Of course. But those days, everyone also like dat.
-
IP addresses are NOT logged in this forum so there's no point asking. Please note that this forum is full of homophobes, racists, lunatics, schizophrenics & absolute nut jobs with a smattering of geniuses, Chinese chauvinists, Moderate Muslims and last but not least a couple of "know-it-alls" constantly sprouting their dubious wisdom. If you believe that content generated by unsavory characters might cause you offense PLEASE LEAVE NOW! Sammyboy Admin and Staff are not responsible for your hurt feelings should you choose to read any of the content here. The OTHER forum is HERE so please stop asking.
Of course. But those days, everyone also like dat.
You are right. Still I wonder if encouraging criticisms but cannot take them, both traits being not of a party but one same person (!), is worth listening to. That's the kind of opposition we see many times. It's like hoping a high-flying colleague get sacked because he denies everyone else a promotion chance and replace him with a lousy performer who brings down the entire department in the bosses' eyes, and in the end no one from the department get promoted.
The logic goes.... thus, better not to have criticisms... so what are WP MPs doing in parliament for the past few days?
It is a blessing that such illogical "perspective" doesn't get into parliament and count the blessings that PAP doesn't really have that many people with a sharp political mind to put up coherent rebuttal or even mockery.
Goh Meng Seng
It is a blessing that such illogical "perspective" doesn't get into parliament and count the blessings that PAP doesn't really have that many people with a sharp political mind to put up coherent rebuttal or even mockery.
Goh Meng Seng
You consider yourself having a sharp political mind? I hope not. It is not who has that or not but who is in parliament that counts. The sharpest of opposition political mind not elected is no winner.
Gho, you have no right to criticise the party you left and whne you never got elected.
Even a short message people can get it all wrong. Anger blinds the vision.
They are expected to unless and until the Party whip is lifted. The whip is imposed usually on vital critical bills!
"On the other hand, Sembawang GRC MP Ellen Lee rejected Chen’s analogy, arguing that it was inappropriate to compare the PAP to Emperor Tai Zong as he was an autocratic ruler in a feudal era." Why is it inappropriate? What are the qualifications for making this statement? Is history inappropriate? History is always appropriate for possible lessons to apply to the present and for planning for the future. Any leader or leading party in power is the ruler. FYI, "You take me on, I take my hatchet, we meet in the cul-de-sac. That's the way I had to survive in the past. That's the way the communists tackled me. He brought the Chief Justice into the political arena. He brought my only friend in university into our quarrel. How dare he!" - SM Lee Kuan Yew, The Man & His Ideas, 1997. Sounds like an autocratic leader if that is the nuance intended, and definitely one who likes to display power that may be perceived as seemingly unlimited. However, an autocracy is a form of rule in which one person possesses unlimited power, by definition. That cannot exist. Anyone with knowledge of science knows unlimited power is impossible. The emperor had to fight wars with real soldiers and a numbered army which would suggest boundaries of power. So Tai Zong cannot be an autocrat. Nor in that sense is LKY or the ruling party. PAP, LKY and LHL have negotiate and appeal to countries overseas, even today. By virtue of this action, the powers wielded are limited. The fact that Tai Zong's area of control was threatened implies that others do not recognize his power and definitely do not acknowledge his powers as unlimited. Tang Dynasty was a great dynasty. It is an honor to associate the Tang dynasty with the PAP. It is perhaps one of the greatest dynasties acknowledged in China, among overseas Chinese and people who know about China. The Tang Dynasty had comprehensive administration and official system, strict legal system, and equitable imperial examination system, important elements of modern day democracy. Tang Dynasty was forward looking and one of the most prosperous dynasties in history. Many good parallels can be drawn. Rather, is it appropriate to debate about inappropriateness, without appropriate understanding and knowledge of Chinese history and ,also, without appropriate understanding of CSM's parallels and perspectives of the Tang Dynasty for appealing to draw invaluable lessons from a forward looking dynasty with a 290 uear ruling history versus Singapore which only has a 46 year history? If drawing inspirations from history is inappropriate, then the PAP should not keep harping about the importance of history. Is it appropriate for Ellen Lee to imply she has amassed more wisdom to ensure that Singapore and the Singapore government will last more than 290 years? I doubt Ellen Lee has a lifespan that long nor can ensure any plan to be in place that long. USA had its independence in 1776 and it will be 2066 before USA has a claim on governing history through democracy as long as the Tang Dynasty. Is Ellen Lee being appropriate by making such an argument of inappropriateness of the Tang Dynasty to modern day life and let it stand on record to be known to Chinese in the People's Republic of China, Taiwan, Hong Kong, Southeast Asia and around the world, together with the top East Asia studies experts in political law and history, now and forever? Some thoughts from a feeble citizen hoping for inclusion in the progress of Singapore. While "the Government is not the Emperor and doesn't chop heads off" (LHL Speech), please do not chop my head of freedom off with ISA or chop my head of financial assets off with Sue. 
Aiyoh it's really embarrassing to hear all these PAP MPs one by one "attacking" CSM's Emperor Tai Zong analogy? PAP MPs scoring little brownie points and making loud noises; passing off as parliamentary debate. They should instead clarify and then justify their own respective stands before going off on a tangent and worse still pretending to be smart. Rhetoric passing off as parliamentary debate. CSM was merely provoking and exhorting the PAP government to flourish and to bloom into a thousand flowers (if you don't mind my own analogy), bearing in mind this is his maiden speech as an opposition MP. There is no need for the PAP MPs to get so worked up unless they are feeling insecure with CSM in the House.
), bearing in mind this is his maiden speech as an opposition MP. There is no need for the PAP MPs to get so worked up unless they are feeling insecure with CSM in the House.
KuanTi01 said:Aiyoh it's really embarrassing to hear all these PAP MPs one by one "attacking" CSM's Emperor Tai Zong analogy? PAP MPs scoring little brownie points and making loud noises; passing off as parliamentary debate. They should instead clarify and then justify their own respective stands before going off on a tangent and worse still pretending to be smart. Rhetoric passing off as parliamentary debate. CSM was merely provoking and exhorting the PAP government to flourish and to bloom into a thousand flowers (if you don't mind my own analogy
It simply shows that they do not welcome opposition MPs. In other words, they don't believe in democracy. There is only one way. If they cannot change, change them.
I sensed that all the MPs feel a sense of insecurity and abit shock with CSM esp in his maiden speech which is not typical in parliament since many years ago.The rush to rebut him only expose their lack of oratical skill, political acumen,insight and deep knowledge of history as compare to CSM.
Last edited:
Agree with all the comments thus far about the futility of debating over analogies in parliament.
Analogies are rhetorical devices, for crying out loud. There's no such thing as right or wrong analogies, only good or bad ones. If I were to say I exhibited as much grace when dancing as a refrigerator tumbling down a flight of stairs, can you say that's inappropriate because I'm a human being, not an inanimate object? Geez.
To the likes of Ellen Lee: Get a soul. Read some books. It might make you less boring, if not more intelligent.
Analogies are rhetorical devices, for crying out loud. There's no such thing as right or wrong analogies, only good or bad ones. If I were to say I exhibited as much grace when dancing as a refrigerator tumbling down a flight of stairs, can you say that's inappropriate because I'm a human being, not an inanimate object? Geez.
To the likes of Ellen Lee: Get a soul. Read some books. It might make you less boring, if not more intelligent.
Last edited:
I'm embarrassed that Ellen Lee is a lawyer. Does she understand the meaning of analogy ? The message is in the similarity, not differences in time and space.
Does Ellen Lee think that all Chinese proverbs and idioms are no longer applicable in today's world?
MIWs know there is a prize that awaits anyone who can make CSM look bad. Perhaps MOS appointment etc? Anyway, all who did the attacks scored some brownie points with father-son. Dogs will always try their best to please their masters.
WP look like government and PAP look like opposition. WP talk about issues and PAP keep opposing LOL
M
Mdm Tang
Guest
I'm embarrassed that Ellen Lee is a lawyer. Does she understand the meaning of analogy ? The message is in the similarity, not differences in time and space.
Does Ellen Lee think that all Chinese proverbs and idioms are no longer applicable in today's world?
... listen last part of csm's g e speech ...
.... " make them improve day by day " !!!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wv7N-GhyNZs
M
Mdm Tang
Guest
Similar threads
