Originally posted by TooFree:
It is a fact, not just a causal derogatory remarks that most
politicians from the opposition have no prior experience or
credible track records working in the government boards, NGOs or
even MNCs. If the opposition leaders do not even possess resilient
as a strength of character against causually factual comments, then
can we safety entrust our future to them in period of the cyclic
economic recession?
Unfortunately, your facts do not
seem to tally with the profile of those Singaporeans standing as
candidates for the Alternative Parties - as published by AsiaOne - where did you get your
"facts" from ?
Basing an opinion on wrong facts can get you into serious trouble
with those in the Ruling Political Party, and making claims based
on wrong facts can only be callous and derogatory.
Can we trust your judgment that "the opposition leaders do not even posses
resilient as a strength of character against causally
factual comments " ?
Is your concept of "causally factual"
comments based on your own understanding of what is "basic cause, and
factual" leading to the "EVIL" in your
own understanding of the "causally factual"
concept ?
From the recently held 2006 Elections, did PM LHL show any of your
required leadership "resilient as a strength of character against
causually factual comments" in his infamous election speech
:
"Instead of spending my time thinking of what is the right policy
for Singapore, I have to spend all my
time thinking what is the right way to fix them, what's the right
way to buy my own supporters over," said Lee, the
son of Singapore's founder, Lee Kuan Yew.
The comment drew instant fire from the Workers' Party, which said
Lee's use of the term "fix" was ominous and that his comments suggested he was not competent to handle
a robust opposition. In a rare retraction, Lee's
office later said the prime minister was sorry if his "direct
language" had offended anyone.
Does this resemble anything close
to leadership qualities ?
Is Singapore in mature safe hands of persons with discerning and
circumspect minds and visions ?
Though qualities of leadership is a non-exhaustive list, to possess
all the attributes in a leader is definitly too much too ask for.
Our leaders' foremost ability to lead and manage does not
neccessarily means they possesses the enterprise and innovative
aspects. Although the latter is more of a pre-requisite in the
corporate field, the former is more crucial for any politicans to
had. So if one truely seek a rare talent with all four qualities
that I had mentioned or even more, then surely it is fair to pay a
higher premium for the best talent for our country.
Your views simply do not tally
with the statements made by the Ruling Party during the
introduction of new candidates, when it was attributed to Wong Kang Seng stating that
:
"we look at 4Cs capability,
character, commitment and compassion.
We look for able men and women they usually distinguish
themselves in their fields of activity. We look for people with
integrity as this is one of our Partys core values. We look for
people who are committed to Singapore. And we look for people who
care for other Singaporeans. "
If they possess the capability -
evidenced by the boastful self-award of the million dollar
ministerial wages - and their claims to an experienced track
record, why are we spending more money to engage those Foreign
Talents whose time are expensive on their own merits ?
During the last exercises in 1987, 1997 and 2002 - the Economic
Review Committee had charted some new directions, was there any
review published as to the efficacy of those new found targetted
territories of education, bio-science, SME development ?
Are the new found goals of the Research,
Innovation & Enterprise Council a rehash of
what is already being done by the Private Sector before the Council
had even any clue and latching on to these areas that are already
identified by the Private Sector and in various stages of
development, namely : "
biomedical sciences, environmental and water technologies, and
digital and interactive media" ?
In Romance of the Three Kingdom - 'Three Visits to the Thatched
Cottage', Liu Bei makes three visits to Zhuge Liang's residence to
enlist his help. So if your assumption that a leader needs no
consultation, then can you kindly tell me why did Liu Bei, a
leader, needs to seek help from others? 
Are you confusing the topic
?
Was Liu Bei recruiting a Foreign Talent by the
name of Zhuge Liang, or was he trying to enlist his own countryman to
advance his own ambition towards a common goal - much like the new
Singaporean
faces being recruited by all the Political Parties
in the recent Election 2006 ?
In any case, just to humor you along :
Liu
Bei realised his own weakness in military
warfare and strategies, and his visit was to recruit Zhuge
Liang to a common cause of conquering the other
two rivals, and assuring the peaceful growth of its own
Shu Han
Kingdom.
Zhuge
Liang (a.k.a Kong Ming) accepted
Liu Bei's
sincerity and served as a Chancellor, continuing in the same post
into reign of Liu
Bei's son - Liu Sun
Unlike our present day million dollar ministers, Liu Bei and Zhuge
Liang had a modest lifestyle and little demands for their service
to their nation.
Zhuge Liang was a well known military strategist, and his services
was sought after for this reason only.
No record exist to confirm his vision and astuteness in matters
related to economics.
