Op-Ed Columnist
More Phony Myths - By MAUREEN DOWD
Published: June 25, 2008 NYTIMES
WASHINGTON
Karl Rove was impressed with Barack Obama when he first met him. But now he sees him as a “coolly arrogant” elitist.
This was Rove’s take on Obama to Republicans at the Capitol Hill Club Monday, according to Christianne Klein of ABC News:
“Even if you never met him, you know this guy. He’s the guy at the country club with the beautiful date, holding a martini and a cigarette that stands against the wall and makes snide comments about everyone who passes by.”
Actually, that sounds more like W.
The cheap populism is really rich coming from Karl Rove. When was the last time he kicked back with a corncob pipe to watch professional wrestling?
Rove is trying to spin his myths, as he used to do with such devastating effect, but it won’t work this time. The absurd spectacle of rich white conservatives trying to paint Obama as a watercress sandwich with the crust cut off seems ugly and fake.
Obama can be aloof and dismissive at times, and he’s certainly self-regarding, carrying the aura of the Ivy faculty club. But isn’t that better than the aura of the country clubs that tried to keep out blacks? It’s ironic, and maybe inevitable, that the first African-American nominee comes across as a prince of privilege. He is, as Leon Wieseltier of The New Republic wrote, not the seed but the flower of the civil rights movement.
Unlike W., Obama doesn’t have a chip on his shoulder and he doesn’t make a lot of snarky remarks. He tries to stay on a positive keel and see things from the other person’s point of view.
He’s not Richie Rich, saved time and again by Daddy’s influence and Daddy’s friends, the one who got waved into Yale and Harvard and cushy business deals, who drank too much and snickered at the intellectuals and gave them snide nicknames.
Obama is the outsider who never really knew his dad and who grew up in modest circumstances, the kid who had to work hard to charm whites and build a life with blacks and step up to the smarty-pants set.
He might be smoking, but it would be at a cafe, hunched over a New York Times, an Atlantic magazine, his MacBook and some organic fruit-flavored tea, listening to Bob Dylan’s “Blood on the Tracks” on his iPod.
Rove was doing a variation on the old William Buckley line: “I would rather be governed by the first 2,000 names in the Boston telephone book than by the 2,000 members of the Harvard faculty.”
Conservatives love playing this little game, acting as if the “elite” Democratic candidates are not in touch with people like themselves, even though the guys doing the attacking — like Rove, Limbaugh, O’Reilly and Hannity — are wealthy and cosseted.
Haven’t we had enough of this hypocritical comedy of people in the elite disowning their social status for political purposes? The Bushes had to move all the way to Texas from Greenwich to make their blue blood appear more red.
Everyone who ever became president was in the elite one way or another, including Andrew Jackson.
Rove and Co. are nervous because they see that Obama, in rejecting public financing, is not going to be a chump, like some past Democratic candidates.
For some of Obama’s critics, it’s a breathtaking bit of fungible principles, as though Gandhi suddenly donned a Dolce & Gabbana, or Dolce & Mahatma, loincloth.
But even as the Republicans limn him as John Kerry, as someone who is too haughty and too “foreign,” Obama is determined not to repeat what Kerry thinks was a big mistake: not having enough money to compete against the Republicans in 2004.
Charlie Black crassly argued in Fortune that a terrorist attack would “be a big advantage” for John McCain. And what’s scary is, Black is the smartest adviser McCain’s got.
It’s hard to believe that if Americans get attacked after all these years of getting strip-searched at the airport, they’re going to be filled with confidence at the performance of the Republicans on national security. And at least Obama wants to catch Osama and doesn’t think he’s getting his directions on war from “a higher Father.”
Rove’s mythmaking about Obama won’t fly. If he means that Obama has brains, what’s wrong with that? If he means that Obama is successful, what’s wrong with that? If he means that Obama has education and intellectual sophistication, what’s wrong with that?
Many of Obama’s traits are the traits that people in the population aspire to.
It looks as if Rove is on the verge of realizing his dream of creating a permanent position for the Republicans.
Unfortunately for him, it’s in the minority.
Wednesday, June 25, 2008
USA - First Black vs First Women - Obama wins
June 3rd
Obama's win is revolutionary, being the first Black candidate for US Presidency, and his inspirational campaigns moved many. Hilary campaigned well and displayed revolutionary ideas on Health Care/Economy.
