25 May 2006

Raining On The Party

Sunflower brought this article, from TodayOnline dated 24 May 2006, to my attention and as I was reading it, I can't help but rolled my eyes over and over again.

PAP Ms Denise Phua was wondering how come the sentiments on the internet are slanted against the PAP.


It's like a blind man asking how come the room is so dark.

The good thing about the internet realm is that it is self-governing with its own sets of checks and balances. Whenever somebody say something stupidly irresponsible on the net, someone else out there would be sure to take him/her to task for his/her words. A bit like our ministers filing defamation suits against their opponents, whom the latter has this tendency to spout nonsense with nothing to back him/herself up. So in the end kena bankrupt lor. No sympathies there. It's his/her own doing but I digress.

Speaking of checks and balances. While I may be wrong, I am of the belief that intensive coverage on the internet, "in favour" of the oppositions during the elections on the internet was merely a natural reaction to the intensive coverage on the various MickeyMouse Media, "in favour" of the PAP. Call it a balance of the yin and the yang, if you will.

I must thank those who posted pictures of the opposition rallies on their blogs. I was shocked to see the turnout at the opposition rallies from their photos. Being overseas, I would have not known the real picture (no pun intended) had I just rely solely on those MickeyMouse Medias. The latter's intentionally/unintentionally skewed coverage didn't go down well with me.

Anyway, the elections is over and PAP returned to power winning 82 out of the 84 seats. So how come it doesn't feel like a resounding victory when they won? Why the gloomy faces when lifting the championship trophy?

Here's why on a few counts.

1) While PAP may have won this elections with 66.6% of the popular vote, it was in fact a loss of 8.7% of the votes from last election. Wah raoz. Throw Progressive Package, Upgradings and other goodies and still lose almost 9% of the votes??! Kan si lang lao kwee #1.

2) PM Lee's own Ang Mo Kio GRC enjoyed a walkover during GE2001 only to lose 33.9% of the votes to the WP kamakazis this time round. Imagine a team of unknowns sukah sukah just walk in and then effortlessly walk out of our own PM's backyard with a fistful of votes totaling nearly 50,000 votes. Kan si lang lao kwee #2.

3) Speaking of kamakazis, the WP team contesting the Ang Mo Kio GRC aren't the real deal. The real kamakazi would have to be the suay suay kena-arrowed SM Goh putting his endorsement and bearing gifts of lift upgradings to Potong Pasir and yet, still lose miserably to the victorious Mr Chiam who took this election to improve his scorecard by an additional 3.5% of the votes. Kan si lang lao kwee #3.

Here's a question. If Potong Pasir was so important, how come never put MM Lee out there instead of SM Goh? Looks to me like our dear SM Goh tio tuar jeet kee tua tua kee.

In closing, here's my advice to the PAP. Open your bladdy eyes and ears and figure out what the people are trying to tell you. Then and only then would you be able to stem this trend of sliding percentages.

And finally a parting shot to the MickeyMouse Media (you know who you are). With just a remaining sliver of credibility left, you guys effectively just downgraded yourselves to the calibre of tabloids, albeit a little more atas one.

- Voxeros

1. sunflower left...
Thursday, 25 May 2006 1:54 am
Good effort! >.<

Understandably, being in oversea, you will sole depend on online newspaper, eg, ST online or Today online. But if the media only cover our dear gahmen....

Look at this para:
Nowhere, for example, was it mentioned that this particular GE was not a snap poll or that the Opposition had the freedom to hold rallies of its own. But given the fact that cyber-traffic goes out to the world, Ms Phua felt that a foreigner reading about elections in Singapore would only have a chance to hear one side of the story — that too, a somewhat skewed one.

Certainly, I am not trying to say our gahmen is not good. But is just tat they are really arrogant! They always refuse to listen people voice....only gahmen voice is allowed.

I wonder why?

2. airhole left...
Thursday, 25 May 2006 8:48 am
nicely and aptly put.
my sentiments exactly. ~airhole

3. teeim left...
Thursday, 25 May 2006 11:46 am
i know a reporter in the newspaper. All reporters knew the opposition situation (they cover the the elections wholly) but are "restricted" in their reports/photos/writings/quotes in the papers. If not, risk "reprimand".

4. kelawar.kilat left...
Thursday, 25 May 2006 4:51 pm
You're quite the GCT sympathizer, aren't you?

5. JayWalk left...
Thursday, 25 May 2006 7:13 pm ::
Sunflower: Here's why they should start to listen to the people. At this point in time, people make noise because they still care.

Until a time when people give up totally and stop saying anything, there is still a sliver of hope for the PAP to retain the people's hearts.

Let's hope the MIW wake up their bladdy ideas in time.

airhole: Thank you. Great to know that there is someone out there who thinking along the same line.

teeim: Well, well, well, look who decided to finally grace her presence here. Welcome to my humble abode!

Careful what you are saying about the so-called "reprimand". You are venturing into thin ice here and I think it would be safer if we just put this down as hear-say cause you and I both know that when taken to task over this statement, there is no way you can back this up. Even if hypothetically true, your alleged "reliable & credible source" would be expected to deny wholeheartedly or worse, go into hiding, when things get too hot in the kitchen.

Kelawar: Whoa. Tricky question here. Which response will prevent me from getting imprisoned?

6. Pam left...
Friday, 26 May 2006 1:09 am
i was just going to add a link to how the times in UK reported on the elections in Singapore, and basically said that the MIW aren't really winning and that Singaporeans are really waking up and smelling the coffee. it'll be interesting to see how the next 10 years will turn out.
tried hunting it out on the times, but can't find it!

7. JayWalk left...
Friday, 26 May 2006 2:18 am :: 
Pam: I want to read! Go library archives to find?
You'd do that for me? No?

8. Robin left...
Monday, 29 May 2006 11:39 am ::
Well said!

9. JayWalk left...
Tuesday, 30 May 2006 11:17 am ::
Robin: Thanks! Do drop by often!

10. Pam left...
Wednesday, 31 May 2006 12:48 am
my dear friend.. i did try and hunt out the article for you, but to no avail. you can try - it's The Times (, and i think it was on may 9th because i read it on the plane to berlin.

11. JayWalk left...
Wednesday, 31 May 2006 12:19 pm :: 
Pam: Cannot leh. To browse their archives, you need a $ubscription leh. :(

12. Pam left...
Wednesday, 31 May 2006 5:46 pm
really?! i don't think i have a subscription?! oh well. it's lost. next time, i'll remember to hang on to it.

13. JayWalk left...
Thursday, 1 June 2006 12:41 am :
Pam: Same goes for a lot of other newspapers' websites. Anyway, as there are just as many free ones out there, I don't see the justification of spending that kind of money.

No comments: