Why is the DAP blamed for the outgoing MCA President, Datuk Seri Ong Ka Ting’s “Umno is bully in Barisan Nasional” speech at the MCA General Assembly opening ceremony yesterday?
Ong’s speech led to denials by the Prime Minister, Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi resulting in newspaper frontpage headlines like “UMNO IS NO BULLY” (New Sunday Times) and “Umno bukan pembuli: PM” (Berita Minggu), who instead blamed the DAP for “stirring up the issue to see the split of the MCA or Gerakan” as well as Hindraf for targetting the MIC.
Abdullah caught everyone by surprise by his bald denial.
He said Umno “is not a ‘bully’ party” or many component parties would have left BN by now, and asked:
Abdullah has forgotten an elementary rule of life – “don’t ask if you don’t want the answer”!
Does he really want the answer to that loaded question of his? Don’t have to ask the Malaysian public. Just ask the MCA, Gerakan and MIC delegates or members through secret ballot whether they think their leaders have been bullied by Umno in Barisan Nasional, and I have no doubt that the answer would be a resounding and thundering “yes’!
In fact, one of the saddest political episodes of Barisan Nasional post-March 8 “political tsunami” is the response of the leaders of the BN component parties when asked by the press for their response to Abdullah’s “Umno is no bully” response.
Neither Tsu Koon nor Samy Vellu dared to fully back up Ka Ting, who himself backed off subsequently by saying that he never said Umno is a bully!
What I find most disturbing is Abdullah’s statement: “People say that Umno is a party that likes to bully. I actually have no idea how to bully. There is no such thing as bullying.”
I believe Abdullah was speaking the truth that there is not a bone of a bully in him.
That is what is frightening. After half-a-century of Umno political hegemony, Umno bullying in BN has become so institutionalized to perpetuate and increasingly aggravate such travesty of “power sharing”, even though the top No. 1 UMNO leader like Abdullah does not know how to be a bully!
There is no need for the top No. 1 or No. 2 Umno leader to be a bully, when the UMNO bullies at the various hierarchies of the party are allowed a field day!
Abdullah’s denial about Umno bullying in BN does not bear scrutiny – as there is a long catalogue from the recent past, whether the keris-wielding by Umno Youth leader and Education Minister, Datuk Seri Hishammuddin Hussein or the offensive and insensitive statements by the Deputy Umno Youth leader Khairy Jamaluddin or to the most recent times, such as Umno Bukit Bendera division chairman, Ahmad Ismail’s “Chinese are penumpang” outburst or the tearing up of Tsu Koon’s photograph by Penang Umno leaders.
In fact, Abdullah gave an illustration of the irrelevance of the views of top leaders of MCA and other BN leaders yesterday when he summarily dismissed the MCA President’s call for a review of the Internal Security Act, as it is “obsolete and should be replaced with one that is not subject to abuse or cause people to feel insecure”.
Last week, the 37th Gerakan national delegates conference also adopted a resolution calling for a review of the ISA.
If the Barisan Nasional is a coalition of equals, and Umno is not a bully, will the considered views of leaders of BN component parties and the resolutions of their party conferences be dismissed so derisively and summarily, like the call for the review of the ISA?
What happened yesterday at the MCA General Assembly was doubly pathetic:
+firstly, no leader of the BN component parties dared to stand up to admit boldly about Umno being a bully which should end it “bully” ways in BN; and
+secondly, none of them dared to correct Abdullah by pointing out that was most unfair to use the DAP as a “scapegoat” for the public perception that MCA, Gerakan and the other BN component parties were being bullied by Umno when it represented the true situation.
Maybe the MCA delegates in their debate in the 55th MCA General Assembly would dare to speak up what their leaders have failed to do about the truth of Umno being a bully in BN and the need to end such lop-sided power relationship in the BN coalition.
Be that as it may, it is quite obvious from the MCA party election results that Ong Ka Ting was well-advised to withdraw from the MCA presidential contest, for he would have been defeated – and quite decisively – had he decided to defend his post as MCA President.
#1 by bennylohstocks on Sunday, 19 October 2008 - 5:06 pm
DR. PORN ADVISES
#2 by yhsiew on Sunday, 19 October 2008 - 5:24 pm
limkamput Says:
Today at 16: 53.49 (16 minutes ago)
yhsiew, do you really think that Mahathir knows what has gone wrong in UMNO?
====================================================
TDM disagreed that the 5 Hindraf leaders be detained under ISA. Just wait and see what game he is going to play! Wonder Mahathirism II is the same as Mahathirism I ??
#3 by Tonberry on Sunday, 19 October 2008 - 6:37 pm
There are already a lot of pimps inside MCA party.
#4 by draken001 on Sunday, 19 October 2008 - 6:38 pm
Hello Raven77, which would you choose: a porno star or a racist star?
#5 by parameswara on Sunday, 19 October 2008 - 6:41 pm
cheng lee whee, a citizen activist, was handcuffed after giving her statement on abuse of power by the police, like she was some gun totting terrorist.
was she arrested for causing physical injury to others ??
was she arrested for violence ??
then why the senseless use of the ISA nowadays ??
#6 by bystander on Sunday, 19 October 2008 - 7:16 pm
thats because botak hamid is brainless. period.
#7 by joshua7 on Sunday, 19 October 2008 - 7:30 pm
JOKE OF THE YEAR: Umno is not a bully
http://takenotetakeheart.blogspot.com/2008/10/joke-of-year-umno-is-not-bully.html
#8 by shortie kiasu on Sunday, 19 October 2008 - 8:21 pm
That is the whole trouble with Abdullah who has forgotten an elementary rule of life – “don’t ask if you don’t want the answer”!
He has in fact forgotten more elementary rules of life than he can remember.
That also is the the real cause of his premature final death knell to his political life now. He has had his time to proof himself yet he squandered away ALL the support given to him by the Malaysians.
Not only he has to asked Mahathir “who is he?”, he should remember to ask himself “who the hell am I?”.
#9 by Mark Foo on Sunday, 19 October 2008 - 8:39 pm
Come to think of it.
Look at malaysian chinese nowadays. Look at the street, malaysia have becoming a prostitute paradise. How come all the big gunS dare not to clean the street. What are they afraid????
The other day, I went to JB and I really pity those mainland chinese girl. Innocent and naive, worst not educated……wonder what going in theirs mind. When I saw all the banglada…went visit…It really hurt……..
Goverment should build more small colleges and practical for those unfortunate. They willing to spent billions and billions, while the street is fill with prostitutes…….
Very..very…..sad…..
#10 by dapsupporter8888 on Sunday, 19 October 2008 - 9:10 pm
Any ordinary Malaysians know that UMNO has been the taikor of BN. And this taikor has never listened to the views of all his mar chai-s. It is a fact that UMNO is a BIG bully, it is a pity that all his mar chai-s have to put up a show to keep up with the bullying tactics of UMNO – just for the sake of power, position and – $$$. Its a fact that all ordinary Malaysians know.
It looks like Anwar Ibrahim would not be able to take over the government this round. I can’t wait for GE13.
#11 by Dr_Albert_Schweitzer on Sunday, 19 October 2008 - 9:25 pm
Bad Da Wee said “UMNO is not a bully”. He was saying this in his dream. He said this when he was having a nightmare at the recent UMNO Supreme Council meeting during which he was bullied by Moo Yee Deen & his cohorts into submission & surrender of his premier-ship.
UMNO is not a bully but a King Bully, a Supremacist Bully.
This started in 1981 when Mamakteh Kutty Kaka stared his reign of terror in Malaysia.
UMNO has been bullying MCA, MIC, Gerakan, PPP etc and Ling Long Sik, Semi Value, Saliva Lim, Car Wear etc enjoyed being bullied by the sadists in UMNO.
#12 by Hidup Pakatan Rakyat on Sunday, 19 October 2008 - 9:54 pm
Whatever is it, today we do not need MCA to represent Chinese, as there is no need a party based on race, as we are all Malaysian, thus, we stand as Malaysian who love justice and peace, and thus whoever use the ethnic to fight for their political interest are indeed scum…………
And let’s see what will be the right future for Malaysian……
#13 by Godfather on Sunday, 19 October 2008 - 10:04 pm
What is interesting now is the emergence of Chua Soi Lek as Deputy President. Will he claim his old post of Health Minister ? Will Ong Ka Chuan have to give way and relinquish his post to the Deputy President ? One thing for certain is that Chua will forever have the millstone of being a porn actor (albeit reluctantly) around his neck, and that will weigh on his ability to “negotiate” with the taikor UMNO.
MCA is asking to be bullied.
#14 by Loh on Sunday, 19 October 2008 - 10:15 pm
///One thing for certain is that Chua will forever have the millstone of being a porn actor (albeit reluctantly) around his neck,///–Godfather
That would be a plus when Chua says that he is French.
