Tsunami or Landslide?

Lately I have become tired of the word 'tsunami' as in political or election tsunami. In earlier days the word used in similar circumstances when a political party or coalition walloped kau kau the other side would have been 'landslide' as in a 'landslide win' or a 'landslide victory' or 'won by a landslide'.

Mind, I haven't heard of 'lost by a landslide' or 'landslide defeat'.

Is that Jalan Tun Dr Mahathir?
wakakaka

The word 'tsunami'  became better known only after the devastating 2005 2004 Boxing Day tsunami. Prior to that, some poor Japanese or South Pacific islanders were the only people who were conscious of tsunamis, and where most Malaysians (I dare say 99%) weren't even aware of what a tsunami was (Maybe 'tidal wave', but which was different).

Landslide sounds not only more traditional for political wins but also appropriate, because not all sides are crushed by a landslide, but almost everyone would perished when hit by a tsunami.

Thus the word 'tsunami' to describe a 'landslide' election victory would be inappropriate as both sides would have perished and thus lose.

Is that Bandar Tun Dr Mahathir?
wakakaka

On the other hand, with what's going on now in Malaysia, maybe there has been a recent political 'tsunami', wakakaka.

One good Chinese in Dr Mahathir's eyes

Read this - wakakaka!

Ketuanan PKR

K: Amp... ......, I have the committee list.

H..: Only one? I thought there would be two.

K: That's only for public consumption. The list shows a 6-4 ratio.

H..: That's racial. Why must a committee be made up by racial proportion? I don't like it. You know I am against racism. Many are aware I have a very multiracial inclination.

K: Of course of course, but it's a way of curbing, constraining and cowtim-ing those rocket people. They're very aggressive.

H..: Aggressive? or do you mean assertive. There's a world of difference between the two.

K: Yes, yes, amp... ...... I mean assertive.

H..: So what's the problem. Bulan takes 4, Rocket takes 4, you take 2, and there you are, your 6-4 ratio.

K: Yes yes amp... ......, you are absolutely right. But ... er ... that means I'll have to leave out from the committee a favoured hard-working Chinese from my own party - she's totally reliable, 101% loyalty, and even went to Taiwan on our leader's bidding, an activity very much against her human rights grain.

H..: Then there's not much of that grain, is there?

K: Yes yes amp... ......, you are absolutely right. But I really want to have her in the committee as a show of my multiracial credentials and commitment.

H..: Well, make up your mind whether you want a 6-4 racial split or a multiracial credential? You can't have both at the same time. Sticking to the previous 5-5 which worked rather well would have solved your problem.

K: It's politics and I know you once mentioned most emphatically you are not and will not involve yourself in politics. It's about keeping the rocket people in manageable numbers in the committee.

H..: You know what they say about you being lukewarm towards this woman in your party when she was in trouble? You distanced yourself from her when she was a victim of an unscrupulous scoundrel who betrayed her trust, as if she was the scoundrel instead of the victim. It had to take two from the opposite side of the fence to come to her defence. And now you insist on her being in the committee at the expense of your ally, whom you also want to control in their committee numbers. I just cannot understand you.

And when you were in trouble with the Talam issue, who spoke up for you but those rocket and bulan people, Your own party was deafeningly silent. And now you want to stab rocket in the back.

And what is this I heard you want an un-voted person from Kedah in the setup, in fact a failed politician who couldn't even answer questions about the conduct of your last party polls and who now want to postpone the coming one? In fact in his previous political allegiance he was a thug in an international forum.

And don't forget you are already the chair which is always worth at least two in the committee. You now want to deprive your so-called ally of one to give your party 3, which makes a total of five for your party. Isn't that excessive, greedy and unreasonable when your party performed the worst among your allies?

Then I noticed in the last two weeks your party people behaved arrogantly to stake an automatic claim on the chair of the committee as if this State belongs to you party. And that woman had the nerve to tell your allies to back off on the choice of the chair, confirming your party's mistaken belief that the position is your party's birthright. This smells of ketuanan nonsense. Don't forget who I am.

K: Yes yes amp... ......, you are absolutely right. Politics is so dirty which has been why I dare not burden sire with its shoddy complexity.

H..: Since you claim to be multiracial, what about an Indian from your party? I heard the previous one has being dropped?

K: My ally is putting one up so there'll be one Indian in the committee.

H..: So thanks to the rocket, and no thanks to your so-called multiracial party, there would be at least an Indian in the committee. In that case, why not leave it to your so-called ally to put up the Chinese as well as the Indian, and you concentrate just on Melayu?

K: Amp.. ......, I really want to have one Chinese from my party in as well.

H..: One Chinese from your party, or is it THAT particular Chinese?

K: T...... is so perceptive and absolutely right.

H..: I don't like the way your party treats Indians as if there are your mandores. But well, do what you think is right. I have had enough of your nonsense.

K: Menjunjung kasih, but may I drop your name here and there, if only to deter my ally from making too much noise?

H..: Boy, I am glad I am not in politics. You bastards make me sick with your treachery.


Update: FMT - Jangan heret istana kemelut lantikan Exco Sgor

... Mohamad Munir [Setiausaha Sulit Sultan] berkata Sultan Sharafuddin pada 14 Mei lalu telah menitahkan Menteri Besar Selangor Tan Sri Abdul Khalid Ibrahim mengemukakan senarai Exco untuk diperkenan.

Selaras dengan peruntukan undang-undang, Abdul Khalid telah berjanji untuk mengemukakan nama-nama Exco setelah berbincang dan mendapat persetujuan daripada ketiga-tiga parti komponen dalam tempoh satu minggu.

Mohamad Munir berkata, Baginda pada 20 Mei lalu telah menerima surat mengandungi senarai nama Exco semasa Abdul Khalid bercuti membuat rawatan di luar negara.

You must have Eli Wong, even at DAP's expense
What about Xavier if you are really multiracial?
Don't worry, DAP will look after the Indians as you PKR people never do anyway

“Menteri Besar Selangor hanya menghadap bagi mendapat perkenan Sultan Selangor pada Isnin 27 Mei lalu selepas beliau kembali ke tanah air.

“Oleh itu tidak benar tohmahan oleh seorang Ahli Parlimen Selangor yang menyatakan kelewatan pelantikan Exco disebabkan memenuhi kehendak Sultan Selangor,” katanya.