The Democratic Party is divided and how Obama and Hilary work towards a common cause is interesting. Hilary would be good as a Health Care Czar. Who Obama picks as VP would be decisive and my prediction is Senator Jim Webb.
The DNC race showed race and sex is an open debate. Question your pastor and your husband for bad news/views! Well maybe Obama had to question about his pastor, like McCain, and these guys will have to talk about it again and again..
I think Hilary did not question her husband. Celebrating the good economics times only does not remove Bill Clinton’s indiscretion. She should have talked about it, "how he failed the country, and taking responsibility. But she is different; Hilary Rodham first and Hilary Clinton second". It’s a personal question which she failed to answer, even though no one asked her about it. Well Chelsea Clinton was asked. The people wanted to feel her pain and relate to her, which she failed and lost to Obama.
Change without work/process is like asking for rain without thunder and lighting (Quote?). Obama needs to embrace Hilary's policy ideas/details to beat Mccain and be the next US president.
Obama has to relate more to older voters and saying 'Hilary's plan on health care is better' sure would sway many seniors.
Independents seem to sway between McCain and Obama. Guess with the coming debates and political spin we shall see who comes out looking presidential.
Women voter are also key.
Obama - Webb looks like a sure win.
Obama's win is revolutionary, being the first Black candidate for US Presidency, and his inspirational campaigns moved many. Hilary campaigned well and displayed revolutionary ideas on Health Care/Economy.
The Democratic Party is divided and how Obama and Hilary work towards a common cause is interesting. Hilary would be good as a Health Care Czar. Who Obama picks as VP would be decisive and my prediction is Senator Jim Webb.
The DNC race showed race and sex is an open debate. Question your pastor and your husband for bad news/views! Well maybe Obama had to question about his pastor, like McCain, and these guys will have to talk about it again and again..
I think Hilary did not question her husband. Celebrating the good economics times only does not remove Bill Clinton’s indiscretion. She should have talked about it, "how he failed the country, and taking responsibility. But she is different; Hilary Rodham first and Hilary Clinton second". It’s a personal question which she failed to answer, even though no one asked her about it. Well Chelsea Clinton was asked. The people wanted to feel her pain and relate to her, which she failed and lost to Obama.
Change without work/process is like asking for rain without thunder and lighting (Quote?). Obama needs to embrace Hilary's policy ideas/details to beat Mccain and be the next US president.
Obama has to relate more to older voters and saying 'Hilary's plan on health care is better' sure would sway many seniors.
Independents seem to sway between McCain and Obama. Guess with the coming debates and political spin we shall see who comes out looking presidential.
Women voter are also key.
Obama - Webb looks like a sure win.
Sunday, June 22, 2008
PAS, Don’t fall for UMNO’s Trap! - Farish A. Noor - June 17- 08
PAS, Don’t fall for UMNO’s Trap!
Written by Farish A. Noor
Tuesday, 17 June 2008
Civil society, and the actors who occupy that public domain, exists for a number of reasons and one of the reasons is to keep all politicians and political parties in check. It would appear that the work of civil society actors in Malaysia today has been cut out thanks to the murky goings-on within and between the political parties of Malaysia on both sides of the political fence.
Hardly three months have passed since the landmark results of the 8th March Federal elections and already we see Malaysia transformed as never before: Despite winning 79 Parliamentary seats the UMNO party that has been in power for more than half a century is showing signs of internal division and fragmenting before our very eyes; bringing with its collapse the very real possibility of change in the mindset of millions of ordinary Malaysian citizens who were told for so long that the sun of the Barisan Nasional would never set. Well, with BN MPs running helter-skelter in all directions at the moment, it would appear as if that claim is about to be tested in no uncertain terms.
What is worrying, however, is the fact that the Pakatan Rakyat coalition is still in its infant stages and does not have the luxury of time on its side. Should the BN government fall, and that prospect seems more likely by the day, the PR should be ready to assume office at a moment’s notice. This can only be done if and when the PR gets its act together and all component parties of the PR agree once and for all that they will abide by the terms they had set for themselves; which includes the PR manifesto and the standards of the People’s Declaration which they had all assented to.
Now the problem that faces the PR is that for too long the component parties have grown accustomed to their own version of narrow communitarian based politics, identifying specific and exclusive racial and religious communities as their target constituencies and primary vote base. What is even more worrying is the tendency for some of the leaders of the PR component parties to continue operating on the basis of the idea that their primary political constituency has remained unchanged; thereby making the fatal assumption that the Malaysian public and the Malaysian electorate hasn’t evolved over the years. Now the last time a right-wing politician worked on such a silly assumption he did something even sillier: namely take out a keris in public and started waffling about racial dominance and the special status of his ethnic-religious constituency. And see what happened: the same politician’s party was thumped at the polls and lost every single Malay-majority urban seat on the West coast, thereby proving that the Malays were no longer susceptible to this sort of juvenile antics and emotional manipulation. Padan Muka.
Looking at the Pakatan Rakyat coalition today, we sadly see rather similar tactics being used by some leaders of the PR, and in particular by some of the leaders of PAS. First came the claim that the PR in Selangor should start ‘Islamising’ the public space of Selangor and promoting faith and piety among the Muslims of the state, which begs the question: Since when did the PR become a missionary pietist movement and who said that PAS leaders of the PR in Selangor were voted to become our religious mentors and moral guardians?
Now it would appear that there have been calls by some of the leaders of the Youth Wing of PAS for the PR to start Islamising the five states whose assemblies are under the control of the PR, with Kelantan to serve as the model.
Now let us repeat this again for the umpteenth time: The vote for the PR at the recent elections was not a vote for an Islamic state, or an endorsement for any kind of communitarian or sectarian politics, be it on religious or ethnic grounds. The Malaysian public – who remain the real power brokers in Malaysia today – have signalled their utter disgust and frustration with the slow pace of reform that was meant to be the starting point of the Badawi administration but which ended with pointless projects such as an Islamic theme park and crystal mosque instead.
Nor is there any indication that the Muslims of Malaysia have called for any form of theocratic governance in the country, for their rejection of the state’s Islam Hadari project may actually suggest that many of them are fed up with the politicisation of religion by this stage.
So when is PAS – or rather some of the more vocal and hot-headed leaders of PAS – going to realise that for it to become a truly national party with national ambitions, it has to adapt to the reality of a plural, multicultural and multireligious Malaysia where there are not only differences between Muslims and non-Muslims, but also – crucially – differences among Muslims as well? Who and what gave these PAS leaders the licence to assume that all Muslims in Malaysia want an Islamic state, and more importantly their version of an Islamic state? What on earth makes them think that the rest of Malaysia wants to be like Kelantan?
Whenever any leader or any party in the PR makes demands like these, it goes against the collective spirit of the PR, narrows the universalist scope of the PR manifesto and betrays the spirit of the People’s Declaration – which, need we remind them, they all signed and agreed to. The negative consequences of such unilateralism are manifold, and can be summed up thus:
Firstly, it reinforces the BN’s claim that the PR is at best an instrumental coalition that will break apart because there will never be any real compromise and co-operation between PAS and the other parties;
Secondly, it sends shivers down the spines of many non-Muslim Malaysians who – for better or worse – have their own misgivings about the idea of any religious state (Islamic or otherwise) in what they hope to see evolve into a secular, democratic, free and equal Malaysia;
Thirdly, it also alienates Malaysian Muslims who – this writer included – also have deep misgivings about the abuse of religion for political ends and who do not want to live in an Islamic state where our personal lives, private space and right of speech and thought on religious matters are decided by Islamist politicians from a party we are not even members of;
Fourthly, it will provide ample materiel for Malaysia-bashers who would jump at the opportunity to rubbish the PR government (if it comes to power) and to make outlandish claims that Malaysia has fallen under the heels of PAS and is about to be transformed into some Iranian-like theocracy;
Fifth, - and perhaps this is the most dangerous consequence of all – such unilateral moves on the part of this handful of PAS leaders will pave the way for UMNO to open its doors to PAS, and to invite PAS to abandon the PR and opt for joining the BN instead, ostensibly for the sake of ensuring Malay-Muslim unity, and more importantly Malay-Muslim dominance.
