SDP Teo soh lung: I am disappointed with the opposition parties in singapore

[yellowarse]

on ministar salary wp did propose a different formula that is bottom-up.

did the people on the streets pick that up? no.

So why vote with the PAP? What's the message you're sending out to the voters? That you're not just passive, but compliant?

 

[SgParent]

So just because we have a prostitute press you'd choose to sleep with the enemy? To keep silent, because the media will not publish what you say?

What a load of bull crap. For crying loud, this is the age of internet and social media! And Hong Lim Park. And for the IT illiterate there's the Hammer. And the Hansard.

That's why we'll never have a better chance than now of toppling the PAP despite their formidable machinery.

nope.

i am saying, debate the merits in parliament but at the end of the day see the benefits that extra $ can do and vote for it.

voting along principal but denying the extra $ for the poor students serves what purpose? ego?

 

[SgParent]

So why vote with the PAP? What's the message you're sending out to the voters? That you're not just passive, but compliant?

if wp dun vote yes then white scums get to keep the original salary package.

i'm sure the white scums will be even more happy and the fake 40% will have a field day.

 

[yellowarse]

if wp dun vote yes then white scums get to keep the original salary package.

Hello, what BS are you spewing about? Your 7 votes will not do anything. With or without your vote, 80 PAP votes will ensure that whatever bill they table in parliament will be passed. And that means the wayang reduced salary package would be passed, regardless of how WP voted

Parliament is the PAP's rubber stamp. With morons like you, no wonder S'pore is still a dictatorship. Sheesh.

 

[yellowarse]

i am saying, debate the merits in parliament but at the end of the day see the benefits that extra $ can do and vote for it.

What merits? Give a paltry few hundred bucks here, but millions of dollars of full scholarships for foreigners?

voting along principal but denying the extra $ for the poor students serves what purpose? ego?

That's a lie. Your 7 votes will not deny the extra $, because 80 votes will say yes.

Your 7 votes will tell the people what your stand is, and what your party believes in, and why it cannot align its principles with the ruling party's.

 

[tanwahp]

U are the one that has no idea how governance work, Look it up in the dictionary first. The problem with what you say is that its not true. The opposition HAVE NOT debated nor voted to death the PAP laws or anything else passed in Parliament.

I didn't say governance is about voting against PAP laws. I also didn't say the opposition has voted against every PAP law to death. Which dictionary of yours defines it that way?

The opposition HAVE NOT debated nor voted to death the PAP laws or anything else passed in Parliament.

To me, they have. It's on record. You are entitled to your different opinion. By the way, opinion is not fact or truth.

Kindly show me the voting record for Chiam See Tong that proves this. Kindly show me the voting record for all the 7 WP parliamentarians in office now.

Voting records are tedious to compile, so it is interesting you claim to know that the benchmark is 90%. I never claimed to know the voting records, I only said I know the opposition doesn't vote against all bills because the majority are functional bills.

U will find that they voted WITH the PAP probably 90% of the time.

You are simply regurgitating. No opposition in the world is ranked based on how many bills they vote against. All the opposition in the world will probably fail in that respect. Moreover, some bills were what the opposition had been calling for all along and the PAP decided to make these changes after 2011.

I do not take PAP buses, I do not live on PAP land, I do not cross PAP traffic lights, and I do not eat food from a PAP source. Because simply speaking, none of it belongs to the PAP. The PAP is just a political party. They do not own the buses that I ride in. They do on own the land that I live on. That belongs to the people as part of their national assets. I do not cross PAP traffic lights because they don't own the lights. U are confused as to what is a govt and what is a political party. The PAP may act as though all these things belong to them, but when people like you go along with the charade, it makes it easier. These are administrative laws that are not wiped out when another party takes over, and the PAP loses.

Exactly. If amendments were made to improve the Land Transport Authority of Singapore Act, the Agri-Food and Veterinary Authority Act, the Sale of Food Act etc. all which make up the MAJORITY OF THE BILLS, they involve your livelihood and is "not PAP". PAP as the government is still the one that passes the laws that are "not PAP" but defines your livelihood, why should WP vote against them? This is incoherent.

Unfortunately, u have to look at the facts. The WP is not going to wake up, it appears they are in cahoots with the PAP. Somewhere in some backroom, a deal was struck between the 2 parties. PAP says vote with me in PArliament and thereby legitimize the stupid and illegals laws I am passing, and in return, I will not harass and sue and intimidate you like I do with so many other oppos, and you can then earn your $16K a month salary and be happy like fuck.

