5/28/2014

Low Thia Khiang’s constructive politics

Low Thia Khiang tried to expand Tony Tan’s call on constructive politics in Parliament yesterday. He made many good points about what destructive politics was all about. What he said made very good sense to me. But to some it would come through like high falutins. And to those who believe that his descriptions of destructive politics are constructive politics, they would not bother one bit to listen to what he was saying. Some may call him idealistic and his version of constructive politics as an aspiration. Politics was not meant to be constructive.
 

Though Tony Tan aspires for politics to be more constructive in his Presidential Address, he could really mean what he said and want it to happen, but how many people would listen to him and actually make politics more constructive? Maybe those who have been indulging in destructive politics believe that they were really constructive.
 

From the tone and emotion of the voices in Parliament yesterday, Tony Tan may need to visit Parliament again to explain what he really meant or his definition of constructive politics. The expression on the faces told all, who were being constructive and who were being destructive. I don’t think the house understood what Tony said or what he wanted. The mood, as usual, exuded contempt and hostility.
 

Low Thia Khiang’s effort to talk about constructive politics is more like 对牛弹琴。

Kopi Level - Green

5 comments:

Anonymous said...

constructive politics ????

my version;

knnccb .... hsien loong

FUCK YOU ... may you n running dogs n bitches karma, ripen upon during yours twilight years

knnccb .... but limpeh here will not be around to witness these events

Matilah_Singapura said...

I rather have destructive politics. Apart from being more fun, it is also SAFER.

Woe behold the day both sides of the political divide unite t get shit done. Habis. If you the individual just happens to disagree, you'll have NO ONE TO REPRESENT YOU in parliament.

There is a mistaken belief that if all are in agreement, that is "good". Fucking BULLSHIT. You better have a few loud dissenting voices, disruptive is necessary. There is no such thing as absolute certainty in political matters. The occurrences of ALL events is, essentially PROBABILISTIC.

If everyone is in agreement, and you are the odd one out because you disagree, you'd better run, hide and protect your ass. Then read one more time: "The Emperor's New Clothes".

Anonymous said...

Teochew Low is not a foreign talent, so his words doesn't carry
any weight to the ears of PAP MP and ministers and was shoot down. He is an opposition leader, sure kena attached by the PAP's pack or maybe fixed by them.

Anonymous said...

There is no such thing as constructive politics. The Govt and the President must be in a slumber.

Its either you win or lose.

A fine example was when WP proposed that Public Transport be nationalized which the PAP govt objected but had to eventually adopt the idea sheepishly.

b said...

What is 'constructive'? Must spell out the rule clearly otherwise it is subjected to individual interpretation. For example, Rule one: cannot use the f word.