Now of all the worst-case scenarios to contemplate, this is the most worrisome. During the election campaign of March 2008, UMNO’s posters in Trengganu were already paving the way for a PAS cross-over to the BN, with slogans like ‘If you want to really promote Islam, then join the BN/UMNO’. Since March there has been speculation about PAS leaders who have been in negotiations with UMNO, a fact that some of them have admitted; and talk about a PAS hop-over to UMNO/BN should the PR be successful in winning over more MPs from East Malaysia or the non-Malay component parties of the BN.
Now if this were to indeed happen, then we would be left with two political coalitions: The PR that is more pluralist but with a significantly small Malay-Muslim component, and a BN that is less pluralist but with a strong Malay-Muslim component. This may suit the needs and interests of some of the more religiously conservative and racially-minded members of the PR, but it would spell disaster for the country as Malaysia would, for all intents and purposes, be split along both racial and religious lines: the teleological conclusion to five decades of divisive racial and religious politics finally playing itself out in the fragmentation of the nation as a whole. In such a situation, the PR would indeed break apart, but the highest cost (both political and ethical) will be incurred on PAS – that would henceforth be seen and justly condemned for betraying the People’ Declaration and selling themselves to serve their own short-sighted sectarian ends.
Tuan Guru Nik Aziz Nik Mat – who knows better for he was one of those who entered the BN in the 1970s when PAS was brought into the coalition by Asri Muda – is right when he reminds the members and leaders of his own party not to fall into the trap of the BN/UMNO, and to abide by the terms and agenda of the PR. Nik Aziz remembers how PAS was sold short, betrayed and ultimately hung to dry by UMNO; and how it took the party 12 years to put itself back together before they finally regained control of Kelantan in 1990.
The ‘Young Turks’ of PAS today would do well to listen to the wise counsel of the man who is, after all, their spiritual leader and guide, for Nik Aziz knows what he is talking about on this matter. Should PAS’s leaders continue to make such unilateral demands, they will only be helping UMNO/BN weaken the collective resolve and accommodative spirit that brought the Pakatan Rakyat together in the first place, and by doing so be helping further UMNO/BN’s objective of maintaining its hegemonic grip on the country. And so for all our sakes – the Malaysian people’s and for PAS’s sake as well – do rein in these wild horses and keep the PR convoy in line. The road to a plural, democratic, inclusive and equal Malaysia is and can only be a long one, and we don’t need hot-headed unilateralists to take us off track. The March 2008 elections was an election for a new Malaysia, and not a theocratic sectarian state, be it in the communitarian mould of UMNO or PAS.
Written by Farish A. Noor
Tuesday, 17 June 2008
Civil society, and the actors who occupy that public domain, exists for a number of reasons and one of the reasons is to keep all politicians and political parties in check. It would appear that the work of civil society actors in Malaysia today has been cut out thanks to the murky goings-on within and between the political parties of Malaysia on both sides of the political fence.
Hardly three months have passed since the landmark results of the 8th March Federal elections and already we see Malaysia transformed as never before: Despite winning 79 Parliamentary seats the UMNO party that has been in power for more than half a century is showing signs of internal division and fragmenting before our very eyes; bringing with its collapse the very real possibility of change in the mindset of millions of ordinary Malaysian citizens who were told for so long that the sun of the Barisan Nasional would never set. Well, with BN MPs running helter-skelter in all directions at the moment, it would appear as if that claim is about to be tested in no uncertain terms.
What is worrying, however, is the fact that the Pakatan Rakyat coalition is still in its infant stages and does not have the luxury of time on its side. Should the BN government fall, and that prospect seems more likely by the day, the PR should be ready to assume office at a moment’s notice. This can only be done if and when the PR gets its act together and all component parties of the PR agree once and for all that they will abide by the terms they had set for themselves; which includes the PR manifesto and the standards of the People’s Declaration which they had all assented to.
Now the problem that faces the PR is that for too long the component parties have grown accustomed to their own version of narrow communitarian based politics, identifying specific and exclusive racial and religious communities as their target constituencies and primary vote base. What is even more worrying is the tendency for some of the leaders of the PR component parties to continue operating on the basis of the idea that their primary political constituency has remained unchanged; thereby making the fatal assumption that the Malaysian public and the Malaysian electorate hasn’t evolved over the years. Now the last time a right-wing politician worked on such a silly assumption he did something even sillier: namely take out a keris in public and started waffling about racial dominance and the special status of his ethnic-religious constituency. And see what happened: the same politician’s party was thumped at the polls and lost every single Malay-majority urban seat on the West coast, thereby proving that the Malays were no longer susceptible to this sort of juvenile antics and emotional manipulation. Padan Muka.
