Why Pakatan Rakyat Won the Election but Lost Parliament

Deciphering the Numbers behind GE-13:

Why Pakatan Rakyat Won the Election but Still Lost Parliament

Barisan Nasional (BN) – 133              Pakatan Rakyat (PR) – 89

These two numbers will forever be etched in the memory of many Malaysians, and years from now, we will still remember how they emerged against all odds to defer our hope for a better Malaysia. However, these two numbers representing the number of parliamentary seats won by each side are in fact a façade that oversimplifies the election result and masks the reality of an inherently flawed electoral system.

On the surface, the distribution of parliamentary seats suggests that BN has won the election with a 60% majority while the remaining 40% goes to PR. Yet if winning an election means getting the most votes, then with a total of more than 5.6 million votes for parliamentary seats, PR has actually defeated BN, which has garnered a total of only 5.2 million votes.

The Puzzling Distribution of Constituencies

            While all eyes are trained on the delible “indelible ink”, the imported voters, and the blackouts, BN strikes out with a hidden dagger (or keris, in the case of UMNO)—the uneven distribution of constituencies, or in a fancier term, gerrymandering.

            Studying the election results, I was surprised at how many parliamentary seats there are in Sabah and Sarawak. The two states may be geographically larger, but they are also less densely populated. With a little more than 1 million (1,083,972) voters, Sarawak has 31 parliamentary seats while Sabah, with a little less than 1 million voters (981,814), is represented by 25 parliamentary seats. Hence, it makes little sense that a densely populated state like Selangor that has over 2 million voters (2,048,828) is given only 22 parliamentary seats.

            What this then translates into is smaller constituencies in Sabah and Sarawak and larger ones in dense states like Selangor. The sizes of constituencies in Sabah range from 24,000 to 53,000 voters, and the sizes of constituencies in Sarawak range from 17,000 to 84,000 voters. However, in Selangor, the smallest constituency has more than 37,000 voters while the largest one has more than 144,000 voters. Therefore, the largest constituency in Selangor is almost 3 times bigger than the largest one in Sabah. In addition, there are also 8 constituencies in Selangor with more than 100,000 voters.

The Unequal Weight of Each Individual Vote

            Because each constituency is represented by 1 parliamentary seat regardless of its size, the weight of each individual vote cast varies depending on the size of the constituency in which it was cast: the smaller the constituency, the more weight an individual vote carries.

Let’s consider a comparison of the smallest and the largest constituencies. With only 15,791 registered voters, Putrajaya (P125) is the smallest constituency while Kapar (P109-Selangor) is the largest one with 144,159 voters. Simple mathematics reveals that Kapar is 9 times as large as Putrajaya. But because both constituencies are represented by 1 parliamentary seat each in spite of the difference in their respective sizes, 1 vote in Putrajaya carries 9 times as much weight as 1 vote in Kapar.

            As a result of this uneven distribution of electorates, BN won Putrajaya simply with 9,943 votes, but on the other hand, PR won Kapar with a majority of 69,849 votes. Although PR gained 7 times more votes in Kapar than BN did in Putrajaya, both were assigned 1 parliamentary seat each.

Underrepresenting the Urban Areas

The largest constituencies are often the ones in urban areas. As many political analysts pointed out, the result of GE-13 shows that PR gained the support of middle- and upper-class urban voters while BN retained the votes of those in rural areas. But through gerrymandering, BN has managed to gain more parliamentary seats by winning a higher number of smaller and less densely populated constituencies, particularly those in rural areas. PR, on the other hand, won large amounts of votes from urban dwellers, but these large numbers of voters are often lumped into densely populated constituencies, resulting in a lower number of parliamentary seats for PR.

            Let’s consider the example of Sarawak, the state with the highest number of parliamentary seats. PR has won 4 out of the 5 largest parliamentary constituencies in Sarawak, all of which consist of more than 50,000 voters. BN, on the other hand, won the remaining 21 parliamentary constituencies, all of which (except one) consist of less than 50,000 voters, the smallest constituency having only a little less than 18,000 voters.

In Sarawak, BN garnered approximately 481,000 total votes while PR obtained approximately 304,000 votes. Translated into percentage, the total number of votes cast for each party in Sarawak indicates that BN won with a 61% majority as opposed to PR’s 39%. However, in terms of the distribution of parliamentary seats, BN took 81% of the parliamentary seats in Sarawak (25 out of 31) while PR took the remaining 19% (6 out of 31). There is clearly a huge disparity between the percentage of votes won and the percentage of parliamentary seats taken. Although I understand that, due to the way our electoral system works, it is close to impossible for there to be a one-to-one correlation, but nevertheless there should not be such a drastic difference between the two.

The Real Issue behind GE-13

            Yes, the delible “indelible ink”, the imported voters, and the blackouts are problematic issues that need to be addressed. They are blatant violations of the electoral laws. But even if the indelible ink had been indelible, even if there were no illegal voters, even if there had been no blackouts, and even if we had achieved 100% voter turnout, the inherently problematic electoral system still ensured that the odds will always be against PR taking over the parliament. Garnering 5.6 million votes as opposed to BN’s 5.2 million, PR has in fact won GE-13 with a simple majority of 51%, but it still lost parliament due to the manipulation of constituency distribution. Ultimately, in order to ensure that each individual vote bears equal significance, the underlying issue that desperately needs to be addressed is the distribution of parliamentary constituencies.

 

 

Author's note: The numbers in this article are either taken directly or calculated from the election results as published on www.myundi.com.my and SPR's official website (www.spr.gov.my).

The Death of Critical Thinking

“You will recall how you were inspired to think critically and to question without fear,
to seek out radically different solutions and to voice them without reprisal,
to read widely and deeply, and to examine without end and grow intellectually . . .
What I ask is this: pass it on.”

- Navy Adm. Mike Mullen, June 11, 2009

“If you can find but one person who deals honestly and seeks the truth,
I will forgive this city.”

- Jeremiah 5:1b

I heard the toll of a death knell the other day. It announced the death of Critical Thinking in our education system.

The funeral was solemn, but not tearful, because we still did not realize what we had lost. The man who stood up to deliver the eulogy said that, had he lived, Critical Thinking would have fathered a whole new generation of mature thinkers armed with the ability to engage intelligently with current issues, question given propositions, and respond intellectually to problems they encounter. This generation will then transform our nation. But this hope for a generation of thinkers has thus perished along with the death of Critical Thinking.            

“Alas,” the man concluded, “Critical Thinking was too good to be true. He was too good for our education system.”

I found out later that Critical Thinking was brutally murdered. He was attacked by a gang of Machiavellian politicians who only sought to retain power for themselves, while the indifferent and ignorant masses had left him out in the cold to die a slow and painful death.

In spite of the politicians’ efforts to portray him in the pink of health, I remember when Critical Thinking plunged into a steady decline. I was sitting in a Pendidikan Moral class then, holding before me a list of moral values that I had to memorize and regurgitate in all my exams regardless of whether or not I understood them; whether or not I agreed with them; whether or not they reflected my personal beliefs. I was told that, in order to excel academically, I had to accept unquestioningly all that my textbook said. There was only one correct answer: the one that echoed the politicians’ own words. And so, every “correct” answer that was generated struck a blow at Critical Thinking.

I also remember sitting in my Sejarah class on the day when we were supposed to learn about the May 13 Incident. I had heard about the racial riots from my mum who witnessed the riots herself but was too young to comprehend what was going on. I was anxious to discover the truth about what happened on that day so that I can decide for myself who was right and who was wrong. I wanted to see with my own two eyes what was written on that smeared page of our history book. But in class that day, my teacher merely told us that riots were bad, and therefore, we should take care not to approach these “isu-isu sensitif”—issues concerning race, religion, and special rights—lest we stir up yet another round of racial riots. She said those words “isu-isu sensitif” with a scandalized undertone as though they were taboos, and I could not help wondering if she herself knew what happened on 13 May 1969. The deathly silence that followed her comment delivered yet another blow to Critical Thinking.

But the final blow that effectively put an end to Critical Thinking was struck just a few weeks ago. Fearing that the Public Service Announcements on government-owned broadcast channels had not sufficiently demonized Bersih, the politicians deemed it necessary to feature the picture of a Bersih rally in an SPM trial exam, requiring students to conclude, at least on paper, that Bersih corrupted the morals of the nation. Their efforts paid off, because a friend* of mine told me that, in his Sejarah class, the students and the teacher agreed that Bersih was “an immature demonstration that [brought] humiliation to the country.” However, when he asked how was Bersih immature, neither the students nor the teacher managed to justify their conclusion.

Critical Thinking thus slipped stealthily into non-existence. The shrewd politicians orchestrated his death, but the ignorant masses buried his dead body. With the death of Critical Thinking, there is nothing left to redeem our education system from its sorry state. And so, our education system continues churning out generation after generation of robots that do not have the ability to think for themselves.

At the end of the funeral when everyone walked up to the coffin to pay their final respect to Critical Thinking, I turned around and walked out, because I could not bear the sight of a stillborn.

*Special thanks to Calvin Choong, whose brave act of defending the cause of Bersih in his Sejarah class inspired this post.

On Being Chinese Malaysian

“Are you Chinese?”

Due to the colour of my skin and my features, I have had to answer this question way more often than I would have liked to when I am overseas. Yet every time when I am considering my response, I would pause in an awkward silence, unsure of what my answer should be. Sometimes, I would reply with an ambiguous and prolonged “kinda,” and sometimes, I would hesitantly answer and say, “Well, yes and no.” At other times, especially when I am feeling particularly patient, I would seek clarification.

“What do you mean by ‘Chinese’?” I’d ask.

And this question has never yet failed to elicit a perplexed look.

Having spent four years studying abroad, I have learned to be very patient in explaining my complicated identity to my American friends. They seem to be baffled by the fact that I am both Malaysian and Chinese.

“Wait, I thought you’re from Malaysia,” they’d remark, utterly confused. “So are you part Chinese part Malaysian?”

This is the usual prologue that leads into a detailed analysis of how Malaysian is my nationality and Chinese is my ancestry.

“So,” I’d conclude, “I am fully Malaysian and fully Chinese, just like Jesus Christ, who is fully man and fully God.”

As difficult as it was at times to explain the difference between my nationality and my ancestry, I must admit that, deep within me, I found a mysterious pleasure, an inexplicable joy in sharing my unique identity as a Malaysian to my non-Malaysian friends. I was secretly proud of my twofold identity.

However, I never thought that I would have to explain this distinction to my fellow countrymen because I thought they would understand. Recently, a friend* of mine posted on Facebook that he was asked by a Malaysian boy of another ethnicity if he was half Malaysian, half Chinese. Although my friend answered and said that he is a Malaysian, the boy insisted that he is half Malaysian, half Chinese. I know that if I were in my friend’s shoes, I would have been very disappointed that even my fellow countryman fails to understand who I really am. It is one thing to enlighten my non-Malaysian friends about how I can be both Malaysian and Chinese at the same time, but it is quite another to have to explain it to a fellow Malaysian.

I realize that the terms “Malaysian” and “Chinese” are deceptively self-explanatory: we often think we know who these words refer to, but in reality, many who identify themselves as one or the other hold on to very different notions of what they really mean by the use of these terms. According to the Oxford English Dictionary, “Malaysian,” when used as a noun, refers to “[a] native or inhabitant of the Malay Archipelago, or (more recently) of the Federation of Malaysia.” Since the word “Malaysian” is derived from the root word “Malaysia,” there were no Malaysians until 16 September 1963, the day when Malaysia was born. Likewise, the word “Chinese” is also derived from the name “China,” and the Oxford English Dictionary defines a Chinese as “[a] native of China.” In that case, the terms “Malaysian” and “Chinese” evoke national identities, not racial ones.

So I struggle to comprehend how anyone can be “half Malaysian, half Chinese.” After all, you can only be a native of one place—the place where you were born. Besides, in order to be half-and-half, one must obtain dual citizenship. But as far as I know, Malaysia does not allow her citizens to hold more than one citizenship, and neither does China. Hence, one is either a full Malaysian, or one is not; one is either a full Chinese, or one is not. And since I, and many others like me, were born and bred in Malaysia, could we honestly identify ourselves as anything else but 100% Malaysians?

But just in case any of you are about to accuse me of forgetting my heritage (or, worse yet, betraying my race!), rest assured, for I have no intention of denying the fact that I am of Chinese descent. My elders have taught me the Chinese proverb “饮水思源,” and I have also been warned against behaving like a kacang yang melupakan kulit. I have not forgotten that my ancestors relocated from China to the Malay Peninsula during the First World War, and that is why I spend 15 days every year in January or Febraury to celebrate Chinese New Year; why my family and I still eat dumplings and mooncakes every year in spite of their soaring prices; why I speak both Cantonese and Mandarin fluently, and can read and write in both languages even though I had to stay back for extra classes after school just to learn Chinese. Yes, I can say with no reservations that I am of Chinese descent.

Nevertheless, I am essentially a Malaysian, a Malaysian of Chinese descent—a Chinese Malaysian. However, for generations, we have called ourselves Malaysian Chinese, thus suggesting that we are fundamentally Chinese, and that “Malaysian” is merely an adjective that specifies what kind of Chinese we are. No wonder others are confused if we are Malaysians or Chinese! We ourselves seem just as confused! “Malaysian Chinese” and “Chinese Malaysian”—an inversion of the two words makes a whole world of difference. For instance, “sky blue” is a colour, a shade of blue, but “blue sky,” on the other hand, is a sky that is neither grey nor white. Therefore, I proudly call myself a Chinese Malaysian because I am a native of Malaysia with a Chinese ancestry. I am first and foremost a Malaysian, and Chinese is an adjective that describes my cultural heritage. Since multiculturalism is that which makes Malaysia so unique, using an adjective to complement my national identity as a Malaysian is a celebration of this diversity.

Why should I be deprived of the right to call myself a full Malaysian? And why must I be forced to identify myself with the nation of China when I have never even set foot on Chinese soil? I pledge my allegiance to no other flag but the Jalur Gemilang. To those who frequently tell us Chinese Malaysians to balik kampung, let me tell you that my kampung is Kuala Lumpur because I was born here and I have spent 20 years of my life here, with many more to come, Lord willing. I believe that I have every right to call myself a Malaysian, and I will certainly not give in to anyone who attempts to rob me of my proud identity as a Chinese Malaysian.

 

*Special thanks to Chua Woon Chen, whose Facebook status inspired this post.



Silver Lining

Sometimes finding that silver lining is not that difficult.

What I've Been Surviving On

Presenting my proud creations...

I think I am on my way to becoming a world-renown chef . . . or not.

When Racism is Applauded and Democracy Outlawed

“Have I now become your enemy by telling you the truth?”
Galatians 4:16

Diligently poring over the newspapers and online news portals in a post-709 frenzy, I am completely appalled and disgusted by some of the reports that I read. Before I can even fully comprehend how a coalition that calls for a clean and fair electoral system can be declared illegal, I also find myself dumbfounded by the proposal to offer an award to those who excel in “uphold[ing] their race.” Since when is racism applauded and democracy outlawed in Malaysia?

Some of those who are in authority have attempted to politicize recent events, portraying them as the political gimmicks of opposing parties. Yet, such a claim cannot be any further from the truth. Malaysians from all walks of life did not march for a political cause on July 9. In fact, that would not have been worth the while. Malaysians are not waging a political war against the powers-that-be. Instead, the war transcends a mere political cause. Malaysians are caught in the middle of a moral war, trying to defend the values that we as a people hold dear to our hearts.

The demand for a clean and fair electoral system is based on the values of honesty and justice. Those who oppose these demands are also inevitably opposing the moral values that the demands embody. Some have argued and said, “But we do not disagree with these demands. It’s the illegal gathering that we oppose.” To this I shall reply that efforts to prevent the employment of a just and reasonable mean to uphold these values are equivalent to direct opposition to these values themselves. Besides, by whose definition is the gathering “illegal” anyway? Isn’t it our constitutional right to gather peacefully?

On the other hand, the same powers-that-be who seemed to have been so concerned with uniting the people, promoting acceptance instead of tolerance, and breaking down the wall that isolates Malaysians of different races also seemed to have been wilfully deafened and blinded to the loud call of racism. An award named after an outspoken racist offered to those who “uphold their race”? It seems to me that one cannot exalt anything without doing so at the expense of another, just as the Ku Klux Klan had advocated white supremacy at the expense of the “coloured people” and Hitler had sacrificed the Jews to achieve a purer and more superior race. Who then will be sacrificed to uphold the Malay race and preserve Malay supremacy?

It is far too easy to underestimate the moral implications of our actions and decisions. After all, a slightly compromised electoral system can hardly qualify as immorality and comparing racial inequality in Malaysia to Ku Klux Klan and Hitler’s regime may seem like an exaggeration. However, moral degradation is not a destination; it is a journey. Having taken one tiny step down the road of moral degradation, there is nothing to prevent one from travelling further down that road until it becomes too late to turn back. From the empty and not-so-wise words of a loudmouth racist to the booing of an Israeli football player culminating in a complaint letter to the Football Association of Malaysia (FAM), and from the authorities’ use of a little violence with the excuse of “crowd control” to the mysterious death of certain individuals, this road is a slippery slope that will take one on a downhill ride.

I believe many Malaysians would like to ask the authorities the same question the apostle Paul asked the Galatians: “Have I now become your enemy by telling you the truth?” If that is indeed the case, so be it, for we cannot cease our fight for truth and righteousness. We can tolerate incompetent and inefficient leaders, but we certainly cannot tolerate immoral ones. Neither can we tolerate those who opt for silence in the face of immorality. Just as it is said of Shakespeare’s Prince Hamlet that “on his choice depends [t]he safety and health of this whole state,” likewise the safety and health of Malaysia is also dependent on the choices (and values) of our leaders.

The True Spirit of One Malaysia

As I was manning the information counter at the expo that my company organized last weekend, a lady walked up to me and said, "Excuse me, is that a bumi hall?" While my eyes followed the direction her finger was pointing, the thought that I might have possibly misunderstood her question crossed my mind.

"Sorry, ma'am," I found myself saying, "What was your question again?"

"Oh, I took a peek into that hall and saw that there are a lot of bumis in there. So I was not sure if there are different halls for bumis and non-bumis."

So I did not misunderstand her question after all.

"Oh, no," I quickly replied, "There is no distinction between bumis non-bumis. All halls are open to all visitors." Then I added, "One Malaysia, right?" To this, the lady gave a light chuckle and walked away.

A few moments later, the implications of her question sank in. The fact that such an idea actually crossed the mind of a Malaysian and that she saw the need to check if there are halls specifically designated for people of different races troubled me greatly. Do we still fail to look beyond racial lines after more than five decades of nationhood?

Indeed, considering all that Malaysia had gone through in the past few weeks, those last three words that I uttered seem to have been unintentionally laced with cynicism.

But do not get me wrong. I am a firm supporter of the idea of One Malaysia that seeks "to preserve and enhance this unity in diversity which has always been our strength and remains our best hope for the future" and to encourage the rakyat to identify ourselves first and foremost as Malaysians, while preserving our unique cultural identity as a complement to our national identity.

However, such a noble and idealistic concept seems rather risible in the light of the reality of our political situation. After all, the ruling coalition consists of three main parties separated along racial lines: the United Malay National Organisation (UMNO), the Malaysian Chinese Association (MCA), and the Malaysian Indian Congress (MIC). If we are truly one, why can't we have the United Malaysian National Organisation, the Malaysian Citizen Association, and the Malaysian Interracial Congress instead?

In some aspects, we have indeed come a long way since the May 13, 1969 racial riot. Yet after all this while, we are still living with the ghost of May 13. The bloodshed and violence of that fateful day has ever since haunted the generation that has lived through the event, frightening many into silence and acquiescence as they have learned to quietly accept the "lot" that is dealt to them, even int he only place that they can truly call home. But for my generation, we have heard so many different versions of the event from parents, teachers, and history textbooks that we have ironically become oblivious to what really happened on that day. Quoting George Santayana, "Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it." Let alone those who do not even know that actually took place in the past.

The July 9 scare that involved the shutting down of downtown Kuala Lumpur may have been partially reminiscent of May 13, and yes, my generation will always remember 709 just as my parents' generation remembers 513, but we will remember this day for a very different reason: 709 reversed the effects of 513, because on July 9, 2011, thousands of Malaysians of all races stood up together in unity for a common cause: to fight for that which is right and just. And all these not for the benefit of any particular racial group, but for the good of the country in which God has placed us. Those who stood up did so because we care for this place that we proudly call home and we care enough to defend our rights as citizens of this nation. If this is not the spirit of One Malaysia, I don't know what else is.

On July 9, 2011, One Malaysia ceased to be merely an idealistic concept; on this day, the world stole a glimpse of the attainable reality of One Malaysia, when Malaysians managed to look beyond the color of our skin. On this day, the cause of Bersih 2.0 has achieved what the government has failed to achieve in the past 54 years: the unity of all Malaysians, regardless of race.

While the Deputy Prime Minister unashamedly declared that he is first and foremost a Malay, those of us who see ourselves first and foremost as Malaysians hunger and thirst for justice and integrity in Malaysia.

For the concept of One Malaysia to transcend mere idealism, Malaysia should be only led by those who perceive themselves first and foremost as Malaysians. Those who do not see themselves primarily as Malaysians are not fit to govern this land called Malaysia.

Malaysia belongs to Malaysians. And I am proud to be Malaysian. Let us join hands with our fellow countrymen and further the reality of One Malaysia!

The Political Circus

Here we are again, caught up in the tangles of yet another sex scandal involving politicians. Déja vu!

So Datuk T invited members of the press to view the alleged sex video individually, and the viewing was conducted privately at a hotel room, of all places. And how did the video come into his possession? Why, of course the accused had sent him to the alleged crime scene in search of a misplaced watch, during which he stumbled upon a hidden CCTV!

Somehow, I cannot seem to shed the feeling that there is something fishy (almost Machiavellian!) about this.

After all, why is the exposition carried out in such an under-handed fashion? Private viewings in a hotel room? Can anything be carried out in a more discreet manner? If the act in question does indeed pose a dire threat to the moral values upon which our nation is founded (as Datuk T claims, the culprit is not "the pious person with high moral values and integrity as portrayed, and therefore is not fit to be leader" (The Star, March 21)), it seems fit to me to expose the culprit and his deeds to the public, and allow justice to run its due course. And why does the accuser perceive the need to assume anonymity? If his intention is indeed to preserve the political integrity of the nation, his duty to the rakyat surely obliges him to bring to light the misconducts of another fellow politician, and he should carry it out without fear or shame.

Yet, to insist on the political demise of the accused, that, I believe, has crossed the line of duty. In fact, the call for the accused "and his wife [to] step down from politics" (The Star, March 21) not only reflects a double standard (wait, who's the president of MCA?), but it also consitutes an infringement on the rakyat's freedom to decide. In a democratic nation, the right to pronounce a death sentence on the political career of the individual in question should be left in the hands of the rakyat. I fully trust that the rakyat has the wisdom to know who and what kind of individual they want in authority over them.

However, the identity of the culprit is a question that has yet to be answered, and so is the question of the video's authenticity. For all we know, this may be yet another attempt at political assassination.

In the midst of all these uncertainties, one thing is certain: We, the Rakyat, are tired and sick of sex scandals and political gimmicks.

Since obtaining independence almost 54 years ago, as a nation, we are still in the process of forging a national identity. And even before we manage to arrive at any substantial achievement, here we are caught up in yet another frivolous political child's play. Perhaps if we begin to transfer our energy and attention from these scandals and gimmicks to our efforts in nation-building, we will finally achieve what our founding father dreamt of when he negotiated for our independence from the British.

Dorothy Parker

General Review of the Sex Situation

Woman wants monogamy;

Man delights in novelty.

Love is woman's moon and sun;

Man has other forms of fun.

Woman lives but in her lord;

Count to ten, and man is bored.

With this the gist and sum of it,

What earthly good can come of it?

Dorothy Parker, 1926

P.S.: Yes, I just found my new favourite author!

The Abstract

"We miss the abstract when we comprehend.
We miss it most when we aspire, - and fail."

-Elizabeth Barrett Browning, Aurora Leigh, fifth book

"a touch of earth"

" . . . but, friend, to me
He is all fault who hath no fault at all:

For who loves me must have a touch of earth"

- Tennyson, Idylls of the King, "Lancelot and Elaine"

Fried Ice-cream

I like fried ice-cream.

The crisp appearance,
dressed in a solid coat
of raw eggs and cornflakes,

sealed in boiling oil:
the ultimate concealment.

Under this maquillage,
is but the delicate and mellow
solid-fluid, the vanilla sweetness
that strips the stoic disguise.

I am fried ice-cream.

The Ironies in Life

"So, throughout life, our worst weaknesses and meannesses are usually committed for the sake of the people whom we most despise."

"All other swindlers upon earth are nothing to the self-swindlers, and with such pretences did I cheat myself."

-Charles Dickens, Great Expectations

Country Music Rawks!!

Ok, that is an oxymoronic title... but, that's besides the point.

I was listening to Rascal Flatts at work today, and thought I'd share a song of theirs (or rather, part of it) with you all.

"Sometimes I take on this world by myself

Thinking I got all the answers, don't need anybody's help

Well, God was right there waiting for me all along

To fall down on my knees, surrender all.

Things that matter, things that don't."

- Rascal Flatts, Things that Matter

Never realised that Rascal Flatts can be so spiritually uplifting. But nevertheless, it's a good reminder. God was right there waiting for me all along to fall down on my knees and surrender all.

The Drama of Life

Sometimes, it feels as though my life is a drama.

I am the script-writer who carefully crafts out every twist and turn of the plot, who ingeniously composes every dialogue, who brilliantly plans the happily-ever-after.

With a sense of self-satisfaction, I proudly display the masterpiece to the Director. Yet, as the drama is being acted out, the Director makes so many changes to the script that the final product is beyond recognition.

I sure hope that the season finale is better than my happily-ever-after ending.

doing what I love doing feels good

The Sunday Star published my article entitled "My Beloved Country" (originally titled "To the One that I Miss") on April 4. The article can be found in print on page E13 of the Education section. The online version of the article can be found here.

To Study

Oh Study, my dear Study,
Of you I have become so weary.

I love you so; I can't deny.
Yet at times, from you I'd fly.

Indeed, to you I'm always bound,
But in restlessness I'm often found.

We were, once, a couple so loving,
Since when have you become so controlling?

From me are driven all my beaux,
For I cease not to have you in tow.

Please release me. Let me go!
But still, you know I love you so.

Just for the sake of...

Well, actually I don't have anything significant to say. Just thought I'd keep this blog alive since it has not been attended to in quite a while. Okay, more than quite a while. Alright! ...for a looong time.

Or maybe this is just an excuse for me to not read or work or do anything that is productive. I just feel like slacking, since it's Thursday night. What about Thursday night, you may ask. 'Cause it's the night before Friday! So what? So that means it's almost the weekend! (Duh!)

But then again, I guess anytime is a good time to slack.

By the way, just to let keep you all updated.... I AM HEADING DOWN TO ORLANDO FLORIDA FOR THE SUMMER! It's official! I will be doing an internship with Wycliffe Bible Translators! That sure keeps me going for the rest of this semester.

The key to success: Beginning with the end in mind!

Laws of the Corporate World

P = w/t

Reads: Power is work over time.

In other words, if you want power, you have to work overtime.

Pt = w
Reads: Power times time is work.

It follows that, if you want to hold power for a period of time, you have to work for it.

2Pt = 2w

Therefore, if you want more power in a longer period of time, you have to do more work!

Man, this is a dog-eat-dog world!

Anyway, now that you have witnessed what Physics can do to an English major, I have to get back to studying Physics for my mid-term...

A nightmare erred

Violently I shook
With tears of sorrow
or rather of fear.
I don't quite know.

Of this I'm sure:
It's a nightmare erred.

Silently I pondered
the question "Why";
To this none answered
And I'm left in a puzzle.

Of this I'm sure:
It's a nightmare erred.

Secretly I hope
it's just a joke-
that it's April Fool!
a little overdue.

Then I'll know for sure:
It's a nightmare erred.