A man and a politician

Ever heard of a man asking money from a politician for cloths, books, fees as the school season about to open. Ever heard of a politician complaining of lot of money needed to service his constituency? So in the end where does the money go to? Also there is no need to ask where the money comes from. Still, gentlemen and decent men, seldom ask and beg.

Political proxy: A guy faking his way up.

There is a story about a guy faking his way up and putting mask all over to hide the guilt feeling and vengeance. He is as good and as bad as he has proven before. Everything has to be right and exciting to his definitions. As a team they are limiting themselves to anything less than decency. For all we know, not many were involved in bombing Hiroshima... Just a few. That's all it takes to bring down humanity, sanity and decency to ashes. So is Barisan Nasional.

POLITICS: Mohsin Abdullah is right.

There is no harm in sharing views irrespective of how diverse and conflicting they are. I thought Mohsin Abdullah tried to do just that.

I likened politics as a pond or pool. Most just dip in and get out. Politicians will dive and swim across. If anybody is crying for help, about to drown, we could just cross our fingers if any politician will dash forward to help.

Politicians play politics, Footballers play football
by Mohsin Abdullah
Mysinchew

I can’t say for sure if it’s the feeling of the majority but we are seeing quite a number of comments from “ordinary” folks on the current state if political affairs in the country. Surf the internet or read the newspapers and we get folks expressing “anger” and “frustration’ that our “politicians are playing politics instead of finding ways to solve the economic crisis”. You can’t dispute that. After all we are facing an economic crisis. And the political play is enough to give us a constant headache. Just look at Perak. And the ‘fear’ is, if the Perak problem spread to other places.

Going back to the “people’s” comments, many preferred to ‘generalised” rather than naming the politicians or the party they represent. But just who’s to blame? Those from BN? Or Pakatan Rakyat? Talk to different people you get different answers naturally. To the pro Pakatan folks, the blame is on the BN, for “disturbing” the PR government and not letting it govern in “peace”. Perak, they say, is a “shining” example, pointing angrily at the “crossovers”.

"Politicians especially those who missed the boat will just have to wait for the next election to prove they are a better choice. Mean time work hard."

But the pro BN people are saying the Pakatan started the cross over thing first, referring to Anwar Ibrahim’s famous “we have the numbers” salvo. But the Pakatan supports “shoot” back by reminding us UMNO had “secret talks” with PAS on 9 March 2008, only hours after the results of 12th general election were announced. The aim of the talks they remind us was to invite PAS to join a coalition government thus foiling Pakatan from taking over Selangor.

Talk to the politicians and they will tell you they play politics to get the power needed to bring good the to the people and and country. Nothing wrong with that they say as long as there’s no abuse of power.

Fine. But the fact is the political temperature is still high nearly one year after the 8 March elections. In Perak, it’s clear there’s no end game insight. The political crisis is set to prolong. The BN and PR are both involved in “manoeuvres ” and “counter manoeuvres’. It has gone to the courts. The legal battle will take a very long time before the winners emerge.

Some folks are saying the situation we are now is the result of the “absence” of clear cut winners at the 8 March elections. They say it’s important for one party to get a big mandate to prevent it from being “disturbed” by the other party.

But others say a party with too big a mandate is open to “dictatorship”’, bull dozing their way without taking consideration of opposing views of the rakyat, what so ever. Hence the need for a check and balance situation. That’s the message the people sent via the ballot boxes on 8 March.They returned the BN to power but with a much stronger opposition in parliament. And at state level, they wanted a change in Penang, Kedah, Perak and Selangor while maintaining their faith with PAS in Kelantan.