#15 by elloh_42 on Sunday, 19 October 2008 - 10:38 pm
MCA don’t want to be bullied? I am afraid they are going to be doubly bullied from now on! And not only bullied but laughed at! Why? Electing an person found wanting in morals and caught with his pants down literally, as a deputy president! This is a first in the history of any political party! Can you expect UMNO to respect this immoral (by connection) party? Can you expect them not to bully you?
Further, if you want to reform and earn the respect of the people, take a leaf from biblical history, and go into the “wilderness” like Moses for the next forty years.
#16 by One4All4One on Sunday, 19 October 2008 - 10:39 pm
UMNO is in denial, in denial for far too long that it has become habitual and ingrained and taking for granted that it has more right than all others.
#17 by One4All4One on Sunday, 19 October 2008 - 11:05 pm
To all who are making nasty and unsolicited comments on Dr Chua Soi Lek:
Look into the mirror and ask yourselves, mere mortals, who you are to discredit another person to the extent of mocking him? Those who pried into his personal matters are worse than Dr Chua himself. At least that poor guy was gentleman enough to admit his escapade, but again that’s is his own business. There are crimes far more worse (and which OUGHT to be reported, but hidden and covered up) that are committed by other “licensed criminals” which went unreported and which did a lot of harm to the community.
Let’s leave other people’s personal lives to themselves especially if they do not concern or harm you. Let God be the Judge. Let’s live as humans.
What is more important at this juncture is what Dr Chua can contribute to the development of the communities. He is a proven and effective leader and has the trust and support of a wide spectrum of grass root members. In this aspect not many are in his league.
#18 by rider on Sunday, 19 October 2008 - 11:28 pm
Bullied? MCA, MIC, Gerakan bullied by UMNO? where got? MCA having fun secretly shooting intimate scenes; MIC involving in Mafia type fun, Gerakan having fun in the sun, it’s we the rakyat being bullied by them.
#19 by luking on Sunday, 19 October 2008 - 11:43 pm
okt is very lucky in his final speech about mca been bullied all this years by umno,and thanks God,the blame was on the opposition.otherwise isa already.
#20 by StevePCH on Monday, 20 October 2008 - 12:31 am
Malaysian Chicky Asso , Malaysian Idiotic Cowards , Gelak -an , People Pengecut P etc ….
all useless. bird of same feather flocks together mah !!! Hopefully they will grow up and come out of their mother’s shadow.
#21 by Kathy on Monday, 20 October 2008 - 7:36 am
MCA is not being bullied by UMNO. OKT should say thank you for all the handouts that he and others have being receiving over all the years. You will never hear such a thing from LLS.
#22 by Godfather on Monday, 20 October 2008 - 8:05 am
One4All4One:
Chua Soi Lek is unfit to be the acclaimed leader of the Chinese community. Yes, we are all mere mortals, and all of us have sinned, but we don’t claim the moral high ground necessary to be a community leader, a leader of society. In the same manner, Zaki Tun Azmi is unfit to be CJ because of his habit of chasing skirts.
Ask yourself what will our children say when Chua Soi Lek appears at a kiddies’ function ? Dato’ Porn Star ? Dato’ Viagra ?
Yes, there are politicians whose morals are far worse than Chua Soi Lek’s, but that is not the criterion with which we use to evaluate leadership by example.
#23 by chiakchua on Monday, 20 October 2008 - 8:17 am
PM is talking crab! ‘Denial’ syndrome is up again. Lip service to ‘cheat’ the rakyat as usual. Many UMNOputras are bashing the suggestion of the deputy BN president suggestion; are they not stirring up ‘unhappiness’ of the non-Malays? Don’t you think its better for BN component parties to have a close door discussion on this matter or the UMNOputras are the deciding taiko? Please take a survey of all non-Malays to see if they do feel UMNO is bully?
#24 by taiking on Monday, 20 October 2008 - 8:22 am
Umno a bully? Nah! Its just a terribly spoilt obese child with lots of choco in his pockets and who uses his big body to great advantage against the other kids in the neighbourhood.
#25 by Godfather on Monday, 20 October 2008 - 8:30 am
Everytime there is an argument between MCA and UMNO, the discussion will be diverted to Chua Soi Lek being stupid enough to be caught on video. Not about him cheating on his wife, but about him being caught.
