government limits overachievers

Most of the governments tax the rich more so they can, at least in theory, provide universal services to the citizen. The governments might also use the money help the abject poor segment of the countries. The rich segment, while some with objections, mostly agree that is the best social policy. The overachievers helping the underachievers, the oldest heartwarming story in the world and that is how a country move forward.
The Malaysian government however, starting to limit over-achieving. Starting from next year, no secondary students can take more than 10 subjects for SPM. Why the artificial ceiling? The official excuse is to streamline the scholarship award process. The scholarship program that is used to spur the overachievers to achieve more is now the excuse for limiting achievement. Let alone the fact our government is utterly inefficient, now it is devising policies that is paradoxical to its own other policy.

Contradictions in life

For most modern office workers like myself, the most physical thing we do during work hour is getting coffee in the office. It is not exactly an athletic undertaking. The problem with such living behavior is that, at the end of the day, most of us are left with a tired mind and not-so-tired body.
To cope with such phenomena, we start to exercise more. Most of us dedicate quite some time in the gym or to the sports of our choice. Such is contradiction in life, the advent of technology has enable us to accomplish a great deal simply by the will of mind. Yet, we ended up having to compensate the lack of physical activities by doing exercises that contribute nothing to the production of the society.
It seems to be the advancement do not make us more efficient, it simply concentrates the production in a short amount of time of the day and leaves a vacuum at the rest of our waking hours.

Stupid political rhetorics

"Najib said the by-election was a political game being played by the Opposition and they did not want to play to their tune."

I fully expect politicians being political in their responses; it is, after all, inscribed in their job title However I just cant stand dumb ones like the aforementioned. An election, regardless if it is by-election or the actual one is the pinnacle event of democracy. The citizens exercise their right of choice of government in elections. When a major political party rescinds their nomination, its an act of depriving the voters a choice. It is not a game; it is the essence of democracy.

The dictionary definition of an impostor

Zambry claimed that his fight is akin to those of Gandhi and Mandela. This is laughable and shameless. Lets look closer into each of the cases:

From 1948 to 1994, South Africa was under the spell of apartheid. During the time, racial politics were employed to systematically deny certain racial groups of equality. Mandela went through great personal losses to overturn the racist then government of South Africa. I dont see Zambry fought for equality. In fact, he belongs to the party that demonstrably played the racial politics to remain in power. Zambry will compare more favorably to the leaders in the pro-apatheid South Africa National Party than Mandela in the ANC.

Gandhi is a internationally revered figure for his philosophy and practise of total-nonviolence. His work and writing had inspired legions of next generation leaders from Martin Luther King to Au Sang Suu Kyi to Barack Obama. He employed his non-violent activitism to promote his central theme of equality. Its fair to say Zambry has yet to inspire much except confusion and anger of Perakians.

Zambry, please, before invoking the names of the accomplished, accomplish something worthy.