Pap always hold the wild card. they will just choose pro-estab people and Jc students as audience. And don't even think about call-in audience since they are always filtered.
-
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.
Singaporean wants TV debate
- Thread starter theDoors
- Start date
Pap always hold the wild card. they will just choose pro-estab people and Jc students as audience. And don't even think about call-in audience since they are always filtered.
The opposition gets a chance to showcase their oratory skills in debate.
I think the only articulate engrish speeching oppos (and i mean articulate enought for live television) are Kenneth Jaya and Dr chee. No way will the latter be will be allowed on air so only Kenny J is the best hope. How effective will that be for the opposition?
Some more it is a high risk-low return venture for Pap, it would be sucidical affair for them. A televised debate will only happen in singapore when we have a genuine 2 party system.
I think opposition leaders should publicly challenge the PM to a debate, let him find some excuse not to have one.
I think he will cry for daddy to help him again.
Don't get me wrong. I think a televised debate is good for politics. But the chances of one happening soon is as good as Ho ching's estrogen count. Zero.
If he does that, better still.
Ask the question:Is the PM or the MM who is running the country? Surely the PM can handle a live televised debate?
First world countries must hold debates lah! It's a sign of political maturity.Singapore , being first world; the hub of so many things, should hold one. However such a debate should also appoint a well-respected international figure to act as moderator or more precisely, to ensure that the ruling party don't play cheat.
It was the ineptness of LTK that made LHL look good. I believe LHL did not ask if WKS should resign. He asked if he, the PM, should also resign. I believe LTK was dumbstruck. Now I'm going to forgive LTK because of his command of the English language. But he could have retorted in Chinese or even Teochew.
The PM was driving home the point that somewhere the witch hunt must stop. If WKS could not shirk responsibility because he was the boss of the Director of Prison; and Director of Prison the boss of the warden who allowed MSK to slip out of the prison, then being the PM and the direct boss of WKS, should he also resign ?
LTK could have told PM that it would be honourable if he resigned too, not just because of MSK matter, but the myriad of booboos that Temasek created. A new PM should then reshuffle the PMO and relieve the tax payers of the burden to feed a couple of Senior Ministers and Ministers without portfolios. After all, a capable PM does not need so many mentors in the PMO to coach him.
LTK should also explain that the call for WKS to resign is not because "he is the boss of the Director of Prison" etc. It's because he is the Minister for Home Affairs. He is NOT vicariously liable for the escape of MSK; he is directly responsible as Minister for Home Affairs !!
Last edited:
First world countries must hold debates lah! It's a sign of political maturity.Singapore , being first world; the hub of so many things, should hold one. However such a debate should also appoint a well-respected international figure to act as moderator or more precisely, to ensure that the ruling party don't play cheat.
My sentiments exactly.
On a lighter note, if at all possible,
I would LOVE to watch Lim Swee Say debate Ling How Doong !
It will not be short of frog parables, colorful colloquial language... maybe even tears & saliva flying !
At least then, I would feel my $110 annual TV extortion fee is not entirely wasted
!
I would LOVE to watch Lim Swee Say debate Ling How Doong !
It will not be short of frog parables, colorful colloquial language... maybe even tears & saliva flying !
At least then, I would feel my $110 annual TV extortion fee is not entirely wasted
!
mr Mah's fancy population statistics and misleading economic indicators will be swiftly squashed once mr Lim tells him: 'don't talk cock'.
It will never happen. Unless its PAP vs PAP LOL
HTOLAS, thanks for posting this link here.
This rare 1988 Debate on Elected Presidency between PAP & WP/SDP (transcript made by Nathaniel Koh, a WP Youth CEC member) is priceless.
In contrast to present day talk of 'new media' & 'inclusive society' , when the Second Guard Leadership under then 1DPM Goh was slowly taking over the reins of power in the 80s, the mood was surprising more 'fresh' & 'experimental' and that was in pre-internet days.
Then, Goh started the Feedback Unit, experimented with 'Today in Parliament' - TV telecast of Parliamentary Proceedings (not the whole show but still better than now) and even agree to this 1988 TV Debate on Elected Presidency - something that is unthinkable now (any TV Debate on casinos?)
Is PM Lee more kiasu now ? C'mon, Hsien Loong is an above-average public speaker - or maybe he feels it will unwittingly promote political theatre - something PAP is fearful of confronting.
Given the gungho confidence of a young Lee Kuan Yew of the 50s & 60s, he will never be adverse to any opportunity of a public debate .
But having assumed power, he is wary of the threat of similar young upstarts. Hence, his constant emphasis that substance is more important than style & his paranoia of rhetoric brilliance in his political opponents.
You just answered your own question about first world countries and political maturity.First world countries must hold debates lah! It's a sign of political maturity.Singapore , being first world; the hub of so many things, should hold one. However such a debate should also appoint a well-respected international figure to act as moderator or more precisely, to ensure that the ruling party don't play cheat.
Oh, of course the opposition must insist that parliamentary priviledge would apply.
There may be a televised debate one day, but it will never be live.
Otherwise there won't be the opportunity to ahem, make the necessary edits.
Similar threads
