BN will the next GE, and will still maintain its 2/3 Majority.
Why do I say that? Frankly, we do not have a good alternative, well not yet. BA neither DAP did not provide the majority of the voters how their will govern Malaysia.
Have anybody ever seen the opposition provide a good blueprint on the best way to govern? No matter how vocal we are towards the current government, voters will still vote for BN.
I am amused by the writing of Steven Gan from www.malaysiakini.com , on the time for change and the opportunity for change. But, then again how many Malaysian ever read his writing?
Now whenever we are at an opposition ceramah, what did we hear? I remembered most speakers talking about sex scandals, corruptions blah blah blah... Never in my life I heard on how the opposition will run and govern the country.
If the opposition really want voters to give them a chance to govern, show us something. Dont just talk and being rhetoric, we the voters want alternative, what the opposition can bring us if they are elected.
Friday, January 18, 2008
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
5 comments:
Hi
Thanks for leaving a comment in my post Waris Bukan Bumiputera. I have responded to your comment.
Also will like to know if you have any views on the huge BMF loss, the billions of ringgits gone down the drain in the Port Klang Free Zone, a mansion built on land meant for the poor, while others' extensions get torn down because they could not wait for planning approval or submitting plans, that mansion built without remained and a fine only be paid? Lots of other questions.
You said the alternatives do not have an alternative. I thought the alternatives have one - get rid of racial politics. Is that not an alternative? Do we have to have UMNO fighting for Malays, MCA fighting for Chinese, MIC "fighting" for Indians, and I don't know what else fighting for what else. All I want is for Malaysians fighting for justice and eradication of poverty irrespective of race.
Do you want a Parliament where the ruling majority have the whip on their MPs ALL THE TIME, for the Barisan and against the "opposition" (wished they need not be called opposition) IRREESPECTIVE OF MERITS. We have seen matters of crucial national importance been shot down in Parliament. Now I have been told the DAP have voted with the Barisan when they see that it was in the interest of the nation to do so. Should we call them "opposition"?
I have responded to your second comment, but for your convenience, I paste it below:
...................
OK you say, I do. Check Wikipedia. To my surprise, I expected what you said, for Muslim only, but check Zakat from Wikipedia. For your convenience, I paste what I saw there:
=================
Zakat is the Islamic concept of tithing and alms. It is an obligation on Muslims to pay 2.5% of their wealth to specified categories in society when their annual wealth exceeds a minimum level (nisab). Zakat is one of the Five Pillars of Islam.
Aims
People Whose Hearts are to be Reconciled (Normally new Muslims or those close to becoming Muslim. Even non-muslims could be included)
* Freed slaves
* Those heavily indebted with paying their debts
* Travelers who find themselves in difficult circumstances
====================
Now did I see Even non-muslims could be included or did I went to the wrong Wikipedia?
Also, you said argue. I don't want to argue. I want to discuss. Open discussion. Open mind. No argument. Just present my side of the story and you present your side. I have given my side, that is, why did the previous arrangement which is multi-racial, multi-religious, no discrimination, had to be changed. I hope to hear your views. If you don't agree with me, you tell me your view. I like to think of myself as a good listener, willing to listen to both side and accept what I think is right and reject what I think is not right or fair.
But you said you don't want to argue. I agree. I don't want you to argue. I want you to present your side of the story. If I find it reasonable, I accept it. Not arguing. Discussing. Discussions are good for mutual understanding. I want to hear your side, not only my side. You said Waris, not Warisan. I checked and found you are correct, correct, correct. I correct (only 1 time) my mistake and thank you. So what argument? Tell me I am wrong, and if I am wrong, I accept it. I don't run away. But if I cannot accept what you tell me, I explain again, not argue. That makes for mutual understanding, not sweeping things under the carpet. You see, I didn't sweep my mistake under the carpet. I correct it when you pointed out my mistake. No offence. I am scientist. I say things as I see them. I see my mistake. I call it a mistake. I don't say that only sounds like me, looks like me and I don't know what else like me.
Mistake is mistake. I welcome people correcting my mistake. If people don't correct my mistake how am I going to learn? I will forever be ignorant. I don't want to be ignorant, katak di bawah tempurung.
I hope you respond, not say don't want to argue. I hope you are willing to discuss. Friendly discussion is good for mutual understanding. Now I don't understand how the school which is under the Ministry of Education which is non-religious would want to bring in a religious body into something which was never religious, just tuition to help students irrespective of religion.
looks like it's working out well. ;)
Post a Comment