Agree or disagree it was the choice of the people. The people’s verdict must be respected. Always. Politicians especially those who missed the boat will just have to wait for the next election to prove they are a better choice. Mean time work hard. Keep clean and be and honest. Speaking of which, are there clean and honest politicians? Some people say politics is dirty. But some argue saying humans are the ones dirty. So I ask again… are there clean, honest politicians? Yes there are. Many or not many? I don’t know. But in the words of an old friend of mine, of course politicians play politics. They are politicians. You don’t expect them to play football do you? [Politicians Play Politics, Footballers Play Football Sin Chew Jit Poh ]

REPUBLICANS WITH MALAYSIAKINI: Political suicide

Political
Suicide

by Brad Woodhouse

chicagotribune.com
29 jan 2009

While the House of Representatives passed the economic recovery package Wed. evening by a wide margin, scoring a major victory for American workers and families and a beleaguered American economy, they did so without a single Republican vote.

Republicans appear to have learned nothing from the message sent to all of our elected officials in the most recent election that it's time to set partisan games, politics and ideology aside and work for bold solutions to the daunting challenges facing the American people. Rather than address the most severe economic crisis America has faced in a generation, Republicans retreated to the partisan games and failed policies of the past eight years, which cost them dearly in the last two elections. In turning their backs on the American people during a time of historic economic crisis to score cheap political points, Republicans in the House at worst may have committed political suicide and best proved their irrelevance to the process.

[Political suicide
Chicago Tribune, United States]

NUTTY FEELING with MALAYSIAKINI: politics and pop culture

Another round to Pakatan Rakyat. Wahid is now a man representing a smaller state constituency of Wakaf Mempelam and a bigger parlimentary of Kuala Terengganu. Lets share with Malaysiakini, if political music has been blended well into some form of pop culture.

2. Thats the beauty of the whole thing. Politic is really entertaining to the point that not many is very concerned with strategies to steer Malaysians to a better level. Too much time and effort is poured into this funny pop culture; belittling and discrediting others. Can anybody guess how a videographer shoot to stardom as he curi-curi tangkap video. Lingamgate opens door to stardom!

3. Nutgraph probed into an unintended byproduct of political manoeuvre; perception. Lets read.



Making sense
of politics
and pop culture

By Deborah Loh

POOR Datuk Wan Ahmad Farid Wan Salleh. Much has been made of his looks and demeanour in an election where perception could turn out to mean everything.

As the Barisan Nasional (BN) candidate in the Kuala Terengganu parliamentary by-election, Wan Farid has been advised to smile more and behave less snobbishly. In this semi-urban east coast constituency, people want their elected representative to be friendly, accessible, and to possess the human touch.

Though a local boy, the 46-year-old former lawyer grew up in a privileged family of civil servants. During the campaigning, remarks have been passed that he should wear the kain pelikat (sarong) more when canvassing among the locals. He's also been advised to not be afraid to sit on the floor of homes to show that he is one of them.

Perception problems

Another perception problem Wan Farid faces is his links to outgoing Prime Minister Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi. He was the premier's political secretary for four years, before being appointed senator and made deputy home minister after the March 2008 general election. He has since resigned from both positions to contest in the Kuala Terengganu by-election.

Additionally, it didn't help the BN campaign when former prime minister Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad described Wan Farid as Abdullah's proxy.

Wan Farid also got caught in the web of allegations that Abdullah's cronies were given the contracts to build the Pulau Duyong marine facilities to host the annual Monsoon Cup sailing competition, and the Islamic theme park on Pulau Wan Man

His candidacy has appeared to put BN on the defensive in this campaign. Top leaders including Abdullah and Deputy Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak have been giving one explanation after another on Wan Farid's perceived aloofness, the proxy allegation, and his capabilities as a first-time candidate.

Development gains

Wan Farid's campaign message rides on the BN's development track record. He is positioned as a representative who will be able to help the electorate because of the government machinery behind him.

Najib has also promised that Wan Farid will be reappointed as a deputy minister if he wins this election. The message to voters is that Wan Farid, as a deputy minister, would have better access to federal help than a PAS Member of Parliament (MP).

However, his former ministerial post is being used against him in Pakatan Rakyat ceramah. The opposition alliance has used blogger Raja Petra Kamarudin, who was detained under the Internal Security Act (ISA), to speak against Wan Farid, although it is the home minister who signs detention orders.

