You have until 23.59 today…
… to vote for the essay you like in the Essay Writing Competition organised by the Workers’ Party Youth Wing as part of this year’s National Day Celebrations - “What is your ideal Singapore?”. Vote for them before 16 August 2009 by clicking on the ‘like’ link to increase the score that the essay you favour gets. You can always ‘like’ more than 1 essay.
The essays are:
Entry #1 - Natasha Lai Huiling, 22
Entry #2 - Kevin Tan, 20
Entry #3 - Jasline Yeow Pui Yee, 30
Entry #4 - Huang Xinyuan, 15
Entry #5 - Crystal Ong Min Ning, 15
Entry #6 - Terence Lee, 23
Entry #7 - Khairulanwar Zani, 20
Entry #8 - Edward Lim, 22
Entry #9 - Maurice Woo, 20
Entry #10 - Elvin Ong, 24
Entry #11 - Foo Zhou Jie Aloysius, 19
Of course, if you happen to read them after 2359hrs tonight, you can still ‘like’ the essays, just that it will not contribute to the final score for the essays.
An ideal Singapore and wishes for the Nation
Do you have an ideal Singapore in mind, one place where you truly call home, no ifs no buts, no complains and nothing yuo need to tolerate, just somewhere that closely resembles your version of paradise? Ok, paradise is a mythical place and no where on Earth can truly claim to be the perfect paradise, but one can surely dream right?
Some young people penned down their vision of an ideal Singapore, and submitted their entries to an Essay Writing Competition organised by the Workers’ Party Youth Wing (WPYW). The deadline for submission is today - 9 Aug, so you could spend part of today to write a short 500-word essay and stand to win Borders gift vouchers worth as much as $150. Simply send the essay to essay@wp.sg, but of course you would want to read the Terms to Participants first. Alternatively, you can also go to WPYW’s Facebook page to vote on essays that you like.
Of course, not everyone has a flair for writing, but I am sure everyone has a desire/want/wish for the kind of country they want. Earlier this month, I started a hashtag (#ndp09wish) on Twitter to encourage people to condense these thoughts into the 140 characters of Twitter, and it is interesting to see the kinds of wishes people come up with. I copied some more interesting ones below:
@anarchetype I wish we can eat and drink on all public transport #ndp09wish 15 days ago
@wpyw A good wish! RT @csllim : I wish all Singporeans dare to wish#ndp09wish 16 days ago
@dwcw #ndp09wish I wish there would be no such thing as STOMPers. 16 days ago
@josephinekoh #ndp09wish I wish that the Singapore govt would love us more and that we learn to love one another. 16 days ago
@sharoncsy I wish for Singaporeans to not be afraid of realizing their dreams, even if it means dropping out of the ‘paper chase’. #ndp09wish 16 days ago
@tweetsg I wish smelly NS men can still take public transport #ndp09wish 16 days ago
@wpyw RT @eechuan : My wish for SG is for all to realise that there is more to life than GDP growth and $$$ #ndp09wish 16 days ago
To bring it one step further later, I was thinking it would be interesting to be able to add a little Singapore Flag in my Twitter avatar, just to display my patriotism and started a Twibbon called Singapore Wish, and a new hashtag (#sgwish), and hope that the wishes for Singapore goes beyond today. I view Singapore Wish as both our wishes for Singapore, and our aspirations for ourselves. Our hopes and dreams should not have a deadline.
To add the Singapore Flag in your Twitter avatar, click on the following image:
So, beyond the celebrations today, why not spend some time to pause and reflect on your dream for the country and your dream for yourself.
“Lighting up our City Centre” and EarthHour
I am concerned about the Climate Change problem, and thinks that EarthHour is a good idea to spread the message to more people that we need to be more concerned about the effects of things we do to the only Earth we have. However, while the Climate Change issue has gotten more recognition over the years, it is telling that some people/organisations just jump on the bandwagon to show the world that they too are ‘in it’, while not really having the heart to solve the problem.
In Feb, The Straits Times carried an article on the target of getting 1m people in Singapore to join in EarthHour this year. On the same day, in the Life section, there was another article on the new Illuma shopping centre coming up in the Bugis area, and the Singapore Lighting Master Plan was mentioned in it. Seeing such a coincidence, I decided to dig a little more into this.
What I found out is that in 2006, URA engaged some lighting consultants and launched a plan to light up our city centre. Part of the plans is to incentivise owners of existing building to set up ADDITIONAL lighting and for owners of newly built buildings to incorporate more lighting into their plans, by either giving them a maximum of 2% of additional gross floor area or a maximum of S$500,000 to implement lighting in accordance to the master plan. There was even an exhibition showcasing what the final result could look like (http://www.ura.gov.sg/lightingplan/). The following image is one of the images used in the site.
The masterplan suggested that the owners light up the buildings from 7pm to 11pm on weekends.
So, even if all the buildings along the the Singapore skyline signed up for EarthHour, we only saved 1 hour of electricity, but once this plan comes in effect, we are spending extra (4 x 2 x 52) 416 hours of electricity on lighting. I wonder if this is an appropriate message fro the Government to the people on its attitude towards the Climate Change issue.
Is there anything wrong with the current skyline? From what I gather from the site, the Lighting Masterplan will “develop a signature image for the city, create a beautiful nightscape and enliven the visitor’s experience”. In the larger scheme of things, signature image, beautiful nightscape and enlivened experiences would probably count for nothing when we have to bear with the consequences of Climate Change.
Is the Hansard verbatim, or near-verbatim?
My blog post on my recent visit to the Committee of Supply debate in Parliament was initially written with the intention of telling people that they should take the time off to watch Parliamentary debates in person, rather than rely on media reports on what happened within the chambers.
Interestingly I touched on a topic that many Singaporeans were concerned with, which was at the same time not found to be reported in any mainstream media, thereby proving my point that it is better to be there.
After my reporting, I was also very keenly watching the Singapore Parliament Report (or commonly known as Hansard reports) to see how the episode I witnessed will be recorded. I used a search term of ‘GIC’ and looked at the report dated 2009-02-10, under HEAD M - MINISTRY OF FINANCE.
Here’s an extract of what I see:
Ms Sylvia Lim: Sir, earlier the Senior Minister of State mentioned that the impact of the current turmoil was to reduce the overall portfolio value of Temasek by about 31%, if I heard her correctly. Can she also tell us by how much the GIC overall portfolio has been reduced in the percentage terms, because I did not quite hear that.
