Fact: Low Thia Kiang voted against having a time limit on when to hold a By-Election

[Perspective]

Re: Fact: Low Thia Kiang voted against having a time limit on when to hold a By-Elect

Count some of the regular nicks collectively in total giving the fat insect chap left-and-right bitch slaps over and over again over SHITS anti-WP rants for the last 2 months.

@rmadill0
BlueWave
Debonerman
eatshitndie
Fook Seng
Forvendet
GoldenDragon
HedgeTrader
HorGauGan
HTOLAS
joetys
jw5
kingrant
kukubird58
LeMans2011
myfoot123
Perspective
PMPunk
po2wq
Porfirio Rubirosa
rainnix
rodent2005
scroobal
Seee3
sleaguepunter
ssrrvv11
Thick Face Black Heart
wikiphile
wwabbit
zhihau

This must either be a real big overloaded busload of "WP insects" in an overloaded RC bus, or we must be cyberbullies (boo-hoo), or in reality these nicks don't give a damn whether WP goes down the popularity charts or not, or whether WP wins more seats or even lose those seats they have or not, or whether WP disappears off the face of the earth tomorrow, but who probably care about the stinky smell of SHIT 'thru their computer screens.

 

[wikiphile]

Re: Fact: Low Thia Kiang voted against having a time limit on when to hold a By-Elect

Count some of the regular nicks collectively in total giving the fat insect chap left-and-right bitch slaps over and over again over SHITS anti-WP rants for the last 2 months.

That is quite a list there and you have not exhausted the list of critics of SHIT yet

 

[ssrrvv11]

Re: Fact: Low Thia Kiang voted against having a time limit on when to hold a By-Elect

GMS can preach principles and shout democratic representation till the cows come home because HE HAS NOT WON anything or his party has not.

Locke

gms : ouch

 

[Forvendet]

Re: Fact: Low Thia Kiang voted against having a time limit on when to hold a By-Elect

GMS can preach principles and shout democratic representation till the cows come home because HE HAS NOT WON anything or his party has not.

gms : ouch

The pain can use some salt. Not only has he not won anything, he lost his place and pants in WP and NSP.

 

[palden]

Re: Fact: Low Thia Kiang voted against having a time limit on when to hold a By-Elect

Scared will lose?

 

[Perspective]

Re: Fact: Low Thia Kiang voted against having a time limit on when to hold a By-Elect

ouch

Yep the "ouch" caused it to bounce out of the thread into another thread where it is buzzing all over the place again.

 

[Forvendet]

Re: Fact: Low Thia Kiang voted against having a time limit on when to hold a By-Elect

I'm quite amused by the pig degenerating to a dog and to a maggot. I don't know him personally except through his online persona and his public profile. Really can't stand him and don't understand why WP and NSP placed him in high position and fielded him as candidate. He's really doing PAP great favors (along with James Gomez) by ensuring that WP couldn't win Aljunied GRC in 2006 and NSP couldn't win Tampines GRC in 2011, and now greater and greater favors toward the next BE or GE.

 

[Debonerman]

Re: Fact: Low Thia Kiang voted against having a time limit on when to hold a By-Elect

Goh Meng Seng is an astute gambler despite losing his pants. He had betted "all in" on the the Sinkie Short Term Memory propensity. Is it true for the samsters here as well? Short term memory that is.

 

[HedgeTrader]

Re: Fact: Low Thia Kiang voted against having a time limit on when to hold a By-Elect

Goh Meng Seng is an astute gambler despite losing his pants. He had betted "all in" on the the Sinkie Short Term Memory propensity. Is it true for the samsters here as well? Short term memory that is.

I think he look like thick skin terminator. No matter how you shoot, he say I'll be back LOL

 

[ChaoPappyPoodle]

Re: Fact: Low Thia Kiang voted against having a time limit on when to hold a By-Elect

For me, your example would have been relevant if the difference had been as follows: Thio had moved for the writ of by-election to be issued no less than three months from the date of vacancy and I believed the period should be two months, and there were no other issues. That would have been an acceptable compromise for me to not just abstain from, but even support.

In fact, the following would have been a more relevant analogy:
I'm against the consumption of sharksfin because:

• it endangers the shark population
• it leads to cruel practices such as cutting off the fins of sharks and throwing maimed sharks back into the sea.

Someone comes forward to propose:

• the setting of a quota on the number of sharks that can be caught (regardless of purpose)
• cessation of further criticism of the practice of de-finning because it is the most cost effective way of harvesting fins.

Can I abstain from voting against such a proposal?

I thank you for providing an alternative but as it was in the original case, your alternative proposal is not accepted. You are therefore forced to vote on the bill that I proposed originally. How would you vote?

 

[HTOLAS]

Re: Fact: Low Thia Kiang voted against having a time limit on when to hold a By-Elect

Please clarify what has not been accepted and what I have to vote on.

I thank you for providing an alternative but as it was in the original case, your alternative proposal is not accepted. You are therefore forced to vote on the bill that I proposed originally. How would you vote?

 

[ChaoPappyPoodle]

Re: Fact: Low Thia Kiang voted against having a time limit on when to hold a By-Elect

Please clarify what has not been accepted and what I have to vote on.

Bro, quite busy now. What I'm asking is that you vote based on my first proposal regarding the sharksfin. Disregard the need for a clarification on my part. Just accept it as such. The gist of it is that you are now asked to vote on a controversial matter as it is placed in front of you.