Confused Man!

ZAM you are one confused dude!

Last I recalled Dr M was still the "nemesis". Wasn't he supposed to do that, being the "enemy" and all?

Stop bro! You are glorifying the man. As the superhero or shall we say, ex-superhero, you are not supposed to do that, giving cred to the "villain". ...kan?

It's a blessing that you are not the Information Minister anymore.

"Way to Go, Captain Obvious!" nonetheless.

Maybe it's a curse for what you have done to the old man. Moral of the story, don't ever bite the hand that have fed you.
The Star has this to say, today:
Zam: Dr M to blame, too
KUALA LUMPUR: Former Prime Minister Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad must shoulder some of the blame for Barisan Nasional's worst-ever performance in the recent general election, says former Information Minister Datuk Seri Zainuddin Maidin.
Dr Mahathir’s various accusations swayed the people to vote against Barisan, he said.
“Laying all blame on Prime Minister Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi for Barisan’s losses is not right because it is clear that Dr Mahathir is full of anger and uncontrolled vengeance,” said Zainuddin.
“His credibility influenced people into believing what he said and he also lent this credibility to bloggers and websites,” he said when met at his house here yesterday.

P/S- Still harbouring hopes to become a "superhero" once again, are we?

"Captain Obvious" - Contrary to popular belief, Captain Obvious is capable of flying but is afraid to, so he drives around the country in an RV, constantly on the lookout for blatantly obvious things to explain to the general public. Source: here

The Fiasco Is Over, But Does It Really?

Lots of relieved faces were visibly seen when the fiasco of Terengganu MB (State Chief Minister) crisis came to and end recently. I for one did not see it as over, in the actual sense. The Pandora box has only been opened. Now, it seems that the MPPR (Royal Advisory Council) do have veto power over the voice of the people, the recently concluded General Election, and for me, this does not augur well with the constitutional monarchy and parliamentary democracy concepts that Malaysia uphold since her independent, more than half century ago. Much has been deliberated on this issue and I believed that Malaysian of all and sundry do understand the consequences and the principle law regarding the same and as such will not be discuss here.

But what I wish to touch here is the consequences with regard to blatant disregard of convention. Convention or practice has been accepted as one way to interpret the constitution, in the event of lacuna or gap in the law itself, and the failure to adhere to such a convention that since 31st August 1957, the Prime Minister, by way of a Letter of Appointment issued under his name, has been the person advising the ruler on who is to be elected as State Chief Minister of that particular state where his party has managed to form a government, would definitely have some adverse effect in the future. It is foreseeable that other convention such as that the Prime Minister must be Malay no longer holds water and precedent wise could as well be challenged. Malaysia is a very unique country, one of a kind in this context, and negative consequences will always be there no matter how matured and savvy the people are. Even recently, "demos" have been carried out by UMNO Penang due to a statement made by the new CM of Penang concerning the much debated NEP (National Economic Policy), which in actual sense, does not exist anymore due to its abolishment in 1990 when it was changed to another policy by the former Premier. And the danger is that some quarters would keep on to stoke the sentiment of the people and by starting a precedent, in terengganu context, that is alright not to adhere to established convention of the constitution certainly would not help. Laws and conventions must be certain and consistent. To simply disregard certain laws or conventions according to one's whim and fancy would only makes matter worst.

Having said that, hypothetically, in Terengganu context, the MPPR, down the line during the term of the coming Terengganu State's Assembly, feels, for whatever reason (they seem to have that luxury, of not having to justify their decision), that they do not like the new MB anymore and decides that he does not "command the support of majority" in the State Assembly and instead appoint another state assemblymen as MB, that in their mind command the majority support. From what have happened in Terengganu, that would constitute a valid appointment nevertheless in accordance with the precedent made recently. What will happen then? Your guess is as good as mine.

..So, is it really over? "Tepuk Dada Tanya Selera"

The issue and some interesting points relating to the same have been raised and blogged here, here, and here too.

Addendum: Courtesy of MalaysiaKini.tv

Former MB apologizes and making his points on the issue.

The Grand Old Man Speaks Up!

..once a statesman, always a statesman...

DrM speaks up on Rulers and politicians
Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad

PETALING JAYA (March 27, 2008): A Concerned Malaysian has expressed his worry over the role being played by Sultans in the appointment of the Mentri Besar.

His Royal Highnesses have clearly refused to take the advice of the Chief Minister i.e. the Prime Minister. Instead, they have chosen on their own a member of the state legislature to head the Government.

We hear a lot of opinions on the propriety of the action by the Sultan. Some say he has the right to do this while others point out that as a constitutional ruler, he could not do this.

The Prime Minister, as Prime Minister, has no role in the choice of the State Mentri Besar or Ketua Menteri. His naming of candidate who should be the Mentri Besar is purely a party matter. Obviously, if the State is captured by the Opposition Party, he cannot name the candidate...... ...However, if the Ruler chooses someone who does not enjoy majority support, he could be deposed at a sitting of the legislative body through a vote of "no confidence".