Dong Jiao Zong should stop bugging MCA and turn to DAP

November 4, 2015 at 12:21 pm 25 comments

It appears that funding for SJK(C)s has been delayed and Chinese parents are unhappy. So Dong Jiao Zong is urging MCA and Gerakan cabinet ministers (below) to fight for allocations.

See story ‘Chinese schools yet to receive funds from Budget 2015‘ (The Ant Daily, 31 Oct 2015).

Chinese BN ministers

Since 95 percent of the Chinese support DAP and the opposition, what do they expect the MCA to be able to do? Don’t be delusional.

After all, six of the MCA’s seven Parliament seats are demographically Umno anyway.

Below is the BN. And the BN is the federal government.

BN component parties 2015

The red chunk above in the BN donut is Umno.

Lim Kit Siang jibes (below) that the ‘M’ in Umno may well stand for ‘Morons’.

Many DAP supporters similarly believe that Umno people are “born idiots” – see Facebook below.

Many DAP supporters including EvangeliSTARs – see ‘The Star thinks Malays are stupid’ (14 Aug 2013) – also believe that kampung people are stupid because they still want to vote for BN.

Below are the seven MCA Parliament seats. Six of the MCA constituencies are in kampung areas.

  • Bentong – rural
  • Alor Gajah – rural
  • Tanjong Malim – rural
  • Labis – rural
  • Ayer Itam – rural
  • Tanjong Piai – rural
  • Tebrau – semi-urban

MCA is on life support from Malay “village idiots”, i.e. bodoh voters in the eyes of the Chinese electorate. The party does not have a mandate to speak on behalf of the Chinese community.

Dong Jiao Zong should leave MCA alone and turn to the DAP which represents the 95 percent voice of the Chinese.

Entry filed under: DAP MENGKHIANATI KAUM CINA. Tags: .

DAP evangelical Christian leadership of M’sian Chinese Pudin ubah jadi hong dou sha

25 Comments Add your own

  • 1. I am Woman  |  November 4, 2015 at 1:49 pm

    I support you on this. If the Cina do not want to support the BN or in their words Umno government then they should not expect any support from the government. And the PM also shared this sentiment: “You can’t demand and then support DAP. You can’t demand and then support PR. You demand, you support BN, we will be fair to the Chinese,” said Najib. – See more at: http://www.themalaysianinsider.com/malaysia/article/dont-make-demands-if-you-dont-support-bn-najib-tells-chinese#sthash.Cf07pNw5.dpuf

    Let’s see if Najib can stand firm on this.

    Reply
    • 2. Helen Ang  |  November 4, 2015 at 1:56 pm

      I believe the BN chairman took a dig at MCA three days ago as well when he opened the Parti Bersatu Rakyat Sabah AGM.

      He said,

      “I as the BN chairman do not see too much into the size of the party. To me size doesn’t matter, what matters is your loyalty and commitment.”

      http://www.bernama.com/bernama/v8/bu/newsbusiness.php?id=1185476

      Reply
    • 3. Mulan Malaysia  |  November 4, 2015 at 3:18 pm

      There are more Malays and pribumi in Malaysia than the Chinese and Indians combined. A Malay unity government between UMNO and PAS and other Bumi parties would suffice. In most countries, you don’t need a pre-election Barisan or Pakatan, and the countries do not collapse. Conservative with Liberal to kick Labour out in the UK.
      You don’t need a BN, BN boleh bubar. Just a Bumiputera post election coalition would do. If it works in the UK, it surely works here.

      Dong Zong can cry and run to the arms of the Kuomingtang.

      Reply
    • 4. drinho  |  November 5, 2015 at 7:05 pm

      Your logic is perverted. Try to consider the following scenarios:

      1. Vote PR and demand government funding
      2. Vote PR and demand Umno/BN funding

      For no. 1, government funding comes from taxpayers monies. How can Najib treat such public monies as private assets of Umno/BN and deny the rightful rakyat (irrespective of their voting pattern) of their tax monies. Please differentiate between taxpayer’s monies and monies belonging to political parties.

      For no. 2, I agree that if a person voted for PR then he should not seek assistance or make demand to Umno/BN.

      Conclusion, government funding are not personal/private assets of Umno/BN. You cannot punish or deny funding to anyone for not supporting your party. If this is allowed, what is the point of democratic right to vote?

      Reply
  • 5. calvinsankaran  |  November 4, 2015 at 2:50 pm

    This is the problem with BN. The Chinese can vote DAP and then demand MCA to solve all their problems. Another classic example is the DAP MPs most of whom (including Granpa Dapster) do not reside in their elected constituency. They live in KL and spend their time mostly in ceramahs or hogging the social media than do any real service. yet the Chinese accept it and keep voting for them.

    Reply
    • 6. Shamshul anuar  |  November 4, 2015 at 4:54 pm

      Calvinsankaran,

      Agreed.

      But it can change too. I am not so sure whether you realise it but the call to ensure MCA to contest only in Chinese majority constituents is getting louder.

      I was pleasantly surprise when MB of NS said the very same thing few months ago. I wrote several times that BN lost Alor Setar in 203 due to putting Gerakan to contest there. UMNO would have won the seat if its candidate contesting Alor Setar.

      The last election was an eye opener. PAS that previously refused to accept reality that its ties to DAP in PR upset Malays learnt the hard way. Its share of Malay votes decreases.

      UMNO should learn that 2013 election only confirms what Malays have been saying all along; that no matter what Najib or any UMNO leaders trying so hard to please Chinese, UMNO or BN will be rejected by Chinese.

      The last election also shows that Malays have defended Perak government. UMNO can claim that even without Chinese , it can forms many states governments and Federal Govt.

      UMNO must teach those Chinese who rejected UMNO or BN TO GO to DAP for help. Helen made a good remark. why on earth Chinese expect MCA to deliver to them when they rejected it outright.

      Apa susah hati. hang tok sokong aku , aku masih PM juga

      Reply
    • 7. islam1st  |  November 8, 2015 at 2:15 am

      ‘The Chinese can vote DAP and then demand MCA to solve all their problems.’

      Kiasu taraf dewa-dewi!

      Reply
  • 8. Jade Emperor  |  November 4, 2015 at 7:03 pm

    Dong Zong and Islamism are the obstacles to a veritable Malaysian cultural education.

    Reply
    • 9. Melayu Malaysia  |  November 4, 2015 at 9:11 pm

      Bulls…..

      Reply
    • 10. I am Woman  |  November 4, 2015 at 10:33 pm

      Dong Zong, yes. Islam, no. But of course, if your understanding of Islam is based purely on what is happening in the political sphere, then I can’t blame you for making that statement.

      Reply
      • 11. Chris  |  November 5, 2015 at 4:08 pm

        These days, after all the decades of politicking and radical movements, the Muslims among my friends are much clearer about the major differences between the true religion and what some groups of fanatics are claiming it should be.

        http://historynewsnetwork.org/article/1671

        Reply
  • 12. RINA  |  November 5, 2015 at 1:49 am

    My Apek jiran spends approx RM1.5K monthly to send his SJKC for tiution classes, 5days a week after their regular school sessions. Usually for BM/BI/Maths and science subjects (package).

    SJKC depa mintak bantuan from gomen. Their own funds they lambak kat tiution centres. Lucrative business buat tiution centres. Ada satu kat Jinjang the tiution teachers (two of his daughters teaching there), also given full boarding and free training – sent to Singapore).

    Putar belit sana sini bagi semua orang lain kalut.

    Reply
  • 13. drinho  |  November 5, 2015 at 6:56 pm

    “Since 95 percent of the Chinese support DAP and the opposition, what do they expect the MCA to be able to do? Don’t be delusional.”

    Irrespective of the % of Chinese voting whether DAP or MCA, the funding of SJKC came from taxpayers monies. The government of the day whether BN or otherwise has a duty to allocate money as per what is being budgeted.

    Your logic is being used by politicians to use ‘threat’ i.e. if constituents fail to vote for them, no funds will be given to the constituency.

    Reply
    • 14. Helen Ang  |  November 5, 2015 at 7:17 pm

      re: “Irrespective of the % of Chinese voting whether DAP or MCA, the funding of SJKC came from taxpayers monies.”

      This is a Michael Chong-like public service bureau SOS. The funds are ‘there’. Dong Jiao Zong requires help to facilitate the transfer of payment (get its hands on the money).

      Usually it is MCA to the rescue in such situations. I believe however that it’s time the DAP is answerable to the Chinese community on these kind of issues and problems.

      Remember the slogan “no taxation without representation”? In our context, it should be no representation (YB perks and salaries for DAP) without doing some legwork.

      re: “The government of the day whether BN or otherwise has a duty to allocate money as per what is being budgeted.”

      The money was budgeted by the Gomen and the Treasury claims that it has already disbursed the amount. So now apparently it’s matter of stuck in transit and the Ministry of Education is answerable.

      re: “Your logic is being used by politicians to use ‘threat’ i.e. if constituents fail to vote for them, no funds will be given to the constituency.”

      Not to say that two wrongs make a right but the Selangor government did the same. Each Pakatan (then) Adun got RM1 million – any wonder Hannah loves her YB status? The BN Aduns did not.

      Back when I voted opposition in 2004 & 2008 and even before that, I’d always thought that the BN was unfair in starving/’punishing’ the DAP constituencies.

      But looking at Pakatan doing the same thing, we can see that when the shoe is on the other foot, the oppo is no better, and in fact, even worse.

      Reply
  • 18. Helen Ang  |  November 6, 2015 at 9:41 am

    See below. The TMI report is dated 12 Jan 2011 while the Malaysiakini report is 13 Jan 2011.

    See Khalid Ibrahim’s reply to reporters’ queries (quoted below) as to whether the oppo reps, i.e. the more than a dozen Umno & two MCA YBs would get the same.

    Subsequent news reports established that the oppo (i.e. BN) did not receive the allocations vis-a-vis rejecting the anak tiri offer of RM200,000.

    http://www.malaysiakini.com/news/153266

    “Ditanya sama ada pihak pembangkang Selangor akan mendapat peruntukan yang sama, Khalid berkata kerajaan Pakatan Rakyat akan merujuk kepada amalan kerajaan persekutuan.”

    null

    Reply
    • 19. islam1st  |  November 8, 2015 at 2:24 am

      drinho likes the rest of the RBAs kat sini, bila kena muka sendiri, mula buat magik menghilangkan diri! Tipikal RBA’s!

      Reply
      • 20. drinho  |  November 11, 2015 at 2:24 pm

        Tak ada hilang diri.

        Helen, now we acknowledged that both BN and PR denied allocation to their respective opponents in Federal and DUN levels respectively.

        Does it mean that both are equally guilty? Some stats as below:-

        GE Parliament 2008 results, BN – 140, PR – 82
        GE Selangor DUN 2008 results, PR – 36, BN – 20

        As per your news link, Khalid denied 1 mil allocation to 20 BN Aduns (that would translate to 1mil x 20 Aduns = RM20 mil).

        I have no info what is the amount of allocation denied to PR MPs at parliament level. I would assume 3 mil as Parliament constituencies are much bigger in terms of area and no. of voters than a typical DUN seat.

        Hence, I assume BN denied the 82 PR MPs a total of RM246 mil in allocation (3 mil x 82 MP = RM246 mil).

        Based on the above, despite the fact that both BN and PR were guilty in denying allocation to their respective opponents I say that BN committed a much bigger sin due to these reasons:-

        a) The amount of allocation being denied is much bigger i.e. RM246 mil vs RM20 mil.

        b) The adverse impact on the voters in the constituencies due to allocation being denied. BN denied PR 82 parliament seats whereas PR denied BN 20 DUN seats. Bear in mind that the no. of voters in a typical Parliament seat is many times more than the no. of voters in a typical DUN seat.

        Agree or disagree?

