3/30/2011
Tin Pei Ling, the future of PAP
At 27, she is one of the youngest candidates ever fielded by the PAP. The oppositions had field some who were younger in the past if I can recollect. All these young things are so cute and promising.
What is unfortunate is the dirty linen being dragged out in cyberspace. Why should people go and dig into someone’s past, some private and some personal to embarrass or discredit another person? This is definitely bad behavior and disgusting. Anyone guilty of such practices is unbecoming and undeserving of respect in the eyes of the public.
Politics is already seen as a dirty game. Let’s not make it dirtier by having dirty people airing people’s dirty linen in public. We need to raise the political culture and ethics to a higher level, for respectable people and for politics to be a respectable endeavour. And it should be, as everyone in politics is seen as a leader of the country or aspiring to be one.
Everyone, regardless of which party he/she belongs, should refrain from personal attacks and digging of people’s past unless it is criminal or something that makes the person unsuitable to be a leader of the people.
Let’s leave this young lass alone. She is the future of PAP and Singapore. She will grow up and who knows, become the first female Prime Minister of Singapore one day. The people should look at the future with optimism and show more tender loving care to nurture it. Attacking and destroying the future is not a practical thing to do.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
36 comments:
Have you forgotten which Party was the originator of "washing opponent's dirty laundry" in public?
The internet is a great leveler and others can now play the game. What goes around, comes around.
No I don't. I have very low opinion of whoever indulges in such slimy stuff.
Let me add, one shall not do unto others what one does not want others to do unto one.
As good as the internet is, it does have a dark side. Although, if you think about it deeper, that dark side -- the ability for anyone to express their opinion, and when transmitted that opinion having "equality" of voice with all other opinion -- is a strength provided you can think for yourself.
Opinion is opinion, not truth. It takes critical thinking skills to find out the truth. Most people can't be bothered, or simply lack critical thinking skills which takes a lot of effort and time to develop.
redbean, for example (see above) simply resorts to well-worn boring slogans like quoting the golden rule -- and somehow this counts as an "argument". Others similar to redbean cite "human weakness" as arguments. Now you know why I also hold the opinion that the education system has failed -- miserably.
These people cannot differentiate between inductive and deductive reasoning let alone spot logical fallacies or be aware of cognitive biases, nor are they able to at least grasp the abstracts of statistics and probability. And forget about expecting them to even know what 'The Scientific Method' is -- just forget it! Thus, they treat Google like an all knowing god with infinate wisdom and a source of unerring truth, and thus believe what they already unconciously hold in their mind as 'truth'. Good luck to them.
Juicy news spreads very quickly. Some folks started a rumour that Jackie Chan had been killed by cardiac arrest. And the internet went nuts.
After consulting with the omniscient Great Google God, and surfing blogs and media sites, I garnered I think enough "data" to form a provisionary conclusion viz-a-viz Ms Tin. Reading that crucible of messy, smelly democracy -- The Temasek Review -- was so hypnotic I had to become conciously aware to extricate myself from the trance -- and shake my head to dislodge the shitty comments posted by even shittier people.
Nonetheless, my stance of not voting stands and here's why: look at the madness and insanity of people who just form opinions -- opinions which will guide their choice at the ballot -- and you'll know why I fear and mistrust Big Democracy and Big Politics.
People in large groups tend to be STUPID, even though individually they might be quite intelligent.
Politics IS a dirty game. That won't change. For candidates who step up to the podium, they have to eventually accept -- in public life, your private life (including alluring, sexy photos) and your past -- with all its regrettable events -- is fair game in an unfair world, populated by human primates with large, dysfunctional brains.
The prerequisite for any public figure -- whether govt or private sector -- is A THICK SKIN. No one in these theatres ever survive unless their hide is so thick and their self-esteem so robust that they can not only take but deflect the toxic arrows and brutal slings of public opinion, and carry on -- even more energised -- with their tasks.
I don't like politicians -- but I don't define individuals by a single label either. Everyone is judged on their actions. We are all actors -- we exist in a objective reality and to continue to exist we must ACT -- and we have no choice in the matter. By choosing not to act (wu wei) is itself an action.
