This is the same trick that Wooden tried to use during his watch to convince the people that there are check and balance. Seems like Wooden is more creative than Pinky.
-
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.
2-party system not workable here: PM
- Thread starter MarrickG
- Start date
This is the same trick that Wooden tried to use during his watch to convince the people that there are check and balance. Seems like Wooden is more creative than Pinky.
you are exactly right, the peasants can only be ruled, if they give the power to rule.
thanks for highlighting the peasants greatest strength and the governments greatest fear:
the people's vote
GCT is now the official joker of the PAP. From ex-PM to joker. LHL is a good-for-nothing PM. He blindly follows Lau Goh and also wants to be a joker. From BG to PM to joker. Now we know why there is not enough talent in S'pore when even the PM CMI. Is WKS a talent? If he is, I suspect we have at least 500,000 more talented chaps in S'pore.
ha ha ha, the same old rhetoric about why we can't have a multi-party system. Fool the peasants, fuck with their brains and then fuck them in the arse. We need a multi-party system with strong opposition. What we don't need are useless bunch of yes men making loads of $$ and thinking we are fools.
ah loong : 1 single PM is not workable here. i cannot function with papa lee and uncle goh holding my hands.
Com on ! Wat makes u think he functioning alone ? His wife, papa, uncles and aunties all helping wat
2-party system not workable here: PM
then make it 3 or 4 party system!!!
then make it 3 or 4 party system!!!
hi there
1. a 2-"party" system within the same party, of course with the same agenda, leadership and interests is totally different from 2 or 3 parties of different make in sheepishland.
2. the latter is some check and balance to the ruling party.
3. while the former is just a sing-along session among the same herd of sheep blah the same tune.
4. it just does not add up!
5. it does not take some scholars to reason it out.
6. risk low can detect it anytime man!
1. a 2-"party" system within the same party, of course with the same agenda, leadership and interests is totally different from 2 or 3 parties of different make in sheepishland.
2. the latter is some check and balance to the ruling party.
3. while the former is just a sing-along session among the same herd of sheep blah the same tune.
4. it just does not add up!
5. it does not take some scholars to reason it out.
6. risk low can detect it anytime man!
Talking cock and throwing smoke is part of the PAP game! I can't believe in 2011 a PM can still talk so callously. 2 party-system cannot work only for PAP.He should call for a referendum and he'll have to eat his words. The groundswell of public opinion esp. among the younger and better educated voters yearns for 2 party-system. Who is he trying to bluff?
Wow, had the PAP split and shared out the seats, there'd have been:
No wonder he said it was not workable, especially if they pay key members of the opposition ministar salaries (as in the UK).
- one PM / one leader of the opposition
- two senior ministars / two shadow SMs
- two DPMs / two shadow DPMs
- one MM / one shadow MM
- etc.
No wonder he said it was not workable, especially if they pay key members of the opposition ministar salaries (as in the UK).
Goes to show they cant hide their avarice. They just cant wait to get their hands on the booty whichever side of the Bench they are on.
Fucking crass money-faced gutter politicians.
Fucking crass money-faced gutter politicians.
He's really frightened of the prospects of being the PM with the lowest approval percentage in history, so he's trying hard to talk up his chances by conning Singaporeans that they dont need any more Opp in Parliament becos the PAP has even thought about it for their sake.
I agree with KuanTi101 that it doesnt work for the PAP but it sure will work for the real Opposition! Who wants a phony and a fake when they can have the REAL one?
I agree with KuanTi101 that it doesnt work for the PAP but it sure will work for the real Opposition! Who wants a phony and a fake when they can have the REAL one?
Me can empathize with this ah loong.
If SG had two or multi-party long time ago, ah loong at the first place won't even have a chance to be a PM.
Not to mention to have a old man still collecting paycheck at the age of 87.
By the way, he seems responding to WP which been calling for multi-party system in the parliament.
If SG had two or multi-party long time ago, ah loong at the first place won't even have a chance to be a PM.
Not to mention to have a old man still collecting paycheck at the age of 87.
By the way, he seems responding to WP which been calling for multi-party system in the parliament.
Sir, I totally agree with you and wish to add a little of my sincere feeling.