Looking at the Pakatan Rakyat coalition today, we sadly see rather similar tactics being used by some leaders of the PR, and in particular by some of the leaders of PAS. First came the claim that the PR in Selangor should start ‘Islamising’ the public space of Selangor and promoting faith and piety among the Muslims of the state, which begs the question: Since when did the PR become a missionary pietist movement and who said that PAS leaders of the PR in Selangor were voted to become our religious mentors and moral guardians?
Now it would appear that there have been calls by some of the leaders of the Youth Wing of PAS for the PR to start Islamising the five states whose assemblies are under the control of the PR, with Kelantan to serve as the model.
Now let us repeat this again for the umpteenth time: The vote for the PR at the recent elections was not a vote for an Islamic state, or an endorsement for any kind of communitarian or sectarian politics, be it on religious or ethnic grounds. The Malaysian public – who remain the real power brokers in Malaysia today – have signalled their utter disgust and frustration with the slow pace of reform that was meant to be the starting point of the Badawi administration but which ended with pointless projects such as an Islamic theme park and crystal mosque instead.
Nor is there any indication that the Muslims of Malaysia have called for any form of theocratic governance in the country, for their rejection of the state’s Islam Hadari project may actually suggest that many of them are fed up with the politicisation of religion by this stage.
So when is PAS – or rather some of the more vocal and hot-headed leaders of PAS – going to realise that for it to become a truly national party with national ambitions, it has to adapt to the reality of a plural, multicultural and multireligious Malaysia where there are not only differences between Muslims and non-Muslims, but also – crucially – differences among Muslims as well? Who and what gave these PAS leaders the licence to assume that all Muslims in Malaysia want an Islamic state, and more importantly their version of an Islamic state? What on earth makes them think that the rest of Malaysia wants to be like Kelantan?
Whenever any leader or any party in the PR makes demands like these, it goes against the collective spirit of the PR, narrows the universalist scope of the PR manifesto and betrays the spirit of the People’s Declaration – which, need we remind them, they all signed and agreed to. The negative consequences of such unilateralism are manifold, and can be summed up thus:
Firstly, it reinforces the BN’s claim that the PR is at best an instrumental coalition that will break apart because there will never be any real compromise and co-operation between PAS and the other parties;
Secondly, it sends shivers down the spines of many non-Muslim Malaysians who – for better or worse – have their own misgivings about the idea of any religious state (Islamic or otherwise) in what they hope to see evolve into a secular, democratic, free and equal Malaysia;
Thirdly, it also alienates Malaysian Muslims who – this writer included – also have deep misgivings about the abuse of religion for political ends and who do not want to live in an Islamic state where our personal lives, private space and right of speech and thought on religious matters are decided by Islamist politicians from a party we are not even members of;
Fourthly, it will provide ample materiel for Malaysia-bashers who would jump at the opportunity to rubbish the PR government (if it comes to power) and to make outlandish claims that Malaysia has fallen under the heels of PAS and is about to be transformed into some Iranian-like theocracy;
Fifth, - and perhaps this is the most dangerous consequence of all – such unilateral moves on the part of this handful of PAS leaders will pave the way for UMNO to open its doors to PAS, and to invite PAS to abandon the PR and opt for joining the BN instead, ostensibly for the sake of ensuring Malay-Muslim unity, and more importantly Malay-Muslim dominance.
Now of all the worst-case scenarios to contemplate, this is the most worrisome. During the election campaign of March 2008, UMNO’s posters in Trengganu were already paving the way for a PAS cross-over to the BN, with slogans like ‘If you want to really promote Islam, then join the BN/UMNO’. Since March there has been speculation about PAS leaders who have been in negotiations with UMNO, a fact that some of them have admitted; and talk about a PAS hop-over to UMNO/BN should the PR be successful in winning over more MPs from East Malaysia or the non-Malay component parties of the BN.
