Singapore Election Date Set

Today the president in Singapore dissolved parliament and announced the date for the next election, which is set to take place within less than three weeks, on May 6, 2006. The upcoming election will be an important test for the current Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong, as it will be his first election since the son of the former prime minister and founding father Lee Kuan Yew was appointed to his office in August 2004.

It is expected that the ruling party, the People’s Action Party (PAP), will be reelected as it has been since its first election victory in 1959. This year’s election comes amid favorable economic growth, which the ruling party hopes will help it to increase its election result from 75% in the 2001 election. The ruling party hopes an increase in the election result will give Lee Hsien Loong the necessary mandate.

At the present the ruling party holds 84 of the 82 elected seats in parliament and has made it its goal to recover the two seats occupied by a candidate of the Worker’s Party and a candidate of the Singapore Democratic Alliance.

Recently, the ruling PAP has upped the stakes when former Prime Minister Goh Chok Tong announced that wards, which vote for the opposition, would not be eligible to upgrades of public housing. Almost 90% of the population lives in public housing. This was accompanied by cash handouts to individual citizens, officially termed Progress Package, which marks the first time the government has directly offered money to the people before an election. In the past benefits have only been given in form of indirect benefits.

This year also marks a shift in the tactics of the political opposition. In the past opposition parties have stressed their intention of always remaining part of the opposition. This has changed this year as the opposition is more united than ever before and is furthermore expected to contest more than half of the seats. The Worker’s Party, the strongest opposition party under the new leadership of the Sylvia Lim, made this point very clearly in its most recent manifesto: “As a political party, the long-term goal of the Workers’ Party (WP) is to be an alternative government.”

Nevertheless the extremely short election period, the difficulties of the opposition of communicating with its potential voters as well as raising campaign money, and recent announcements that the government will regulate the internet more rigorously during the election will make it an uphill battle for the opposition.

The Lie that Started the Iraq War

The Washington Post (interesting graphic) today revealed that intelligence showed that what has been repeatedly used to assert that there are weapons of mass destructions was only a harmless hydrogen producing truck.

The three-page field report and a 122-page final report three weeks later were stamped "secret" and shelved. Meanwhile, for nearly a year, administration and intelligence officials continued to publicly assert that the trailers were weapons factories.

It seems that someone is shelving the really important information, while revealing selectively misleading news (see my previous post). How can such an important report just be shelved??? To claim that no one looked at the report and especially that the president didn't know about it is either a terribly stupid act or was don on purpose to start the war against the war. I am afraid the latter is more likely!

The Plame Is on Bush

Dubbed the "Leaker-in-Chief" by the Los Angeles Times, President Bush was accused today of having authorized selective leaks concerning weapons of mass destruction. The White House reponse was not a denial but an assertion of the president's right to declassify information. How that is done, however, also seems to be in the hands of the president. Even if it is legally justifiable, the president's selective revelations that may have led to the Plame affair and to the war in Iraq are morally wrong.

I have made the argument before that the President should be impeached, but this time I think we can move the charge from high cimes and misdemeanors to treason.

Why treason?

The arguments in favor of WMD in Iraq led America into a bloody, drawn out conflict with a country that was not at all a danger to the United States. Iraq was stable, very authoritarian, but not a haven for terrorists. Iraq would have been better off without Saddam Hussein but Iraq today would be better off without the daily violence and lawlessness (for example: today's explosion that killed between 40 and 80). Iraq is in such a bad shape, that the American government even pays to get some good stories published. Sad but true. Iraq has also become a haven for terrorists and has increased hatred against the United States.

The war amounts to treason because it betrayed many American lives and threatened the future safety, power, image, and position in the world of the United States of America. It has also led to a negative image of democracy even though a true democracy should safeguard the population from the government.

Therefore I think Bush should be impeached. It is the only moral thing to do. I know it's not realistic but it is the only right thing to do!

Indecision 2006 - Singapore Edition

With apologies to Jon Stewart, I would like to use this forum to present my ideas for an "Indecision 2006 - Singapore Edition":

It's only been a bit more than a year ago when one brave student, called Jamie Han, stood up and asked Lee Kuan Yew about freedom of speech. Lee had this to say:

Well, you have the Internet - put up a website. You know how to put up a website? If you don't, I know a friend who can help you.

Well, what does Senior Minister of State for Information, Communications and the Arts Balaji Sadasivan have to say about free speech during the upcoming election?

There are also some well-known local blogs run by private individuals who have ventured into podcasting. The content of some of these podcasts can be quite entertaining. However, the streaming of explicit political content by individuals during the election period is prohibited under the Election Advertising Regulations. A similar prohibition would apply to the videocasting or video streaming of explicitly political content.

Now, in the past, I have thought that only explicit sex streams were forbidden, but now Mr. Balaji is telling me that explicit politoporn is too. Well, so much for those who claim that porn and politics are two different things.

If President Bush Were Average Joe...

... then he would be like Homer Simpson. Let's think about it: Homer Simpson has the possibility to destroy the atomic plant in which he is working by just pushing a button, the President has a similar button, only that it would destroy much more.

I can imagine Homer saying: "That's a question-I-don't-answer question." But in reality that's what Bush said.

I also can imagine Homer saying this after getting the Freedom House report: "Little print, no pictures." But, d'oh, it was Bush again.

The Good news: The Simpsons will already be on the big screen in 2007.
The Bad news: The next presidential elections are only in 2008.