Khairy tawar diri; ‘kelebihan’ yang menentukan UMNO terus dibenci

Besok, Rabu 17 September 2008 merupakan hari dimana Naib Ketua Pemuda UMNO Malaysia Khairy Jamaluddin mengumumkan menawarkan diri untuk jawatan Ketua Pemuda UMNO Malaysia pada pemilihan parti, Perhimpunan Agung Tahunan UMNO 16-20 Disember 2008 di Pusat Dagangan Dunia Putra, Kuala Lumpur.

Pada peringkat akar umbi UMNO, penawaran ini adalah cukup kontroversi. Ini kerana begitu banyak diperkatakan mengenai MP Rembau ini, yang di’parachut’kan kepada persada perdana politik UMNO dan tanahair pada usia yang sangat muda. Pada pemilihan parti Ogos 2004, Khairy yang baru mencecah 28 tahun diangkat kejawatan sekarang tanpa pertandingan, setelah calon calon yang pada asalnya berhasrat kuat seperti Dato’ Mohd. Norza Zakaria menarik diri pada saat akhir.

Timbul juga desas desus dimana Presiden UMNO PM ‘Flip-Flop’ Dato’ Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi memberikan ‘restu’ agar Khairy diberikan pencalonan atau tidak diberikan ‘tentangan’ apabila Pemuda UMNO peringkat Bahagian seluruh negara membuat penyenaraian jawatan parti.

Kini, timbul pula kontroversi yang UMNO perlu pertimbangkan semasak masaknya. Sekiranya Khairy menawarkan diri, maknanya dia mempunyai peluang cerah untuk menang jawatan Ketua Pemuda UMNO Malaysia.

Apa akan jadi pada UMNO sekiranya Presiden merupakan bapa mertua dan Ketua Pemuda merupakan menantu kesayangan? Apakah masyarakat Malaysia menerima percaturan politik dinasti ini, terutama tatkala UMNO dan BN sudahpun begitu tidak diterima majoriti rakyat? Apa akan jadi pada UMNO dan BN pada Pilihanraya Umum ke XIII, dijangkakan selewat lewatnya 2013?

Khairy Jamaluddin sendiri merupakan seorang personaliti politik yang begitu kontroversial. Anak muda ini mula mula menimbulkan kontroversi apabila pada usia semuda 29, dibawa masuk kedalam bank pelaburan ECM Libra sebagai Pengarah dan kemudian bank ‘butik’ ini “menelan” sebuah syarikat jauh lebih besar, Avenue Capital, dalam tempoh amat singkat dan proses yang amat mencurigakan., termasuk penyah-sejat nilai harta ehsan (impairment of goodwill) yang bernilai RM 300 juta  dan membinggungkan pasaran modal. Badan seperti Suruhanjaya Sekuriti ‘menutup sebelah mata’ walaupun bertubi tubi aduan dibuat, termasuk badan professional penyelia bebas bagi pihak pemegang saham minoriti, Malaysian Minority Stockholders Watchdog Group. Kemudian ECM Libra – Avenue (pada masa itu) secara mudah diberikan lesen universal stock broking dan dinaik taraf kepada bank pelaburan.

Khairy juga dikatakan berperanan besar dalam pengembangan strategik AirAsia, terutama dalam tempoh yang amat singkat. Kontroversi paling tiada tolok bandingnya ialah hubung kait terlalu rapat Khairy dengan ‘Budak Budak Tingkat Empat’, yang ramai percaya punca asal ketirisan kepimpinan dan ketokohan PM ‘Flip-Flop’ Abdullah. Banyak penulisan diterbitkan mengenai tempoh hayat Khairy sebenarnya tidaklah lama lagi kerana penglibatan beliau dalam pelbagai kontroversi.

Walaubagaimanapun, penawaran besok ini wajar diteliti secara rapat. Liputan media, terutama perdana keatas calon yang cukup kontroversi ini jelas menampakan percaturan yang dilakukan pihak tertinggi untuk menentukan Khairy mendapat ‘kelebihan’ dalam pertandingan Disember ini. Ini kerana calon calon lain yang menawarkan diri sebelum ini, Dato’ Mukhriz Mahathir, Dato’ Seri Dr. Mohd. Khir Toyo dan Dato’ Zahidi Zainul Abidin, diberikan liputan media ala kadar dan “sekadar melepaskan batuk ditangga semata mata”.

Semua ‘kelebihan’ yang personaliti kontroversi seperti Khairy perolehi, dalam pemilihan Disember ini, hanya akan menimbulkan kebencian rata rata rakyat Malaysia kepada dinasti PM ‘Flip-Flop’ Abdullah makin memuncak dan mungkin meluap luap. Walaupun ada pihak akan mengunakan alasan “demokrasi masih subur dalam UMNO” apabila mengunakan pencalonan Khairy semasa PM ‘Flip-Flop’ Abdullah masih lagi berkuasa, ianya ‘wayang yang tidak laku lagi’ pada kacamata rakyat marhain.

Yang nyatanya, ini semua merupakan proses yang menentukan UMNO dan BN terkubur, dalam  kepimpinan dan pemerintahan seorang Presiden yang hanya baru berusia 5 tahun Oktober ini.

Published in: on September 16, 2008 at 08:08  Comments (15)  

The URI to TrackBack this entry is: https://bigdogdotcom.wordpress.com/2008/09/16/khairy-tawar-diri-kelebihan-yang-menentukan-umno-terus-dibenci/trackback/

RSS feed for comments on this post.

15 CommentsLeave a comment

  1. lebih baik khairy simpan duit aje buat pelaburan dimasa depan, masa depan politik mu dah gelap

  2. Kes Anggkat muat dalam UMNO bukan tradisi…orang lain pun ahli umno jugak…apasal senang jer jadi orang atas…kena kaji…sebab peratusan kekalahan BN adalah Khairi…bagi kita tak perlulah kita dok bantai dia kerana tak lama lagi dia akan tenggelam begitu saja…rakyat malaysia memang tak ndak khairi

  3. Tapi sebab kepimpinan UMNO dan Pemuda UMNO bahagian dan cawangan kebanyakan nya dah dibeli, menang ler nanti Khairy.

    Makes me want to throw up.

  4. Baru demokrasi.

    Ok, Mukhriz better be ready with the lawyers’ briefcases.

    Khairy wins – any serious punters out there?

  5. As in our northern neighbour, when the embattled ruling party wanted to select a new nominee for PM re the softly spoken former judge, Somchai Wongsawat as its candidate for prime minister to succeed Samak Sundaravej, he Somchai was rejected by the people.
    Reason – Somchai is a brother-in-law of the controversial former PM, Thaksin Shinawatra on the premise that Mr Somchai would be beholden to Mr Thaksin – now in exile but facing charges of corruption relating to his five years in office.

    Similarly in our country, KJ as the dunggu son in law of our embattled PM must be so desperate and tak malu muka to want to try sniffing for the UMNO youth post. The bulk of the Silent Majority already despises the sight and sound of KJ for the all the mess and destruction he brought into UMNO politics; UMNO grassroots are most aware so such distaste sentiments. It’s best that KJ go pack his bag and together with PM’s daughter, exile themselves into Australia and enjoy the tons of money they “took” from the Rakyat and the Treasury.

  6. untuk selamatkan umno lebih baik khairy duduk diam diam, kalau tak lagi orang benci umno. apa apa pun mesti selamatkan parti dari jatuh ketangan pkr. nauzubillah.

  7. ANwar tak jadi PM hari ni dah start gaduh balik pasal pemilihan parti ?

    Biarkanlah sesiapa nak jadi calon. Orang layak tetap terpilih walaupun berbagai cara usaha dilakukan menghalangnya.

    Siapa terbaik kita tunggulah Disember nanti.

    sekarang ni berikan sokongan kepada siapa sahaja jadi Perdana Menteri kerana seluruh amanah dan juga dosa di atas bahunya.

    Kita tak perlu bimbang kerana semua ada balasan baik dan jahat.

    Takut juga jika kita tak sedar diri kita banyak lagi yang perlu diperbetulkan segera sebelum akhirat datang saat kematian kita nanti.

    salam.

    Penulis Cyber
    http://beritamalaysiakini.wordpress.com

  8. Berani Berubah semacam tagline dari kempen Omama Obama.

    How Obama Blew It
    Loserville

    By DAVE LINDORFF

    Well, it’s happened, and it’s no surprise.

    Barack Obama, the prospective Democratic presidential candidate, has managed to turn a 5-8 point lead over prospective Republican opponent John McCain into a 7-point deficit—a double-digit slide—in just two and a half months following a campaign that had voters really excited over his candidacy.

    How did he manage this feat (which is documented in the latest latest Reuters/Zogby poll)?

    Simple: he followed the tried-and-true strategy of Democratic centrist advisers who have increasingly dominated his campaign since the end of the primaries, and who have a proven track record of producing Democratic electoral disasters now for several decades.

    Like John Kerry and Al Gore before him, Obama, who ran his primary campaign as a liberal, staking out an anti-war position, has morphed over recent weeks into a Republican-lite candidate, calling for a hard line against Palestinian rights, threatening to attack Iran, calling for an expansion of the disastrous war in Afghanistan, and backing away from genuine health care reform and other important progressive goals here at home.

    One might think that after watching Democratic candidates lose the last two presidential elections by following exactly this kind of “strategy,” if it can be called that, Obama and his campaign managers would have decided to try something different, but it appears that the Democratic Party at the top is hopelessly in the grip of corporate interests that favor war, free-market nostrums and corporate welfare. (Okay, I know Gore really won the 2000 election, but he should have won it so convincingly—for example taking New Hampshire and his home state of Tennessee—that the election couldn’t have been stolen. And Kerry, similarly, should not have had his race determined by a close vote in economically distressed Ohio, which should have been his by a blowout.)

    Obama got where he is—the first African-American major party nominee and the first black candidate with a real shot at winning the White House—by appealing to the Democratic Party’s liberal base. Now Zogby reports that Obama’s support among liberals has plunged 12 percent. That’s liberals folks!

    I count myself among those on the left who have turned away from this fast-talking eel of a candidate.

    It’s not a matter of turning to McCain, who is if anything more dangerous than President Bush because of his fondness for war and his evident lack of any kind of principles, not to mention his personal greed.

    But how can I or any progressive vote for a presidential candidate who goes from opposing a war to saying he not only supports the idea of keeping troops in Iraq for another five years—the length of the entire WWII!—but who further says he won’t rule out attacking Iran, even if that country poses no imminent threat to the US, simply because it develops nuclear weapons—the same weapons that our putative friends, Pakistan and India, have? How can I vote for a candidate who wants to expand the military (by 65,000 troops) instead of shrinking this huge, bloodsucking parasite of an organization which is costing as much as the rest of the world spends on its armies?

    How can I or any progressive vote for a presidential candidate who cannot state categorically that he will defend the Constitution by reversing all of President Bush’s abuses of power and who will not promise to prosecute the president and members of his administration for any crimes committed while in office?

    If you look at Obama’s vaunted website, and check out his positions on the big issues of healthcare, education, the economy, labor, social security, etc., you can see he’s pretty good on most things (okay, his health care “reform” is a loser and will never fly. He should be calling for a nationally-run insurance system modeled on Medicare and paid for by the government). The problem is that there has been a deliberate effort to soft-pedal all of it, while backpedaling on his position on the Iraq War. It’s almost as if he and his campaign think the “smart” progressives will go to his website and be satisfied with his online positions, while the “dumb” unaffiliated voters will not go there and will just base their votes on his gauzy image TV ads. (More importantly, if he can go from anti-war to pro-war, what’s to say he won’t backpedal in office on the rest of his positions, especially if he won’t highlight and defend them vigorously on the campaign trail?)

    There has clearly been a decision made in the Obama campaign to soft-pedal liberal positions and to make Obama appear “safe” and uncontroversial.

    The result has been his precipitous slide in the polls.