That's not what I see. I see the PAP govt confiscating land from Aljunied after 2011, refusing to do a proper handover causing failure of audit then using this failure of audit to tekan AHPETC further, finding fault with dirty hawker centres and rental of TC premises, things they themselves failed when they were in charge of Aljunied. Are yours really "facts"?

You are also implying that voters of Aljunied do not have control over the results in Aljunied. People who voted for the opposition and seeing their ward fall to the opposition have been elated to see that happen. I see your statement as an insult to opposition voters in Aljunied.

 

[tanwahp]

No. Because 80 PAP MPs will vote 'aye' anyway. But WP would have won a moral victory by showing Singaporeans where it stood on the issue of million-dollar ministerial salaries, defence budget (2nd highest per capita in the first world), no universal healthcare, inadequate education allocation, etc. (Of course WP must make its stand clear why it wouldn't want to vote for the budget.)

Absolutely agree that the way the opposition votes shows their party stand more than to stop a bill, since their numbers are too small to veto any bill. Agree with the morals part, which also means that if WP votes against all bills including a bill for a new government body to examine animal abuse cases, the morals of the WP is no different from that of the PAP, never giving credit and never acting responsibly.

The issue is that the person you are responding to is responding to a person who says opposition is rated based on voting against ALL BILLS. You have only cited some "bad bills", the others were saying "all bills are bad".

 

[Seee3]

When Ali defeated foreman, he used "rope-de-dope", held back punches to conserve energy and avoid mistakes, frustrate him with words in his ears, finally tiring him out. When a man cannot win support from the mainly Chinese community because he can't speak the language, he made use of another who is fluent and charismatic as a stepping stone. When this guy becomes too big and need to be removed, he used others to handle him so that his good name is intact.

Above incidents showed that when faced with something much mightier, direct confrontation may not work. Patience, subtle use of others to weaken, employing carefully selected issues to frustrate, avoiding mistakes,..... that is the art of war. Hopefully, what we are seeing now is part of the process.

 

[tanwahp]

This simple statement, if ever the WP is interested, would have won them the admiration of singaporeans, while casting a bad spotlight on an erroneous and flawed policy of the PAP. But of course, you would not expect PAP lite to say that.

And I would not expect coffeeshop talk to amount to anything more. The bill wasn't related to foreign scholarship. The government is already giving foreign scholarship which is why you can cite so. Your intention may be to "借题发挥", but there is a better way in PQs, that is Yee JJ's favourite topic.

Totally off tangent.

If you are in a wrong channel all the time, you can make mistakes in a forum like this just like I often do, but national politics is different.

 

[yellowarse]

The issue is that the person you are responding to is responding to a person who says opposition is rated based on voting against ALL BILLS. You have only cited some "bad bills", the others were saying "all bills are bad".

There are good bills and just laws, just as there are bad bills and unjust laws. A responsible opposition will vote for the former, and against the latter. Above all vote according to your principles and ideological stance, so that the electorate knows what you stand for.

It did not matter who SgParent was responding to. I was pointing out his illogical reasoning that if a small party votes no, it will mean vetoing the bill. Or winning seats in parliament means a party is doing the right thing. (PAP has won 80 seats; and the people are suffering.) It's irrational supporters like him that can give a party a bad name.

That said, I didn't think Papsmearer was referring to 'all bills'. I can understand his frustration, which is shared by many oppo supporters, some of whom are/were actually WP supporters (like winniepegjets). The overall thrust of his message is, opposition supporters had high expectations for WP when they won a GRC and subsequently two by-elections, but are increasingly being disappointed by their performance in parliament and their perceived silence on several key national issues.

With great power comes great responsibility. It's only natural that being the strongest oppo party and the only one with elected MPs comes with the territory of leading the people's fight against a tyrannical regime. Also, if kiasi Sinkies can see that 7 oppo MPs can make a difference, they'll be willing to vote in 70 more.

 

[SgParent]

Hello, what BS are you spewing about? Your 7 votes will not do anything. With or without your vote, 80 PAP votes will ensure that whatever bill they table in parliament will be passed. And that means the wayang reduced salary package would be passed, regardless of how WP voted

Parliament is the PAP's rubber stamp. With morons like you, no wonder S'pore is still a dictatorship. Sheesh.

i see wp voting yes as agreeing to the lower salary and pls calling me names like my ex-gf that i dumped ok?

the fact that nobody on the streets or in this forum mentioned much about their bottom-up calculation suggests strongly that whatever ego-talk, moral-highground-talk in parliament is meaningless.

voting no may not change the outcome but would you bet the fake 40% will not have a field day smearing wp is eyeing the original higher ministar salary themselves?

so between meaningless parliamentary chit-chat and getting smeared, which would you choose?