Kenyataannya itu dipercayai ditujukan kepada Ahli Parlimen Shah Alam Khalid Samad yang mendakwa kelewatan itu kerana Sultan Selangor mahu melihat nisbah Exco yang berlainan pada kali ini.

HRH is not happy with you

Now who's been naughty to HRH and fibbing to DAP? Khalid Samad or Khalid Ibrahim?



Addendum:

Dr Utterly Frustrated & Shafted

What I wrote as a comment over at Malaysia-Today on the topic of Xavier’s supporters gather outside Anwar’s house prior to the announcement of the Selangor exco lineup:

PKR has the MB and 3 exco positions which will be filled by Elizabeth Wong, Rodziah Ismail and Daroyah Alwi..

Actually HRH can still get his 6 Melayu with PAS' 4 and PKR's Rodziah Ismail and Daroyah Alwi, on top of a Malay MB in PKR's Khalid. And DAP could still enjoy its deserved 4 excos.

But that would mean leaving out Eli. That won't be accepted by Khalid who coincidentally is the only one to speak with HRH, so God knows what's spoken between HRH and the MB?

Be that as it will be, the fate of Xavier is the fate of Indians in PKR - eg. Kalla, Gobala both of whom were once bodek-ers of Anwar Ibrahim but which didn't save them. PKR is just another UMNO who sees Indians as mandores or lapdogs.

However, there is a kaytee solution. Take for example the case of Eli Wong, a fave of Khalid Ibrahim because she is 101% loyal to him like Faekah, hardworking and a commendable exco on the portfolio of environment. She even sacrificed her reputation by going to Taiwan to chase after potential frogs for Anwar in the 916 Great Shame.

Imagine, a great human rights advocate and sweet lady like Eli chasing Anwar's frogs all the way to Taiwan!!! If that's not dedicated blind loyalty, what then is? So PKR's appointment of her to the exco is only to be expected, and f* anyone who stands in her way

Because PKR insists on having her in the exco, it has to be done at the expense of DAP, without touching HRH's 6 Melayu excos provided by 4 PAS ADUNs and PKR's Rodziah Ismail and Daroyah Alwi.

Thus, to have Eli Wong in the exco on top of the PKR MB and 2 Malay excos, DAP is forecast to have to give up one of its exco allocations to Eli.

Indispensable and f**k DAP

The solution for PKR and Xavier is to get DAP to give up another exco position. In fact, why not take all exco positions from DAP. That way, Xavier and 2 additional PKR ADUNs (perhaps Nik Nazmi and Azmin Ali himself) can all be in the exco too.

Wakakaka!

Silence of the lap dogs

M Saravanan, VP of MIC, was particular LOUD in egging the UMNO-led government to punish the Chinese for not supporting BN in GE-13. This anti Chinese batu api acted in total contrast to his MIC colleague Dr Subramaniam who sought to quell UMNO's post-election anti Chinese diatribe.

presumably Saravanan knows what Interlok says of his ancestry

There is no doubt that Saravanan acted ferociously and LOUDLY in his support for Utusan Malaysia, the UMNO media mouthpiece, in the latter's attack against the Chinese.

A reader of Free Malaysia Today, Cabin Ramadass, said: "Saravanan being a MIC leader has done great injustice to the Chinese community by joining the Chinese bashing bandwagon just to get popular with the racist Utusan and with the PM."

Personally I am not surprised by Saravanan's anti Chinese vitriolic because I have someone coming to my blog who claims to be an Indian and is fond too of abusing Chinese. It's just their way of ingratiating themselves with UMNO.

Be that as it was, Saravanan was certainly LOUD against the Chinese.

But now he is as silent as a ... er ... lamb (as in Silence of the Lamb?)

Edgar Lee Masters wrote a poem on Silence more than a century ago. The following is the last paragraph of his poem:

And there is the silence of the dead.
If we who are in life cannot speak
Of profound experiences,
Why do you marvel that the dead
Do not tell you of death?
Their silence shall be interpreted
As we approach them.

Yes, Saravanan who had been extremely LOUD against the Chinese is now startlingly silent on the murder of N Dharmendran.

Dharmendran was not an Indian gangster or unemployed vagrant, two groups of Indians whom police (and a former Home Minister) blamed for their criminality whenever they perished under mysterious or unexplained circumstances in police custody. FMT's Cops delaying murder probe informed us that:

Dharmendran, 32, an Indah Water employee was arrested on May 11 shortly after lodging a police report that he was involved in a fight earlier that night. 

The father of a two-year-old daughter was held at the Kuala Lumpur police headquarters and was sent to HKL, where he died, on the night of May 21 due to an alleged asthma attack. 

However, the post-mortem revealed that he had died of blunt force trauma. The family was also horrified to discover that his body was covered with bruises, while his ears and ankles were stapled.

Employed by Indah Water, he must have been surprised by the police arresting him after he had like a dutiful citizen made a police report for being involved in a fight. From the FMT report, it's obvious he was tortured before he perished, in all likelihood from the blunt force trauma.

Imagine the horrors he underwent - his body was covered with bruises, while his ears and ankles were stapled. What beasts or barbarians have our once respected police become?

No wonder the most dangerous place in Malaysia is the police station. Please read my post Pagar makan padi - deaths in police custody.

Okay, but what about LOUD-mouth Saravanan? Why is he in this sad tragedy of a murdered Dharmendran quiet as a ... no, not lamb, but ... lapdog!

Methinks he dares not offend his MASTER.

Likewise with another UMNO lap dog Waythamoorthy who is no doubt trying to out-do Saravanan in a (lap) doggie competition to see who will please UMNO most by being most silent.

But Waythamoorthy is not only silent but has already sold away one of his so-called Hindraf central issues, that of Indian deaths in police custody. He willingly dropped this crucial Hindraf issue in his sweetheart deal with Sahib Najib.

And Indian deaths in police custody continue.

Thus, perhaps Waythamoorthy deserves the title of best lap dog.

seen outside PM's Office

Saravanan, Waythamoorthy - their SILENCE is all that more startling because they had very recently been most LOUD against the Chinese.

Related: The tragedy of Hindraf

Myth of the 'Popular Vote'

Free Malaysia Today's Going back to the polls? tells us:

More Malaysian voters who have begun to weigh heavily towards Pakatan Rakyat (PR) are absolutely devastated that it is instead Barisan Nasional (BN) that has been installed as the government–of-the-day after the 13th GE.

