Shin Leong is an honest person. I’ve had the pleasure to know him and work with him during the last elections. A man whose passion is unquestionable. His energy during the last elections was inspiring.

Politics, unfortunately, comes with the emotional. And when one is seen to have broken the ‘golden rule’ (at least to some segments), in this case that of not voting for the incumbent no matter what, forgiveness then becomes a very hard thing to receive.

Still, the party will have to get through this. And one way to do so would be to be more active. The main issues right now which Singaporeans are concerned with are bread and butter issues. The WP should engage these more, and do so more vigorously. After all, they are the WORKERS’ Party, are they not?

I believe that this issue is not a big one among heartlanders – yet. It will only be so if the PAP, through the mainstream media, plays it up. Good thing for the WP is that the next elections is not going to be called anytime soon, in my opinion.

There are mainly two issues which is preventing the PAP from calling for an election – one, the rising cost of living & the income gap, and two, ministers’ salaries are going to be increases for the 3rd time this year. Calling for an election at such times will be political suicide indeed.

So, the WP has time to work on this.

The question is: Will it continue to sit back and do only the minimal? If they do, then sadly, Shin Leong and the WP will not get anywhere at the next elections.

Just my two cents.

I think the general sentiment that “opposition politicians must vote for opposition MPs if given the opportunity” is quite misplaced.

The Opposition is seen as monolithic — clearly untrue. It is pertinent to remember that YSL was WP whereas the opposition candidate in his ward was SDP. Absent any formal ties between the WP and the SDP (e.g. a shared electoral platform), there is no basis for the assumption that ’support for one opposition party implies support for all the opposition parties’.

Such blind support does not advance *any* opposition party’s aim of providing a viable political alternative to the PAP. “Pro-opposition” becomes watered down to “anti-PAP”, so that the legitimacy of the opposition is parasitic on (one’s dissatisfaction with) the PAP. Surely any credible vote for an opposition party should be based on some independent ground (e.g. a more appealing candidate), and not just because “it is the Opposition, and not the PAP”.

Neither do I think that a WP member necessarily must vote for a WP candidate. Simply put, an election vote = candidate + cause. We vote on the basis of the candidate’s credentials, personality, likeability etc., and on the basis of the political cause he represents (his electoral platform). If a WP member votes for a PAP candidate, we could accuse him of hypocrisy only if he voted that way because he really secretly believed in the PAP’s cause, or rejected the WP’s cause. But he could just as well have voted that way because he disliked the WP candidate’s personality, or background, or credentials, etc. If so, then we might charge WP for being disunited, but not for being hypocritical.

@ la nausee –

I broadly agree with the first half of your comment, but not the second half / last one-third (including your too-neat causal/motivation chain of “election vote = candidate + cause”).

I agree with Sylvia Lim that the WP (and any other political party for that matter) would expect its members to vote for his/her own party’s candidate(s).
My agreement is premised on how a party should already have consensus on supporting every fellow party member who runs – because the candidates _should_ have already been vetted by the party CEC or whatever internal process or procedure it undergoes. This shows institutional unity, which every party should have, as well as proper organisational philosophy and processes.

Sylvia Lim only said ‘member’. Let’s say she meant it in its most basic meaning. Then what would it mean if you are not just an ordinary card-carrying member, but an electoral candidate as well as a CEC member? Wouldn’t the responsibility of ensuring that the candidate

YSL’s actions were odd in a couple of ways:

1) In his blog statement that:
“The interesting question perhaps would be, if a WP candidate is to offer himself/ herself for election in the constituency I reside, will I vote for this WP candidate? Partisan considerations will certainly weigh heavily in my considerations. Having said that, ultimately this WP candidate has to convince me that he/ she has what it take to better serve the interests of our country and the constituents to win my vote.”

First, the minute detail:
Scenario A – if YSL resides in a particular constituency with this hypothetical WP candidate, are we to assume that it’s an SMC? He did write ‘himself/herself’. In which case, can we assume that, erm, the candidate would not be YSL himself? (haha)
Scenario B – what happens if it’s a GRC? Do we need to assess the suitability of every single candidate in the team? And will YSL be part of it?