"If he wins and becomes deputy home minister again, he will sign orders to detain people like you and me under ISA," Raja Petra told a largely Chinese crowd at a ceramah in Bandar Baru, Pulau Kambing on 9 Jan.

Internal factionalism

Politically, the former senator and deputy home minister has never contested an election, whether at state or parliamentary level

In Umno, Wan Farid is the party's two-term Kuala Terengganu division chief. He won the post uncontested the second time in divisional elections in July 2008. Despite this show of Umno grassroots unity, factionalism within the division has given the opposition PAS leverage to run down his candidacy.

PAS has drawn comparisons between Wan Farid and the previous MP and deputy education minister, Datuk Razali Ismail, whose death in November 2008 forced this by-election. Razali was liked for his efforts to improve education in the state. He beat his PAS contender, the popular Mohamad Sabu, in the 2008 general election by a slim majority of 628 votes.

During the campaign, Wan Farid has been forced to say that as division chief, he never sidelined Razali, who ran for the division's vice-chief post but lost to Wan Farid's brother, Datuk Wan Hisham Wan Salleh.

Thus, the BN's announcement of Wan Farid as their candidate two weeks ahead of nomination day on 6 Jan was seen as a move to give the factions time to cool down and unite.

Wan Farid has denied any internal rivalry and said his early candidacy gave him an edge to know voters better. He will face PAS's Abdul Wahid Endut and independent Azharudin Mamat @ Adam in the 17 Jan polls.

refer for full in Surviving perception The Nut Graph

Beritadarigunung

POLITICS-MALAYSIA: Alarm at Move to Regulate Media

Saturday, November 29, 2008 07:45:46 PM

A government proposal to set up a media council to ‘regulate’ news reporting has alarmed journalists who see it as an attempt to add yet another layer of control over their profession.

Home Minister Syed Hamid Albar who made the announcement early November said that the government intends to establish a national media policy and a regulatory body for the media called the National Media Council.

He said that the policy is being drafted and the foundations for the council are being established. But the proposal seems deliberately vague and civil rights lawyers see it as an attempt to rein in the media which has appeared freer and more exertive after the Mar.8 general election that saw the United Malay National Organisation (UMNO)-led coalition government suffer unprecedented losses.

Mainstream media, much of it owned and controlled by ruling parties or individuals allied with government, have responded to the changed political landscape with critical comments and reporting.

However, this response may be an attempt to retain readership, survive as business enterprises and maintain control over advertising revenue. There is competition from Internet-based media which is more aggressive and beginning to poach on advertisement revenues that have traditionally been a preserve of print media.

"The government is hoping that through a media council it could exert greater control over media contents and keep them from reporting opposition views," said Yap Swee Seng, executive director of SUARAM, a leading rights NGO.

"Fear of losing control is driving them," he told IPS adding that alternative, Internet-based media could also be brought under the "regulation" of the proposed council.

So far the government has not specified what the council is for, its area of authority and who may come under its ambit.

Unlike before, when mainstream media were mere mouthpieces of the Barisan Nasional (National Alliance) coalition and toed the official line diligently, the political changes have encouraged the media to be more critical and demanding that authorities account for their actions.

Although the media is freer all the laws that control and regulate publishing remain in place making the proposal to set up media council "highly suspicious" said a senior editor with a Chinese vernacular daily. He declined to be identified for fear of reprisal.

"During a meeting between editors and the authorities we objected strongly to the media council move," he told IPS referring to a meeting between the two sides in early November.

"We asked the government to repeal all the numerous restrictive laws first before carrying through the media council set-up," he said.

Under current laws all media must obtain a publishing permit which is issued for a year and expires automatically at term end. Permits are issued or withdrawn at the sole discretion of the home minister.

Even a court of law cannot challenge the decision of the minister and journalists can be jailed for a mandatory one year for publishing "false" news. "It is a catch all phrase that hangs like a sword of Damocles over our heads," another editor said.