Saying and describing that the majority of voters, as the popular votes were in favour of Pakatan, were “devastated” is to put it mildly as tens of thousands of Pakatan supporters are gathering at mass rallies to protest against the outcome of the 13th GE.

While Pakatan has stopped short of organising mass rallies and to take to the streets in the form of mass demonstrations, their leaders have nevertheless gone to the ground to get the rakyat to nullify the results of the recently-concluded general election.

Going by the huge turnouts at these rallies, with Pakatan claiming that they have been robbed of victory by the Election Commission (EC) and BN partnering to ensure victory for the latter, Malaysians of all walks of life, including non-voters are beginning to realize that all is not well in the political arena.

By and large, it might be that the best solution would be to call for fresh general election, only this time round with major changes being made in how the election proper is conducted.

We know journalists have to write interesting articles, and the only interesting articles in Malaysia today are those which are controversial, racial and provocative. Hence in the above FMT article, we read of  "the majority of voters, as the popular votes were in favour of Pakatan, were “devastated” is to put it mildly as tens of thousands of Pakatan supporters are gathering at mass rallies to protest against the outcome of the 13th GE".

The continued reference to and reliance on the 'popular vote' as indicative of who should be sitting in Putrajaya is unfortunately a misconception in our political system which has adopted the Westminster 'first-past-the-post' race.

But is all well and kosher with our electoral system? I grant that the EC hasn't helped its required characteristics of being independent, impartial and professional by its lamentable performance, aggravated by pathetic statements from its Chairperson and Deputy Chairperson, the latter being the worse for his nonsensical utterances (I'll give an example shortly in the case of the so-called indelible ink).

For a start, its gerrymandering has been gross, an obscene example being the Putrajaya versus Kapar contrast.

Okay, Putrajaya's electoral standing as a federal parliamentary seat, despite its paltry 15,000 voters (was only 12,000 in the 2008 GE) is protected by the Constitution (thanks to Dr Mahathir, but where were MCA and Gerakan?) and thus the EC's hands are tied, but I need to ask why it has been paralytic for decades in the case of Kapar and other federal and state constituencies in which non-BN parties (especially the DAP) are favoured?

By fiat I have a LOUDER voice
and SUCK on that

The three common techniques of gerrymandering seen in Malaysia are:

• Sardinization (copyright kaytee wakakaka) or the 'compressed packing' of opposition voters like sardines into BN’s unwinnable seats, eg. Kapar and at state level, Paya Terubong in Penang (compared to BN's Teluk Bahang in same state)
• Mincing (copyright kaytee wakakaka) or chopping up potential bloc of opposition voters (like Indians) and then spreading the mince over a number of seats where they would only be only useful, I suppose, under MIC guidance, and
• Lite omelette (copyright kaytee wakakaka) or spreading just an egg or two to make a light omelette but one which covers the breath of a federal parliamentary seat like Putrajaya and Labuan or at state level Teluk Bahang in Penang, obviously for UMNO candidates.

Additionally, the EC is not trusted (how the f**k to?) when it's known to be a bullshitter as in the case of the indelible ink where its reason(S) for the shameless joke was initially about EC staff not shaking the ink bottle properly (hence its weak state making it a non-indelible ink), but that excuse (not reason, meaning it was bullshit) quickly changed to an Islamic requirement, which hopefully should deterred questioners from further broaching a sensitive' subject.

The Islamic requirement was the ink had to be deliberately diluted so as to be NOT indelible because Muslims have to conduct mandatory ablution prior to prayers and an indelible ink would have prevented that.

I wonder for the utter f**k of it all why the use of the ink wasn't completely abandoned if its application would prevent Muslim voters from conducting religious ablution?

Can some kind Muslims please advise me because the idiotic EC couldn't! OTOH, don't bother because it's apparent the excuse (again not reason, meaning it was bullshit) was to hopefully explain away why voters could easily erase the so-called indelible ink, and it was way way too late by then to abandon the bullshit.

And couldn't the EC have at least stuck by one given reason instead of changing its excuse (not reason) which not only showed it was lying in the first place (and hence would likely be again) but also its executives' sheer lack of competency.

Then to show the utter idiocy of the EC deputy Chairperson, he dismissed the issue of the non indelible ink as unimportant because, according to this Malaysian Solomon, the voters won't be able to vote THE FOLLOWING DAY.

And believe me, he didn't-won't give a f* if you cough blood on his moronic utterance. We know he and his stupidity would be well "protected".

I suppose that's why the EC's motto is cekap dan telus - cekap in doing the required things for UMNO and telus because it doesn't give a f**k what you think, wakakaka.

Then in either a shameless blatant lie or gross ignorance, the Malaysian Stolid Salmonella-ed Solomon stated NZ and Australia also practise the first-part-the-post system. 

This drove an enraged NZ academic, Dr Tessa Houghton, an assistant professor in Media and Communication, and director of the Centre for the Study of Communications and Culture, University of Nottingham Malaysia Campus, to write a stinging rebuttal of the EC deputy chairman's bullshit - see TMI's Open letter to the EC ― Tessa Houghton in which she excoriated Malaysia's Stolid Salmonella-ed Solomon as follows:

... your claim that NZ “uses FPP” and conflation of the two systems is a grave misrepresentation of New Zealanders’ opinions on the system of FPP used in Malaysia. Ordinary NZ citizens understand the myriad voting systems available and have clearly registered their preferences. I take issue with you misrepresenting my country in an attempt to silence both the widespread criticism of both Malaysia’s iteration of the FPP system and the EC’s conduct.

As a Malaysian I couldn't help but cringe and grow red in the face when a foreign academic lambasted our Election Commission's deputy chairperson for 'misrepresenting' (a polite term but which actually means 'lying about') a foreign country.

Wan Ahmad should be Japanese and go now to commit seppuku for the honour of King and Country, or raja, bangsa, agama dan negara. But some kind Samaritan will have to show him which end of the knife is the cutting & stabbing part.

I told an unforgivable LIE
thus I'll eat only one kuih koci santan instead of my normal 3
wakakaka

I can also attest to Australia not using Malaysia's first-part-the-post system. Australia practises the preferential voting and two variants of proportional representation, depending on whether the election is for the House of Representatives, Senate, (which) States or others. The aim in very simple terms (and very very simplified for convenience of reading and following, if I may qualify) is to ensure the candidate with the maximum (or popular) votes gets the seat.