Mrs Lim Hwee Hua: Sir, I have given that reply to a previous parliamentary question, that GIC has actually registered a significantly lower reduction in value than the World Equity Index which I believe was 41% - let me just clarify that it is actually in the Hansard*.
*Vol. 85, 4th February 2009.
The Chairman: You want to clarify it some other time, Mrs Lim?
Mrs Lim Hwee Hua: Yes.
Hmmm… it is definitely not what I witnessed. I am still pretty sure that to the person watching the debate that day, the answer from Mrs Lim Hwee Hua with the 41% figure was NOT referring the World Equity Index. Mrs Lim Hwee Hua’s reply was not so fluent and I remember her sentence structure to be more broken, since she was looking for words to answer Ms Sylvia Lim’s question.
I did a little more digging around and looked for the Vol. 85 Hansard report and the following is the relevant section:
The Senior Minister of State for Finance (Mrs Lim Hwee Hua) (for the Minister for Finance): Mr Speaker, Sir, the Government’s mandate for GIC is to achieve a reasonable rate of return above global inflation, over a long-term horizon. In the last 20 years to March 2008, the average annual rate of return of the portfolio was 5.8% in Singapore dollar terms. This was 4.5% above global inflation. This data and more information can actually be found in the GIC Report published in September 2008.
GIC has performed well over the long-term, in accordance with its mandate. In the current financial meltdown, GIC’s investments have lost value, just like any other institutional investors. The overall value has, however, fallen by much less than the decline in global equity markets of 42% for 2008, mitigated by GIC’s decision early in the crisis to reduce its equity market exposures, and its portfolio diversification strategy. Further, GIC takes a long-term approach to investment management, which enables it to ride through the cycles, including the current severe downcycle. It is difficult to make meaningful direct comparisons between the performance of GIC and other institutional investors as the investment horizons, objectives and parameters vary widely.
So the number for decline in global equity markets for 2008 is 42%.
A look at the report for 2009-02-10, Mrs Lim Hwee Hua actually re-stated the 42% figure earlier in the same session.
With regard to how the portfolio as a whole has performed, like what I had mentioned in a reply to another Parliamentary Question last week, while GIC’s investments have diminished in value just like any other institutional investors’, it has fallen by much less than the decline in global equity markets indices of 42% for 2008.
If Mrs Lim Hwee Hua had intended to deflect’s Ms Sylvia Lim’s question by giving the same textbook answer given earlier, then it is strange that a Senior Minister of State can forget so quickly a figure that she rattled off earlier in the day (off a written speech) and make a mistake of quoting a different (albeit near) figure of 41%.
In any case, I think I have also said it in one of the replies to comments to my blog, the 41% figure was something that seemed to be plugged out of thin air, but it is definitely obvious to the observer that Mrs Lim Hwee Hua was seemingly trying to grapple with the pointed question from Ms Sylvia Lim, and almost gave away the ‘big national secret’.
Enough of whether GIC loss 41%, or it was just a slip of the tongue of Mrs Lim Hwee Hua. The more important thing this episode has taught me is another thing - that the Hansard reports, contrary to popular belief, are not verbatim. This means that the Hansard reports do not necessarily contain word-for-word of what is being said in the Parliament. I did a quick check on the history of Hansard reports, and found that in the parliaments around the world where Hansard reports are kept, it is always stated that it is a near-verbatim record. Meaning, it is as close to verbatim as possible, but never word-for-word.
Looking at the Standing Orders of the Parliament of Singapore, we can also see the section under Official Reports:
29. − (1) An official report of all speeches made in the Chamber and debates on a Bill in Select Committee which shall be as nearly as possible verbatim, shall be prepared in such form as the Speaker may direct.
(2) A first copy of the report shall be sent to each Member as soon as practicable after the conclusion of each sitting. This first copy of the report shall be exclusively for the use of Members in relation to the business of Parliament conducted in the Chamber or in the Select Committee as the case may be, and subject thereto, shall not be for publication.
(3) If no Member in writing addressed to the Chief Reporter and Editor seeks to make any change in the report within seventy-two hours from the time when the first copy of the report was despatched to each Member, the report shall be published without correction.
(4) Any dispute as to the correctness of the report of any speech contained in the first copy of the report and any request for any material change in the report shall be referred to the Speaker who shall rule thereon and shall direct publication of the speech in accordance with his ruling which shall not be called in question.
In other words, it is confirmed that the Singapore Hansard is also near-verbatim, but not verbatim. Also, according to 29(4), the Speaker has the last say in what is published in the Singapore Hansard.
I checked the ChannelNewsAsia videos of the budget debate, but could not find the portion of the debate. I checked a few other day’s vidoes, and realised that although there are many videos of the Parliament debates available, the videos don’t cover every minute of the debates. Now I start to wonder whether the $110 of TV and Radio license should be used in financing the TV stations to ensure that Singaporeans can view every minute of the Parliament debates, rather than sponsor shows like Little Nonya (which I enjoy, but does not really fall under the category of a public broadcasting programme).
So now with the publication of the Hansard and no video from our TV and Radio License funded public broadcasting programmes to back up my narrative of what happened in Parliament on 10 Feb 2009, it is up to you, my readers, to discern whether I was speaking the truth, or I am just another (not faceless, not pseudonym wielding) blogger that spews half-truths or un-truths.
Redrawing of Polling Districts
Latest at 5:00pm today: http://www.elections.gov.sg/gazette/Boundaries%20of%20altered%20polling%20districts.pdf
I misunderstood earlier that this means the Electoral Boundaries are being redrawn. Someone pointed out to me this is just a re-designation of polling districts within the existing electoral division.
Maybe it is just one of the ‘routine’ things done like the update of the Register of Electors.
Watch it live!
As with rock concerts, watching something on TV never beats watching it live - right there, right then.
This is what motivated me to attend one of the Parliament Committee of Supplies debate for Budget 2009. I chose the day when the budget Ministry of Education was slated to be discussed, since I have a 5-yr-old who will be most directly impacted by the recommendations laid out by the recent Primary Education Review and Implementation (PERI) Committee report.
It is not my first time attending the Parliament debates, so I took note of some things before going, so that I won’t be turned away. Dressing is important, as I had a friend who was once rejected by the staff from entry because she was wearing jeans. From my observations, office wear like business shirts and pants will do, and sometimes I also see some men wear short-sleeved shirts with collar. I also remembered to remove my little Swiss Army knife from my keychain and leave it at home, while switching my phone to a non-camera phone. Previous experience tells me that I had to deposit these items at the counter before being allowed into the building. I understand the Swiss Army knife part, since I cannot go on an airplane with that too, but I am always wondering why they don’t allow camera phones. It is not as if the area accessible by the public has any sensitive information that cannot be leaked out.
However, the most important thing to bring is an identification document - NRIC or driver’s license. With that, I was issued with a pass indicating which seat number in which row to take.
After going through the necessary security check at the ground floor, I took the lift to level 3, walked along a long corridor until I reached another security checkpoint. Past this second checkpoint, are some staff who guided me to my seat.
From my understanding, there are two sides of the Parliament, one with the front row occupied by the Cabinet and back rows occupied by the various SMS, SPS, MS etc; the other side has Mr Low Thia Khiang occupying the middle seat, “eyeball-to-eyeball” with the PM (the exact words I hear from a staff leading a student tour of the Parliament), and other MPs (usually chairpersons of GPCs - the Government Parliamentary Committee - who will also take the respective Ministers to task on policies). Mr Chiam See Tong sits on one side of the first row, and Ms Sylvia Lim is allocated a seat on the last row, alongside PAP back-benchers and Nominated MPs.
Similarly, the public gallery is divided into 2 sides, and I am glad that I am usually allocated the side facing the opposition MPs. After entering the public gallery, one has to bow to the Speaker, if Parliament is in session, and take one’s allocated seat as soon as possible. Anyone can leave anytime, as long as he bows to the Speaker before leaving the gallery.
On this particular day, 10 Feb 2009, the public gallery was quite crowded. Part of the reason, I understand later from a teacher I know, is that some teachers are asked to attend the session where the Ministry of Education’s budget is debated, so that they have a better understanding of the policies. Other than the groups of teachers, I observed the usual crowd of retirees who has nothing to do, civil servants who are there to listen to the debates about their own Ministries, students on a tour of the Parliament (and usually causes the most commotion when they enter and leave the public gallery) and a handful of people like me who are interested in watching the debates live.
Other than the actual serious atmosphere experienced, there are a few other things that cannot be observed by simply reading the papers or watching TV news on Parliament.
One thing that striked me time and again, is how big the Parliament chamber seems to me. It is not about the actual size of the building, but mainly because of the high level of absence I see even when Parliament is in session. On this particular day, at 1400hrs, I counted that the side of the Parliament I was facing had 12 seats occupied, out of 46 seats in total. Out of the 12 seats, 3 were the opposition MPs. At 1500hrs I did another count, this time it was 20 occupied seats. Although it is common for MPs to walk in and out the chambers, to attend to other matters or take a break, I really think that maybe they should be spending more time within the chambers, even to just listen to the points of other MPs. If they really has something to attend to, maybe they should take a leave of absence, rather than “mark attendence” and disappear for a large part of the day’s session.
There was also one incident which I witnessed, which is a bad reflection of the personality of a particular MP: Dr Ong Seh Hong. When he entered the chamber, he did the same thing as others, take a bow, and moved to his seat. As he was sitting down, I saw that he popped a candy into his mouth, and with a very fluid action, flicked his left hand towards the back of his seat. When his left hand returned to meet his right, I saw a clear wrapper sitting on the wooden platform behind his seat! About an hour later, I checked to see if the wrapper was still there, this time I think I saw 2 wrappers instead! So maybe that’s why camera phones are not allowed in the public gallery!
Other little interesting things to watch out for are the body languages, tones, accents and bad-hair days for the MPs. There was a very passionate speech by MP Denise Phua about her observation of the village model in which normal students and special ed students can integrate very well. When read from the papers, this passion is not adequately conveyed. As for bad-hair day, it suffices for me to say that I guess many of the MPs would also see a “pointy-hair boss” that day.
The un-reported Lim Hwee Hua - GIC episode
Of course, these little observations are what spiced up the trip to the Parliament, but the main thing I get from being there, instead of relying on mainstream media, are the un-reported stuff.
That day happened to be the day when the budget for Ministry of Finance was debated. Many MPs, including Ms Sylvia Lim, filed ‘cuts’ asking the Ministry of Finance to disclose how much reserve Singapore still has, and how much losses have the 2 SWFs - GIC and Temasek incurred.
Mrs Lim Hwee Hua, SMS (Senior Minister of State, and yes, they used this acronym there) for Finance, read her reply from her file, and gave a fluent answer (re-hashing) of the Government’s stand on why we should not disclose the amount of reserves we have, and that the SWFs did not do as badly as the various indices tracking the similiar markets.
She also added that Temasek Holding’s portfolio fell 31%. When it was time for clarification questions, Ms Sylvia Lim rose to ask about the exact figure for losses incurred by GIC, since no specific number was quoted, while the 31% was disclosed for Temasek. Mrs Lim Hwee Hua was stumped for words for a few seconds, stammered a little, mumbled something about “it was reported during the budget debate last week”, while frantically flipping her file infront of her to look for an answer. Sylvia Lim spread her hands in a gesture asking “what number”, and Lim Hwee Hua, after not being able to give a specific number, suddenly succumbed and threw out a number, “41%”. The Speaker was nice to Lim Hwee Hua, seeing that she was not very sure of the number herself, and asked if she wants to clarify the number later. She took the opportunity, and since it was also time for the recess at 1520hrs, the Speaker declared that the Parliament go into recess.
As I stood up to walk out the public gallery to a much needed toilet break, I saw Minister of Finance Tharman Shanmugaratnam walk towards Lim Hwee Hua. He did not look fierce, but I assume she must be getting her earful from him right there.
I scoured Straits Times, Zaobao, Channel News Asia, Today, and found no mention of this incident. So if I did not attend the Parliament live that day, I would not have known such an episode happened.
In any case, I am still eagerly waiting for Mrs Lim Hwee Hua to clarify the figure, the amount that GIC has lost last year.
Watch it live!
As with rock concerts, watching something on TV never beats watching it live - right there, right then.
This is what motivated me to attend one of the Parliament Committee of Supplies debate for Budget 2009. I chose the day when the budget Ministry of Education was slated to be discussed, since I have a 5-yr-old who will be most directly impacted by the recommendations laid out by the recent Primary Education Review and Implementation (PERI) Committee report.
It is not my first time attending the Parliament debates, so I took note of some things before going, so that I won’t be turned away. Dressing is important, as I had a friend who was once rejected by the staff from entry because she was wearing jeans. From my observations, office wear like business shirts and pants will do, and sometimes I also see some men wear short-sleeved shirts with collar. I also remembered to remove my little Swiss Army knife from my keychain and leave it at home, while switching my phone to a non-camera phone. Previous experience tells me that I had to deposit these items at the counter before being allowed into the building. I understand the Swiss Army knife part, since I cannot go on an airplane with that too, but I am always wondering why they don’t allow camera phones. It is not as if the area accessible by the public has any sensitive information that cannot be leaked out.
However, the most important thing to bring is an identification document - NRIC or driver’s license. With that, I was issued with a pass indicating which seat number in which row to take.
After going through the necessary security check at the ground floor, I took the lift to level 3, walked along a long corridor until I reached another security checkpoint. Past this second checkpoint, are some staff who guided me to my seat.
From my understanding, there are two sides of the Parliament, one with the front row occupied by the Cabinet and back rows occupied by the various SMS, SPS, MS etc; the other side has Mr Low Thia Khiang occupying the middle seat, “eyeball-to-eyeball” with the PM (the exact words I hear from a staff leading a student tour of the Parliament), and other MPs (usually chairpersons of GPCs - the Government Parliamentary Committee - who will also take the respective Ministers to task on policies). Mr Chiam See Tong sits on one side of the first row, and Ms Sylvia Lim is allocated a seat on the last row, alongside PAP back-benchers and Nominated MPs.
Similarly, the public gallery is divided into 2 sides, and I am glad that I am usually allocated the side facing the opposition MPs. After entering the public gallery, one has to bow to the Speaker, if Parliament is in session, and take one’s allocated seat as soon as possible. Anyone can leave anytime, as long as he bows to the Speaker before leaving the gallery.
On this particular day, 10 Feb 2009, the public gallery was quite crowded. Part of the reason, I understand later from a teacher I know, is that some teachers are asked to attend the session where the Ministry of Education’s budget is debated, so that they have a better understanding of the policies. Other than the groups of teachers, I observed the usual crowd of retirees who has nothing to do, civil servants who are there to listen to the debates about their own Ministries, students on a tour of the Parliament (and usually causes the most commotion when they enter and leave the public gallery) and a handful of people like me who are interested in watching the debates live.
Other than the actual serious atmosphere experienced, there are a few other things that cannot be observed by simply reading the papers or watching TV news on Parliament.
One thing that striked me time and again, is how big the Parliament chamber seems to me. It is not about the actual size of the building, but mainly because of the high level of absence I see even when Parliament is in session. On this particular day, at 1400hrs, I counted that the side of the Parliament I was facing had 12 seats occupied, out of 46 seats in total. Out of the 12 seats, 3 were the opposition MPs. At 1500hrs I did another count, this time it was 20 occupied seats. Although it is common for MPs to walk in and out the chambers, to attend to other matters or take a break, I really think that maybe they should be spending more time within the chambers, even to just listen to the points of other MPs. If they really has something to attend to, maybe they should take a leave of absence, rather than “mark attendence” and disappear for a large part of the day’s session.
There was also one incident which I witnessed, which is a bad reflection of the personality of a particular MP: Dr Ong Seh Hong. When he entered the chamber, he did the same thing as others, take a bow, and moved to his seat. As he was sitting down, I saw that he popped a candy into his mouth, and with a very fluid action, flicked his left hand towards the back of his seat. When his left hand returned to meet his right, I saw a clear wrapper sitting on the wooden platform behind his seat! About an hour later, I checked to see if the wrapper was still there, this time I think I saw 2 wrappers instead! So maybe that’s why camera phones are not allowed in the public gallery!
Other little interesting things to watch out for are the body languages, tones, accents and bad-hair days for the MPs. There was a very passionate speech by MP Denise Phua about her observation of the village model in which normal students and special ed students can integrate very well. When read from the papers, this passion is not adequately conveyed. As for bad-hair day, it suffices for me to say that I guess many of the MPs would also see a “pointy-hair boss” that day.
The un-reported Lim Hwee Hua - GIC episode
Of course, these little observations are what spiced up the trip to the Parliament, but the main thing I get from being there, instead of relying on mainstream media, are the un-reported stuff.
That day happened to be the day when the budget for Ministry of Finance was debated. Many MPs, including Ms Sylvia Lim, filed ‘cuts’ asking the Ministry of Finance to disclose how much reserve Singapore still has, and how much losses have the 2 SWFs - GIC and Temasek incurred.
Mrs Lim Hwee Hua, SMS (Senior Minister of State, and yes, they used this acronym there) for Finance, read her reply from her file, and gave a fluent answer (re-hashing) of the Government’s stand on why we should not disclose the amount of reserves we have, and that the SWFs did not do as badly as the various indices tracking the similiar markets.
She also added that Temasek Holding’s portfolio fell 31%. When it was time for clarification questions, Ms Sylvia Lim rose to ask about the exact figure for losses incurred by GIC, since no specific number was quoted, while the 31% was disclosed for Temasek. Mrs Lim Hwee Hua was stumped for words for a few seconds, stammered a little, mumbled something about “it was reported during the budget debate last week”, while frantically flipping her file infront of her to look for an answer. Sylvia Lim spread her hands in a gesture asking “what number”, and Lim Hwee Hua, after not being able to give a specific number, suddenly succumbed and threw out a number, “41%”. The Speaker was nice to Lim Hwee Hua, seeing that she was not very sure of the number herself, and asked if she wants to clarify the number later. She took the opportunity, and since it was also time for the recess at 1520hrs, the Speaker declared that the Parliament go into recess.
As I stood up to walk out the public gallery to a much needed toilet break, I saw Minister of Finance Tharman Shanmugaratnam walk towards Lim Hwee Hua. He did not look fierce, but I assume she must be getting her earful from him right there.
I scoured Straits Times, Zaobao, Channel News Asia, Today, and found no mention of this incident. So if I did not attend the Parliament live that day, I would not have known such an episode happened.
In any case, I am still eagerly waiting for Mrs Lim Hwee Hua to clarify the figure, the amount that GIC has lost last year.
[Update: see Is the Hansard verbatim, or near-verbatim? for a follow up to this post]
犯太岁？
今天是正月十五元宵节。初一到十五，短短的十五天内，我就病了八天。初六晚上拜访一位老朋友之后，带着家人到住家附近的食阁解决晚餐，妻子和我都心想试一试那里的酿豆腐摊。还好我指出食阁里有出售妻子喜爱的炒粿条，才让她“逃过一劫”。我却没有那么幸运，吃了一碗味道不怎么样的酿豆腐，当晚半夜就“狂泻不止”！
保济丸、五塔散、超碳丸（Ultra-carbon pill)三管齐下，都没有让我在接下来的一天有任何起色。还好记得前一阵子儿子肚泻时医生建议可以饮用H2O等运动饮料迅速补充身体流失的水分，所以也就猛灌H2O!初七人日在外婆家大聚餐、捞鱼生，我也只有干看的份儿，唉！
接下来几天，看了医生，拿了药，但医生也说药只能帮助控制，不让肚泻情况太过火，主要的还是要休息以及足够的水分。所以初八、九这两天，我不是白面包配清水，就是白粥配粥水。清清淡淡过了几天，身体也轻了几公斤。
初十开始尝试吃一点炒菜配粥，没事；再进一步吃肉配饭，也没事。心中庆幸肚泻情况终于有起色。十一那天，很“勇敢”地吃了一顿平常爱吃的fish-n-chips。老人家说，肚泻最忌讳吃鱼，但我这次吃后，肚子并没有闹革命，很开心地向妻子宣布自己痊愈了！当天晚上还干劲十足的和一群工人党的党员一起在实龙岗一带做例常访问，一层一层地在政府组屋上上下下，没有什么问题。
不料，隔天清早起来，右边膝盖隐隐作痛，起初还以为是在睡梦中撞到床边，没有太过在意。带了儿子上学，径往后港的善堂和父母亲会合，一同拜祭忌日在当天的祖父。拜祭的当儿，膝盖的痛渐渐加深，甚至在需要下跪后差点儿就站不起来。后来载了姑姑回家，自己已经是有点困难地驾车回家了。还好车子是自动档，所以我还可以比较容易控制，不至于让自己陷于危险驾驶。
抵达家门后，不得已得取消当天的一切计划。膝盖上的疼痛已经从一点类似被撞到黑青淤血，变成一阵阵刺痛的感觉。这种感觉一来，就肯定是老毛病：痛风了。随即吃了以前医生预配的药丸，但到了晚上，还是需要依靠一把雨伞充当拐杖才能三秒一步地自行到厕所小解。
当夜虽然很快入睡，但凌晨四点半就给膝盖上随着脉搏跳动的一阵阵像是刀割的剧痛痛醒。剧痛让我无法继续入眠，只得到客厅扭开电视机，希望能靠“家好月圆”的剧情让我暂时忘却脚上的痛。在这个时候我才能够领略到星和随选电视的好处。
看了两集，膝盖似乎真的没有那么痛了。关上电视，我也昏昏沉沉地睡着了。
醒来后，不到几个小时，之前约好来我家拜年的朋友陆续到访。我也只能一拐一拐地迎接他们，随后就一屁股做在自己的椅子上。朋友们之间的谈话，叙旧，也让我比较容易过了许多小时，忘却了脚上的剧痛。
朋友们在晚上离开后，我发觉自己似乎已经不需要用我的“雨伞拐杖”了。膝盖的痛也从刀割变成比较忍得的痛。
睡了一觉，正月十四日清早起床，虽然还是得一拐一拐地走路，但至少是能走了。下午出席了工人党福利股的新年团拜，上下楼梯时还是有点问题，但其余时间，只要不站得太久，也还可以。
今天元宵节，可以算是完全痊愈了，但膝盖部分的肌肉还是有点绷紧的感觉，看来也许要多一两天才会散去。
所以说，从初六到元宵，其中只有一天是没事，其余的八天都是有病缠身。照理说，就算今年是我的本命年，犯了太岁，我也在初四那天听父母的话到庙宇里拜拜了。
只希望自己在接下来的日子里有如以下（最近在早报看到）的对联：
祸不单行昨日行
福无双至今日至
犯太岁？
今天是正月十五元宵节。初一到十五，短短的十五天内，我就病了八天。初六晚上拜访一位老朋友之后，带着家人到住家附近的食阁解决晚餐，妻子和我都心想试一试那里的酿豆腐摊。还好我指出食阁里有出售妻子喜爱的炒粿条，才让她“逃过一劫”。我却没有那么幸运，吃了一碗味道不怎么样的酿豆腐，当晚半夜就“狂泻不止”！
保济丸、五塔散、超碳丸（Ultra-carbon pill)三管齐下，都没有让我在接下来的一天有任何起色。还好记得前一阵子儿子肚泻时医生建议可以饮用H2O等运动饮料迅速补充身体流失的水分，所以也就猛灌H2O!初七人日在外婆家大聚餐、捞鱼生，我也只有干看的份儿，唉！
接下来几天，看了医生，拿了药，但医生也说药只能帮助控制，不让肚泻情况太过火，主要的还是要休息以及足够的水分。所以初八、九这两天，我不是白面包配清水，就是白粥配粥水。清清淡淡过了几天，身体也轻了几公斤。
初十开始尝试吃一点炒菜配粥，没事；再进一步吃肉配饭，也没事。心中庆幸肚泻情况终于有起色。十一那天，很“勇敢”地吃了一顿平常爱吃的fish-n-chips。老人家说，肚泻最忌讳吃鱼，但我这次吃后，肚子并没有闹革命，很开心地向妻子宣布自己痊愈了！当天晚上还干劲十足的和一群工人党的党员一起在实龙岗一带做例常访问，一层一层地在政府组屋上上下下，没有什么问题。
不料，隔天清早起来，右边膝盖隐隐作痛，起初还以为是在睡梦中撞到床边，没有太过在意。带了儿子上学，径往后港的善堂和父母亲会合，一同拜祭忌日在当天的祖父。拜祭的当儿，膝盖的痛渐渐加深，甚至在需要下跪后差点儿就站不起来。后来载了姑姑回家，自己已经是有点困难地驾车回家了。还好车子是自动档，所以我还可以比较容易控制，不至于让自己陷于危险驾驶。
抵达家门后，不得已得取消当天的一切计划。膝盖上的疼痛已经从一点类似被撞到黑青淤血，变成一阵阵刺痛的感觉。这种感觉一来，就肯定是老毛病：痛风了。随即吃了以前医生预配的药丸，但到了晚上，还是需要依靠一把雨伞充当拐杖才能三秒一步地自行到厕所小解。
当夜虽然很快入睡，但凌晨四点半就给膝盖上随着脉搏跳动的一阵阵像是刀割的剧痛痛醒。剧痛让我无法继续入眠，只得到客厅扭开电视机，希望能靠“家好月圆”的剧情让我暂时忘却脚上的痛。在这个时候我才能够领略到星和随选电视的好处。
看了两集，膝盖似乎真的没有那么痛了。关上电视，我也昏昏沉沉地睡着了。
醒来后，不到几个小时，之前约好来我家拜年的朋友陆续到访。我也只能一拐一拐地迎接他们，随后就一屁股做在自己的椅子上。朋友们之间的谈话，叙旧，也让我比较容易过了许多小时，忘却了脚上的剧痛。
朋友们在晚上离开后，我发觉自己似乎已经不需要用我的“雨伞拐杖”了。膝盖的痛也从刀割变成比较忍得的痛。
睡了一觉，正月十四日清早起床，虽然还是得一拐一拐地走路，但至少是能走了。下午出席了工人党福利股的新年团拜，上下楼梯时还是有点问题，但其余时间，只要不站得太久，也还可以。
今天元宵节，可以算是完全痊愈了，但膝盖部分的肌肉还是有点绷紧的感觉，看来也许要多一两天才会散去。
所以说，从初六到元宵，其中只有一天是没事，其余的八天都是有病缠身。照理说，就算今年是我的本命年，犯了太岁，我也在初四那天听父母的话到庙宇里拜拜了。
只希望自己在接下来的日子里有如以下（最近在早报看到）的对联：
祸不单行昨日行
福无双至今日至
REACH cannot be reached
After posting the previous article on Waste of Money, Waste of Electricty, I was thinking of posting it up at the official Government e-engagement site reach.gov.sg, since they mentioned in the recent response to the AIMS recommendation, that the Government will limit their online responses to posts on REACH, and online forums of mainstream newspapers like Straits Times.
I opened my Google Chrome browser, typed in reach.gov.sg in the address box. The browser was redirected to http://app.reach.gov.sg/reach/default.aspx, a pale orange bar appears at the top of the page, and that’s it. The browser’s page-loading icon continued to spin indefitinitely.
Ok, I was thinking maybe it is a browser issue. Tried Firefox. Same result. Maybe Government websites supports only Internet Explorer. Tried that, and this time even the orange bar does not appear.
I thought maybe it was a problem with some server maintenance, so I gave up. This morning, I tried it again and the same thing happened on all 3 browsers.
Now it really makes me wonder how would any one be able to provide feedback via REACH, if it is not reachable?
Update: After posting this article, I went back to the browsers, and the REACH website did return, but my Firefox reports that it took 1263.187 seconds (more than 20 mins!!) to load. Sigh.
Update 2: I proceeded to try to register. Clicked on the ‘Register’ link and I am presented with another blank page, I am not going to wait another 20 mins for the next page to load. Guess feeding back via REACH is only for people who has many 20mins to spare.
Update 3: Poll created.
Note: There is a poll embedded within this post, please visit the site to participate in this post's poll.
Update 4 on 12 Feb 2009: Looks like it is now ok, after checking back one week later. Maybe I can start to register and try posting my comment there.
REACH cannot be reached
After posting the previous article on Waste of Money, Waste of Electricty, I was thinking of posting it up at the official Government e-engagement site reach.gov.sg, since they mentioned in the recent response to the AIMS recommendation, that the Government will limit their online responses to posts on REACH, and online forums of mainstream newspapers like Straits Times.
I opened my Google Chrome browser, typed in reach.gov.sg in the address box. The browser was redirected to http://app.reach.gov.sg/reach/default.aspx, a pale orange bar appears at the top of the page, and that’s it. The browser’s page-loading icon continued to spin indefitinitely.
Ok, I was thinking maybe it is a browser issue. Tried Firefox. Same result. Maybe Government websites supports only Internet Explorer. Tried that, and this time even the orange bar does not appear.
I thought maybe it was a problem with some server maintenance, so I gave up. This morning, I tried it again and the same thing happened on all 3 browsers.
Now it really makes me wonder how would any one be able to provide feedback via REACH, if it is not reachable?
Update: After posting this article, I went back to the browsers, and the REACH website did return, but my Firefox reports that it took 1263.187 seconds (more than 20 mins!!) to load. Sigh.
Update 2: I proceeded to try to register. Clicked on the ‘Register’ link and I am presented with another blank page, I am not going to wait another 20 mins for the next page to load. Guess feeding back via REACH is only for people who has many 20mins to spare.
Update 3: Poll created.
Note: There is a poll embedded within this post, please visit the site to participate in this post's poll.
Update 4 on 12 Feb 2009: Looks like it is now ok, after checking back one week later. Maybe I can start to register and try posting my comment there.
Waste of Money, Waste of Electricity
Seen at the lift landing of a block of flats in Aljunied GRC. In this times of belt tightening, and amongst the many publicly annouced ‘Green’ schemes to save energy, we see another example blatantly going against these principles.
This electronic noticeboard replaced the usual static noticeboard found at HDB void decks, and I believe the block that I see this is not the only block with this. The usual notices that used to be displayed uses A4 pieces of paper are now rotated after the message from the MP (Cynthia Phua), and some repetitive fireworks images, so I guess in terms of effectiveness to convey events in the community, this electronic noticeboard is even less effective that the old one.
I wonder at what time this screen is switched on and off everyday, or is it left on for 24 hours?
Who foots the bill for the purchase of the screen? Who foots the bill for the electricity to power it?
Going by conventional wisdom, it is either the RC (since the noticeboard declares its name so prominently) which in turn gets funding from PA, which in turns gets funding from the taxpayers; or it is the Town Council, which gets half of its funding from the S&CC charges paid by the residents, and another half of its funding from the taxpayers. No matter what, the taxpayers seem to be the ones footing the bills for this, unless someone tells me the MP herself is paying from her own pocket.
Some civil servant was chided for spending 45K on his vacation, but that has an end to it. Does this installation has an end to it? Or will it continue to waste the money that is funding it until some enlightened folks say enough is enough?
Waste of Money, Waste of Electricity
Seen at the lift landing of a block of flats in Aljunied GRC. In this times of belt tightening, and amongst the many publicly annouced ‘Green’ schemes to save energy, we see another example blatantly going against these principles.
This electronic noticeboard replaced the usual static noticeboard found at HDB void decks, and I believe the block that I see this is not the only block with this. The usual notices that used to be displayed uses A4 pieces of paper are now rotated after the message from the MP (Cynthia Phua), and some repetitive fireworks images, so I guess in terms of effectiveness to convey events in the community, this electronic noticeboard is even less effective that the old one.
I wonder at what time this screen is switched on and off everyday, or is it left on for 24 hours?
Who foots the bill for the purchase of the screen? Who foots the bill for the electricity to power it?
Going by conventional wisdom, it is either the RC (since the noticeboard declares its name so prominently) which in turn gets funding from PA, which in turns gets funding from the taxpayers; or it is the Town Council, which gets half of its funding from the S&CC charges paid by the residents, and another half of its funding from the taxpayers. No matter what, the taxpayers seem to be the ones footing the bills for this, unless someone tells me the MP herself is paying from her own pocket.
Some civil servant was chided for spending 45K on his vacation, but that has an end to it. Does this installation has an end to it? Or will it continue to waste the money that is funding it until some enlightened folks say enough is enough?
祝己丑年快乐！
祝己丑年快乐！
祝己丑年快乐！
祝己丑年快乐！
Verb for diarrhoea?
I was typing a blog post in happyeternally.blogspot.com and was thinking of the verb for the word “diarrhoea”. However, searching a few online dictionaries only yielded the noun, and there was no mention of the verb for this word.
Anyone knows?
Verb for diarrhoea?
I was typing a blog post in happyeternally.blogspot.com and was thinking of the verb for the word “diarrhoea”. However, searching a few online dictionaries only yielded the noun, and there was no mention of the verb for this word.
Anyone knows?
Late night SMS
Received 2 SMS past midnight yesterday. Both were friends wishing me a happy and prosperous Lunar New Year. Nice little messages, but the timing could be better. Imagine being woken up from a deep slumber by the beeping of the phone to see a non-urgent message. During the Christmas seasons, I received some messages even at 4 or 5 am!
Some might say I can always switch off the phone if I don’t want to be disturbed, but nobody knows when an emergency occurs that might require friends/relatives to contact me via my mobile phone in the middle of the night.
Not really blaming my friends for the late night SMS, since they might not have control over the actual time I receive the messages. From what I know, SMS messages can get delivered hours after they are sent due to the high traffic over the festive seasons, especially one or two days before the actual ‘Big Days’ like Christmas, New Year and Lunar New Year.
However, some time ago I ticked off a friend who was sending me messages after midnight, during off-peak seasons. His reply to me was that in his circle of young people, sending SMS to people in the wee hours of the day is a common practice.
Maybe I am getting old, but I belong to the group of people that will think twice before calling/SMS people after 11pm, just in case I disturb their rest. Corresponding via email / facebook / twitter is another matter though, since all these communication channels do not usually cause an alert (unless one enables the alerts) upon receiving them.
So during this Lunar New Year season, I hope to receive less of the almost-heart-attack-inducing-midnight-SMS and more Wall Posts / Twitter talk / Email / Blog comments from my friends.
Late night SMS
Received 2 SMS past midnight yesterday. Both were friends wishing me a happy and prosperous Lunar New Year. Nice little messages, but the timing could be better. Imagine being woken up from a deep slumber by the beeping of the phone to see a non-urgent message. During the Christmas seasons, I received some messages even at 4 or 5 am!
Some might say I can always switch off the phone if I don’t want to be disturbed, but nobody knows when an emergency occurs that might require friends/relatives to contact me via my mobile phone in the middle of the night.
Not really blaming my friends for the late night SMS, since they might not have control over the actual time I receive the messages. From what I know, SMS messages can get delivered hours after they are sent due to the high traffic over the festive seasons, especially one or two days before the actual ‘Big Days’ like Christmas, New Year and Lunar New Year.
However, some time ago I ticked off a friend who was sending me messages after midnight, during off-peak seasons. His reply to me was that in his circle of young people, sending SMS to people in the wee hours of the day is a common practice.
Maybe I am getting old, but I belong to the group of people that will think twice before calling/SMS people after 11pm, just in case I disturb their rest. Corresponding via email / facebook / twitter is another matter though, since all these communication channels do not usually cause an alert (unless one enables the alerts) upon receiving them.
So during this Lunar New Year season, I hope to receive less of the almost-heart-attack-inducing-midnight-SMS and more Wall Posts / Twitter talk / Email / Blog comments from my friends.
Heating Up?
Just went for another round of house visit last evening. As usual, some of the residents’ response upon seeing us coming is “要大选了？” (”Elections coming?”). There has also been some speculation among observers and internet bloggers on the possibility of snap elections.
The same topic is a recurring theme in a lot of my conversations online and offline with friends recently, since they know of my heavy involvement in WP, and so they ask me if I think a snap election is possible.
My responses so far to my friends is that, to me, it does not really matter whether elections is called 3 months from today, or in 2011 when the full term of the current parliament is up. Basically as a volunteer to a cause I believe in, I just put in the same amount of commitment to help contribute in whatever way I can, in a consistent and sustainable way. My foray into local politics since 2006 is not a long one, but it is enough for me to understand one thing - a consistent level of contribution is always a lot better than burst-mode enthusiasm that comes quickly and goes equally fast.
In any case, the changes I hope to help create are long term goals, which do not materialize overnight. Be it the goal to have Singapore wean off its dependency on fossil fuel, or the vision to see Singapore moving away from being dominated by a single party, my dreams will take a long time to materialize.
So does it matter whether there are signs that things are heating up? I will still work as hard as before to fulfill my dreams.
Heating Up?
Just went for another round of house visit last evening. As usual, some of the residents’ response upon seeing us coming is “要大选了？” (”Elections coming?”). There has also been some speculation among observers and internet bloggers on the possibility of snap elections.
The same topic is a recurring theme in a lot of my conversations online and offline with friends recently, since they know of my heavy involvement in WP, and so they ask me if I think a snap election is possible.
My responses so far to my friends is that, to me, it does not really matter whether elections is called 3 months from today, or in 2011 when the full term of the current parliament is up. Basically as a volunteer to a cause I believe in, I just put in the same amount of commitment to help contribute in whatever way I can, in a consistent and sustainable way. My foray into local politics since 2006 is not a long one, but it is enough for me to understand one thing - a consistent level of contribution is always a lot better than burst-mode enthusiasm that comes quickly and goes equally fast.
In any case, the changes I hope to help create are long term goals, which do not materialize overnight. Be it the goal to have Singapore wean off its dependency on fossil fuel, or the vision to see Singapore moving away from being dominated by a single party, my dreams will take a long time to materialize.
So does it matter whether there are signs that things are heating up? I will still work as hard as before to fulfill my dreams.
Clean Coal: It is a myth
Received this video in my inbox today. Interesting ‘reverse-advertisement’ that tells you subtlely about the truth in using coal. Just a nice little thing to think about during the year end holidays….
Clean Coal: It is a myth
Received this video in my inbox today. Interesting ‘reverse-advertisement’ that tells you subtlely about the truth in using coal. Just a nice little thing to think about during the year end holidays….
Petition against Whale Sharks in Aquarium
Sign the petition! http://www.petitiononline.com/mod_perl/petition-sign.cgi?NoWSinSG
I was at 214.
Petition against Whale Sharks in Aquarium
Sign the petition! http://www.petitiononline.com/mod_perl/petition-sign.cgi?NoWSinSG
I was at 214.
Crowd Powered Media
Talk about wisdom of crowds and citizen journalism. Forget Stomp!, forget omy.sg, NowPublic is the latest kid on the block that allows people to collectively create news reports. The best part of it is that it is not backed by a Singapore GLC. Check it out, and you can be a reporter in no time.
Nothing but the truth?
It has been drummed into the people that online media is always not worth listening to, because of all the bad things being said there. Today’s Straits Times editorial piece “Online citizen engagement must happen - soon” had the following paragraph:
“A serious handicap is that cybersphere as exists in Singapore today for the purpose of sounding off is a jungle. It is chock-a-block with half-truths, rumour, innuedo, distortions of facts and mispresentations, spiced with loads of off-beam opinion-making and defamation.”
The underlying message, of course, is to say that main stream media is all high and mighty and will spare no effort to ensure that the “truths” and facts they present to the readers will never be wrong.
However, it is interesting to note that, in a recent parliament sitting, when MP Baey Yam Keng cited a Straits Times report and asked a question on the management of the fund set up for formerly conjoined Nepalese girls, the Health Minister Khaw Boon Wan replied: “So here is an example of not all reports are factual. So you have to double-check your facts.” (Straits Times, 27 Aug 2008, “Govt has no role in fund for Nepal twins”)
Another instance of main stream media making a mistake is spotted today on ChannelNewsAsia’s website.
Click on the above image to see the highlighted portion. MP Lim Hwee Hua is a part of the Aljunied GRC, and not a part of the Ang Mo Kio GRC.
Maybe these are just isolated cases where mistakes are made, but it does show that the main stream media is definitely not to be relied upon totally for truths.
Taking the flip-side of the coin, there are many websites and blogs in the online world, using phrases like those written in the ST editorial today does not do justice to the efforts taken by some who seriously and painstakingly ensure that the information on their site are accurate.
Google Chrome - cool new app
It is more than just a browser, I think it is a Google OS disguised as a browser: http://www.google.com/googlebooks/chrome/index.html
Took me all of 5 secs to download and install, and this post is written while accessing my wordpress admin through Chrome.
If there is one cool app you install in your computer this year, this will be IT!
只许州官放火，不许百姓点灯？
谁说新加坡政治发展缓慢？相隔一年，执政党处理政治性活动的方式有了一百八十度的转变，这种变化不叫快，叫什么？
一年前，新加坡的一个政党申请在九月九日于东海岸公园举行脚踏车活动，被警方拒绝。（存档链接：http://www.clipclip.com/choongyong.koh/clips/detail/29750）总理几个星期前宣布放宽某些政治活动的限制，与今天起允许国民在芳林公园示威。无独有偶，在所谓放宽管制的今天，于中英两份主媒体报章中，就看到了总理在脚踏车上的“英姿”。
工人党主席林瑞莲一年前在国会上询问警方拒绝有关申请的原因，内政部兼律政部高级政务部长何炳基副教授（好长的名堂）答复时，列明以下几点原因：
东海岸公园是让新加坡人和他们家人休闲的地方，政党不应该用来宣传其政治理念。
那是个户外场所，更可能出现破坏宁静环境，导致骚乱、难控制的局面。
即使主办者奉公守法（如果只有20人参加，对公众不会造成任何干扰），但其他人可能因为不赞同主办者的政治观点而导致双方争吵起来，引来群众。何炳基对刘程强先生说：“你也许会守秩序，但你在骑脚踏车过程中遇到的一些人也许会逼你停下来，和你争论不休。这可能引来群众加入，引发警方不愿意看到的秩序问题。”
总结以上几点，不难得出警方一年前拒绝批准申请的主要考量：
政党不能在休闲地段主办活动
政党不能在户外场所主办活动
政治人物在外活动，也许会遇到人们和他们争论不休
政党在户外主办活动，就算只有20人参加，也会可能引发警方不愿意看到的秩序问题
令人费解的是报章报道昨天的活动时，也有以下几个共同点：
主办者是人民行动党社区基金-隶属于人民行动党，新加坡现今的执政党
活动地点在西海岸公园，与东海岸公园一样是休闲场所
活动地点也在户外
据早报报导，参加这项活动的部长和议员包括：李显龙，林瑞生，许文远，尚穆根，颜金勇，张俰宾，林文兴，张志贤
据早报报导，昨天约有1万3000人参与这个活动
相比下来，两项活动的共同点实在太多，昨天的活动最大的不同，只有（1）人民行动党是执政党，（2）活动的规模大了许多倍，政治人物也多了许多，（3）活动被批准主办。
所以说，若不是政府处理政治性活动的方式改变的话，就只有一个可能：只许州官放火，不许百姓点灯。
注：点击谚语的链接，读一读典故，细细回味吧。*一笑*
Our Flag, Our Anthem, Our Pledge
Our Flag, Our Anthem, Our Pledge
Those who recognise the voices leading the Pledge will know that part of this soundtrack was taken from the last rally held by the Workers’ Party in the GE2006. Ms Sylvia Lim led the English version of the Pledge, and Mr Low Thia Kiang led the Chinese version.
I missed the last rally then, but was told by those who were there that they were really overwhelmed with a strong sense of patriotism. Hearing them recite the Pledge now again still touches my heart.
Thanks to The Online Citizen for a nice video made.
Blogged with the Flock Browser