The group chief editor of ‘The Star’ daily, Wong Chun Wai, spoke up in his blog against the media council saying there were "too many stringent laws governing the press and certainly we do not need any (new) regulatory body’’. He said if the proposed media council body takes off it should consist not of politicians but editors, publishers, ministry officials and representatives from NGOs. Some opposition lawmakers have called for an "independent high-powered Media Council" that would promote free and responsible reporting with the powers to expose and punish irresponsible reporting.

They said such a council could curb race and religion based hate reporting that is on the rise and practised by several government-owned daily newspapers and television stations.

"On one side the media is much freer but on the other hand some media is abusing the freedom to create rift among the races," said Yap. "It is a complex issue and needs to be well researched." Others, including bloggers and even former premier Dr Mahathir Mohamed, a prominent blogger now, are opposed to the idea.

A media council should not be sprung on the profession without extensive consultations with all stake holders, said Gayathry Venkiteswaran executive director of the Centre for Independent Journalism.

"The authorities must first review and repeal regulations and procedures that restrict media freedom and the public’s access to information," she said in a statement. She said the Printing Presses and Publications Act, the Official Secrets Act and the Sedition Act as laws that were outdated and irrelevant in a democratic society. "The government should set up a parliamentary select committee on the media to discuss press freedom and media law reform," Wong Chin Huat, a Monash University academic and political activist told IPS.

"The select committee can collect public feedback as well as consult civil society members to reflect the views of all the stakeholders," he said urging the media fraternity to stand united against any new "control" mechanism.

"A thorough and open review of all the laws and policies that govern media is also urgently needed," he said. (Baradan Kuppusamy)

POLITICS-MALAYSIA: Alarm at Move to Regulate Media
Mindanao Examiner, Philippines

POLITICS: An east africa perspective

Jerry Okungu

BEING dominant economically and numerically is not the same as having the ability to rule a country. If that were the case, the Baganda would have ruled Uganda from independence to this day. If that were so, the economically powerful Chaga tribe of Tanganyika would have ruled Tanganyika and subsequently Tanzania rather than Julius Nyerere.

Political leadership requires more than numbers. If it were not so, Barack Obama would today not be the president-elect of the United States of America despite his coming from the minority African-Americans.

These examples should warn William Ruto of Kenya and the Rift Valley tribe to tread carefully. Let him remember that the reason Kenyans accepted Moi in 1978 and tolerated him for 24 years, was partly because he was from a minority tribe. Had he posed a threat to the Kenyatta regime due to his tribe’s numerical strength, the cabal around the old man would not have allowed him near the seat of power.

Because of this apparent ineffectiveness, the powers that be preferred him to Jaramogi Oginga Odinga who hailed from the second-largest tribe after the Kikuyus at that time. In Kenyan politics, the system is capable of isolating a political leader for as long as it takes until he burns out.

In 1966, Jomo Kenyatta began a systematic process of isolating Jaramogi Oginga Odinga while at the same time used a few sycophants from the community to placate the region.

When it did not work three years later, he banned the community’s political party, detained its leaders and boycotted the region for the rest of his life. He died nine years later without setting foot in Nyanza. With that decision, all physical development in the region came to a halt.

Between 1978 and 2002 when Moi ruled Kenya with an iron hand, he isolated two of the most populous regions; Nyanza and Central Province due to their opposition politics. For all those years, Moi could pick sycophants from those regions and rule Kenya. Even during the multiparty era between 1992 when Nyanza and the Central Province repeatedly voted against Moi; he still managed a majority.

One would argue that Kenyatta and Moi did what they did due to the one-party state that existed for the better part of the first 30 years of independence. However, there is a possibility that banking too much on numerical strength in a society where ideological politics is rare; chances are that firebrand oppositionists such as Mrema of Tanzania tend to burn out sooner rather than later.

Politics in Africa is the politics of cunning, intrigue and bribery. It is the politics that is akin to urban guerrilla warfare. You never see the enemy yet you feel his might.

In Africa, more so in Kenya; we practise the politics of the stomach. When our neighbour is appointed a minister in the cabinet; outwardly we congratulate her for her appointment yet when we go home; we pray for her demise.