But alas, that is NOT Malaysia's current system and unless and until we change to the preferential or/and proportionate voting system, we shouldn't use the popular vote as an argument to have the rights to sit in Putrajaya. First-past-the-post was the rule by which the GE-13 was conducted, so tough luck, that's what we have to abide by.

And nowhere had this been more painfully manifested than in Kota Damansara, thanks to an avaricious, arrogant and asshole PAS.

In a preferential voting system, PAS' 7312 votes (being in 3rd place) would theoretically have gone to either UMNO or PKR, depending on which party PAS gives its votes to. With PAS behaving like it did in Kota Damansara (and badmouthing PSM standing under PKR banner) we shouldn't automatically assume, should we? But we all know PAS has been an unforgivable asshole to sabotage and deny PSM's Mohd Nasir Hashim the seat!

I can't blame Saiful, can I?

Christopher Fernandez, a social critic and commentator, and author of above FMT article also wrote:

It is really the electoral system that has failed us Malaysians. Therefore there is a need for all the political stakeholders in this country to come together and agree to conduct free and fair polls by a reformed EC.

Only by ensuring that the EC undergoes great structural changes and conforms wholly and totally to the tenets and obligations of parliamentary democracy, can Malaysians be assured that democracy is in place in this country.

And I couldn't agree more. But Fernandez then spoilt it by stating as per his theme in the article's opening paragraphs:

This means the results of the 13th GE must be declared null and void before the two sides of the political divide sit down to discuss terms and conditions of a free and fair polls to be undertaken by an EC that is approved by both sides of the political divide.

Sometimes I wonder what people have been smoking?

Before I end, I just want to point out another aspect pertaining specifically to Sabah and Sarawak when it comes to the delineation exercise.

Because these two states joined Malaysia in 1963 supposedly as equal partners to Peninsula Malaysia (its 11 states combined), Singapore (ter-Talaq, wakakaka) and an absent Brunei, each must have adequate voice in the federal parliament.

But because Sabah and Sarawak each has lower population in comparison to the other (Peninsula) states, it cannot meet, say as an example, the ideal notional 60,000 voters per federal constituency and yet enjoy adequate representation in parliament. Thus its seats must enjoy extra weightage (not gerrymandering) or greater representation like, say as an example, 45,000 voters per federal seat.

Contrary to what the EC chairperson said recently, this extra weightage or greater representation is NOT based on geographical area BUT rather the distinct rights of Sabah and Sarawak as equal partners in Malaysia. 

Thus it is the State of Sabah and Sarawak which shall be guaranteed a minimum number of federal seats, and NOT because Sarawak (or Sabah) has a vast geographical area, as the EC Chairperson wanted us to believe.

As my matey Ong Kian Ming wrote recently in an article (in Malaysiakini or TMI?) there are federal constituencies in Australia which individual area would boggle one's mind as to its geographical vastness but which nonetheless carry equal number of voters as other urban federal seats.

However, in Australia, for example, Tasmania as a State is guaranteed 5 parliamentary seats regardless of its voting population, and hence has a higher than normal representation, but most certainly not to the obscenities we see in Putrajaya and Labuan - once again, thanks to Dr Mahathir and his colouring book called the Federal Constitution, and also Harris Salleh for dropping Labuan unexpectedly onto Mahathir's lap (very much to the outrage of many Sabahans).

Currently Sabah with almost a million registered voters (let's leave aside some voters' authentic and yet to be authenticated eligibility, wakakaka, aside in this post), so with its 25 federal seats, that should work out to 40,000 voters per seat. I believe 25 federal seats is reasonably fair for Sabah as a principal state of Malaysia and the 40,000 per seat, though a wee low, would be acceptable.

Sarawak has 1,083,972 registered voters (2013 figures), thus if we were to apply Sabah's 40K per (on the basis of Sabah and Sarawak enjoying equal status as principal States of Malaysia), that will translate into 27 federal seats for Sarawak which I believe is also reasonable representation in parliament for a principal state of Malaysia.

I believe Sarawak is currently over-represented by 4 federal seats. Kapar and a few other places could do with that allocation if we want to maintain the 222 federal seats for parliament.

Is GE-13 over yet?

One could be excused for believing the 13th general elections in Malaysia is still not over as some Malaysians continue to demand on a different outcome (results) of the elections to what it has been, wakakaka.

I would claim to be among the earliest (if not the earliest) to explain why BN with 47% of the popular votes ended up with 133 or 60% of the 222 federal parliamentary seats. I wrote on that in my 06 May 2013 post The Morning After - Part 1 as follows:

It's also interesting to note than Pakatan has actually won the popular vote by amassing about 51% share of the total votes for GE-13 but been rewarded with only 40% share of federal seats, whilst BN with 47% of total votes garnered 60% of the 222 federal seats  Only once before in Malaysia's political history has a party with the majority of federal seats lost the popular vote, to wit, in 1969.

But this is a result of a combination of 'first past the post' contest combined with gross gerrymandering where in one federal constituency, only 15,000 registered voters can elect a MP to represent them in parliament while in another constituency, nearly 150,000 voters may only vote for also one MP to represent them. The voter in the former has ten times the say in parliament compared to his/her sardine-ized fellow Malaysian in the latter, who is perhaps a 'lesser' Malaysian.

The job of a truly independent impartial Election Commission, which of course doesn't describe the Malaysian EC, would have endeavoured to ensure the universal suffrage of 'one person, one vote' in a democracy, thus dividing the 222 federal constituencies into lots having an average of, say, 60,000 voters in each [some minor variations may be allowed but subject to justifications, etc].

Kapar would then be divided into Kapar East (or North) and Kapar West (or South) represented by 2 MPs while Putrajaya doesn't deserve to be be a federal seat by itself and would be subsumed under another Wilayah constituency or combined with Labuan as one.

But that's only a pipe dream as the ruling party will never allow such impartial professionalism to come about for the EC. Let me share a very closed secret with you - the EC is in fact UMNO's real fixed deposit, not just some pro-UMNO states.

Nonetheless, I would say, notwithstanding suspicions of UMNO's alleged 'creativity' with the alleged help of the EC, Najib has done well not to let the BN lose and, what more, also in regaining BN's control of Kedah and retaining rule in the Silver State, the latter very much to my surprise!

It's a truism of politics that political parties lose elections, not win them.

I believe poor Anwar Ibrahim must have thought he would end up as the PM of a post GE-13 situation when he made a secret peace deal with Najib which was brokered by former Indonesian VP Jusuf Kalla.

The best PM we didn't have

The best PM we couldn't have

The broker had recently emerged to criticize Anwar for reneging on the peace deal by his continuation of post-election protest rallies.

Of course Anwar's fave journalist, Terence Netto, expectedly came up with an article in Malaysiakini on the circumstances and issues surrounding this so-called peace deal which concluded with a one-liner stating "It looks like Anwar has allowed one Bugis, Jusuf Kalla, to get him snookered by another, Najib Razak."

Let me just say I am not at all impressed by Netto's terrible Bugis remarks.

Anwar has no shortage of supporters in this apparent attempt to create a state of political instability, not when his supporters possess the mindset of Myrmidons. They drew heavily on the 51% vs 47% popular votes as indicative of Anwar's right to be PM without even understanding the Westminster first-past-the-post character. And what for - why let the inconvenience of facts interfere with jolly good protests!

They talked about the BN government being a 'minority' government without understanding that its 133 seats out of 222, namely 60% of the total number of parliamentary seats, is not a minority in any way.

Their Myrmidon mindset was apparent when in an (pre election) article about Hishamuddin Hussein escaping unscathed from a private chartered helicopter during his election campaigning, some readers of that news article berated him for misusing RMAF (TUDM) helicopter for his political purpose.

Attack, attack, attack - that's all they can think of. Just right up someone's alley, which to understand more will require you to read The fantasy of Anwar Ibrahim? wakakaka.

In my second post-election post The Morning After - Part 2 I stated very clearly my 5 reasons why Dr Mahathir would NOT oust Najib from being PM despite not winning 2/3 majority in GE-13. In support of this, my personal views, I also wrote on Najib's election achievements in a letter to Malaysiakini which was surprisingly but to my entire delight published as an article titled (wakakaka) Apa lagi UMNO mahu?

In one of RPK's articles I left a comment about my 6th reason which I missed out in The Morning After - Part 2, that currently UMNO has no one suitable apart from Najib to lead UMNO.

Thus I am not surprised at all to hear Dr Mahathir echoing my views in Malaysiakini's Mahathir says Umno has no alternative to Najib.

But our dear Olde Man couldn't resist harping on the Chinese tsunami bullsh*t, stating that national unity will be an uphill task because, according to him, "We are still striving to bring the races together".

He striving to bring the races together? Wakakaka, what an obscenity of such a brazen claim by him, and then some.

He provided the nonsense that because of racial polarization, Najib couldn't obtain Chinese support, conveniently avoiding mention that the Chinese had voted for Malays in PKR and PAS, while Malays also voted for Pakatan. And I feel sorry for those Chinese who had voted for BN to be so insulted by Dr Mahathir.

Though Dr Mahathir was speaking at the Foreign Correspondents’ Club in Japan, he was obviously addressing his propaganda to the Heartland faithful. Given that the Malay middle and upper social class and Malay young voters have swung towards Pakatan, his strategy for UMNO would have to be keeping up the faithfuls' rage against the evil bogeymen behind every Hibiscus plant in Malaysia, those bloody Chinese.

one of Dr Mahathir's evil Chinese bogey sweeties?
wakakaka

And that iniquitous feathering & tarring appears also to be the role of Ahmad Zahid Hamidi, the world's best known patriot, someone who has never served in the armed forces or police but who has no compunction insulting non-Malay policemen or servicemen who gave their lives in their duties to the nation, to wit, a cheap armchair warrior in his air-conditioned office. For more please see my posts Patriotism - a useful UMNO word in which I penned:

... on 09 Nov 2010, predictably as to be expected for UMNO ‘patriots’, Defence Minister Zahid Hamidi stated in response to a question in Parliament that the low number of Chinese and Indian recruits in the military could be due to the Chinese and Indians [being] 'not patriotic enough'.

Zahid Hamidi, once a very close ally of Anwar Ibrahim and the man who accused Dr Mahathir of nepotism and cronyism in an apparent impatient move by the Anwar faction in UMNO to nudge then-PM Dr M out for Anwar’s final ascendancy to the PM’s post, but who has since abandoned his allegiance to Anwar to be allied to Najib, is hardly an appropriate person to talk about patriotism or loyalty. But Zahid is certainly the very model of treachery in UMNO or, if one really wants to be kind to him, a mercenary unprincipled opportunist.

You may also wish to peruse:

(1) Chinese policemen
(2) Malay 'sacrifice', Chinese 'sacrifice'

Meanwhile in the 'other' Malay world wakakaka, Terence Netto's words about the 'intent' of PKR members have once again been manifested in Malaysiakini's Let us into state GLCs to axe those against PKR.

Netto had written in last year's Malaysiakini’s Selangor MB's pol sec Faekah at bay in which he said of Khalid Ibrahim, as follows:

However, he has been slow to recognize as the PKR leader of a state regarded as a jewel in the federal crown that politics is also about providing opportunities, rewarding loyalties and managing expectations of the party faithful.

Oblivious of these aspects of his role as MB, he has courted trouble with sections of the party - mainly ex-Umno members - whose 10 years (1998-2008) in the political wilderness before the Selangor government was captured by a PKR-led opposition has had them ravening for whatever rewards were to be had.

“… politics is also about providing opportunities, rewarding loyalties ..... of the party faithful”?

“… he has courted trouble with sections of the party - mainly ex-Umno members - ..... ravening for whatever rewards were to be had …”?

As if that was not bad enough, Netto then went on to criticise Khalid’s political secretary, Faekah Husin, the target of PKR’s inner coterie, for not cultivating those in the party who would be crucial to the fulfilment of her (alleged) political ambitions.

Now, would I be correct in saying that, according to Netto, Sweetie didn't given a rat ass f**k about 'greasing people's palms'? If so, bravo to Faekah.

As the wise said, the buah bangsat langsat doesn't fall far from the bangsat langsat tree.

And no wonder the inner coterie in PKR now wants to postpone party polls.

But to Anwar's credit he has finally gathered his balls together and put paid to those 'ravening' (wakakaka) ex-UMNO members - read Malaysiakini's Anwar steers PKR through as 'storm' fizzles out. Maybe there's still hope for Anwar Ibrahim; maybe he knows what's good for him and his political future.

But to end this post, Pakatan people especially PKR members better come back to Earth before some innocents get hurt for the unjustified glory of "God's gift to mankind".

I don't give a f* if you glory-wannabes have a death wish but it's the innocents I care about.

New brooms

When you have a new Home Minister and a new IGP, guess what?

That's right! Both are trying to make an impact. New brooms!

Furthermore, the UMNO election is coming up soon and someone may be having fanciful ideas about moving up from being a mere VP. And what better way to move up the party hierarchy today than by showing how tough he is, and a great comfort to the right wing elements in UMNO ...

... which explains his incoherent scream for those who don't like the Malaysian election system to migrate elsewhere. Low class!

Don't forget that in 1998 he was treacherous to Dr Mahathir when the latter was party president, indirectly accusing the PM of nepotism and cronyism.

Just a year later, in 1999 when Anwar was in the UMNO dog-house, he turned around and bit Anwar, declaring that his old ally, poor Anwar, was the bloke who told him to raise allegations of nepotism and cronyism against Dr Mahathir. He further revealed that Anwar as Finance Minister had provided him with allocations of shares of listed companies.

What a double headed snake, wakakaka!

In Anwar's camp one moment, in Mahathir's the next. Najib should watch out for him as he's far more shifty, sneaky and sly, wakakaka!

Real reason for PKR delayed party polls?

TMI - PKR mulls delaying party polls

PETALING JAYA, May 22 — PKR is considering delaying its party elections, initially scheduled for November, as the Pakatan Rakyat (PR) anchor party is still recovering from a “fierce” Election 2013 battle, its secretary-general Datuk Saifuddin Nasution said today.

The move comes as the party copes with internal strife as its leaders squabble for key posts in the Selangor state government. The party is also seen as failing to get its act together following its first elections that were marred with allegations of irregularities and, in some cases, violence.

“PKR is considering delaying its party polls which are scheduled for November. But the party will have to call for an emergency meeting to gain approval and amend the party constitution,” Saifuddin (picture) told a press conference in PKR’s headquarters here.

Saifuddin added that among the main reasons behind the party’s decision to delay the polls was that its grassroots and machinery had just gone through a “battle” at the May 5 ballot.

“One of the reasons behind the delay is because the party has just finished a fierce battle which was the 13th general election where a lot of energy and resources was spent,” he said.

BULL!

[and call Shahrizat please to tell her we've found her missing cattle, wakakaka]

Usually political parties delay party elections BEFORE public elections, not after one. So why is PKR considering something so unusual?

Well, let me tell you what I think would be the real reason for the 'inner coterie' proposing so.

Read FMT's PKR grassroots want action against Azmin which informed us:

The attacks against PKR deputy president Azmin Ali escalates as more party grassroots members call for action to be taken him for criticising party president Dr Wan Azizah Wan Ismail.

And mateys, that's probably the true reason for Saifuddin Nasution, one of PKR's 'inner coterie', talking about delaying PKR party polls, to protect Azmin Ali from being voted out of his party deputy president position.

Also read my earlier posts:

(1) Zaid Ibrahim - suffers no fool gladly

(2) The Poison within PKR - Part III

The Midas Dilemma - The Mahathir Dilemma

Yes, that's right, the title of this post is not a typo, where I had erred in replacing 'Malay' with 'Midas' or 'Mahathir', who coincidentally is the author of Malaysia's most controversial book 'The Malay Dilemma', basically a printed rant of his twisted perceptions.

Wikipedia has this to say about his book:

In the preface of the book's 1st edition, its British publisher casts doubt on the accuracy of Mahathir's assumptions and facts. Mahathir has been rightly criticised for the lack of documentary evidence to buttress his many arguments and conclusions. His assertions and assumptions were based on his personal observations and experiences, with no empirical data to support them.

The phrase '... based on his personal observations and experiences' could also mean based on his personal prejudices.

The book was banned by the Tunku Abdul Rahman administration and the prohibition maintained through two subsequent administrations (Tun Razak's and Tun Hussein Onn's) until the author became the Prime Minister of Malaysia, wakakaka.

quite a leng chai

But my wakakaka is not so much directed at Dr Mahathir but rather at those sycophants who ooh and aah at 'The Malay Dilemma' the moment it was un-banned by Mahathir's own government, as if it was a hidden treasure of Asian wisdom, not unlike a socio-political version of a Malaysian Kama Sutra.

Okay then, this calls for a wee teng k'ooi-ish (chong hei) digression into the Kama Sutra, wakakaka.

Academics said that the Hindu love-making Manual was written by Vatsyayana (Dr Vatsyayana? wakakaka).

His delightful deliciously decadent tome contains 1250 verses in 36 chapters, which were then compiled as 7 parts, on subjects from amorous advances, sexual union, acquiring a wife (what, only one?), courtesans and their economics (economics of prostitution or prostitution of economics a la NEP? wakakaka), occult practices related to getting more of you-know-what, which are something SE Asian witchdoctors (bomohs)  are very good at.

some postures are more yoga-ish challenging

However, Hindu religious belief has it that the Kama Sutra, regarded as the oldest and most notable of a group of texts known generically as Kāma Śāstra, was initiated by Nandi, Shiva's sacred bull and also gatekeeper. I have a few stories to tell about Nandi but let’s leave those for another day.

Apparently Nandi, being Shiva’s gatekeeper, was in a fortunate or (depending on your morals) unfortunate position where it could easily hear the love-making moans, groans and whispered sweet-nothings of his master and lady (Parvati) when the two gods were at it. It was said he was so moved (???) by their ‘sacred utterances’ that he recorded those for the benefit of mankind in what has now become known as the Kama Sutra. Hallelujah for that blessing!

Nandi, Shiva's sacred vahana

Incidentally, The Kama Sutra rhymes with The Malay Dilemma, wakakaka. Thus I am wondering how to tie all these legendary stuff with The Malay Dilemma’s ‘sacred utterances’ and Shahrizat’s ‘bull’ about her missing cows, wakakaka ...

... which brings us to, firstly, Bhai Karpal's rant about the Senate. Bhai has been so incensed with Najib's (as well as his prime ministerial predecessor's) misuse of this convenient 'back door' to the cabinet that he proposed for the abolishment of the legislative institution. I don't agree with my hero as I think that's way too drastic.

As Gobing Rudra, a former editor of a newspaper wrote: DAP chairman Karpal Singh has gone overboard in asking for the Senate to be abolished. He’s throwing out the baby with the dirty bath water out of anger and disgust with the way that Umno-BN use the Senate for appointments to the cabinet.

I agree with Gobind Rudra's take on only that but most certainly NOT his other points in his article in FMT's Reform the Senate, not abolish it. I'll come back to Gobind later.

Needless to say, when Bhai Karpal called for the Dewan Senate to be abolished, DAP's former VP and current chief pest wakakaka, Tunku Aziz, disputed Bhai's call, stating most incorrectly that "... the Senate would unearth and develop more political and administrative talents for the good of the country" because that's not the purpose of the Senate, to 'unearth and develop talents'.

However, Tunku has been correct in saying the "Senate would give the government an opportunity to use a much bigger pool of talents to administer the country", though the only 'talent' the government had ever recruited via the Senate 'back door' into the cabinet was King Guz, better known as the late Tun Ghazali Shafie.

In Tunku and Tun Razak's days, Ghazalie Shafie was a superb (probably the best ever) civil servant, and it wasn't surprising the 2nd PM brought this 'talent' into the cabinet via the Senate.

But I can't name other 'back door' candidates for the cabinet, people like Koh TK, Waythamoorthy, etc, as 'talent' but more as 'mandores'.

Another senator, though wakakaka we cannot describe him as a Senate 'back-door' product* because he is NOT in the Malaysian cabinet (yet anyway), Senator Jaspal Singh, who is MIC treasurer-general wrote a letter to Malaysiakini about the call by his 'countryman'** to abolish the Dewan Senate.

* while being nominated to the Senate is a constitutionally legal process and a singular honour, taking a senator into the cabinet particularly one already rejected resoundingly by the voters, people like Koh TK and Shahrizat etc, or one who is hardly a representative of a minority group, like Waythamoorthy, is known as a 'back door' process, and an insult to the rakyat.

** if you're a Sikh, you'll know the flippant and humorous reference to 'countrymen', wakakaka.

Jaspal Singh's letter to Malaysiakini titled Karpal's pitch to abolish senate ill-considered has only one good point for us to share, while the rest of his letter consists of attacks against Karpal and DAP, which is okay since Jaspal is from MIC, wakakaka - now, surely you don't expect him to praise Karpal or DAP.

Jaspal wrote in his opening paragraphs:

The Dewan Negara plays a critical role in Malaysia’s democracy. It reviews laws passed by the raucous lower house. It allows minorities, like the Orang Asli, or for that matter, Sikhs, to have a voice in the legislative.

It also ensures representation for states. Senators comprise individuals of worth and if Karpal finds some of them unsuitable, his personal views cannot be confused for widely-held public opinion.

I may have some questions about his claim that 'senators comprise individuals of worth' wakakaka, but I would grant he has been partially right, considering not all senators have been cast-aside & recycled rubbish.

However, Jaspal Singh failed to put his above statement, though correct, in full context, and I suppose I can't blame him because I don't expect him to criticize Dr Mahathir for messing up the Senate as he (Dr Mahathir) had messed up most things he laid his hands on.

What would be this 'full context' I've just mentioned?

Without going into itsy bitsy teeny weeny details, during Dr Mahathir's tenure as PM, the Senate changed (through constitutional amendments - possible when the government has a two-thirds majority) from one which ensured the states and minorities could check and challenge the federal government's legislation which might not be in their (states' and/or minorities') favour into one which is controlled by the federal government - and in such a change, has thus lost its raison d'être, its ability to check & balance legislations passed by the Dewan Rakyat that are unfair to minorities or the states.

The Senate previously had more states-appointed senators than the King's (but in reality the PM) appointed ones, but the majority has now gone the other way.

The King's or federally appointed senators, having been increased through constitutional amendments from 16 to now 40, could easily overrule the states' and territories' maximum of 30 even if the impossibility exists of all 30 states-appointed senators being from non-UMNO parties.

Mohamed Suffian Mohamed Hashim

Mohamed Suffian Mohamed Hashim, former Lord President of the Federal Court, said that the amendments acted "contrary to the spirit of the original constitution which established the Dewan Negara specially as a body to protect in the federal Parliament, state interests against federal encroachments."

So what's new in Malaysia Boleh! Just another obscene molestation of the already much mutilated federal Constitution.

And that's the 'full context' within which Jaspal Singh should have made his comments on the Senate, namely, that it is currently one that can no longer protect the interests of minorities or the states, but just a rubber-stamping factory for the federal cabinet's legislations and a back door avenue for the PM to reward failed and rejected politicians like Koh, Shahrizat, etc.

Thus Jaspal Singh should appreciate why his 'countryman' Bhai Karpal has been so outraged by the 'unrepresentative swill'* that is the Dewan Senate today.

* the term 'unrepresentative swill' was first used by former Australian PM Paul Keating to describe the Australian Senate, though his words carried a different meaning to the one I have for the Malaysian Senate, where mine indicates that Malaysian senators are not directly voted into office by the rakyat.

Dr Mahathir was not unlike the fabled King Midas, though of a version which changed everything he touched into disaster (instead of gold).

You may wonder who's King Midas. Well, rather than write the story on my own, here's what I obtained from the web about Midas (slightly edited by kaytee for better reading and clarity):

Midas was a king of great fortune who ruled the country of Phrygia, in Asia Minor. He had everything a king could wish for. He lived in luxury in a great castle. He shared his life of abundance with his beautiful daughter. Even though he was already very rich, Midas thought that his greatest happiness could only be provided by gold. His used to spend his days counting his golden coins! Occasionally he used to cover his body with gold objects, as if he wanted to bathe in them. Gold was his obsession.

One day (to cut the story short) he did a favour to Dionysus  the god of wine and revelry, who passed through the kingdom of Midas. The god was very grateful to Midas for his kindness, and granted Midas any one wish the king desired. Midas though for a while and said: “I hope that everything I touch becomes gold”.

Dionysus

Dionysus warned the king to think carefully about his wish, but Midas was very firm about what he wanted. Dionysus could do nothing else but to grant the king his wish, that from that day everything he touched would turn into gold.

The next day, Midas woke up eagerly to see if his wish became true. He touched a table which immediately turned into gold. Midas jumped with joy! He then touched a chair, the door, his bathtub, a table, etc until he was exhausted yet happy at the same time with all the new gold objects he came into possession!

Then he sat at the table to have breakfast, and while waiting to be served, took a rose between his hands to smell its fragrance. When he touched it, the rose turned immediately into gold. "I will have to obtain the rose's fragrance without touching it, I suppose," he thought in disappointment.

When he tried to eat a grape it also turned into gold! The same happened with a slice of bread and a glass of water. Suddenly, he was afraid. Tears filled his eyes and at that moment, his beloved daughter entered the room. When Midas hugged her, she turned into a golden statue! In great despair and fear, he prayed to Dionyssus to take the curse of his magical touch away from him.

Fast forward, and do we recall someone had once cried in equal despair at the curse of what he erroneously imagined would be his magic touch?

And hasn't everything he touched turn into disaster? Forex, Sabah, Senate, the Pandora Box of religion, crooked bridge, etc etc etc, even his beloved NEP ended up with him (not someone else) criticizing his UMNO people for continuing to lean on crutches?

What about the recent elections in Pasir Mas, Shah Alam and the latter's domino effect in Selangor? Just another of his 'Mahathir' magic touch for UMNO!

But alas, unlike King Midas, King Mahathir is not repentant. He doesn't believe in the curse he has in his hands, changing every everything he touched into disaster, even and especially for those he favours.

Yes, I grant he wants to help the UMNO Malays, he wants to strengthen UMNO, yet he makes matters worse for them. That's the Mahathir Midas-like Dilemma.

But let's return to Gobind Rudra's proposal to reform the Senate. Gobind spoilt a serious proposal, for a start, by his rants against Singapore (which I have to admit I have been fond of too, though only against LKY, wakakaka).

However, Gobind behaved in an irrational angry manner, a behaviour which incidentally he had accused Karpal Singh of, when he wrote:

Karpal seeks to destroy what would be an institution that could strengthen democracy and the people’s interests. He is disgusted that P Waythamoorthy was made a deputy minister. So he says close down the the Senate.

But didn’t the DAP appoint Tunku Aziz Ibrahim as senator? And when he was appointed, didn’t the DAP trumpet the fact that he was the first DAP senator?

Yes indeed, DAP did appoint Tunku Aziz to the Senate as allowed by the Constitution, BUT NOT into the cabinet via the Senate 'back door'.

That has been the fundamental difference which unfortunately Gobind, in his anger against Karpal Singh wakakaka, failed to distinguish. Thus, Tunku Aziz was NOT a 'back door' appointment.

Then strangely for someone who claimed to speak for the rakyat, Gobind cast his anger at the Dewan Rakyat in saying:

Karpal’s suggestion for only one house, of a Parliament consisting only of the Dewan Rakyat, is a disguised appeal for the supremacy of parties and politicians, instead of the supremacy of the people.

For a start, to argue that the Dewan Rakyat is not an expression of the supremacy of the rakyat shows his somewhat confused understanding of parliamentary democracy, warts and all.

Additionally, he failed to explain how a Dewan Senate would be different from a Dewan Rakyat in terms of politicians and political parties, since we may be sure that the Dewan Senate would be filled mainly by apppointees from the same political parties in the Dewan Rakyat.

He was talking as if his reformed Dewan Senate will be completely divorced from the Malaysian political sphere. What was he smoking?

Or, has he been prejudiced against the Dewan Rakyat because there isn't in the legislative institution those he wants to see?

But nonetheless  let us examine what he has to offer:

What Malaysia needs is a reformed Senate as well as a reformed government and reformed politicians who believe in the principles of democracy and will uphold them. One of those principles is representation of the people. Another is separation of powers. And another is check and balance.

Okay, no problem, though all are motherhood statements thus far. But nothing enlightening. Let's read on.

A reformed Senate, if given due respect from reformed politicians and a principled government, would provide a check and balance against a house of MPs who believe their word should be law merely because they were successful in conning an unthinking and gullible rabble into voting for them.

Again, a motherhood statement with a wee ranting at the end wakakaka, though I question his particular rant against the Dewan Rakyat as not being the law maker. I'm getting worried about his understanding of parliamentary democracy.

Or, I am now even more convinced the people he supports haven't been (or couldn't be) elected into the Dewan Rakyat, hence his invincible prejudice.

A reformed Senate would give voice to ethnic minorities, to those sidelined by the political process, for example allowing all religions to be represented. A reformed Senate would provide a place for those who cannot, or will not, take part in the dirty business of winning votes. Technocrats could be appointed to represent industries and trades, artists and performers, sportsmen, maybe even journalists.

Some good points but I have a few questions for him:

(a) who, apart from ethnic minorities like the Aborigines and other (East Malaysian) natives, are those 'sidelined by the political process'? C'mon, don't be shy or oblique. Say it out aloud.

(b) who is an ethnic minority? How would we define an ethnic minority in Malaysia? One with less than 3, 2, 1 or x% of Malaysian population? Or perhaps one with less than 8%, wakakaka.

(c) what did he mean by 'those who cannot, or will not, take part in the dirty business of winning votes'? Is he advocating a departure from the (his) 'dirty business' of democratic elections? Is he suggesting imperious (note: not imperial, but perhaps Ah Jib Gor's) appointments instead of the choice/voice of the people?

I gather by now Gobind isn't exactly a man in favour of democratic elections, sneering at it as 'dirty business', but I suspect, only because those he supports couldn't get elected into Parliament, wakakaka.

A reformed Senate would have direct elections for people to represent the 14 states. It would also provide for royal appointment, by which minorities and other neglected groups could have a voice.

Again I have to ask who he meant by 'neglected groups'? As I urged before, c'mon Gobind, say it out aloud, or no one will hear you.

But I am now getting the sense he could be a Hindraf sympathizer or even is a member who wants a SARSI wakakaka.

An upper house would provide a place for unpolitical debate, for a calm rethink of what the rowdy politicians in the other place demand.

Unpolitical debate? There is no such animal when one deals with issues pertaining to, or involving the state or its government, in defining policies and legislations of a state. All these are political. I am afraid by now, I have to regrettably say he's talking SARSI cock. So goodbye Gobind.

I had hoped someone would propose a Senate based on the powerful Australian version, to make amends to King Mahathir's 'Midas' touch on it, but let's leave that lengthy discussion for another day.