Man, this is getting convoluted. My basic point here is: in what capacity or context did he have in mind for himself when he wrote that last paragraph of his post? Did he consider any scenarios?

A problem with his statement is that it is vague enough to be placed in several different contexts.

Now, the more general points:
So is there even that institutional process I mentioned earlier? And if so, was he just speaking out of turn and trying to make a general point?
Or, is there _no_ institutional process that already determines party consensus and unity on suitable candidates? If this is the case, it therefore allows him to vote for anyone he decides to, which gives a fuller contextual meaning to his statement above.

If the latter is true, then YSL and the WP are really in trouble. I would really like to listen to a conversation between Sylvia Lim and YSL about this, if they have it!

2) I respect his reasons for voting who he voted for. I even understand them on a certain level. But at the same time, I feel there was no need for such voluntary disclosure.

Lastly. I really wonder what he’d hoped to gain from the disclosure – for himself, his party, or both. Or maybe the WP has some ‘grand strategy’ I’m unaware of. (But somehow – to be brutally honest – i doubt it.)

(Apologies to all if my comment doesn’t make sense, or if I’m analysing it to death…it’s been a long day)

Andrew, I may respond to you another time. Thanks for letting us know (or reminding us) that you were a WP member.

On my part, full disclosure as well:
I assisted the WP Aljunied GRC team and James Gomez in particular during GE2006. I was also his guest blogger during that time. However I have never been a member of WP or any other political party.
(hardly controversial compared to YSL’s, eh?)

Looks like a damage-control article to salvage whatever little bit of credibility that
is left?

To me, this whole saga says one thing very clearly, i.e. it reflects that the Workers’
Party is very disorganised,

And who is responsible for organising the party? The Organising Secretary?

This speaks volumes. There is no need to dwell into the details.

In the Army, they called it: COCKUP!

Yaw Shin Leong must resign, no ifs and buts. Otherwise, WP will lose its credibility and support.

Lets just remember YSL for his LAME HONESTY if there is indeed no ulterior motive for this dumb revelation.

PAP is all smiles now that WP has a member of such calibre who is none other than its organising secretary. IRONIC in every sense UNLESS YSL is a mole.

I totally agrees with Sylvia view that he’s free to make his choice and that should the constituency has a WP canididate, He should vote for his comrade.
He must be free to make his choice otherwise there is no difference to the ruling party whip.

In this instance, a void vote by him would have been an ideal choice

[...] Voting for the Opposition – The Online Citizen: Political suicide or political maturity? [...]

<>

I find the question put forth by the person above rhetorical and meaningless. It only seeks to tarnish the oppositionists who adopt a different stance from WP. Singaporeans are not easily fooled by such sweeping statement.

I was refering to the remark by Bernard Chen:

Bernard Chen, a WP Youth Wing member, agrees. “The question is: Do Singaporeans prefer an opposition that opposes just for the sake of opposing, seeking to rally the people around an agenda that is based on hatred for the incumbent, or rather a mature and responsible opposition that has the interests of Singaporeans at the core of its agenda?”

I agree he has a right to do what he did at GE’06 and being Honest. But I do not think the electorate is forgiving. IF, I were WP, I would not field him in the next GE. I feel he has just committed his own political suicide with a splattering of his sillyness affecting WP just a tad. I hope we will MOVE ON! Don’t let the bogeyman in, focus on our real issues with the PAP.

There some much talk of changing Gahmen and yet still vote for PAP. This is very sad state of mind. Cant you make your vote invalid? Too honest so still have to rely on PAP right????

May I just come in to say that I fully concur with Roderick.

And have nothing fresh to add.

patriot.

The years of propaganda and indoctrination have made a huge impact on the Singaporean persona. Quality candidates, educational qualifications, track record, credibility, these have been driven into our brains by the MSM & PAP. It would seem that Yaw is now imbued by these same PAP values even though he is the OS for an opposition party. Or has the WP he subscribed to adopted the same PAP values? Some how, we have forgotten that IQ does not equate to EQ.

I will support even the slipper man just to confront pap. We must make known our agenda, not sway by other feel good factor.

There may be a logic, at least in WP mindset, in the way YSL voted.

My feeling is that given WP’s craving to be “credible”, I am guessing what is in the mind of YSL for voting for PAP over SDP is to demonstrate the WP “non-radical”-ness. Hence, it may have been YSL calculation to reveal his voting action. The part about his claim of facing dilemma if the PAP was opposing his own party was largely academic. After all the argument was largely hypothetical. I believe if it was a case of his party standing against PAP he would not have been so candid.

You see his voting action fits into a pattern where they want to capture the wavering PAP supporters. What better way of assuring the wavering PAP supporters the “non-radical”-ness of WP than by not voting for the SDP and make a song and dance about it?

At the same time it wants to assure the non-partisan electorates that when voting for the WP you are indeed getting people who cling on to lofty ideas that the PAP don’t possess. In simple term the WP thinks about the nation and the PAP thinks only about wining for wining sake!

You could say YSL is playing a very cunning game. A kind of play by the rules now and then change the rule when come to power. Will it work?

Maybe possibly it will be a strategy to win the hearts of a bunch of, as Mollymeek (http://mollymeek.livejournal.com/189769.html) described best as “wishy-washy” type electorates, characterised most starkly in mindsets similar to those exhibited by Littlespeck, Aaron “Here ye”, etc.

Will the WP types be able to withstand a real wacking by the PAP, when the PAP really feel threatened and start playing dirty games? I doubt it. Wishy washy people are generally naive and will crumble. Contrast with the SDP type that are willing to fight on even if the cause seemed hopeless and impossible.

Will the WP types be good for Singapore if they came to power? My feeling is no. The problem with “Wishy Washy” type characters is that when it come to the crunch it will be paralysed with indecision!

As for this notion of “opposition for opposition” sake being a bad thing. It is kind of strange notion. Even in so-called highly objective field of study like Science, the technique of “opposition for opposition” sake is a valuable tool for determining if a theory is valid.

In politics “opposition-for-opposition” is vital as a way of ensuring checks and showing up flaws in policies. Of course the PAP types will say opposition for opposition sake is bad. That’s because the PAP types are a bunch of thin skin people who wants power but also want to be save face!

If you are not THE viable opposition party waiting in the wings to take over the goverment, then why and what are you in opposition for? To vote for the current party in power? :)

Hey, Roderick. Nice to see you here. :) I don’t believe that there is a ‘grand strategy’ which required Shin Leong to make such a revelation. If there was, I think it’s a pretty risky strategy. Nah, I don’t think there was.

Some have said that the WP is trying to win over PAP supporters by their “responsible” and “moderate” position. Indeed, if you’re going to win any seats or constituencies, you’ll need that extra 5 to 10% of people crossing over from supporting the PAP to supporting you.

But being seen as too pro-PAP risks losing the support of your current supporters.

So, while WP’s position may win them some PAP supporters, it may also lose them some present WP supporters. In the end, they may end up with a zero sum gain. You win 5% support, and lose 5% support as well. Back to square one.

I don’t know but I myself am confused by what the WP is trying to do. Right now, I have no clue what their philosophy is – except to continously hear them say they want to be or are a “responsible party”.

Honestly, I don’t see being quiet and inactive as being necessarily “responsible”. It could very well be just the opposite.

Regards,
Andrew Loh

Sometimes successful organizations breed successful individuals, successful governments breed successful MPs & successful projects & stories via the government link media . All opposition parties don’t have this advantage and luxury, and it is difficult to measure them against the PAP candidates. What has Dr Teo done before the elections that was personally achieved other than endorsed by the PAP? I am unaware. Perhaps someone can enlighten me.

All said, YSL thus, as an organizing secretary for the WP, it is not strategic and is simply poor PR for his own party and all opposition parties, and playing to the media. From a strategic perspective as organizing secretary, what has he to gain or the party to gain? If it is nothing than this action is stupid and careless. If it was to show his personal ability to view issues objectivity and a performance of maturity, then the intent is self interest and not the interest of the concept of the opposition in a democracy; more importantly, what the WP and all opposition parties had been fighting for the last decade despite all obstacles thrown at it.

Beware! From his public disclosure I think he is obviously a mole that must be removed as quickly as possible before he does more damage to the WP. He has obviously been furtively planted there by sinister camps to discredit and disrupt the opposition cause.
Pwo

If this happened in the PAP, you can be sure the ‘traitor’ would be sacked!

Remember, LKY passed a parliamentary law that required MPs who crossed the floor to the Opposition bench would have to resign from PAP and their seats and vacate them for by-election.

Andrew Low noted:

Some have said that the WP is trying to win over PAP supporters by their “responsible” and “moderate” position. Indeed, if you’re going to win any seats or constituencies, you’ll need that extra 5 to 10% of people crossing over from supporting the PAP to supporting you.

He then adds:

So, while WP’s position may win them some PAP supporters, it may also lose them some present WP supporters. In the end, they may end up with a zero sum gain. You win 5% support, and lose 5% support as well. Back to square one.

On face value this may be true. The situation is that I suspect, in the thinking of the leadership is that they will not loose the 5% support. After all, if they didn’t stay with the WP where will they go? The SDA is dead. The NSP is probably no different in terms of cautiousness to the WP. The SDP may be too much for the defectors to stomach. The Reform Party may still be too much like the SDP.

In the next election, it is unlikely there will be a three-way fight. So the WP’s leadership calculation is that if people wanted opposition representation, the choice is WP and no other to choose from.

Tan Ah Kow,

I wouldn’t be too sure of that – that the WP would not lose their current level of support. Remember that they did relatively well in the last elections because obviously some PAP supporters voted for them and also other who might have supported other opposition parties in the past.

There is still a possibility that those PAP supporters who voted for the WP in 2006 might be bought back to vote for the PAP. I expect the PAP to go even further in the next elections in terms of handouts. (I suspect that is one reason why they’re accumulating so much money – from GIC/Temasek to Town Councils).

But in truth, it’s not about what the PAP does totally. It’s more of what the WP does and offer the people. Right now, at best the WP is seen as a “safe” party. But will that make more people cross the line and support them?

I don’t think so.

While WP may lose some of its supporters I believed its a very well calculated game, considering all factors and weighing all the costs. I believed the overall could be a positive net gain for WP, this is definetly a well thought out strategy, while they cant be bothered with all the critical comments cos they knw its a small price to pay in order to win, thts WP, ths YSL!!!

The last election, I voted for the ’suicide team’ WP , to register my unhappiness of the PAP govt.

It was more of a protest vote against PAP rather than a vote for opposition.

Since then, I regretted my vote to the WP, based on SL and LTK performance in the parliament.

Now that Yaw has revealed his vote to a PAP candidate and his reasoning, I shall not cast a vote in favour of him or his party for the next election.

I would simply spoil my vote, believe it will still serve my aim of showing displeasure to the PAP Govt.

Be careful, Yaw and WP, you guys might lose your election deposit the next time round, the 33 plus % garnered in last AMK GRC election might drop with more percentage going to spoilt votes instead.

Andrew,

The issue I was pointing out is not what you and I think about the WP support base. I was SUGGESTING that the thinking in the WP leadership is that gaining wavering PAP support is most important and that is the only way forward. The point here is my believe is that is what is in the mind of the leadership. I accept I may be guessing but the pattern of statements made by the leadership:

(a) Low’s oblique endorsement of PAP’s concept of “credibility”

(b) Sylvia’s endorsement of PAP’s propaganda about the soundness of the judiciary when it is clearly far from that;

(c) Now YSL voting pattern.

All seemed to be pointer to a desperation to be acceptable to electorate on PAP term.

I do not disagree with your assessment but I don’t get the sense that is what the leadership of the WP is actually taking on board what people such as you are saying.

WP now in damage control mode? If every opposition member can anyhow vote in their opponents… it will spell the end of the Opposition in Singapore. .

[...] Secretary revealing that he voted for the PAP, I did a report for The Online Citizen titled, “Political suicide or political maturity?”. I believe that I was fair and balanced in that report, including as many of the comments and [...]

If WP dont sack YSL from the party will be like keeping a time bomb with them. You never know when it is going to explode new issues out from him again. Can LTK take the risk? He has been flak for his poor response in the MSK case when PM ask him a question. He appears to be indecisive, but now can he afford to be in this mind frame again? His WP party may see defections to other parties like Reform Party if nothing is seen done to YSL double headed actions.

My apology in advance if I sounded harsh here. By not taking any action against Yaw, WP leadership did more damage to their own party credibility and their brand of providing alternatives to us Singaporeans.

Sadly, based on their inaction or lack of affirmative action, the so called LEADERSHIP quality in LTK has now been questioned by me.

In my eyes now, LTK is not a LEADER but only an efficient Town Council Estate Manager in Hougang ONLY, SL is no LEADER also but a proficient Poly Lecturer that is good in theory only…… sort of NATO type!

Just go over to the P65 website and read what will be the action taken by Dr Lam if Yaw will to be his party cadre…… effectively Yaw will be shown the way to the door immediately, if Dr Lam has his way.

Time to act, WP!

Or you might not only destroy your own party credibility but also bring down the others opposition party in a worst case scenerio as well.

I think Yaw had done right by voting the right person. it is immature for the next person who criticise him for being a traitor or whatever name.

It is the right thing to vote someone whom he feel can take care of his ward better and someone who is credible enough to represent the citizens in Parliament.

If the opposition is good enough in that ward, then the result will be shown by the votes they receive.

I have more respect for WP after seeing this post. But to be seen as credible, they will need to work really hard…

Adrian Khiat
http://akhiat.blogpspot.com

Dear Adrain,

Given you, who will you vote for?

Yaw and his WP team for AMK GRC?

Get real, Yaw will never ever able to beat the PAP Team with PM Lee in it, based on his own reasoning.

Then why need to contest in the first place?

Unless you Adrain like to make an honest assessment on why 33% plus citizens residing in AMK GRC voted for Yaw and his WP team?

Credibility? Ability? Courageous? Stupidity?

On whose part? Candidates or Citizens?

WP TEAM
Abdul Salim Bin Harun
Gopal Krishnan
Han Su May
Lee Wai Leng
Tan Kian Hwee Melvin
Yaw Shin Leong

PAP TEAM
Inderjit Singh
Lam Pin Min
Lee Bee Wah
Lee Hsien Loong
Sadasivan Balaji
Wee Siew Kim

Quote from ELECTRIC NEWS – May 17, 2008:

Dr Teo, Mayor of the North West district, had known that WP candidate Yaw Shin Leong was going to vote for him, even before Nomination Day in the 2006 General Election (GE).

When The New Paper called him yesterday to find out if he knew about Mr Yaw’s vote, Dr Teo replied matter-of-factly: ‘He told me himself, when I visited him at a block visit before the GE that he and his mother were going to vote for me.’

Unquote.

That was a couple of weeks before nomination day. The fact remains that Yaw Shin Leong had already decided for himself and for his mother to vote for Dr Teo Ho Ping two weeks before Nomination Day.

How did Yaw Shin Leong know that Mr Ling How Doong or Dr Teo Ho Ping was going to contest at Bt Panjang SMC in the first place?

Isn’t it quite clear to all of us that at that point in time, his comparison between Mr Ling How Doong and Dr Teo Ho Ping could not have arisen yet?

Therefore, Yaw Shin Leong’s explanation for voting for the PAP cannot stand.

COI,

If what you said is true, you just open a can of worms for WP. YSL is none other than a [deleted by moderator] PAP Mole. He is out to destroy WP and opposition. To discredit and disarray the opposition by claiming PAPpies MP is the best choice before he even know SDP Mr Ling is standing against him. Now that more cat is out of the bag, I am watching what WP and the committee is handling the issue of YSL greatest stupidity. A non-action by WP is going to be a political disavantage to them in the long term. A big liabilites they are going to bear for the next election. PAP must be having a good laugh and enjoying free publicity with a good no. of letters to ST from ball carrying dogs claiming YSL is doing right. Bad day for the opposition.

FG

Guys give it a rest. This topic has been hotly debated for more than the past week already.. Let everyone take a break. :D

SDP had said it would field its chairman Ling How Doong in Bukit Panjang on as early as March 20.

———————————

Holland-Bukit Timah likely to get woman PAP candidate
Holland-Bukit Timah likely to get woman PAP candidate

Residents have expressed a wish for a female MP in the all-male MP GRC

By Sim Chi Yin
March 20, 2006
The Straits Times

………………………………….

The Singapore Democratic Party has said it will field its chairman
Ling How Doong in Bukit Panjang and indicated interest in
Holland-Bukit Timah, but has not named candidates for the GRC.

Yaw Shin Leong’s revelation came at a time when Low Thia Kiang’s performance has been called into question. Is this a coincidence or an opportune time to discredit as well as weaken Low and WP?

Failure to be decisive on this issue will be WP’s achilles’ heel and political baggage. ACT NOW!

YAW SHIN LEONG CANNOT REMAIN IN WP. Lets challenge him to stand as an independent candidate in the next GE.

That Marcus Yap is… gone case.
This is not the conduct of a mature politician.
If he one day becomes MP…
“Right or wrong, I support WP! I do right, WP must vote me!”

To Marcus and the likes: You people are dangerous.

There is nothing wrong Yaw votes for Teo. Ling How Doong himself was with Dr Chee when they kicked the opposition chairman out. How can he expect opposition members or even myself to vote for him? If I were to vote, I’d also not vote for Ling.
—————————————————————————
“kingfisher on May 22nd, 2008 10.28 pm If this happened in the PAP, you can be sure the ‘traitor’ would be sacked!

Remember, LKY passed a parliamentary law that required MPs who crossed the floor to the Opposition bench would have to resign from PAP and their seats and vacate them for by-election.”
—————————————————————————

To Kingfisher’s kinda thinking…

Nosense… When has Yaw become PAP or a MP???

Traitor for a good course is never a traitor. Voting in a rubbish is a traitor to the state. I really hate this sort of nosensical party politics. It’s going to drive Singapore to the hellhole.

Sigh… power struggle in such manner… How can Singapore not be finish in time?

33% vote for WP because most people know that PAP will win for sure. They know they can vote for the opposition not worrying that PAP will lose. Some just wants to give WP some encouragement with a better result and some vote just for the sake of opposing. But ultimately, to vote is to choose the person you want to represent in Parliament and to serve your ward. I just feel that Yaw did the right thing.

I am probably one of the many Singaporean who hope to see a group of strong opposition being field in an election to give positive contrary views to the ruling party. However, I’m disappointed every election because all opposition parties including WP cannot give us the credible feel. But good to see WP have some very small improvement.

If Yaw is seeing this comment, I hope he will keep it up and do the right thing. I don’t know him but this posting had given me a better feel about WP.

Adrian Khiat
http://akhiat.blogspot.com

I met Yaw and he came across as a sincere yougn man to me.

I came to praise him, not to bury him.
As an up-and-coming aspiring politician, he is dead as a door nail, politically speaking, come GE2011.

Dear Adrian Khiat,

It’s actually quite an ironic thing you said.

I broadly sympathise with YSL’s position on voting, although on balance I disagree with it (but that’s for another time maybe), and I definitely think he was naive in revealing it in the first place.

The ’small improvement’ which gave you a credible ‘feel’ that you referred to was the WP fielding during the last elections right? Because I don’t see how revealing that he voted for the PAP candidate was any improvement!

We should make a difference between the two cases. YSL and the rest of the WP candidates have given, broadly speaking, a more ‘credible feel’ to many s’poreans during the last elections. But to many others including myself who hold a different principle, voting for the incumbent party’s guy was not credible. Or worse, revealing it voluntarily (as far as I know).

If Yaw insists that he has done nothing wrong and wants to put his personal belief above his party’s belief, i would suggest he stand as independence candidate instead of under WP banner. By then, he can says and do whatever he wants and nobody will care.

Even if the SDP, on 20 March 2006, had said that it would field Ling How Doong in Bukit Panjang, it could be confirmed until Nomination Day. There can always be last-minute switch as part of the tactics and strategy. This has always been done by both the PAP as well as the Opposition in the past.

In the same GE 2006, WP had been talking about fielding a team for the Sembawang GRC but it pulled out at the last minute, probably because of its desire to avoid a three-corner fight, as SDP’s had also fielded a team to contest in the Sembawang GRC at the very last minute.

In addition, did the PAP publicly announced that they would field Dr Teo Ho Pin in Bukit Panjang before Nomination Day? Or, was it only privately known to Yaw Shin Leong at that point in time when he was making his decision, two weeks prior to Nomination Day?

Even if Yaw Shin Leong had known before the Nomination Day about the fielding of both Dr Teo Ho Pin (PAP) and Mr Ling How Doong (SDP) at Bukit Panjang, how can he, being a responsible leader in the Opposition, be so reckless in making his decision based on unconfirmed information at such an early stage?

And how did his mother came to know of the information and made the same decision as him, and also conveyed to him her decision at that early stage, during Dr Teo’s visit? Or had he arbitrarily made the decision on behalf of his mother, over-riding his mother’s personal right to vote for whoever she so wished?

No voters can be so sure as to who will stand in which constituency until Nomination Day. Even the Elections Department itself cannot guarantee the accuracy of the information on candidate vis-a-vis constituency until Nomination Day. The only way to confirm the information is on the Nomination Day itself. And as a politician and Organising Secretary of the Workers’ Party, Yaw Shin Leong should be very well versed in this matter, is it not?

I rest my case.

CO.

Correction 1st sentence “… it could be confirmed …” should read as “… it could not be confirmed …”

Let me put Cool Observer’s argument in this manner:

“Even if SDP had known before the Nomination Day about the fielding of Khaw Boon Wan at Sembawang, how can Chee, being a responsible leader in the Opposition, be so reckless in making his decision based on unconfirmed information at such an early stage?”

Sarek, the issue is about 2 things:

1. YSL campaigning as a candiate against PAP while voting for PAP as a voter.

2. YSL would consider voting for PAP even if it’s against his own WP comrade.

What’s wrong with you? What has it got to with Dr. Chee’s fielding strategy or announcement timing.]

You’re making things worse for YSL even if you’re trying to do him a favour.

BBC News: updated at 02:09 GMT, Monday, 2 June 2008:

Fashion king Saint Laurent dies

“Yves Saint Laurent, considered by many as the greatest fashion designer of the 20th Century, has died in Paris at the age of 71. ”

Yaw Shin Leong has the same initials as Yves Saint Laurent = YSL.
This could be a bad omen for Yaw Shin Leong.

The Crow – Bearer of Bad News.

Is like Hilary voting for McCain to be President and not Obama.

Is like Singapore fans cheering for Malaysia in Malaysia Cup. How do we decide what the term fan really means?

Is like supporting the self proclaimed Feminist Mentor in the AWARE saga when one belongs to the old guard fighting against equality.

Is like preaching the importance of and standing as a total vegan to others, whilst be seen exercising the free will during lunchtime, sipping down a bowl of beef noodle soup, upsized.

Is like being a monk, priest or ordained holy man, driving around in a BMW, holding a Prada wallet, buying properties and having a 24/7 personal companion for special “needs”.

Maturity? Yeah Right! zzz

A downright SPY.

Chinese saying;
” Day vigilance ah, night vigilance ah. Home thief very hard vigilance ah!”

Error:
Is like supporting the self proclaimed Feminist Mentor in the AWARE saga when one belongs to the old guard fighting against (INEQUALITY).