    That’s not the worst of it, either. Obama is not just losing liberals in droves. Many liberals, after all, will in the end return and vote for grudgingly for Obama, though they probably won’t volunteer to do any of the critical campaign work registering voters, promoting his candidacy or getting people to the polls. The worst part is that by becoming just another middle-of-the-road, namby-pamby, Republican-lite clone of Kerry circa 2004 and Gore circa 2000, Obama is losing the young and also the disaffected, unaffiliated voters who were flocking to his campaign during the primaries. This group of erstwhile enthusiasts is down 12 percent, too. And it’s those people—particularly the unaffiliated voters–who are raising McCain’s numbers. The Zogby poll reports that McCain’s support among younger voters has reached 40 percent—not that much below Obama’s 52 percent.

    There is probably still time to turn this electoral debacle in the making around. Obama needs to come out unambiguously for a quick end to the war in Iraq. He needs to do an about face on his call for an expansion of the war in Afghanistan. He needs to flatly rule out preemptive war as a policy for the United States of America, unless the country is in danger of imminent attack. He needs to scotch plans for expanding the military, and instead to start talking about how to reduce military spending, so that those funds can be shifted to domestic priorities like improving education and dramatically increasing research into carbon-free energy production. He needs to call for a national healthcare system that will provide quality, affordable medical care for all, and he needs to call for an aggressive campaign to combat joblessness and to reduce income disparity within the US.

    Do that, and we will see an Obama presidency and a Democratic sweep of both houses of Congress.

    Continue with the present losing strategy, and we will see John McCain as president, and the continuation of a weak, compromised, sell-out Democratic Congress for at least the next four years.

    Now as sympathetic as I am to the politics espoused by Ralph Nader and by the Green Party, I’m well aware of the futility of Third Party campaigns. Even so, count me as one progressive who at this point has stopped supporting Obama.

    DAVE LINDORFF is a Philadelphia-based journalist and columnist. His latest book is “The Case for Impeachment” (St. Martin’s Press, 2006). His work is available at http://www.thiscantbehappening.net

    Nice read. and so was the kid jerlun’s blog even when there was a virus there.

  9. Here is why Mukhriz will blow it:

    A Good Example Of A Parasite
    (cerita periuk nasi berasap)

    Lehman Gone; Merrill Lynch Swallowed Up; AIG Going… Who’s Next for Madam Defarge?
    The Tumbrils Roll at Dawn
    By MIKE WHITNEY

    Bank of America is buying Merrill Lynch for $45 billion, AIG needs an emergency $40 billion bail-out from Uncle Sam to stay afloat, and Lehman Bros is kaput. Whew! The financial world has been turned upside-down overnight. It’ll be a rough day of trading ahead.”

    The news of Wall Street’s Sunday night massacre sent foreign stock markets into a deep swoon. Shares tumbled in Asia and dropped more than 4 per cent in Europe. The dollar is steadily losing ground to the euro and gold is on the rise. The question is not whether the Dow will fall, but “how far” and what affect that will have on increasingly fragile financial institutions.

    Lehman Brothers, the 158 year old Wall Street warhorse, announced Sunday that it will file for bankruptcy after weekend rescue plans broke down without finding a buyer. Fears of credit contagion and a global recession have resurfaced and become more widespread. Lehman’s failure suggests that that the other Wall Street giants will soon be following the same path to extinction. Economist Nouriel Roubini put it like this:

    “All of the independent broker dealers are going to disappear. In March it was Bear Stearns. Tonight it was Lehman and Merrill Lynch. Morgan Stanley and Goldman Sachs should go find a buyer tomorrow. The business model of broker dealers is fundamentally flawed. They cannot survive.”

    Roubini may be right. The funny thing about capitalism is that you need capital to play. When the bank-vault is full of nothing but worthless mortgage-backed securities (MBS) and overvalued junk bonds; the whole thing goes belly-up fast. That appears to be the case with Lehman Bros, the century-old Wall Street warhorse that has joined the long procession of underwater banking establishments now hurtling towards the cliff. Lehman had a great go of it during the boom times when all it took to make oodles of money was a predictable flood of low interest credit from the Fed and a compliant ratings agency that would stamp every crappy securitized pool of mortgages with a big Triple A before hawking it to some gullible investor in Shanghai or Heidelberg.

    Lehman travails are not much different from anyone else in the banking fraternity. The problem is that the entire system is under-capitalized and over-leveraged. When Bear Stearns went down last year, it was levered at a ratio of 26 to 1. When Hedgie Carlyle Capital blew up, it was levered at 32 to 1. And when Fannie and Freddie were finally taken over by the US Treasury; the two behemoths were levered at 80 to 1, which is to say that they had a one dollar capital cushion for every $80 they had loaned out. They would have continued on the same erratic path –buying up toxic mortgages and MBS from people who had no chance of ever repaying their loans — had they not been taken into federal “conservatorship”, which is a fancy way of saying they were insolvent. Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson unwisely attached a 6 inch-wide money-hose from the bowels of the Treasury to Fannie’s front office so the two mortgage giants could continue to teeter-along at taxpayer expense regardless of the fact that the securitization business model has completely broken down and foreign investors–including China–have already started cutting back on their purchases of GSE debt. This is no laughing matter. The $700 billion US current account deficit is financed through foreign investors who are getting increasingly jittery about sinking money into a system that looks more like casino-poker all the time. Here’s a clip from China daily on Friday:

    “China, which holds a fifth of its currency reserves in Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac debt, may cut the portion held in US dollars, according to China International Capital Corp (CICC), one of the nation’s biggest investment banks.

    “The crisis has made Chinese officials realize it’s a bad idea to put all their eggs in one basket,’wrote CICC Chief Economist Ha Jiming. ‘This will likely lead to greater diversification of foreign exchange reserve investments.’ China held $447.5 billion of US agency bonds as of June 2008, according to the CICC calculations using disclosures by the US Treasury. It is likely to reduce the portion of reserves in dollar assets from the current 60 percent by purchasing more non-dollar assets with new reserves, he said.”(China Daily)

    Naturally, foreign investors and central banks will curtail their purchases of US securities and Treasuries until there’s some indication that US markets have stabilized and will be able to withstand the ferocious headwinds of the biggest housing crash in history, a frozen corporate bond market, a paralyzed banking system, and steadily waning consumer demand. But Americans still seem breezily unaware of what all this means for the country’s future. They’d rather savor every new bit of gossip about the Bible beating, Grizzly-hunting Alaska governor who wants to lead the country back to Frontierland lips rather than learn about the about the firestorm raging through the financial markets.

    When the net foreign purchases of US financial assets begin to slow; the game is over. The Fed will be forced to raise interest rates to attract foreign capital which will put downward pressure on the economy and accelerate the housing crash. Paulson’s decision to provide unlimited capital to Fannie and Freddie, will stack more and more debt atop the faltering dollar and US Treasuries. It is the equivalent of lashing the greenback to an anvil and tossing it overboard. Paulson’s attempts to stave off a systemic banking crisis ensures that the federal government will undergo an unprecedented funding crisis sometime in the near future. There will be higher taxes for the battered middle class and higher interest rates for businesses and consumers. This will trigger a protracted economic slowdown and weaker growth. Credit will get tighter, banks will default, unemployment will soar and GDP will shrivel. A negative feedback loop will develop from the faltering financial system to the real economy; a vicious circle ending in massive layoffs, weakening demand, falling stock prices, and withering consumer confidence. Welcome to Soup kitchen USA.

    Presently, Paulson and New York Fed chief Timothy Geithner are pressing Wall Street banking elites to pony-up enough money to buy up Lehman’s devalued real estate assets. The Fed’s proposal is similar to Greenspan’s rescue of Long-Term Management LP (LTCM) which roiled financial markets in the late 1990s. Paulson has signaled that there be NO government bailout like Bear Stearns when the Fed bought up $29 billion in mortgage-related assets. The Fed is tapped out, having already committed half of its balance sheet — nearly $500 billion — in repos through its “auction facilities” which have recently skyrocketed to record highs of $19 billion per week for the last 3 weeks. The crisis is deepening by the day. Similarly, the Treasury has hitched its wagon to Fannie and Freddie which expands the National Debt by another $5.2 trillion and seriously undermines the “full faith and credit” of the US in the process. Keep in mind, the biggest source of American power is its access to cheap capital via the US taxpayer. Paulson has now put that source of revenue at risk by nationalizing the housing industry and burdening the taxpayer with (potentially) astronomical future obligations, even though he knows full-well that the market could drop another 15 to 20 per cent before the end of 2010. Paulson’s recklessness has doomed the country to years of struggle.

    As of Sunday afternoon, no deal had been struck to buy Lehman Bros. and it looked like the bank was headed for bankruptcy. Wall Street prepared for the worst. Nouriel Roubini gave a particularly grim assessment of a Lehman default in his latest post on his blogsite Global EconoMonitor:

    “It is now clear that we are again – as we were in mid- March at the time of the Bear Stearns collapse – an epsilon away from a generalized run on most of the shadow banking system, especially the other major independent broker dealers (Lehman, Merrill Lynch, Morgan Stanley, Goldman Sachs). If Lehman does not find a buyer over the weekend and the counterparties of Lehman withdraw their credit lines on Monday, you will have not only a collapse of Lehman but also the beginning of a run on the other independent broker dealers…Then this run would lead to a massive systemic meltdown of the financial system. That is the reason why the Fed has convened in emergency meetings the heads of all major Wall Street firms on Friday and again today to convince them not to pull the plug on Lehman and maintain their exposure to this distressed broker dealer.”

    The giant investment banks are inescapably trapped in a net of complex, unregulated, over-the-counter derivatives contracts which — given the right conditions — could threaten every financial skyscraper in lower Manhattan.

    A sizable portion of Lehman’s $128 billion in long-term debt will probably be ring-fenced in a “bad bank” which will hold its toxic mortgage-backed assets and be financed by either the Treasury or the other Wall Street banks. The good assets can then be separated and sold off to either Bank of America or Barclays, the two prospective buyers. That way, according to Forbes, “the bad bank would be kept afloat while its assets could be unwound over a period of time in a way that wouldn’t disrupt the financial system more than it already has been.”

    Some variation of the “Forbes solution” will probably be enacted, but, let’s be clear; this is really no solution at all. It’s just a way of buying time by rolling-over debt to avoid the ugly consequences of accounting for the massive losses. In other words, it is cheaper to keep burning up capital to prop up moribund assets than take the loss and make a genuine effort to restructure the dysfunctional system. Here’s how former Fed chief Paul Volcker summed it up just two weeks ago:

    “This bright new system, this practice in the United States, this practice in the United Kingdom and elsewhere, has broken down. Growth in the economy in this decade will be the slowest of any decade since the Great Depression, right in the middle of all this financial innovation. The current financial system is dysfunctional. That is a polite way of saying it failed.”

    Securitization has failed. The cuts to the Fed’s Funds rate have failed. The auction facilities — TAF, PDCF, and TSLF — have all failed. The off-balance sheets operations, the debt-pyramiding asset-inflation, the Enron-style accounting, the SIVs, the CP, MBS, CDOs, have failed. The subprimes, the piggybacks, the option-ARMs, the Alt-As have all failed. Structured finance has failed. The system doesn’t work; won’t work; can’t work. It’s built on the misguided assumption that capitalism can thrive without capital; that one dollar can be infinitely magnified by complex debt-instruments and mega-leveraging to generate real wealth and keep the wheels of finance and industry humming along. It can’t be done. The system is under-water. Economist and author Henry Liu put it like this:

    “Yet this approach is preferred by those in authority, trapped in self deception about unregulated market capitalism being still fundamentally sound. They try to calm markets by asserting that the current turmoil is merely a minor liquidity bottleneck that can be handled by the central bank releasing more liquidity against the full face value of collateral of declining worth. (There are) No signs of any coherent grand strategy or plan to save the cancerous system from structural self-destruction.”

    Instead, the marauding of a handful of Wall Street “innovators”–drunk with hubris and blinded by their own bizarre sense of entitlement—have thrust the financial markets to the brink of catastrophe and pushed the the broader “real” economy towards a painful retrenchment. Now everyone will pay for the greed of the few.

    So, what’s next?

    An article in the Financial Times spells it out, but government officials will undoubtedly deny it until after the November presidential election.

    From the Financial Times:

    “The debate over whether an RTC-style (Resolution Trust Corporation)vehicle is needed – perhaps just to ring-fence troubled mortgage assets – also gained traction among central bankers at the Jackson Hole symposium hosted by the Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City in August….

    “The problem that an RTC vehicle could help to solve is that there are very few buyers for troubled mortgage assets, and few investors now willing to inject fresh capital into the tattered balance sheets of the banks left holding them. As a result, banks such as Lehman and Washington Mutual have struggled to sell their soured mortgage portfolios, and to broker deals for fresh capital. The takeover of Fannie and Freddie, which virtually wiped out preferred equity holders, has also made banks’ access to the preferred capital market increasingly difficult. Through a new RTC, the government could provide financial support if needed in return for a share in potential profits once the assets were liquidated.”

    What the Feds are refusing to admit, is that there is already a plan in place to make the government an active, “shareholding” partner in failing commercial banks. (There’s no way the FDIC could pay for all the projected losses anyway) That will give the US Treasury the authority to provide insolvent banks with enough capital to muddle through while their impaired assets are liquidated via the RTC; a morgue for distressed mortgage-backed garbage.

    How this will affect the already-anemic dollar is anyone’s guess. But it won’t be pretty.

    Mike Whitney lives in Washington state. He can be reached at fergie@msn.com

    Nota:

    Mukhriz, walaupun kita bukan pakar dalam bidang ekonomi glokal maupun global, janganlah cerita celaru politik anwar-abdullah melalaikan kita tentang pentingnya dapur nasi kita halal dan terus terurus.

  10. malaysia will have dynasty goverment like singapore, but worst, in-law dynasty..

    lim-kit-siang –> lim Guang Eng
    Karpal Singh –> Singh Deo …
    Anwar Ibrahim –> Nurul Izzah
    Mahathir M –> Mukhriz Mahathir
    Husseion Onn –> Hishamudin
    Razak –> Najib

    but
    Paklah –> Khairy Jamaluddin.. ???????

    -local news gadget-
    http://www.arkib.com.my

    It is not completely fair.

    Unlike Lim’s, Karpal’s and Anwar’s, Tun Razak’s, Tun Hussein’s and Tun Mahathir’s off springs did not enter politics when they father was still in power and active in mainstream politics. These people offer themselves when their fathers no longer in active politics.

    There is a difference there.

  11. Bagus lah. Mempercepatkan lagi process tukar milik jawatan PM.

  12. I am neutral, I am not a great fan of Mukriz, nor Khairy nor Dr Khir. However, at least we know now that there will be a contest for the UMNO Youth Chief post. All the candidates must now show how much they really want the post and convince the voters that they are the best candidates who could rejuvenate UMNO Youth after the lustreless and boring leadership of Hishammuddin who virtually turned the Youth Wing into just an Echo Chamber for whatever decision made by the President.

    I would suggest also that the new incoming UMNO leadership decides that the UMNO youth Chief Post holder should not hold a Full Minister Post, if need be they should hold at best just a Deputy Minister Post or NO post at all so that he could concentrate to lead UMNO youth 100%.

  13. Khir Toyo datang dari bawah , berjiwa Rakyat dan mudah didekati (silap kes penyapu je) oklah

    Mukhriz golongan berada, tapi ada semacam gap dari segi hubungan, tapi sebab bapa ada brand dan ada ciri yang diikuti kira ok jugalah.

    KJ permata hitam jatuh dari langit, bertuah sebab pilih Pak Lah jadi mertua. Tapi nampak rakus dan gila kuasa, boleh jadi terjual negara. Tak oklah budak ni.

  14. […] seorang yang menerima begitu hebat sokongan media semasa mengumumkan bertanding jawatan bertaraf Naib Presiden Ramadhan lepas, beliau dipaparkan sebagai calon ‘pedigree’ dan dilihat sebagai mendabik […]

  15. […] Hassan and then the recently resigned Deputy Chief of Staff in Prime Minister’s Office Khairy “The Most Powerful 28 years old in Malaysia” Jamaluddin into the […]


Leave a Reply

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 )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google 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 )

Connecting to %s

<span>%d</span> bloggers like this: