Never knew there are so many visitors/readers here – suddenly over 250 interesting comments, when much that is serious is at stake.

However on the lighter side first, whenever passion/anger is aroused at our political frogs, I lament that prostitutes –ooops sex workers – get maligned!

The people have been “betrayed and cheated by the three prostitutes from Jelapang, Behrang and Changkat Jering” negarawan said Yesterday at 21: 31.57 to be joined force by Ktteokt’s comments Yesterday at 23: 31.59, “Hee Yit Foong, the political prostitute…”

If it’s any consolation, such comments are buttressed by the “astute” broadside of one such famous political practitioner who ruled popularly as 44th president of USA : “I used to say that politics was the second lowest profession and I have come to know that it bears a great similarity the first/oldest” – Ronald Reagan in “Observer” 13th May 1979!

Be that as it may, a comparison of political frogs with sex workers has its limits : not only they do different type of ‘jumping’, but the latter provide an important service of therapeutic/physical value to hypocritical society. More important, you get what you pay, fair and square, but in the case of political frogs, you vote them under PR and they jump to BN in betrayal of the original bargain! The more active of course jumped from BN to PR and then shortly from PR back to BN!

Unfortunately, this difference is ignored when we drag sex workers in to criticize people whom we regard would sell their principles for money.

Here “principles” are not one’s private principles. If “private” and not affecting anyone else, who cares what they are?

However here for “kataks’, ‘principles’ involve 3rd parties/public in the sense that they placed their trust to vote for you based on your claim to fight for their interest, and after getting there, use it as a bargaining chip to get a large wad of cash – that will take care of generations to come – for jumping to the opposite camp…..and this where the cutting edge of betrayal is keenly felt.

Unfortunately, even as we become sanctimonious and criticize, it is good to question how many amongst us will resist the blandishments of Millions if the other side deems us “worthy” to buy?

It appears that the difference between an honourable politician and a not so honourable one is the price for the soul/conscience or reputation, whichever more important : the first needs RM50 Million, the latter RM5 million?? Well whilst definitely we cannot say all and every single politician but we can say it for (maybe) 90+% of them?

Running a political party/coalition needs management of checks and balance taking into account human frailty.

It is interesting mother of three said in posting Yesterday at 23: 09.18 “Uncle Lim, How could u miss out the “Hee” virus in your party???? Maybe he forgot to ask Fong Po Kuan (DAP-Batu Gajah) her insights? :)

On subject of “kataks” and in response to an earlier challenge from the comment “by the way, why is it that when someone defects from BN to PR they are called heroes and are doing so for the rakyat”, KennyGan has answered Yesterday at 19: 20.50 “Because when they defect from BN to PR it is for principles. When they defect from PR to BN it is for money, position and dropping of corruption charges.”

The latter part – “when they defect from PR to BN it is for money, position and dropping of corruption charges” – is of course commonly accepted as true.

I am not too sure about the first part – “they defect from BN to PR it is for principles”.

It flies in the face of the common assumption that if they were in the BN, they would not have placed high premium on principles in the first place.

A change of heart, a sudden seizure of conscience, an apocalyptic revelation? Possible but not likely.

The other interpretation : they were in BN because they were deliberately “planted” there in the beginning as trojan horses by some ‘mastermind’ to spy on its goings on….and at the right time, required to jump back to PR to balance the numbers, and then they later decide to jump again back to BN except that this time around it’s a bit hazy and we’re left wondering whether there’s other motivation (yet to be divined) beyond the commonly assumed ones!

The beautiful part is that our politics don’t just involve unquantified number of political frogs or potential frogs : it is confusing because we’ve also got “Trojan horses” embedded in key areas to monitor events, identify and report back developments and so and so on. In war it would be undercover spies.

PR may have a couple of “Trojan Horses” embedded within the BN, and vice versa : however it is not just “inter”-coalition/party as in PR versus BN, it is also “intra”-party/coalition in the sense that, supposing parties A, B and C are in a coalition, A may have its trusted lieutenants embedded as member of B or C…..

Interesting isn’t it, having frogs and Trojan horses and not being able to tell who is who???