MCA will forever be bullied by the taikor.
#26 by ch on Monday, 20 October 2008 - 8:38 am
Dear All,
A comment by Muhyiddin Yassin which appeared on the New Sunday Times yesterday gave us an insight as to what roles had MCA, MIC and Gerakan been doing all these while. Muhyiddin commented that if you attend meetings and choose to keep quiet and say nothing to help your race, there is nothing we could do.
The above statement had hit the nail at the right place. Sad but the truth hurts.
#27 by The Old Man By The Sea on Monday, 20 October 2008 - 8:47 am
PM Abdullah is not a smart chap. He is blurred anything and everything from his mouth. Well, he is a true UMNO member, just blame others for thier own failure.
PM Abdullah needs not to blame DAP or make an explanantion to avoid Ong Ka Ting’s statements. Everyone even the blind can see that UMNO is the bully in BN.
UMNO has to be the bully simply to remain power and to accumalate personal wealth for themselves.
Well, it is high time for MCA, MIC and Gerakan to think of thier position in BN. No marriage is forever and eternal. These goes to the other smaller component parties from East Malaysia.
#28 by Jeffrey on Monday, 20 October 2008 - 12:18 pm
About Dr Chua Soi Lek’s being caught in ‘pornographic’ act, there is universal consensus that leadership is evaluated by example, and the leader holding office has to be exemplary by repute and conduct in the sense of being “ethical”. There is however no universal consensus whether a breach of sexual morality in private realm is “unethical” as the expression “ethics” or lack thereof is applied in the public sphere.
It depends on the society or sub groups of that society how they look at it.
By ecclesiastical and religious norms, yes, it is universal that sexual immorality or misconduct is unethical. But by secular and modern day standards, is it?
Secular modern societies uphold more values of tolerance, freedom and truth (as against hypocrisy).
More and more of their citizens will take the view of moral relativism as opposed to moral absolutism.
The former holds the position position that moral or ethical propositions do not reflect objective and/or universal moral truths, but instead make claims relative to social, cultural, historical or personal circumstances. Moral relativists inspired by earlier thinkers like Descartes, Jean Paul Sartre, Albert Camus hold that no universal standard exists by which to assess whether an act is ethical or unethical except when that which is empirically verifiable in relative universal sense. One such is Confucious axiom that “Do not do unto others what you do not like when done to your self”. It draws the line at “harm”.
Therefore in context of sexual morality as long as the act is consensual between adults and not harmful (as involving underaged minors) or the rest of society, it is a private matter for which society has no business to bother. Because if it does, we go down the slippery slope giving huge endorsement to moral police snooping around public parks to catch errant youngsters engaging in extra marital sexual activities. The cost is Freedom and Liberty of the individual.
According to this line of thinking if Dr Chua’s immediate family have no beef of his infractions who are we to say he is immoral as to be unfit for office when or supposing he has other qualities of competence and integrity in discharge of public office duties?
Yes he was “caught” but that was not because he flaunted it but rather was entrapped by those whose acts to deliberately compromise him are morally despicable. Dr Chua was a victim : we’re not Dr Chua’s victims.
Are we going to say that President Eisenhower or Kennedy are lesser presidents because of their extra marital affairs? Clinton was taken to task because he lied about having sex engaging in legal double talk before the Enquiry that fellatio was not sex, as compared to Dr Chua who confessed and took accountability for the scandal leaked.
The nature of such scandal bears no relevance to a person’s ability or probility to discharge public office functions – this the point. Is this not agreed?
Secular modern societies also disdain hypocrisy and partial towards values like empirical verification and science : so they take, in the flow of evolutionary biology – the Darwin and Science thing – that sex, Testosterones and libido are normal human biological imperative that requires expression, too great a repression will lead to undesirable consequences.
As to how to balance expression against restraint, such societies accord the value freedom to the individual, drawing the line at “harm”. Only when that line were crossed would the act be condemned as immoral and unethical but not otherwise or until then.
#29 by teacher on Monday, 20 October 2008 - 4:22 pm
umno is no bully. Tell it to the birds and marines. This has been going on for so long. Sad to say those entrusted to run mca mic gerakan had no guts/balls to speak up. We also heard all things are done through give and take spirit. The spirit I saw was all take and no give. OKT and LKY and the rest are only beggars and look after their own interest.
If only AAB would dissolve parliament and call for fresh elections we will send this BN goons packing.. but that is only a dream and we will have to wait for the next GE
#30 by Godfather on Monday, 20 October 2008 - 6:01 pm
“The nature of such scandal bears no relevance to a person’s ability or probility to discharge public office functions – this the point. Is this not agreed? ”
It is absolutely not agreed. Eisenhower, Kennedy and Clinton would have had to resign if there were VCDs of their illicit romps.
When Chua Soi Lek “negotiates” with (say) Singapore or Thailand, what do you think would be the first impression on the minds of the neighbours ? Bet you it would be: Hmmm…..have we seen his DVD ? How did he do it ? Should we ask him for the formula ?
When Chua Soi Lek “negotiates” with UMNO and things get nasty, what do you think UMNO would say, directly or indirectly ?
When Chua Soi Lek opens a place of worship or a school, what example do you think he will carry with him ?
No, Jeffrey, a person in high office had better carry the moral high ground. Chua Soi Lek lost it some time ago, and he can never regain it.
#31 by ktteokt on Monday, 20 October 2008 - 8:10 pm
What good is the change in leadership of MCA? After all, it is a sinking ship and has been abandoned by the Chinese community in Malaysia who had been “blinded” for so many years but who are now “wide awake”.
Chinese calls this “changing the soup without changing the herbs”. The MCA “pot” stinks and no matter how you wash, scrub or clean it, it still stinks!!!!
#32 by One4All4One on Monday, 20 October 2008 - 9:51 pm
For one, Dr Chua did not ever made any claims publicly that that he is a exemplar of high morals, what the vcd proved is that he is a mere mortal with sexual desires just like you and everybody else.
If you perceive him to be a “porn star” just because the act is made public by some irresponsible parties, then you are no different from other perverts or voyeurs ( if you have indeed watched the recordings).
Well, it makes no ABSOLUTE difference whether you are the “actor” or the “watcher”, as both sides of the divide are also “participants” in the “act” – whether you are being the “active” player or the “passive” watcher : both derive satisfaction and sexual stimulation – the “actor” derive actual physical and mental gratifications, whereas the poor “watcher” could only mentally try to figure it out…just like any other perverts.
Anyway, Dr Chua was having a good intimate moment with his good girl friend. And mutually consenting at that. Not many adults could claim to have a good partner, let alone a consenting one. Many resort to one night stands instead. Let’ not pass judgments and be judgmental. Let the man do his job, forget about his private life. Let’s move on.
#33 by One4All4One on Monday, 20 October 2008 - 9:54 pm
Those who are passing judgments are mostly hypocrites.
#34 by One4All4One on Monday, 20 October 2008 - 10:29 pm
*Godfather : Yes, there are politicians whose morals are far worse than Chua Soi Lek’s, but that is not the criterion with which we use to evaluate leadership by example.
I think your reasoning has got the better of you, godfather.
How could “far worse morals” not be criterion for us to evaluate a leadership? Your reasoning is flawed my dear friend.
*Godfather : It is absolutely not agreed. Eisenhower, Kennedy and Clinton would have had to resign if there were VCDs of their illicit romps.
Your reasoning has failed you again, godfather. With or without vcds, people knew what actually happened. A fact is a fact, with or without vcds.
*Godfather : When Chua Soi Lek “negotiates” with (say) Singapore or Thailand, what do you think would be the first impression on the minds of the neighbours ? Bet you it would be: Hmmm…..have we seen his DVD ? How did he do it ? Should we ask him for the formula ?
When Chua Soi Lek “negotiates” with UMNO and things get nasty, what do you think UMNO would say, directly or indirectly ?
When Chua Soi Lek opens a place of worship or a school, what example do you think he will carry with him ?
You seem very naive, godfather. No one is interested in another’s sex life. Unless you are a super celebrity and real hot – people might want to have a “peek” at your great vital stats. And they will forget it as soon as their curiosity wanes.
Having said that, most people are more interested and concerned about their very own sex lives, if they actually do have one. For those who don’t, they mostly resort to being purveyors of porn stuff, or dared themselves to visit one nite stands to get some cheap or costly (and mostly dirty, in the real sense ) satisfaction, or that poor fellow could only imagine till he drop dead.
Make your personal choice, godfather. You choose the way you live. Your standards are your own. But make sure they are not filmed and “vcd-ed”. Good luck.
#35 by Jeffrey on Monday, 20 October 2008 - 10:48 pm
When Godfather says “Eisenhower, Kennedy and Clinton would have had to resign if there were VCDs of their illicit romps” there is an implied suggestion that Eisenhower, Kennedy and Clinton are not disqualified from public office because of their sexual romp or extramarital affairs per se – but the fact of their being caught on VCD is: that is why (in Dr Chua’s case) the worry of what Thai or Singaporean officials might think (in negotiation) or what UMNO officials might think and what priests, teachers and school children might think when one “opens a place of worship or a school” becomes pertinent.
So what exactly is the disqualifying factor?
It is, I submit, shame – the shame of being caught in a private act exposed to public. Those who say Dr Chua is disqualified is experiencing ‘vicarious’ shame, which refers to the experience of shame on behalf of another person, ie Dr Chua.
I think he should not be ashamed as he is victim of surreptitious filming, no more than say an aspiring female politician who was raped and filmed by perpetrators and posted on the Internet should be any ashamed of being publicly seen in the “act” albeit forced…..
[If one objects to the comparison and says that rape is not consensual extra marital sex, this is an immaterial distinction as it was earlier conceded that Eisenhower, Kennedy and Clinton would have had to resign not because they had extra marital sex per se (not seen nor publicly viewed) but that their acts were captured on VCDs distributed and seen by public, implying public and viewers have sen and felt vicarious shame and therefore have no more respect of such an individual because of the viewing and the ensuing shame.
Well I for one don’t feel that way after the viewing!
I see it that if a person has ability or commitment to hold public office to do something good for public and all of us – assuming that is the case – there is no reason then why we should feel ‘vicariously’ ashamed on behalf of Dr Chua when he himself is either not feeling it anymore (having moved on) or if feeling such, he is otherwise still not deterred from contesting and holding public office.
To give in to this shame, direct or vicarious, and to desist from running for or hoilding high office is to give in to the objectives of and also reward those who dastardly filmed him, invaded his privacy, seeking to use the material to destroy his political career by unfair, illegal and wicked means. It will be giving in the Evil.
I rather reward Dr Chua for his sense of accountability in owning up and moving on and vote for him.
If the UMNO officials have freakish thoughts, well that’s their problem – and hypocrisy, as they have more skeletons to hide, bury and deny at the same time.
#36 by aries66 on Tuesday, 21 October 2008 - 12:10 am
Ya,I supported One4All4One. Like Bill Clinton, No problem lah It’s his personal business as long he can help and perform his duty to the RAKYAT. I hope the new MCA breed will wake up ! Not like the old
useless ones.
#37 by AhPek on Tuesday, 21 October 2008 - 8:55 am
If at all Eisenhower,Kennedy or Clinton were to be caught in VCDs doing their romps the public will definitely not be after them from the lofty ground of high morality.Rather the public would be far more concerned whether state confidential matters are leaked out in the process of conducting their affairs!In that case Kennedy would have to resign if it is found that Marilyn Monroe is a KGB agent or Clinton has to resign if Lewinsky is employed by China’s secret service.
#38 by Godfather on Tuesday, 21 October 2008 - 11:10 am
You guys really make me laugh. If Chua Soi Lek wasn’t caught on DVD, and rumours go around that he was keeping a mistress in Johor, nothing would have happened. He, like so many before him, would deny, and with no photographic evidence, his infidelity would remain a rumour. Same case with Eisehhower, Kennedy and Clinton. It was someone else’s word against theirs, and rabid supporters would always believe the rumours to be untrue.
We are not saints, but we also do not go around touting ourselves to be leaders of society. We don’t go around advising people on morals and on “doing the right thing”.
Chua Soi Lek is spoilt goods, and he will forever remain that way. Unfortunately (or fortunately as some may say) the MCA is now tainted.
#39 by AhPek on Tuesday, 21 October 2008 - 3:46 pm
“There is however no universal consensus whether a breach of sexual morality in the private realm is ‘unethical’ as the expression of ‘ethics’ or lackoff is applied in the public sphere,
It depends on the society or subgroup of that society how they look at it.’ Jeffrey.
Precisely and I would say that Godfather is looking at American society thro his own lens and therefore entirely mistaken for the Americans don’t have such hang-ups on the wrongness of relationalship as long as it is consensual and the following is an extract survey report done on 4th August 1998 by The Pew Research Center.
“Most people foresee embarrassment,not impeachment in the saga of the Clinton-Lewinsky affairs.Few think that the incident will lead to the end of the Clinton presidency.In the end,most Americans(55%) believe that Independent Counsel Kenneth Starr’s expected report to Congress will embarass the president but not lead to impeachment hearings.Some 20% think the report will clear Clinton of wrongdoing;13% think that it would lead to impeachment hearings.
Fully 60% would be satisfied to end the matter if Clinton were to tell the American public that he had an affair with Lewinsky but lied to protect his family.Only 32% think Congress should consider impeachment hearings in the wake of public confession.In fact a Congressional vote in favour of impeachment hearings would risk a public backlash. A majority (57%) says they would have an unfavourable opinion of members who voted for impeachment hearings.The crucial swing voters would not be impressed with members who pushed for hearings.”.
But if the relationship were to lead to a leak in confidential state matters then I think the outcome of American public opinion will swing 180 degrees!!
But of course Godfather is entirely right if he applies his judgement in the context of the Malaysian society.
#40 by shamshul anuar on Tuesday, 21 October 2008 - 11:05 pm
DEar Godfather,
Yes. Ong KaTing and his successor must do some soul searching before resenting UMNO’s dominance in Federal Govt. Actually what said is not surprising. No Malay ever denies UMNO’s dominance in BN and Federal Govt.
It is a known fact. THere is nothing shameful about that. UMNO earns the dominance. How ? By winning seats. It holds 79 seats in BN. It can easily earn more seats if it is not that generous( UNIQUE IN THIS WORLD) by allowing mind boggling practice( as per world standard) of allowing noin Malay politicians win in Malay area.
I would strongly remind Gerakan, MIC and MCA to be careful not to insult UMNO members. Considering that Chinese support to MCa and Gerakan is very minimal, they depend on Malay votes( UMNO votes) substantially. Without Malay votes, actually MCA and MIC together with MCA will likely to be wiped out in the last election.
So give some credit when it is due.
#41 by shamshul anuar on Tuesday, 21 October 2008 - 11:16 pm
DEar Taikohtai,
UMNO is dominant but not bullying others. If it only cares about itself, it would not have put MIC candidates in Ijok when Anwar was busy saying to the Malays “pilih masjid atau kuil”.
If UMNO cares about itself only, it would not have put MIC candidate in Malay majority area Pasir Panjang in Perak where PAS was busy sending fliers in mosques it is “haram ” to vote for non Muslim politician.
THe problem faced by MCa is self inflicted. Who would want to vote MCA when just before election, Soi Lek was captured comiiting adultery in Johor. As for Indians, half truth story about demolition of a temple( but the story about a surau on the same area also demolished was not told) incited the Indians. Besides, Samy Vellu stayed too long.
As for MCA, Gerakan, they have no guts to face DAP which not surprisingly played to the same gallery by saying a vote to MCA is a vote to UMNO( representing Malay supremacy in politics).
Upset by these accusations, Maly votes punished non Malay Bn politicians like Fu Ah Kiow, Tan Chai Ho and Palanivel.
So, sometimes, the knife cuts both way. As for Gerakan, MCa urging UMNO to shed its dominance will only alienate UMNO members. As these parties have minimal support from Chinese community, they depend heavily on Malay votes. Without UMNO support, everybody knows that they soon will find their place in museum.
#42 by One4All4One on Wednesday, 22 October 2008 - 12:16 am
I am not suggesting who is right or wrong in the absolute sense. Nothing is absolute actually ( read: no one is perfect in this world).
So why keep on harping on what happened to be a personal matter made public by whoever it was, who definitely had certain ill or perverse intentions to embarrass Dr Chua personally, or to made him a liability to MCA and the Chinese community?
Let’s hope the episode made Dr Chua a corrected man who would go on sincerely to offer his service to the community.
Let’s forgive and forget. And move on…
A person who had committed a wrong, if sincerely reformed, should be given a chance to prove himself. We are no saints my dear friend, godfather. I was wondering…the nick you are using…jut a flash in my mind…I thought God is forgiving when human erred?
I don’t know Dr Chua personally, neither supporting him in anyway, politically included. But, I find it difficult to understand why you find it so hard to be forgiving.
Surely there are much more important issues and matters to be looked into to make Malaysia a better and more equitable place for all? Issues like corruption, inequality, equal opportunities for all, education, social rights, etc., etc. await our leaders to tackle and resolve. Let’s wish them well, my friend. And if he fails to perform his duties, then no one cares if you keep on condemning him till the cows come home.
For now, let’s give them the benefit of the doubt…