The truth comes out when she actually dies and neighbours see us fighting for her vacant position! That is how genuine our grief is when our important neighbour dies.

Right now, the rumbles in the Party of National Unity and the Orange Democratic Movement (ODM) would, under normal circumstances, call for a reshuffle in the government bearing in mind that a quarrelling government cannot deliver services to the people no matter how much they shout about it at public rallies.

If it were in a disciplined political system like Israel, Britain, France or the United States, ministers that have differed with their parties would have quit their offices and possibly triggered fresh elections.

However, in Kenya, belligerent members of the government would eat their cake and want to have it at the same time until they are pushed out. When finally they are shown the door, they retreat to their tribal cocoons claiming that their communities are being finished.

They are blind even to the recent examples set in South Africa when cabinet ministers resigned when they differed with the African National Congress over Mbeki’s sacking.

One may argue that the era of Moi and Kenyatta is long gone. That may be so, but the reality is that the current crop of politicians were also schooled in the art of politics by the same presidents. They may not today detain or murder like during the past regime, but the truth is; the art of warfare is still intact.

Political leadership in Africa requires more than numbers
New Vision, Uganda

Party Feud Grips Malaysian Politics

KUALA LUMPUR: A new generation of leaders in Malaysia is fighting for control of the ruling party--in disarray since heavy election losses--with the premier's son-in-law battling his predecessor's son.

The successors of current leader Abdullah Ahmad Badawi and former premier Mahathir Mohamad are shaping up to continue hostilities that have raged between the two veterans for the past few years.

After disastrous election results in March, Abdullah has been forced to stand down early next year, unleashing an unprecedented contest for top posts in the United Malays National Organisation (UMNO).

Drawing intense interest is the tussle for the influential role of youth wing chief--a nurturing ground for future leaders.

Abdullah's son-in-law is pitted against Mahathir's son, in a fight that could determine which of the rival clans will control Malaysia's future.

The two patriarchs have had a very public falling-out since the 2003 leadership handover, and Mahathir's constant sniping is one of the major factors behind Abdullah's impending departure.

"It is obvious that the person who wins will determine whether the party's future will be more aligned to Abdullah or Mahathir, as they have each got their favourite proxy in the race," said Tricia Yeoh from the Centre for Public Policy Studies.

Mukhriz Mahathir, a sophisticated 44-year-old businessman, is the front-runner for the youth chief job.

His father will forever be remembered as the man whose two-decade rule brought prosperity to Malaysia, transforming a tropical backwater into one of Southeast Asia's most prosperous nations.

But Mukhriz says he is his own man and is looking to reform the youth movement, which along with the ruling party has lost much support and credibility over the years.

"One of the reasons we were rejected in the last general elections and recent by-elections was the perception that we misuse, worse still abuse, our positions in government for political purposes," he told AFP.

"So I want an arm's-length relationship between the party and the government."

The UMNO-led coalition, which has run Malaysia since independence in 1957, suffered its worst-ever setback in March elections, losing five states and a third of parliamentary seats--effectively ending Abdullah's career.

Abdullah had been criticised as weak and ineffective, but many Malaysians believe a major factor in his downfall was the antics of his 32-year-old son-in-law Khairy Jamaluddin.

The Oxford-educated Khairy was an aide to Abdullah before marrying the boss's daughter in 2001, sending him on a meteoric rise that landed him the deputy youth chief position in 2004.

Eloquent and expensively dressed, Khairy cuts an impressive figure but his naked ambition and alleged influence with his father-in-law have seen him vilified on political websites and in water-cooler gossip.

Mahathir has accused Abdullah of pandering to the demands of Khairy, whom he said was influencing government policy, contracts and appointments--charges he denies.

"I've gotten used to it. As far as I'm concerned, nobody has substantiated any of this innuendo with any facts or evidence, I have consistently denied it but people persist on perpetuating this perception," Khairy told AFP.

Khairy, who also has big reform plans for UMNO youth, says his reputation has been unfairly smeared.

"I'm not merely up against Mukhriz. There looms behind him someone, something, much larger. That is exactly what I'm up against," he said.

"Mahathir has... openly campaigned for Mukhriz, has repeatedly criticised and denigrated me and who am I when compared to Mahathir? He is a statesman and a PM of 22 years and I'm just starting off in politics."

With Abdullah almost out of the picture, Khairy's star may be fading but analysts say that in the arcane business of UMNO internal politics, Mukhriz cannot yet count on victory.

"But whatever the outcome, it will finally determine whether Mahathir or Abdullah has the last say," said Yeoh. (AFP)

MySinchew 2008.11.16

Political Orienteering

Laura Drake and Andrew Potter, The Ottawa Citizen

Published: Saturday, September 27, 2008

Way back in 1789, when France was fruitlessly trying to avoid an American-style revolution, the powers-that-were decided to convene the French Estates-General for the first time in more than a century to try to sort their problems out.

For ease of seating the near-600 representatives of the Estates-General, those who generally favoured state intervention sat on the right, while those who thought the state should keep their noses out of people's business sat on the left. And thus, the labels left-wing and right-wing were born.

Though the definitions of the two wings have essentially flipped since their invention, the popularity of the labels has endured, possibly since the word 'nut' attaches so neatly to the end of both.

However, given that the concept of left- and right-wing stretch back to the French Revolution, it's not surprising that they came to be viewed as anachronistic. Eventually, political scientists started musing that a simple left-right divide based solely on economic preferences unfairly ignored the entire social dimension of politics. After all, Joseph Stalin and Gandhi were both collectivists, but they probably wouldn't have gotten along had they run into one another at a pool party.

Thus, the political compass was born. The traditional left-right economic line was bisected with a north-south social line. Early versions of the political compass test presented in textbooks and political papers had five or 10 questions that quiz-takers self-scored then placed themselves on the grid appropriately. Presumably, this was an exercise undertaken mostly by political science undergrads putting off doing a paper.

But then the Internet took off, and around 2001, a political journalist hooked up with a social history professor, made a version with around 60 questions, and bought the domain name politicalcompass.org.

The online version of the test divides questions into six subsets: views on your country and the world, the economy, personal social values, wider society, religion and sex. In each, respondents are asked to consider propositions to which they can strongly agree, agree, disagree, or strongly disagree. The end result places the respondent on a grid with the economic left and right along the x-axis, and social authoritarianism and libertarianism on the y-axis.

With the Canadian election in full swing, The Citizen Intelligence Unit invited the major party leaders to take five minutes and fill out the online quiz. All declined, though the Bloc Québécois did fill out the survey from the party's point of view.

Undeterred, we combed through the Liberal, Conservative and NDP platforms, policies and texts of speeches to answer the test for them. This, undoubtedly, was an inexact art. Whenever possible, the questions were answered based on the party's professed ideology -- even where recent actions would seem to betray party doctrine.

Ultimately, our assessments landed all parties but the Conservatives in the left wing/libertarian quadrant, though to varying degrees. The Conservatives ended up on the right wing side of the economic scale, with a slightly authoritarian bent.

source: Political Orienteering
Ottawa Citizen, Canada

The Business of Politics

Talk about mixing business and politics; they’re practically married now. As the debate surrounding the federal government’s proposed $700 billion bailout rages, it is interesting to note who’s in the loop.

Each of the two presidential candidates have taken time during campaign stops and interviews to discuss their views and perspectives on the crisis in the financial services industry. We’re not here to debate who’s right and who’s wrong.

What’s fascinating is that both candidates were at the White House yesterday in the room with Congressional leaders and others, debating and negotiating their way to what -- as of this morning -- is a stalemate.

Neither candidate is a member of a banking- or financial services-related committee in the Senate. Neither has a background in the financial services industry. Their participation in the meeting was solely due to their candidacies for president.

That leads to this question: To what extent should they be involved in crafting a bailout program for the banking industry, outside of incorporating their solutions into their platforms?

source: The Business of Politics
BankInnovation.net, NY