It is up to the electorate to decide whether to have a 2-party system or not and not for the PM or anyone else to do so. Remember, the power lies with the masses when they cast their ballots.
Believe me, there is nothing to fear as the vote is indeed a top-secret. From the time, the sealed ballot boxes are brought into the polling stations before casting of votes begin, all parties involved in the elction battle are required to initial on the seals till the boxes are opened and vote-counting begins. Thereafter, the boxes are once again sealed with the signatures of the interested parties and the sealed boxes are then taken to a vault and kept therein for six months. If during this six months, there is no objection, whatsover from either party, these sealed boxes are inspected once again by the interested parties and then taken away for incineration under the escort of armed guards.
Coming back to a 2-Party system, let it be emphasised, that to keep in power or otherwise, anyone in the government or opposition, is a decision rightfully made by the electorate of Singapore and not any Tom, Dick or Harry, who may feel that is within their "God-given" power to do so. To such-minded people, I have this to say - be humble and you will be rewarded. Arrogance only lead to self-destruction. Hitler, Stalin, Saddam, Marcos, Mubaruk and Idi Amin are good examples to remember.
In saying that our beloved Singapore Do not need a 2-party ssystem, the PM has unconciously made a very damaging statement and the cost and repercussions from the ground would be high and unbelievable, respectively. It is an arrogant and damaging statement indeed.
We, Singaporeans are not that stupid and blind to take it as a valuable statement. Up across the border, Penang is changing fast under the DAP, who were once underdogs too. Sarawak's familiar "face" is fighting a tough battle amidst cries from fellow Sarawakians for him to step down. The same will apply to Singapore. Time and tide waits for no one.
The British had to leave Malaya, Borneo, Sarawak and Singapore. The Dutch left the East Indies (Indonesian). The colonial masters quit India, Hongkong, Africa and Middle-East. The Portuguese came, then the Indonesians but all left Timor Leste. Many a dictators have been ousted from their entrenched positions. Look at the newspapers and Internet and you will see what is going on. Sooner or later, the "generals" will be kicked out from Myanmar. Macau has been returned to the mainland. Many many more to say. I am sure you readers will be more enlightened than me.
I admire Mr Low Thia Khiang and Mr Chiam See Tong. Both have the guts, moral strength and wisdom to leave their "protective' fortresses of Hougang and Potong Pasir to the new-blood and head for battle into new areas. The people of Singapore admire and respect such strong-willed people like them. Imagine a "general" who remain seated in his cosy office and keep sending his troops to the new war-fronts. Surely, that "general" don't deserve any iota of respect because he is nothing but a gutless coward.
For the good of the PAP, I call upon the MM, PM, SM and other PAP "veterans" to leave their "protected sanctuaries" to their new-blood and proceed to do battle and make new gains against the opposition in single member constituencies. Surely, such people would be respected and cherished by the people of our beloved Nation for embarking on such kamikaze missions.
The ball is now in the PAP's court. The time is now. Ready, get-set, on-your-mark, GO.
That is the traditional expectation.
However both being dominant parties, they may collude to the detriment of the voters. Once they experienced power, they may seek to maintain their dominance, to the extent of beneficial collusion - you don't stand in my territory, I don't stand in yours, let's both of us demolish the other opponents and destroy all independents from venturing into SMCs.
It is anybody's guess as to what they will do. I can't say they will definitely act in this way. I can only say that this is a possibility.
A three-party system is, in my view, a far better option.
If there is a two-party system in Singapore for the past five years, will we:
(1) have all these foreign talents coming in?
(2) will more be done to control inflation?
(3) will more care be taken in investing our reserves?
These are the decisive questions in deciding if a two-party system is good for Singapore.
(1) have all these foreign talents coming in?
(2) will more be done to control inflation?
(3) will more care be taken in investing our reserves?
These are the decisive questions in deciding if a two-party system is good for Singapore.
I don't mean to elbow into Mr Leong's grammar hammer territory but you are very confusing here. While you seem to have started with talking about the past (last five years), you go on to use the future form "will". So, are you talking about the past or the future?
Try reading again. If you understand, you understand. If you don't, then you don't.
Similar threads
