Skip to main content

Lee Hsien Loong’s Stupidity: Parliament Self-Defence, Presidential Controversy, Public Mistrust.



It is a well planned stupidity.  Whether the reserved presidential election or self-defence/self declaration of (non)abuse of power in parliament, these are all well planned strategies by top administrators in Singapore. However, when we look at the outcome, perhaps, it is only a self-satisfaction of Lee Hsien Loong.

Untitled drawing(1).jpg



Smart people do stupid things.  In fact, it is a reflection of inner self with obvious ill intentions. So much so that it not only puts Singapore in a bad shape but creates internal and external confidence problems. There is only one proclaimed winner, putting own self interest above the nation.

It is very surprise top advisers to Lee Hsien Loong have not studied or smart enough or dare enough to point out the stupidity - definition of first elected president, definition of “malay”,  politics of kinship, appointment of attorney-general, ….

Arguments put forward by Lee Hsien Loong and his advisers are far from convincing. There are full of holes which can only be filled by the authority of one-party state machinery.

Lee Hsien Loong’s stupidity also exposes the quality of his top advisers and our top administrators. Are they under stress? Can they withhold the trust and principle of “without fear and favour”? Can they think and judge Independently? If not, it sad to see they are as stupid as Lee Hsien Loong.  And is there a future for Singapore with such a leadership and teamwork?

We are telling people; be it investors, businessmen, salary workers, or professionals; we are practising double standard. If you are my brothers, you are protected. If your racial status is not right, the government can make it right.  We have a unique system to define who is first and who is second. However, if you are not happy, you can still file a lawsuit in Courts.

Labels:

Comments

  1. Unknown6 August 2017 at 12:14

    You have posed excellent questions.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Unknown7 August 2017 at 09:03

    I question the integrity of any government that keeps shifting the goalposts just to stay in power.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Sub-standard PAP and the Singapore education system

I make a 'policy shift' when I hear the debate of right politics, constructive politics and sub-standard opposition. My original aim is to discuss about “Su Dongbo, Zhang Juzheng and Singapore education system”. The discussion will end with a sub-standard PAP, in particular from the assessment of the quality of PAP potential candidates. Another policy shift is to discuss it like a play, a drama and make it more entertainment rather than a sub-standard political discussion. Act 1 Gangster’s demand Imagine a sense in the Hong Kong's gangster movie (or a godfather movie), the gangsters' master is shouting at his poor opponent and demand him to give a price for his wrong act. The poor guy without any resources can only offer his body or his service to work for the master. Back in his own chamber, the master is still not satisfied and continues to shout 'don't play, play, you think you are hero, you think you are tiger, or superstar or acting ...
275 comments
Read more

EBRC objectives: Stop “Out of Aljunied”, Stop SDP Breakthrough and “Negative-Asset” Ministers.

First of all, we have to congratulate the Electoral Boundaries Review Committee for creating more competitions, especially, multi-cornered competitions in the East. When making changes, EBRC aims to achieve 3 goals: To prevent “Out of Aljunied” for Workers’ Party.  This is the most important objective. To prevent Singapore Democratic Party making any breakthrough in the North and Central.   To look for a solution to retire “negative-asset” ministers or reduce PAP damages. From the reported claims from different political parties, we will expect multi-cornered contests not only in single constituencies but also in group representative constituencies. The PAP hopes to have a repeat of 2011 Presidential Election. Then Tony Tan won the Presidency when he got only 35% of the votes, a narrow win.However, a win is still a win. He did in even in the very last minute, after recounts of votes.    How to achieve multi-cornered contests? By i...
65 comments
Read more

Is Prism Project Another Central Planning of the PAP?

There are 3 scenarios under the Prism Project#1 of Institute of Public Policy.  However, it looks more like the central scenario planning of the People’s Action Party. From the instructional menu of Prism Project Primer #2, participants were guided to a situation in 2022 and they have to imagine, within the Primer framework, to come out with 3 possible scenarios in Jun-Aug 2012.  2022. What a coincidence! Not long ago, PM Lee declared that he would like to hold the prime minister post for another 10 years. The other coincidence is the similarity between the 3 scenarios and the candidates of PE2011. How competitive and sustainable are the 3 scenarios to the people of Singapore and to the PAP?   Will the scenarios produce competitive and sustainable Singapore, Singaporeans or the PAP?  Perhaps, as what the Chinese say: planning cannot always catch up with changes.   And planning sometimes turns out the wrong, bad and unexpected results, espec...
50 comments
Read more