 

[tanwahp]

There are good bills and just laws, just as there are bad bills and unjust laws. A responsible opposition will vote for the former, and against the latter. Above all vote according to your principles and ideological stance, so that the electorate knows what you stand for.

Agreed.

That said, I didn't think Papsmearer was referring to 'all bills'.

Let's avoid disingenuity, shall we? It's clear cut. If you aren't sure, you can reply to one of his posts to seek clarification rather than make immediate conclusion on his behalf.

I can understand his frustration, which is shared by many oppo supporters, some of whom are/were actually WP supporters (like winniepegjets).

Was he? That I am not so sure. It is a favourite tactic to say "I'm more credible" because I am a "former insider". Granted that they are not PAP supporters either, but because they serve PAP's purpose in a way, they do not hate PAP as they try to sound but it comes from selfish motives of wanting to see "heat" in politics and not getting it.

The overall thrust of his message is, opposition supporters had high expectations for WP when they won a GRC and subsequently two by-elections, but are increasingly being disappointed by their performance in parliament and their perceived silence on several key national issues.

Understandable, but as I said, WP has never cheated the people because they openly said their approach will always be "rationale and responsible" opposition. What is the final product is the point of contention. In fact, WP of 2014 speaks up more than WP of 2006 (and you know, in 2006 at one point I was one of those frustrated with WP as well in HWZ)

With great power comes great responsibility. It's only natural that being the strongest oppo party and the only one with elected MPs comes with the territory of leading the people's fight against a tyrannical regime. Also, if kiasi Sinkies can see that 7 oppo MPs can make a difference, they'll be willing to vote in 70 more.

Agreed. The greater the power, the more criticized. Natural. I don't disagree with everything said to WP or opposition. That doesn't mean I won't speak up every now and then on things I disagree with.

 

[3_M]

There are good bills and just laws, just as there are bad bills and unjust laws. A responsible opposition will vote for the former, and against the latter. Above all vote according to your principles and ideological stance, so that the electorate knows what you stand for.

It did not matter who SgParent was responding to. I was pointing out his illogical reasoning that if a small party votes no, it will mean vetoing the bill. Or winning seats in parliament means a party is doing the right thing. (PAP has won 80 seats; and the people are suffering.) It's irrational supporters like him that can give a party a bad name.

That said, I didn't think Papsmearer was referring to 'all bills'. I can understand his frustration, which is shared by many oppo supporters, some of whom are/were actually WP supporters (like winniepegjets). The overall thrust of his message is, opposition supporters had high expectations for WP when they won a GRC and subsequently two by-elections, but are increasingly being disappointed by their performance in parliament and their perceived silence on several key national issues.

With great power comes great responsibility. It's only natural that being the strongest oppo party and the only one with elected MPs comes with the territory of leading the people's fight against a tyrannical regime. Also, if kiasi Sinkies can see that 7 oppo MPs can make a difference, they'll be willing to vote in 70 more.

What is a good bill or bad bill? Things you consider bad might be good to others vice versa. The problem with some supporters mostly SDP hardcore is they tend to look at all issues in the sense of good or bad, right or wrong, Pro or anti. Hence they assume that all 40% who voted opposition are homogeneously the same while 60% are pro PAP.

With such mentality, expectations on WP are badly misplaced.

 

[SgParent]

There are good bills and just laws, just as there are bad bills and unjust laws. A responsible opposition will vote for the former, and against the latter.

in your dream yes.

in realty there are many many shades of grey in between good and bad like reducing the ministar salary. then how?

It did not matter who SgParent was responding to. I was pointing out his illogical reasoning that if a small party votes no, it will mean vetoing the bill. Or winning seats in parliament means a party is doing the right thing. (PAP has won 80 seats; and the people are suffering.) It's irrational supporters like him that can give a party a bad name.

disagree.

the white scums won majority because majority still thinks white scums are the betterest. comparing to the other fake, own-goal kings and queens, spoiler oppo parties/individuals and who can say the 60% is wronged?

btw sorry i dun support any particular oppo party. i just support any oppo that will bring real competition to the table. real competition that always, always benefits the consumers.

so this excludes those who at the end gifted more seats to 1 party.

political parties and their ideology are for dreamers.

will you hate me less now?

That said, I didn't think Papsmearer was referring to 'all bills'. I can understand his frustration, which is shared by many oppo supporters, some of whom are/were actually WP supporters (like winniepegjets). The overall thrust of his message is, opposition supporters had high expectations for WP when they won a GRC and subsequently two by-elections, but are increasingly being disappointed by their performance in parliament and their perceived silence on several key national issues..

sure. agree even

so let's whack wp together, our best chance to deny more white scums for being imperfect, not what i'd dreamed of, and start all over again, shall we?

With great power comes great responsibility. It's only natural that being the strongest oppo party and the only one with elected MPs comes with the territory of leading the people's fight against a tyrannical regime. Also, if kiasi Sinkies can see that 7 oppo MPs can make a difference, they'll be willing to vote in 70 more.

actually street-talks is that 7 oppo already put the white scums on defensive on a few issues.

coupled the fact that hdb under ahpetc have not really been on firesale yet, so people are willing to "try out" other brands of oppo except those own-gal kings and queens, spoiler, etc.

of course you can deny all you want because those are just street-talks i gathered.

 

[SgParent]

The problem with some supporters mostly SDP hardcore is they tend to look at all issues in the sense of good or bad, right or wrong, Pro or anti. Hence they assume that all 40% who voted opposition are homogeneously the same while 60% are pro PAP.

then why certain "star" candidates couldn't even score 40%?

dun tell me these "star" candidates are stars you'll see after knocking your head on the wall hard enough instead of stars that shine brightest in the darkest night?

 

[SgParent]

Above incidents showed that when faced with something much mightier, direct confrontation may not work. Patience, subtle use of others to weaken, employing carefully selected issues to frustrate, avoiding mistakes,..... that is the art of war. Hopefully, what we are seeing now is part of the process.

i think many here thought we are already in the final round and foreman/white scums is already a spent force. that's why they grew frustrated why wp has not gone all out offensive yet.

 

[SgParent]

What merits? Give a paltry few hundred bucks here, but millions of dollars of full scholarships for foreigners?

what has the extra $ for the poor true pink singaporean students got to do with free scholarships for foreigners?

you can debate all you want, linking both issues together to show your ideology.

at the end of the day, that bill is about "extra $ for the poor true pink singaporean students".

you vote no the fake 40% will have a field day but the people on the streets couldn't care less about your beautiful debate.

you vote yes the fake 40% got no free ammon to shoot and the people on the streets couldn't care less that you did not try to link extra $ to free scholarship.

you choose.

That's a lie. Your 7 votes will not deny the extra $, because 80 votes will say yes.

Your 7 votes will tell the people what your stand is, and what your party believes in, and why it cannot align its principles with the ruling party's.

pls refer to my above reply.

your beautiful parliamentary debate will not feature much in the voter's mind when it's time to decide which box to tick in the polling booth.

 

[yellowarse]

What is a good bill or bad bill? Things you consider bad might be good to others vice versa.

Precisely. That's why I said: Above all vote according to your principles and ideological stance, so that the electorate knows what you stand for.

Then let the voters decide whether expectations have been met or misplaced, whether the party's position is so similar to the incumbent's there's essentially much agreement and little opposition to talk about.

 

[yellowarse]

Granted that they are not PAP supporters either, but because they serve PAP's purpose in a way, they do not hate PAP as they try to sound but it comes from selfish motives of wanting to see "heat" in politics and not getting it.

I may not agree with everything Papsmearer says, but I'll say that he's one of the most vocal anti-PAP critic here, definitely more oppo than all those 'oppo' supporters who spend all their time attacking other oppo parties instead of the PAP.

This is one of his best threads: http://www.sammyboy.com/showthread....swindle-in-modern-times&p=1842434#post1842434

 

[Maximuz]

Consider this scenario:

If WP wins one third of the seats in the next elections, PAP wins another third, and the remaining seats are scattered amongst other Oppo parties, do you think things will be different?

I don't think so, which is why I think Papsmearer is right in saying WP is PAP Lite. I think the case may be the same even if WP wins two-thirds of Parliament.

If WP holds perhaps 80% of parliament, then I think some minor changes to calm the raging, burning issues of Singaporeans will be made. Inversely, if some other Oppo wins 80% majority (unlikely, since they traditionally don't contest as many constituencies as WP), you can generally expect big sweeping changes, but only time will tell if they're good or bad (I'm foreseeing 70% bad for a first-time government, but performances will improve and the reserves is a pretty good cushion).

The crux of matter is, as I see it, that the first priority is to vote for Oppo first (while avoiding WP in 3-corner fights). The second choice is to spoil to vote, which I feel is a horrible choice, but that is overshadowed by the most horrific choice anyone can make: voting for PAP.