I wish Ms Tin the best. I hope she gets in, and I hope she's good at what she does. And I hope she has the courage to wipe off the slime.
Can you just imagine Ms Tin entering Parliament through a walkover in Marine Parade GRC??
"27 year professional"? Her behaviour apparently does not portray her as one. With the various serious impending issues on hand, Singapore does not need a immature woman behaving in what she thinks is "cute"
"What is unfortunate is the dirty linen being dragged out in cyberspace."
- The public has certain moral expectations of the people who represent them since this represent who they are, what they are, what they think, and how they will act, and not the superficial pose they position themselves infront of the public when they can hide their indiscretions.
"Anyone guilty of such practices is unbecoming and undeserving of respect in the eyes of the public."
- shouldn't you reserve this for the PAP and the Shitty Times. They set the game of the rules and the free press is obliging.
"Let’s leave this young lass alone. She is the future of PAP and Singapore. She will grow up and who knows, become the first female Prime Minister of Singapore one day."
- given a chance to do what? stomp around, trying to behave "cute". Isn't it better to give the oppositions who have been working in the past 5 years to pave the ground a chance, than an unkown, a nobody until today, after the annoucement of her as a candidate. What in the world is PAP thinking of, putting up such candidates? Treating Singaporeeans like suckers... Marine parade has always been a stronghold of the PAP. Why put this unknown her. If, you think that Singaporeans should give her a chance, let her stand on her own, in a SMC, and we can see her true performance, NOT the usual hide behide a SM to get in, not on their own merit. First femae prime minister? you joking redbean?
Hi soojenn, let's be generous to an innocent young thing.
The nasty things done by nasty people, they will have to answer themselves. I must say that it is kind of awkward for people who threw shit and felt offended when the shit came back.
Every child has a future. We won't know what the future lies: )
She must have pulled herself up on a thick rope.
I do know that some have been with the PAP for decades and still not found a string to pull themselves up. Some just gave up. Like that former NTUC Insurance chief.
But, as someone said, it is not right for a 32 year old to be a general without ever been in battle.
What can we say? Uniquely Singapore!
Must say that she has passed with flying colours given the stringent requirements of the PAP. In fact anyone that gone through the selection are a bit of an immortal standard, the bestest of the best.
I agree with you Redbean. I think the innuendo by TR was a bit too much.
I think saying that she is too young is fine, because it is an opinion that is backed up by the fact that she is 27.
Whether she will make a good MP is really something that we have to wait and see. But she has had 7 years of grassroots work under her belt, so I think she should be prepared.
Candidates are chosen by parties for different reasons. Some members can serve for a long time and not be asked to stand as candidates, but it does not mean they are not also doing their share in helping the residents and their party.
Entering the parliamentary wing of any party is a great honour, but some may shun it and prefer to work in the grassroots wing of that party. Some also know their limits, and are happy where they are. It's not about fair or unfair, but putting resources where they best fit.
Hi modernburrow, welcome to the blog.
In the corporate world there is this fallacy that a good soldier will make a good officer. And a good officer will make a good politician.
A good waitress does not necessary become a good cook or a good cook a good chef.
The skills of a good helper in a MPS is a different set of skills required by an MP. To be a good politician one needs to have a dark side to succeed.
The people's favourite Lily Neo may not be running if the rumour is true. That speaks a lot about what is good or treasured in a politician.
Tin is an unknown entity in local politics except where she had been doing her grassroot duty.
Her Mentor in East Coast GRC on the other hand is one of the best known empty promises maker for years.
Me says to honour Democracy, anyone with no criminal record and wishing to contribute to nation building, should be welcome to run for political office. This shall include any man/woman with and without paper qualification, repute and of 25 year old of age and above.
One can see that though it is the wish of the candidates to win, they cannot decide it themselves. IT IS THE VOTERS THAT MAKE THE DECISION. So, when any candidate win by courtesy of the voters, the result has to be accepted and respected, even if he/she turns out to be a lousy choice. Voters obviously will have the chance of removing the lousy choice in the next election unless there is no contest.
The Election System in Sin is loaded with disadvantages to citizens with little proof of tangible achievement. And I say this is VERY UNDEMOCRATIC.
patriot
Tin is an unknown entity in local politics except where she had been doing her grassroot duty.
Her Mentor in East Coast GRC on the other hand is one of the best known empty promises maker for years.
Me says to honour Democracy, anyone with no criminal record and wishing to contribute to nation building, should be welcome to run for political office. This shall include any man/woman with and without paper qualification, repute and of 25 year old of age and above.
One can see that though it is the wish of the candidates to win, they cannot decide it themselves. IT IS THE VOTERS THAT MAKE THE DECISION. So, when any candidate win by courtesy of the voters, the result has to be accepted and respected, even if he/she turns out to be a lousy choice. Voters obviously will have the chance of removing the lousy choice in the next election unless there is no contest.
The Election System in Sin is loaded with disadvantages to citizens with little proof of tangible achievement. And I say this is VERY UNDEMOCRATIC.
patriot
27 too young?
Folks, its time to check your history books -- before you cast aspersions on somebody because of their age -- a fact they have no control over.
Thomas Stamford Bingley Raffles began his career in the Far East as a senior official, in Penang at the tender age of 26. And then, he made history.
BTW, who amongst us -- notably those of us of more "senior" years marked by expanding midriffs and prostates, and receding hairlines and youthful vigour -- can claim to have never been "silly" in our younger days?
I would never trust (nor should any of you) anyone who dare claim they were "always rational and well-behaved" as a youth.
At least Ms Tin's life is an "open book" -- judging from the amount of available information and opinion buzzing all over the place like flies near an open sewer.
Free speech is a wonderful thing. and before people agree to fork over 15 grand a month for their elected representative, it is necessary I think, to have a messy, hard-core, even nasty discourse.
Democracy is loud and messy where everyone doesn't have to fight to have their say because they are free to express, but has to fight to defend their opinions.
Get used to it. Or emigrate to North Korea, where it is nice and "orderly".
Oh BTW, there are many people like redbean who can only be "happy" if everyone (no exceptions) follows "their rules" when it comes to self-expression.
If you have to express yourself to "conform" to someone else's rules, how in the heck can you call that "self-expression"?
...not unless you are someone like redbean of course.
patriot,
Looks like you either don't know of have forgotten: Singapore is first a REPUBLIC, which is run by a form of guided democracy...but there must be checks in that democracy or else it just degenerates into "a tyranny of the majority".
Freedom and democracy are often conflated or used interchangeably. The fact is: they are not the same. You can have freedom without democracy. You can also have democracy with NO freedom e.g. Adolph Hitler came in on a democracy, and soon there was no freedom.
You having too much toddy again or having your period?
The bloggers here are perfectly free to express their views, including yours in your drunken stupor. No, don't blame me for forcing you to accept any views here. And neither anyone will be forced to accept your views.
The last emperor ascended the throne at the age of 9 or something like that. You forgot, all the British lads were pirates in their teens. And many of the likes of Raffles only got secondary education.
Some of our successful entrepreneurs and learned men barely past their O levels. And the scribes who wrote the bible probably did not have an education equivalent to our secondary students..
So what nonsense are you driving at? You know that many graduates are actually doing clerical work like clerks of the olden days, but with fanciful titles?
Anyway, every one is entitled to his opinion. Like you said, every opinion comes out from a shit hole or something like that. What is so great about yours compare to those of everyone here?
Shit, I am having too much toddy too. Bad influence.
Which is worst, tyranny of the majority or tyranny of the minority?
Democracy is for the majority to vote for the minority to terrorise them every 4 or 5 years.
I like redbean soup when it is hot.
redebaen frothing at the mouth:
> No, don't blame me for forcing you to accept any views here. <
Where did I imply you force people? I said specifically that you "won't be happy" unless others conform to you "rules" -- i.e. the standards you hold in your on consciousness.
> You forgot, all the British lads were pirates in their teens.
Not at all. actually some of them were much "worse" or in my world view, more garang than being mere pirates given legal sanction under His/Her Majesty's pleasure.
Can you imagine being a young man in your 20's posted to the Far East? On top of that given quarters, servants, club membership and a nice salary?
No female vagina would be safe, probably no local young lad's "back vagina" either ...given the legendary sodomistic tendencies of male English youth of the day -- a product of a staunch Anglican upbringing I would imagine.
Anyway the point is: you are never too young to hold government office.
> Like you said, every opinion comes out from a shit hole or something like that.
Once again, in your lack of...whatever it is you lack... you misquote me. The correct quote is:
"Everyone has an asshole and also an opinion, and they both stink"
> Democracy is for the majority to vote for the minority to terrorise them every 4 or 5 years. <
Finally, a point where we can both agree on.
Matilah;
me gladly admits that me hardly understand much of the many political system in the World. Me also could'nt be bothered to follow them. Following is either copy cat or plain plagiary.
ANYONE WHO JUST FOLLOW IS ALSO NOT FIT TO BE LEADERS.
Me am not trying to make You happy, it is a person like You that me feels should be political leader, regrettably You seem to prefer asceticism in politics but wisely chooses to paradoxically enjoy the best of materialism. Either You are like me waiting for eventuality to deal with the situation or again like me, sees no hope and have no faith in our fellow compatriots.
Sori to have got a little personal. Now, me shall get personal with meself. Should the Coming Election shows that Fellow Singaporeans are willing to be further enslave and accept others(leaders) to dictate and exploit them, me will not talk with anyone about local socio-political matters anymore. Me makes this vow for myself.
Me is very happy to know that there are many bloggers, Mr Chua Chin Leng included, have been doing their very best to warn Singaporeans that we have been lead down the slippery slope for too long and into the Abyss. ME GIVES THEM MY SALUTES!
The GREATEST DETEST ME HAS OF MAN(KIND), IS THOSE TALENTED BUT WITHOUT CONSCIENCE, THESE ARE THE MOST DANGEROUS SPECIES THE WORLD CAN HAVE AND IT IS TERRIBLE LUCK TO HAVE THEM CONTROLLING US.
Again, let me says that having You around here is a joy.
patriot
Oh yes Matilah;
You can also liked some others, tell me that You care not who me am and whether me exists. Me will gladly accept it.
Me am not selling myself, not when one is old and a pauper; me just feel democracy should allow anyone the freedom to air his/her grouse. Whether it is been heard and or are useful for society, let others decide.
Nice to have your interactions
patriot
[1/2]
patriot:
> Sori to have got a little personal.<
Not at all. I assure you, it is quite difficult (though not impossible) to hurt my feelings ;-) and I will assure you that your reading of me is quite removed from the way I feel or view myself. there we have it: other people think about us in different ways from how we think about ourselves.
Ah, the great "mysteries" of human consciousness.
> Either You are like me waiting for eventuality to deal with the situation or again like me, sees no hope and have no faith in our fellow compatriots. <
I do not, or rather try not to have 'faith' in anything. Mine has been the arduous and often unsatifactory search for objectivity to back up claims people just make -- clains which have deal with 'facts of reality' which affect us all. Alas, it is rare that you get any definitive answer. Such is life.
As for 'fellow compatriots': I have said before -- I detest defining 'something' by it's label. What you label as 'fellow compatriot' I view very simply, plainly and objectively as HUMANS or more scientifically humans of the primate species, possessing their unique mental faculties created by the same type of brain. The growing collection of scientific evidence lends support to the claim that human experience is subjective i.e. we are not 'objective' by default. Quite the opposite.
We tend to make many errors when we make decisions. Or we 'guess' correctly and then attribute the favourable outcome to our 'wise choices'. Our brains are excellent for pattern recognition -- especially patterns in human faces (you can recognise someone even if you haven't seen them for years), but they are very poor for evaluating long chains of reasoning -- even simple reasoning.
Except for the rare savant, most of us need to write mathematical calculations on paper or else we won't be able to 'follow' the logic.and that is for the pure, deductive logic of mathematics. what about the more complex inductive logic we have to use in or normal day-to-day activities? How many mistakes do you make? I make PLENTY.
We view the world through our own 'filters', and then there's also our emotions, and the fact that conciously we live about 0.2-0.5 seconds in the past. Our memory is faulty, our firing neuroons "leak" their electrical signals to adjacent structures causing all sorts of error...no, I am afraid I do not trust emotional, subjective, self-interested, self-absorbed humans making collective decisions in LARGE GROUPS -- where all these error-mechanisms are multiplied several fold.
[2/2]
And no, I am not 'waiting' for any one -- saviour, messiah or Lee Kuan Yew -- to 'appear' to solve problems. I have instead chosen to be on my own, forming associations with similarly flawed humans who are like-minded and aware of their 'imperfections' to get on with life.
The anti-PAP sentiment and 'warnings' on this and other forums all concentrate too narrowly on 'beware the PAP'. You are all under the illusion that 'voting for the other side' will 'solve problems'.
To me that is utter bullshit. Political solutions are at best band-aid solutions, at worst they are epic failures. It is not that 'people are flawed' -- that has been well-established or that 'absolute power corrupts absolutely' or any of the stuff we already know.
What I fail to notice folks here and on other forums notice, is your unfounded belief and faith that a whole bunch of people voting against another bunch of people can actually 'solve problems'.
I, OTOH won't be voting. I have long decided -- although I remain open to possibility -- that democracy has a chance, but only in small groups -- like a club or a group of friends where everyone knows each other and no one is 'above' the other. If your club president does something you don't like, you can go up to him and tell him to his face.
Democracy in LARGE GROUPS -- where strangers vote against strangers -- is collective insanityand institutionalised GANG WARFARE.
So go ahead, vote with your conscience. It is good to have 'hope' even if 'hope' is just an expression for those who want to 'feel good right now'. I won't argue that 'hope' doesn't bring comfort. It certainly does.
Patriot, I hope you are comfortable.
Shanmugam and Christopher de Souza first entered Parliament when they were in their late 20s. Both graduated with First Class Honours in Law.
The lady parliamentarian wannabe, now much talked about, is also in her late 20s. A psychology graduate from NUS.
Fascinating, this reaction to the latter as compared. contrastingly, to that to the two gentlemen when they first arrived on the political scene.
Yes, politics is dirty. What makes you think this PAP youngling won't dredge up YOUR past and examine with a microscope to look for flaws, and worse, use their 154th ranking prostitute MSM to paint you as something worse?
other than having 7yrs of grassroots experience, has she achieved anything else?
to be honest, at first I thought "wah, 27yr old; must be really power."
then i read on... and on... and she hasn't really achieved anything outside academia, has she?
i can see where the PAP is coming from perhaps, getting someone to start in politics rather than in business/other professions and then subsequently crossing over to politics, which will inevitably result in some gap between the populace and the "MP".
i can also see that the reason behind not bringing someone more experienced with better/same grassroots experience; say, above 40, would be that the person might not be well-connected with the youth in terms of needs, wants and habits.
but still, it's quite a risk that the PAP is taking. my guess is that they are just testing the waters for now; after all, it's not nomination day yet. perhaps she will be withdrawn after all these hoo hah and shortlisted for the next one instead.
as for the mudslinging and dirty linen... well, that's politics... and pretty mild if you consider behaviors from all over the world.
This gangster Matilah said he detests labelling woah. What is sheeple, hotel, guests : )
'These people cannot differentiate between inductive and deductive reasoning let alone spot logical fallacies or be aware of cognitive biases, nor are they able to at least grasp the abstracts of statistics and probability.' Is this labelling?
BTW at 27 don't expect too much in big achievements. Many may only just started to work and the only achievement is academic. Let's be fair, unless one is placed in a position to achieve greatness, otherwise, at 27, still in process of learning.
Hope she will learn the good stuff and not the bad stuff.
Can we ever get rid of gutter politics, hitting below the belt, digging out people's past to score a point? No, human beans being what they are, they can be angel at one moment and devil the next, no way can dirty politics be weeded out.
That does not mean that it cannot be minimise. We need good and decent leaders to take the lead and REFRAIN from lowering themselves into the gutters.
Those who have done that will only bring disrespect to themselves.
In the past it is only the PAP doing the airing of dirty linens belonging to the opposition because the only avenue for doing so is the MSM, which is under their complete control.
Can we really blame the opposition for doing exactly the same, now that they have alternative medias for such activities?
As someone said, what goes around comes around.
Indeed the internet has levelled the playing field in many ways. Everyone can now play the same game with the same nastiness.
The choice now is for all to level up or lower down into the gutter. They can choose to play who is the fairest of them all or who is the dirtiest of them all.
Wait for the election campaigning to start and see the ethos.
redbean's brain -- activated by the emotion 'desperation', naturally committs the logical fallacy of "confirmation bias" -- looking for 'facts' to demolish my arguments thereby proving himself to be 'right'.
My comments on 'labelling': what I meant was that my radar gets turned on when people start defining others by LABELLING. It is not the use of 'labelling' per se, but defining people by sticking a label on them and then arguing the case, instead of the other way around.
e.g. 1: He is {insert ethnicity}. All {the aforementioned ethnicity} are lazy and dishonest. Everytime I deal with a {ethnicity} person, I have been cheated. (labels defines the person)
e.g. 2: He takes thing which do not belong to him. He is therefore a thief. (define the action, then put on the label)
The difference is subtle. So when I use "sheeple" -- I use it because the argument already has established what it is the people do or do not do...therefore they are 'sheeple'.
Do I fuck up viz-a-viz labelling: OF COURSE I DO. I don't claim myself 'perfect' in any sense of the word -- even my 'imperfections' are not 'perfect'!
So when the emminent redbean uses a label 'gangster' to define me, has it already been established that I am indeed a gangster?
I don't care actually. You can stick whatever label you like on me -- don't worry -- I have a robust working vocab of labels by which I can respond in kind, motherfuckers :-)
redbean 1025
> We need good and decent leaders to take the lead and REFRAIN from lowering themselves into the gutters.
Those who have done that will only bring disrespect to themselves. <
Here, once again folks is rebean's manifesto on 'how to run politics, by using redbean's rules so dear old redben can be "happy" and not be "disgusted" by the behaviour of lesser moretals'
If you have politics-according-to-redbean -- even if it were possible to have this -- it will be dull and flat -- and boring to the point there won't be any point left. No large group of humans -- each individual with an opinion -- is ever going to behave the way redeban "wishes" the world to be.
When humans express their opinions it becomes emotional. Without 'emotion' your opinion is WEAK. We are more receptive to emotions than we are to facts. Every good communicator and sales person knows this.
But redbean prefers a world where everyone is wooden, but 'perfect'.
What a douche! <--- label
As much as i agree w/ redbean that TPL is a fresh page and one never knows too early if she's indeed S'pore's bright future, i also feel nothing wrong to wash the dirty linen, if its indeed dirty in the first place....
Otherwise, for the Opps to play fair and clean, it will always appear there is no dirty linen as white as the uniform, but always dirt on the Oppos..
"One shall not do unto others what one does not want others to do unto one." should only applies if the game had yet to start, in 1959 or somewhere.. since 50+ yrs ago, when the dirty games starts here, the whites are only getting back what they have been throwing around...
"Tin Pei Ling, the future of PAP", unquote.
Technically correct in terms of remaining time. Compare to those over 70s and still lurking around like leeches, Pei Ling has much future.
And in term of future, IF She truthfully and sincerely serves the people like she serve herself materially, let her be our future prime minister and if not an elected president. Why not?
patriot
Hahaha
What future? The 87 year old is still our future, if what he claims is true. He will still rule from the grave.
Oops sorry, I just remember that immortals do not die.
hahahaaaa...
meiren chi!!!
PAP must have fallen asleep and failed to see how politics and the people's perception have changed. With stakes so big, or money so big, putting up kiddies to grab the cake is definitely a no no.
Post a Comment