        Reply
        • 21. Helen Ang  |  November 11, 2015 at 2:43 pm

          (1) Selangor is the richest state. Never heard of the, say, Perlis Speaker getting paid as much as the Selangor Speaker. It’s also never been reported that any other MB is given a salary surpassing the PM’s – Selangor is the sole exception.

          (2) Are the two sides the same?

          (a) Some/many DAP supporters believe their evangelista YBs are as white as snow, despite the ostentatious show of wealth by David Nga Kor Ming (Taiping MP) flouting his big White House in Ipoh.

          (b) Some/many DAP supporters agree with Hannah Yeoh that BN is “wicked” and evil and corrupt. They even believe Hannah when she declares that her hands are clean despite that she was once investigated by the MACC but NFA when Teoh Beng Hock suddenly died.

          (c) Some/many Mahathir supporters agree with Tun’s accusation that the Umno president is “bangsat” and Umno leaders are “corrupt“.

          (d) In short, pro-establishment voters are willing to entertain the idea that Umno leaders are corrupt whereas oppo followers reject outright the idea that DAP leaders are less than transparent and accountable.

          Hence the double standards. When an oppo rep defects to the ruling party, he’s immediately accused of being bought. When a BN rep defects to the opposition, he’s feted as a hero.

          Reply
          • 22. drinho  |  November 11, 2015 at 2:48 pm

            Erm…. Why you sidetrack? Thought the issue is about how the ruling party deny allocations to their political opponents? You raised the issue of Selangor PR deny allocation to BN Aduns. I agreed. But I raised the issue of BN did the same at Parliament level but at a much bigger quantum.

            Reply
            • 23. Helen Ang  |  November 11, 2015 at 3:04 pm

              (1) BN denied allocations to oppo. BN is called wicked and evil by oppo supporters.

              (2) Pakatan denied allocations to oppo, in this case Umno areas. Pakatan is not called wicked and evil by their loyal sheeple.

              (3) Pakatan people support the denial of funding to BN reps because it’s only tit for tat, they say – after all BN did it, and BN did it first.

              (4) Pakatan people claim their side is Goodness and Light, and that they’re better than the BN. But they still do the very same thing (even if the quantum is not at par).

              Reply
              • 24. drinho  |  November 12, 2015 at 9:08 am

                The benchmark is choose the lesser evil. I am not saying that PR or PH are all saints. Obviously they are not. Same case to BN/Umno. They are not all devils either. They do have merits.

                But when you compare apple-to-apple basis just like “denial of allocation committed by both sides of the political divide”, you will inevitably find that BN (at Parliament level) committed a bigger sin than PR (at Selangor DUN level).

                Or the usual Auditor General Reports where BN at federal levels have much more wastage, leakage and corruption than PR at Selangor/Penang/Kelantan state levels.

                Some may say BN by virtue of being at the federal level will naturally have more impact/wrongdoings/wastage etc than PR at state levels. But the reverse is also true. If BN governs properly at federal level, the positive impact on the entire population will be greatly felt compared to a properly governed state.

                Reply
                • 25. Helen Ang  |  November 12, 2015 at 10:05 am

                  BN is the lesser of the two evils. It took BN six decades (58 yrs) to reach its present stage of wrongdoings/wastage. It took DAP only seven years to become the monster that it is today.

                  Looking at the speed of wastage, the Penang state govt paid out RM305 million (in kind through land swap) on the cost of feasibility study and design alone for the undersea tunnel when there is no sight or smell of any brick-and-mortar on the mega project.

                  BN has been rather tidak apa and letting things slide. Hence now suffering the poor public perception.

                  DAP on the other hand is ultra kiasu brainwashing the public 24/7, and not balking even to spread fitnah without batting an eyelid.

                  Coupled with the DAP’s sneakiness is its vindictiveness.

                  Reply

Dijemput memberi komen anda

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Trackback this post  |  Subscribe to the comments via RSS Feed


My blog, my like

Helen Ang

Recent Posts

Kalender

November 2015
M T W T F S S
« Oct   Dec »
 1
2345678
9101112131415
16171819202122
23242526272829
30  

Pengunjung

  • 7,406,446 hits

Archives

Feeds


%d bloggers like this: