Hopping, hullabaloo, humbug

Malaysiakini - CM defends proposed 'anti-hopping law'

Penang Chief Minister Lim Guan Eng said his administration's plans to enact a law to prevent state assemblypersons from switching political allegiance mid-term is to protect citizens from a breach of public trust and protecting democracy. […]

"For any elected representative elected on a party ticket to hop or cross over is an immoral, unethical and unprincipled act that shows utter contempt for the democratic choice of their voters.”

"If they were elected on the party they represent, they should resign their seat and seek a fresh mandate from the people if they chose to leave the party platform on which they were elected on," said Lim in a press release today.

He argued that democracy meant that voters should be given another opportunity to judge whether the decision by the elected representative to switch allegiance is acceptable, or not.

Precisely my stand all these years, and why I despise you-know-who, with the plural in ‘you-know-who’.

But alas, Koh Tsu Koon somehow found his voice (and balls) to tell Guan Eng off on this, as reported by MKINI in its news article Anti-hopping law: Koh slams Lim for double-standards.

Our dear Headmaster deputy Headmaster on NKRA asked Guan Eng why the latter didn't say a word about the two Sabah frogs, Lajim Ukim and Wilfred Bumburing, leaving BN to form new parties which have allied themselves to Pakatan?

Koh squeaked: "Where is the consistency? I did not see (DAP stalwart) Lim Kit Siang and Lim Guan Eng protest when two MPs (members of parliament) from the Sabah BN jumped into the Pakatan fold.”

"So, why practise double-standards now. Is he doing this for (merely for) show?"

I can answer that for Guan Eng. Lajim and Bumburing have NOT leaped into any Pakatan component parties, as they have formed their own parties. If they wish for their new parties to support Pakatan, I won't say that's of a frog-ological nature.

Okay lah, I admit I sound technically (and defiantly) correct but in reality morally f* weak in my attempted defence of Guan Eng.

That's the f* trouble when DAP patronises a Master-Chef who insists on serving les cuisses de grenouilles.

les cuissee de grenouilles

Also, I learnt that frogs are haram for the Shafi'i, Hanafi and Hanbali (though okay for Maliki) schools of Islam - hmmm, there must be an Islamic moral in this for our Muslim politicians on both sides, not that they care two figs.

Previously, DAP sweetie Hannah Yeoh, not unlike Guan Eng, had suffered from the same diarrhoeic affliction in 'consuming' the dish of les grenouilles de 916.

But it's a curse that DAP needn't have to suffer as its spiritual leader, my hero Karpal Bhai, has repetitively warned against eating non-halal stuff.

The problems surrounding defection have been made deliberately worse by an earlier BN-dominated parliament legislating to prohibit those, who resigned from their positions as MP or ADUN before their elected terms have run out, form standing as (respectively federal or state) election candidates for 5 years. It's this rule that has effectively prevented Dr Wan Azizah from re-contesting in a federal constituency.

Malaysiakini reported in its article Ex-PM decries DAP's anti-hopping law that Dr Mahathir asserted: "We are free ... we say we want to liberalise, to be able to speak one’s mind and criticise people and what not; that is our freedom. So what is it now in wanting to prevent people from party hopping?"

MCA president CSL made more or less the same statement about the federal constitution guaranteeing the freedom of association, as if the BN has ever respected the constitution, having changed it more than 200 times in a the last 30 years of rule to suit its political purposes.

Besides, since we all know the general Malaysian voting preference of electing a representative on the strength of his/her political party rather than the candidate as an individual, what about the rights of voters who voted Party A only to find their votes have gone to Party B?

So CSL, what about the voters' rights? Or would this be the only way that MCA can dream of ever having a MP or ADUN after the next election?

But then, shouldn't Dr Mahathir's claim of liberalness be also applicable to the wish of a MP/ADUN who may want to resign on political principles to re-contest again? So why had the (earlier) UMNO-led government legislated to prevent this by imposing a mandatory hiatus of 5 years?

Don't tell me the bullshit that it's to prevent wasting public money in holding by-elections, because allowing the rakyat to elect or re-elect their desired representative should be their fundamental rights and an overriding priority, where by preventing the MP/ADUN who has resigned on a matter of political principle to re-stand, would be effectively denying the rakyat their choice of re-electing said candidate.

Rights, choice, principles - these are issues far more important than saving a few dollars, tax-payers' dollars, not the government's.

So, Dr Mahathir, you can't claim it's 6 on one while denying half a dozen on the other, because that's hypocrisy and double standards. And don't tell us about the Master-Chef as he was your protégé and his heart, soul and proclivities are still like yours, in and of UMNO wakakaka.

Incidentally, at this point, I must define who's a political frog because it would appear many still don't understand the distinction. The frog has to be a MP or ADUN who was elected under the banner of, say, Party A but takes his MP/ADUN position across to, say, Party B (even if he/she puts on a show of not joining Party B but votes regularly with Party B). In other words, a frog is one who treacherously betrays the choice and trust of the voters.

OTOH, a member from, say, Party A who is NOT a MP or ADUN and who leaves to join another political party, say, Party B or Party C, is NOT a frog. He or she most certainly has the right to freedom of association that Dr Mahathir and CSL have talked about, as this person won't be reneging on or betraying any voter.

But the biggest culprits aren't frogs but us, the voters. We Malaysian voters are the most stupid and hypocritical people. We are stupid because we kept re-electing contemptible frogs like Ibrahim Ali and his ilk. We are hypocritical because we claim we despise frogs yet accommodate them as heroes when they leap to our side.

We lack the political maturity of the voters in countries like Australia or New Zealand for it seems we do not really know how to deal with frogs, both those hopping away from or hopping into our favoured party. In more than one way, we actually encourage frogs by our inconsistent attitude towards them.

So pordah pariahs (that's us, not those opportunistic frogs)!