Why can’t politicians do what they say?
And when the palace, which is equally confused as to what decision to make, does not consent to Dr Wan Azizah taking over from Khalid, Pakatan Rakyat blames HRH the Sultan for this mess.
THE CORRIDORS OF POWER
Raja Petra Kamarudin
My main grouse against Pakatan Rakyat back in 2010 (which attracted a hell of a lot of condemnation from the Pakatoons) was regarding Pakatan Rakyat not delivering on its 2008 election promises, in particular in Selangor, which I regard as my ‘home state’. (I did not talk about Kelantan, Penang or Kedah, which are/were also under Pakatan Rakyat).
When I spoke I did so openly and publicly. I stood on stage and turned to face Anwar Ibrahim, Tian Chua and Tunku Abdul Aziz Ibrahim (of DAP) to address my comments to them. This was not a condemnation of someone you hate but an expression of disappointment to someone you love — meaning Pakatan Rakyat, of course.
I also raised the issue of the so-called ‘Pakatan Rakyat consensus’ and their doctrine of ‘agree to disagree’ and said that this is utter bullshit. This often enough touted ‘Pakatan Rakyat consensus’ and doctrine of ‘agree to disagree’ is more talk than practice. Pakatan Rakyat does not really do this and more often than not utters this just to justify why certain things have gone wrong.
In short, it is to explain or justify why when things go wrong they have not really gone wrong but is just ‘consensus’ and ‘agree to disagree’. It is like saying, “We did not really disagree. We just did not agree.”
What would I call that? I suppose that would be called ‘the same difference’. And is not the same difference an oxymoron?
Pakatan Rakyat loves to chant good governance, transparency, accountability, and whatnot. That sounds nice when campaigning in an election and when explaining to the people why they must choose Pakatan Rakyat over Barisan Nasional.
Pakatan Rakyat propagates and practices good governance, transparency, accountability, etc., while Barisan Nasional does not. Hence you must vote for Pakatan Rakyat and not Barisan Nasional.
To be honest, that, too, was what I chanted in the run-up to the 2008 general election in my campaign speeches during the ceramah.
But chanting alone is not enough. It is like IS (or ISIS, ISIL, Hamas, Taliban, Al Qaeda, etc.) chanting ‘Allah Akbar!’ as they cut off the heads of reporters. How can Allah be great when you cut off the heads of innocent people who did you no harm? Your actions must dovetail with your slogans.
The Kajang Move of PKR master-strategist Rafizi Ramli is definitely a case in point. Rafizi accuses Umno and Barisan Nasional of hypocrisy and of not being transparent plus of lacking good governance and accountability. This may be true but is Rafizi and/or PKR themselves oozing with good governance, transparency and accountability?
First they tell us that the Kajang ADUN (state assemblyman), Lee Chin Cheh, resigned from his seat for personal reasons. What these ‘personal reasons’ are PKR, Rafizi and Lee refused to clarify. Is Lee sick? Is he being declared a bankrupt? Does he have a corruption case about to explode?
No one knows and no one would say other than Lee needs to resign for personal reasons, whatever that is.
Then Lee confesses that he resigned to make way for Anwar Ibrahim. He also said he resigned after meeting Anwar and confirming that Anwar would contest that seat in a by-election.
So it is not for personal reasons after all.
Then Rafizi announces that Anwar is taking that seat so that he can be in the Selangor state assembly. Why does Anwar need to be in the Selangor state assembly? So that he can save Selangor.
Save Selangor? Why the need to save Selangor?
Well, because Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad is plotting to oust Prime Minister Najib Tun Razak and if that happens then Selangor would be at risk.
But why would Selangor be at risk if Mahathir topples Najib? What has that got to do with Selangor?
They do not explain.
But even if this is true, why must Anwar become a Selangor ADUN before he can save Selangor? Can’t Anwar save Selangor without becoming a Selangor ADUN? What special powers will Anwar have that he can use to save Selangor that he can never have if he is not an ADUN of Selangor?
No explanation is given.
Is it because once Anwar becomes the Kajang ADUN he can then take over as the Menteri Besar of Selangor?
No, the Kajang Move is not about taking over the post of Selangor Menteri Besar. Khalid Ibrahim will continue as Menteri Besar. This is not a move to oust Khalid. It is only to stop Umno from taking Selangor in the event Najib falls.
Then Anwar can no longer contest the by-election because of his sodomy conviction so Dr Wan Azizah Wan Ismail will have to contest the Kajang by-election instead. And this is about Khalid after all. That was the whole purpose of the Kajang Move, to get rid of Khalid.
And then they give us the various reasons why Khalid needs to be ousted, different reasons at different times and always changing depending on who is doing the talking.
So you see, how can you call this good governance, transparency and accountability? How can lying, twisting, turning and changing your story every other day make Pakatan Rakyat far better than Barisan Nasional?
And now we have the issue of whom does Pakatan Rakyat want as the new Menteri Besar to replace Khalid? And do I really need to explain what is going on? Can you see the Pakatan Rakyat consensus, the agreeing to disagree, the transparency, and whatnot, in how they are trying to decide Khalid’s successor?
It has been utter chaos, misinformation, disinformation, innuendos, insinuations and much more since late last year. And today we have reached the stage where we do not even understand who is supposed to take over from Khalid.
And when the palace, which is equally confused as to what decision to make, does not consent to Dr Wan Azizah taking over from Khalid, Pakatan Rakyat blames HRH the Sultan for this mess.
I am not sure whether I should say ‘I told you so four years ago back in 2010’ or just stop here and say nothing more.
Maybe I will just stop here and say no more.
