KJ Vs Rafizi

This posting is about  the debate organised by Malaysian students’ NGO United Kingdom and Eire Council (UKEC) between UMNO Youth Chief and MP for Rembau YB Tuan Haji Khairy Jamaluddin and PKR Director of Strategy Rafizi Ramli, which took place in a Thistle hotel in London, recently.

About 1,000 Malaysians, especially students attended.

We would appreciate all comments are centered to the points presented and argued in this debate only.

*Updated Saturday 4 Feb 2012 1200hrs

Published in: on February 3, 2012 at 21:45  Comments (11)  

The URI to TrackBack this entry is: https://bigdogdotcom.wordpress.com/2012/02/03/kj-vs-rafizi/trackback/

RSS feed for comments on this post.

11 CommentsLeave a comment

  1. Brader…talks are cheap!

  2. kj menang.

    • kwn2 bagi menang le

  3. It is one thing to debate on the socio political and economy of Malaysia in the comfort of a venue in London with audience laughing and clapping. But it is another thing to face the stark reality of managing a multi racial country. Public Debate is a second rate publicity seeking approach when it comes to arguing policies and managing a country. This kind of debate is an American style during presidential campaigns. But who needs that kind of debate in managing Malaysia. Only the oppositions who have so much time in their hands and look at governing a country from a narrow lens of an armchair critic. Also the debaters talked about liberal politics and liberalism. These have existed sincr the times of Hobbes and Locke and not new products of younger generation political adpurants. Malaysia has chosen a political model that takes into consideration the perculatities of Malaysia and its multi racial and multi religious compositions. Its guided democracy of constitutional monarchy has worked for the stability of this nation. Can a too liberal Malaysia do the job in sustaining harmony and stability. The more liberal the country the more checks and balances through legal neans are required. One of the debaters criticised DPM and PERKASA over a bangsa Malaysia related issue. Could the debater fault DPM and Perkasa if the debater didnt even mention on what premise did he mean by bangsa Malaysia? I agree with the govt not wanting to debate with the oppositions. The govt is governing and managing the country based on established policies, directions and plans of action to address the realities out there, whereas oppositions will just yak, yak, yak thinking they are right on every turn and every issue.

  4. Corrrections on typo error : ‘political aspirants ‘ not ‘political adpurants.’
    ‘Legal means’ not ‘legal neans’.

  5. I think any rational person can see that KJ did well. One thing that perhaps nobody has commented is also the fact that the audience were very matured. They cheered and clapped for any good points presented regardless if they came from Khairy or Rafizi. Such a scene would never happen in a very politicised and heavily partisan climate in Malaysia.

  6. Frankly, KJ was a better speaker

  7. This type of debate is only palatable to the Bangsa Bangsar Commune. Try holding it around Felda Sayong,Batu Buruk, Jinjang or Jalan Klang Lama , to test how sophisticated the mindset of the rakyat presently.
    Such liberal thinking and action advocated by both debaters would further aggravate the fragile state that we are in now in terms of race relationship.
    Imagine China having full democracy, a China spring will be in the making, where the aftermath may see China being carved into seperate self ruled states.
    Even the doses of liberal thinking of the West are marred by intolerence of foreign culture eg: the French banning burqa, and David Cameron lamenting the lack of assimilation of the Saxon culture by the immigrants.

  8. Political theories are well and good. However what matters are the concrete actions that politicians take to produce results.

    Gifted speakers can sway voters but choosing the right candidate must be based on the candidate’s capacity to realise on those verbal promises – which requires sacrifice and commitment.

    Actions speaks louder than mere words.

  9. Thanks Big Dog.

  10. Why didn’t son in law did why he was talking about when he and his 4th floor boys were running the Sleepy Head government? He is just bullshitting. When Sleeeping Head was in power, he did all the nonsense and screwed up the country and the government.

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: