB for president!!!

Tan Jee Say was a bloody joke since he got soooo upset sooo easily because Tony Tan the PAP puppet challenged Tan Jee Say about the latter's reference to political detention during the Marxist conspiracy and got all hissy when his understanding of English was challenged. He got angry... because of a puppet! Tsktsk How can he represent Singapore as the head of state if he loses his temper at the slightest of prods? Also, what is his horseshit about moral authority the president? Screw you don't act God. TJS, you think what? The president is like the Ayatollah? The president is the head of fucking state in our parliamentary system, like the Queen of England, not a fucking backdoor into parliament and a chance to behave like the alternative PM! WTF, he and his gang of 4 lost Holland and now they want to take over Singapore! Ahem. Talking about fucking backdoors and also this moral authority crap, he is going to allow gay sex. Now how is he going to sell that moral authority hypocrisy to the religious folks out there? Is he going to wag his finger at the mufti or the bishop to stick that gayphobia up their arse?

Tony Tan was smooth in his responses, deferring to parliament of the day the difficult decisions. Spineless pussy! Don't vote him! Clear to everybody who has half a brain that he acts as if he is running for a GE rather than the EP - his answers were full of slick and empty of sincerity if you ask me. Fuck, don't need to ask, me I tell you! He is a PAP man, and everyone in the audience assumed that he was part of the cabinet even if he is made a president. Himself too! He got it right though that the president can yak and wave his arms all he wants as long as it is within the confines of the constitution. Something that SDP man Tan Jee Say didn't get.

Tan Kin Lian, the poor guy trying to connect and be the voice of the people. He made a good pitch that he is neutral and non-partisan. He could have rode on that non-party agenda as an agenda all the way to the Istana except that he was fairly ignorant of issues other than insurance and investment. He had a good angle but he didn't have the intellect to follow it through e.g. He gave lousy answers on 377A as he didn't know what it was. Besides, he can't speak properly and he looked like an ah chek from the kopitiam across the road giving high-5 to anybody.

When 27 August comes, do your bit for democracy. Spoil your vote. Take that piece of paper and write fuck you mr president outside the boxes. Wait you write inside the box and they think it is a vote cast for one of the Tans.  Workers' Party got it right all along, in a way. The EP is full of shit and true power (not fucking moral power) should be held in parliament. Not by an Istana grandpa, or Istana grandma as the feminists in the audience hoped.

Potong Minister Salary!

 What some Singaporeans might think about the minister pay and raiding the reserves issues :)

Or at least that is what they are promising!

Actually, a very good move to score points by the PM. Very smart. Nicole Seah better watch out as PM is also learning very fast to be like her to pull political stunts one after another. Just last week it was news of 2 retired but yet not really tired ministers who are paid millions, who are retiring. Confusing, especially when one of them changed his appointment from SM to ESM!!! Whatever lah. (Shake head) In the end still paid millions! Or maybe not millions because now there is a committee to Potong Minister Salary. PMS. PAP ministers sure feel PMS when they heard PM make his announcement on Saturday night. PMS like before when the PM spoil market and pledged to donate his increase in salary to charity for 5 years from 2007.

But seriously, slick move by PAP to make Singaporeans happy for now. They didn't need to make this show now, they could have done it 2 or 3 or 4 years later before the next GE and pocket the money in the meantime. But they didn't.

Also, let's face it and don't kid ourselves. How much they cut their pay also we think not enough, and it can never be enough. Life is like that as some want to think that politicians must be like Mother Theresa, poor and passionate about serving the people. What is "poor" is subjective and maybe the PMS committee would refer to WP's previous suggestion on pegging minister pay to the lower salaries in Singapore and given a bonus compared to the current model where it paces the higher salaries and given a discount! On WP, MP pay also might be cut to keep abreast with the idea of lowering the pay of politicians. So the 6 WP MP might now feel very PMS too - just when they join parliament, the PM gave such a commitment.

On whether ministers deserve a high pay where one person's "high" is another person's "peanuts"? If they meet our demands for better cheaper faster health, housing, transport services, why not? Let's not be cheapskate about this. But. But since they cannot meet our aspirations and they want to behave like CEOs in collecting big salary, then they should get pay cut or fired like COEs who under-perform when they show poor leadership in leading a big company. Only fair. Corporate world pay, corporate world rules.