Now if this were to indeed happen, then we would be left with two political coalitions: The PR that is more pluralist but with a significantly small Malay-Muslim component, and a BN that is less pluralist but with a strong Malay-Muslim component. This may suit the needs and interests of some of the more religiously conservative and racially-minded members of the PR, but it would spell disaster for the country as Malaysia would, for all intents and purposes, be split along both racial and religious lines: the teleological conclusion to five decades of divisive racial and religious politics finally playing itself out in the fragmentation of the nation as a whole. In such a situation, the PR would indeed break apart, but the highest cost (both political and ethical) will be incurred on PAS – that would henceforth be seen and justly condemned for betraying the People’ Declaration and selling themselves to serve their own short-sighted sectarian ends.
Tuan Guru Nik Aziz Nik Mat – who knows better for he was one of those who entered the BN in the 1970s when PAS was brought into the coalition by Asri Muda – is right when he reminds the members and leaders of his own party not to fall into the trap of the BN/UMNO, and to abide by the terms and agenda of the PR. Nik Aziz remembers how PAS was sold short, betrayed and ultimately hung to dry by UMNO; and how it took the party 12 years to put itself back together before they finally regained control of Kelantan in 1990.
The ‘Young Turks’ of PAS today would do well to listen to the wise counsel of the man who is, after all, their spiritual leader and guide, for Nik Aziz knows what he is talking about on this matter. Should PAS’s leaders continue to make such unilateral demands, they will only be helping UMNO/BN weaken the collective resolve and accommodative spirit that brought the Pakatan Rakyat together in the first place, and by doing so be helping further UMNO/BN’s objective of maintaining its hegemonic grip on the country. And so for all our sakes – the Malaysian people’s and for PAS’s sake as well – do rein in these wild horses and keep the PR convoy in line. The road to a plural, democratic, inclusive and equal Malaysia is and can only be a long one, and we don’t need hot-headed unilateralists to take us off track. The March 2008 elections was an election for a new Malaysia, and not a theocratic sectarian state, be it in the communitarian mould of UMNO or PAS.
Sunday, June 01, 2008
Ketuanan Melayu - Father & Son Letters.
RPK asked "Why am I republishing them? You figure that one out". ((Father and son debate revisited. Friday, 18 April 2008)) - RPK
I think RPK is trying to calm the excitement of the recent election wins. KM is still a sensitive issue! Even a father and son have widely opposing views.
This is my figuring out...
Ketuanan Melayu (KM) can only be discussed with some degree of bias on the part of the writer/reader. So does a non-Malay have more merit than a Malay in discussing KM issues? (I hope it does not)
Anyway, I write on that premise!
It has always been the case, an accepted fact of life. Life was not bad and growing up was fun (in hindsight). Reality hit us in on may 13 1969 inter-racial riots. Fear, sadness and confusion was the order of the day. Pity the Chinese for bearing the brunt; some Malays suffered, perhaps a handful of Indians.
Now, about 40 years later, we find ourselves asking if history would repeat itself. The recent May 2008 election showed that at least some historical events dont repeat itself. People do learn. This in comforting.
KM aka NEP is a delicate and complex socio-economic public policy, unique to Malaysia. This policy has failed dramatically in changing the majority Malay's socio-economic status. Fundamental changes in the socio economic behaviour of Malays were not addressed effectively, in terms of education. Governance matters were neglected for short term success. Picture perfect concrete jungles rose from the ashes of may 13. The era of Mahatir, Ling & Samy was in full bloom.
While individual KM success was beginning to take hold/foot; the everday Malay was not enjoying the benefits of the KM. The poor non-Malay was in the same boat.
World events did not help Malaysia's race relations. 911, Iraq war & Bali bombing sent shivers down people's spine on the dangers of extremism and extreme actions.
It will take another father and son to be agreeable....more soon....Ketuanan Makan (KM) is calling. It is not a joke!
I think RPK is trying to calm the excitement of the recent election wins. KM is still a sensitive issue! Even a father and son have widely opposing views.
This is my figuring out...
Ketuanan Melayu (KM) can only be discussed with some degree of bias on the part of the writer/reader. So does a non-Malay have more merit than a Malay in discussing KM issues? (I hope it does not)
Anyway, I write on that premise!
It has always been the case, an accepted fact of life. Life was not bad and growing up was fun (in hindsight). Reality hit us in on may 13 1969 inter-racial riots. Fear, sadness and confusion was the order of the day. Pity the Chinese for bearing the brunt; some Malays suffered, perhaps a handful of Indians.
Now, about 40 years later, we find ourselves asking if history would repeat itself. The recent May 2008 election showed that at least some historical events dont repeat itself. People do learn. This in comforting.
KM aka NEP is a delicate and complex socio-economic public policy, unique to Malaysia. This policy has failed dramatically in changing the majority Malay's socio-economic status. Fundamental changes in the socio economic behaviour of Malays were not addressed effectively, in terms of education. Governance matters were neglected for short term success. Picture perfect concrete jungles rose from the ashes of may 13. The era of Mahatir, Ling & Samy was in full bloom.
While individual KM success was beginning to take hold/foot; the everday Malay was not enjoying the benefits of the KM. The poor non-Malay was in the same boat.
World events did not help Malaysia's race relations. 911, Iraq war & Bali bombing sent shivers down people's spine on the dangers of extremism and extreme actions.
It will take another father and son to be agreeable....more soon....Ketuanan Makan (KM) is calling. It is not a joke!
After Bad-awi Who? Is this his last Nap?
Malaysian 5th PM - Abdullah Ahmad Badawi. Is this his last nap (ok..stand) as PM? There is wideapread speculation that the PM is in his last throes.
You have Pakatan Rakyat - PK, lead by DSAI & waiting to seize control, with a somewhat people and blog led electoral revolution. see top 5 malaysian political blogs and rpk revolution.
Former PM and UMNO 'outcaste', Dr M is raising all kinds of criticism of AAB; is it to ensure his own legacy is not tainted or for the nation's benefit (which depends how one views him). He even launched a blog on may 1st - http://www.chedet.com/. DAP Chairman Karpal Singh does not think the opposition needs unsolicited support from Dr M. I think our longest serving PM had no choice because no one else was listening to him. UMNO had distanced itself. Note: Dr M said he still supports umno. He appears a complex contradictory character?
Within his own party UMNO, former finance minister Razaleigh Hamzah (or Ku Li) is staging a presidential run. He now admits he was also at fault for losing the 2/3 rd majority. I think he smartely was low-key during the campaign period. He needed the 'shake up' in order to attempt a comeback. Some bloggers think he (& DrM) has some explaining to do wrt accusation of the 80's scandals at bank bumiputra, etc. Ku Li would be admired if he spoke of reforming BN, but he is kind of undefined to most people.
Najib is playing it safe and backs AAB. Perhaps Najib is fated to be the deer in the "Gajah bertarung lawan gajah, pelanduk mati di tengah-tengah" Elephants wage war against elephants, deers die in the midst. People are confused with najib because they cannot really relate with him or know what he stands for, other then the obvious. At least AAB was conceived as being 'clean', initially. Even KJ had a persona of being smart & cocky, initially.
AAB's failures does not take away the fact that he freed DSAI. Do you think this action by AAB, would inadvertently spell his political demise either ceremonially or otherwise? We will let history explain/decide who rekindled DSAI career. KJ appears immatured politically and I wont count him out; in the long term.
The ball (and do they have the balls) is in BN's hand, at least for the moment. DSAI is ready. Can BN change, radically, i.e. UMNO, MCA & MIC individually and mutually.
Lets see whats been happening since the last election;
>KJ now agrees the keris waving was wrong. (and Hisahmudin).
(I think this was not the main or important reason. Its economics mismanagment that the everyday malaysian feel and see. Address crime first, while reforming police, and a rather long list of other issues, perhaps then KJ-BN has a chance in the next election. I wouldn't count KJ out!
>The lawyers gave the PM a standing ovations?
>Some MP forget to send questions in?
>No songkok for me DAP? ok now?.
> CM Penang - LGE is a fine politician - flying economy like the people.
>Publishing licenses given/returned.
>Pakatan Rakyat, stumbles but appears to get it together. Revolution of sorts when PKR-PAS-DAP are working it out. People are learning that PAS politician are ethical-non-corrupt and more accepting of other religions; although they disagree with PAS on the 'Islamic State' debate.
>Are the 5 oppostion states going to get the $$ from federal government?
>Rocky Bru meets KJ on World Press Freedom; and says "Will he walk the talk?"-may 8.
>Muhyiddin says "Why should the position of party president be so sacred, sacrosanct ? that nobody can challenge?
>More shouting matches in parliment....
Hope BN changes fundamantally or the next election it would lose power or sooner, as DSAI and DrM also believe.
I think whatever policy changes takes place in the coming periods of political spin; (for that matter even abolishing ISA) would not help or safe AAB. Its economics stupid. The PM and BN allies have no reasonable plans in taking Malaysia into a globalized, educated and competitive nation of fair and just governance.
It appears DSAI has the political will, economics smarts and moral courage in undertaking those challenges.
BTW, I dont think Badawi is Bad-awi
You have Pakatan Rakyat - PK, lead by DSAI & waiting to seize control, with a somewhat people and blog led electoral revolution. see top 5 malaysian political blogs and rpk revolution.
Former PM and UMNO 'outcaste', Dr M is raising all kinds of criticism of AAB; is it to ensure his own legacy is not tainted or for the nation's benefit (which depends how one views him). He even launched a blog on may 1st - http://www.chedet.com/. DAP Chairman Karpal Singh does not think the opposition needs unsolicited support from Dr M. I think our longest serving PM had no choice because no one else was listening to him. UMNO had distanced itself. Note: Dr M said he still supports umno. He appears a complex contradictory character?
Within his own party UMNO, former finance minister Razaleigh Hamzah (or Ku Li) is staging a presidential run. He now admits he was also at fault for losing the 2/3 rd majority. I think he smartely was low-key during the campaign period. He needed the 'shake up' in order to attempt a comeback. Some bloggers think he (& DrM) has some explaining to do wrt accusation of the 80's scandals at bank bumiputra, etc. Ku Li would be admired if he spoke of reforming BN, but he is kind of undefined to most people.
Najib is playing it safe and backs AAB. Perhaps Najib is fated to be the deer in the "Gajah bertarung lawan gajah, pelanduk mati di tengah-tengah" Elephants wage war against elephants, deers die in the midst. People are confused with najib because they cannot really relate with him or know what he stands for, other then the obvious. At least AAB was conceived as being 'clean', initially. Even KJ had a persona of being smart & cocky, initially.
AAB's failures does not take away the fact that he freed DSAI. Do you think this action by AAB, would inadvertently spell his political demise either ceremonially or otherwise? We will let history explain/decide who rekindled DSAI career. KJ appears immatured politically and I wont count him out; in the long term.
The ball (and do they have the balls) is in BN's hand, at least for the moment. DSAI is ready. Can BN change, radically, i.e. UMNO, MCA & MIC individually and mutually.
Lets see whats been happening since the last election;
>KJ now agrees the keris waving was wrong. (and Hisahmudin).
(I think this was not the main or important reason. Its economics mismanagment that the everyday malaysian feel and see. Address crime first, while reforming police, and a rather long list of other issues, perhaps then KJ-BN has a chance in the next election. I wouldn't count KJ out!
>The lawyers gave the PM a standing ovations?
>Some MP forget to send questions in?
>No songkok for me DAP? ok now?.
> CM Penang - LGE is a fine politician - flying economy like the people.
>Publishing licenses given/returned.
>Pakatan Rakyat, stumbles but appears to get it together. Revolution of sorts when PKR-PAS-DAP are working it out. People are learning that PAS politician are ethical-non-corrupt and more accepting of other religions; although they disagree with PAS on the 'Islamic State' debate.
>Are the 5 oppostion states going to get the $$ from federal government?
>Rocky Bru meets KJ on World Press Freedom; and says "Will he walk the talk?"-may 8.
>Muhyiddin says "Why should the position of party president be so sacred, sacrosanct ? that nobody can challenge?
>More shouting matches in parliment....
Hope BN changes fundamantally or the next election it would lose power or sooner, as DSAI and DrM also believe.
I think whatever policy changes takes place in the coming periods of political spin; (for that matter even abolishing ISA) would not help or safe AAB. Its economics stupid. The PM and BN allies have no reasonable plans in taking Malaysia into a globalized, educated and competitive nation of fair and just governance.
It appears DSAI has the political will, economics smarts and moral courage in undertaking those challenges.
BTW, I dont think Badawi is Bad-awi