RJC BROKE SINGAPORE A'LEVEL RECORD. RJC PEOPLE ARE XIALAN
-
{ i found this email sent to me. what do you people think? Are Rafflesians really that bad?}
What i received:
RJC BROKE SINGAPORE A'LEVEL RECORD. RJC PEOPLE ARE XIALAN AND HAOLIAN.
[Super interesting facts about Singapore, if you receive this by mail, please forward it to your friend to show them how xiao rjc is]
Before I start rambling, allow me to shed some light onto Singapore's 2003 A'level results.
******************************************
Here is the ranking of schools:
1st. Raffles Junior College
2nd. Hwa Chong Junior College
3rd. Victoria Junior College
4th. National Junior College
5th. Temasek Junior College
[The results are compiled with absolute reliability]
What message I hope to raise in this essay is the likelyhood of elitism in Singapore. As we know, and as proven by many countries, elitism is an insidious form of attack that would tear Singapore apart inside out. Raffles Junior College, and the typical Rafflesian we know, are ultra smart but also ultra xialan, ego and definitely proud. Raffles Junior College, founded in 1985, inherited its 180 years of rich tradition from Raffles Institution. A premier and top junior college, RJC stands out not only in academic performances but also in CCAs and sports (So? Does that mean these people have the right to be so hao lian and act like as if the country owe those smartasses something?) To highlight elitism in Singapore, let me reaffirm my stand with the following statistic:
[Percentage of 4A(s) among total school population in A'level 2003]
1) Raffles JC: 51.3% [* broke record in Singapore's A'level history by going past the 50% mark (So scary hor!) ]
2) Hwa Chong JC: 41.8% [* Lost to RJC by 9.5% (approx. 10%) ]
3) Victoria JC: 30.6% [* Lost to HCJC by 11.2% (approx 10%)]
4) National JC: 20+% [* 20+% but exact figures unknown]
5) Temasek JC: 14.5%
Look at the percentage of 4A(s). RJC has clearly proven itself to be a chao-ji super crazy college with mad results. And look at these statistics. This is an example of social polarisation. Each college has a difference of approximately 10% for the top 3 jcs (see the vast difference?). Who would have thought that a college can actually have 1 in 2 students flushing with 4 straight As? Now let me present another set of statistics. The list of colleges with the number of students who acheived 4 A'level Distinctions, 3 S paper Distinctions, 2 A0 Level A1(G.P and MTL) [Total of 9As]
1) Raffles JC [Kwek Li Ern Joy & Tan Shin Eik]
2) Hwa Chong JC: Zero
3) Victoria JC: 1 [Chen De Feng Clarence]
4) National JC: Zero
5) Temasek JC: Zero
******************************************
Now what's this controversy about a neighbourhood-school boy who dated a RGS girl? RJC guys do not condone it. Yes, they do not wish other Singaporeans from neighbourhood schools to date their girls. And RJC girls will smirk if you tried to approach them or something (They don't want to stick with a redneck for the rest of their lives.) Now you know how sucky these people are. RJC people are : HAO LIAN, XIALAN, SMART, INTELLIGENT... they definitely love to despise and look down on other people.
So the bottom line is: Next time you see a RJC person, don't hesitate. Go up to him and kick his ass.
[ Fellow Singaporeans, what do you think? Should RJC people be allowed to stick together and form a elite colony? Or should the ministry close their school? Do you think RJC people are xialan? Share your experiences! Thanks! ]
Credits: [email protected] [Email or msn messenger]
Sources: Raffles Junior College [http://www.moe.edu.sg/schools/rjc/achievements-academic-2004.html]
HwaChong Junior College [http://wwwnew.hjc.edu.sg/2002A/Summary_of_2002_GCE_A_Level_Results_files/frame.htm]
Victoria Junior College [http://www.vjc.moe.edu.sg/about_vjc/alevel/2003/Overall%20Analysis%20of%20Performance%202003.pdf]
National Junior College [http://www.njc.edu.sg/news20040305_gcealevel.html]
Temasek Junior College [http://www.tjc.edu.sg/2003ALevelResults.htm] -
dun generalize. i m RI boy, and im not xia lan, hao lian, ego and proud, and neither are my classmates or pple i noe. of course, there r those i dun noe...*sigh*Originally posted by hlmilksmellsgood:{ i found this email sent to me. what do you people think? Are Rafflesians really that bad?}
What i received:
RJC BROKE SINGAPORE A'LEVEL RECORD. RJC PEOPLE ARE XIALAN AND HAOLIAN.
[Super interesting facts about Singapore, if you receive this by mail, please forward it to your friend to show them how xiao rjc is]
Before I start rambling, allow me to shed some light onto Singapore's 2003 A'level results.
******************************************
Here is the ranking of schools:
1st. Raffles Junior College
2nd. Hwa Chong Junior College
3rd. Victoria Junior College
4th. National Junior College
5th. Temasek Junior College
[The results are compiled with absolute reliability]
What message I hope to raise in this essay is the likelyhood of elitism in Singapore. As we know, and as proven by many countries, elitism is an insidious form of attack that would tear Singapore apart inside out. Raffles Junior College, and the typical Rafflesian we know, are ultra smart but also ultra xialan, ego and definitely proud. Raffles Junior College, founded in 1985, inherited its 180 years of rich tradition from Raffles Institution. A premier and top junior college, RJC stands out not only in academic performances but also in CCAs and sports (So? Does that mean these people have the right to be so hao lian and act like as if the country owe those smartasses something?) To highlight elitism in Singapore, let me reaffirm my stand with the following statistic:
[Percentage of 4A(s) among total school population in A'level 2003]
1) Raffles JC: 51.3% [* broke record in Singapore's A'level history by going past the 50% mark (So scary hor!) ]
2) Hwa Chong JC: 41.8% [* Lost to RJC by 9.5% (approx. 10%) ]
3) Victoria JC: 30.6% [* Lost to HCJC by 11.2% (approx 10%)]
4) National JC: 20+% [* 20+% but exact figures unknown]
5) Temasek JC: 14.5%
Look at the percentage of 4A(s). RJC has clearly proven itself to be a chao-ji super crazy college with mad results. And look at these statistics. This is an example of social polarisation. Each college has a difference of approximately 10% for the top 3 jcs (see the vast difference?). Who would have thought that a college can actually have 1 in 2 students flushing with 4 straight As? Now let me present another set of statistics. The list of colleges with the number of students who acheived 4 A'level Distinctions, 3 S paper Distinctions, 2 A0 Level A1(G.P and MTL) [Total of 9As]
1) Raffles JC [Kwek Li Ern Joy & Tan Shin Eik]
2) Hwa Chong JC: Zero
3) Victoria JC: 1 [Chen De Feng Clarence]
4) National JC: Zero
5) Temasek JC: Zero
******************************************
Now what's this controversy about a neighbourhood-school boy who dated a RGS girl? RJC guys do not condone it. Yes, they do not wish other Singaporeans from neighbourhood schools to date their girls. And RJC girls will smirk if you tried to approach them or something (They don't want to stick with a redneck for the rest of their lives.) Now you know how sucky these people are. RJC people are : HAO LIAN, XIALAN, SMART, INTELLIGENT... they definitely love to despise and look down on other people.
So the bottom line is: Next time you see a RJC person, don't hesitate. Go up to him and kick his ass.
[ Fellow Singaporeans, what do you think? Should RJC people be allowed to stick together and form a elite colony? Or should the ministry close their school? Do you think RJC people are xialan? Share your experiences! Thanks! ]
Credits: [email protected] [Email or msn messenger]
Sources: Raffles Junior College [http://www.moe.edu.sg/schools/rjc/achievements-academic-2004.html]
HwaChong Junior College [http://wwwnew.hjc.edu.sg/2002A/Summary_of_2002_GCE_A_Level_Results_files/frame.htm]
Victoria Junior College [http://www.vjc.moe.edu.sg/about_vjc/alevel/2003/Overall%20Analysis%20of%20Performance%202003.pdf]
National Junior College [http://www.njc.edu.sg/news20040305_gcealevel.html]
Temasek Junior College [http://www.tjc.edu.sg/2003ALevelResults.htm]
but i do agree that there's the elitism problem, even intra-RI. RI favours the "best for the best, worst for the worst" approach, call that inrenal streaming. in addition many of our prefects are stinking populists who are arrogant and only willing to flaunt their power.
n RJC colony? na, soon there is going to be a Rafflesian Colony, and the ORA (Old Rafflesians' Association) is trying its best to promote it. they were raisingmoney for its building last year in RI. gosh, i believe that teh excessive amt the school admin devotes to our loser Rugby Team can more than enough fill up this amt.
the pikamaster -
The first thought that comes to mind here is that hate is just love pointed in the wrong direction.
For myself, hey, if they broke the record, cool - next story. I don't mind because it doesn't matter. -
While they can empower themselves with their own notions of deluded superiority, we can do our part by not adding to their ego by refusing to have the inferiority-complex, which will lend credience to their delusion.
In fact, if you relate to them as if their school and results didn't matter a whit (which is true in the real world anyway), how long do you think they can be arrogrant? No person will become a jerk if he realizes there's nothing for him to utilize to boost his ego, and trying to act superior will only make him look stupid. -
its just a dumb hatemail.
-
to think again, it is a hatemail, but not really dumb - on second thoughts.
the threadstarter did make a generalization, which implies that while the elitist schools do produce such "haoliao" ,"xialan" student, there are also exception like one that replied. how true such i statement is we wouldn't know, though we do know that a few of such "xialan students" from the elite schools had did things to put their schools in a slightly bad name.
the (elitist) system is both good and bad like anything else, a double-bladed sword. the system drives, motivates (whichever way they use is not of concern here) the students to do their best, for themselves or the school. on the downside, not every teenager is hard-working, free of family problems, free of depression etc and even lesser are as intelligent. in this system, only the best would get to the top - those who are intelligent, who can work-hard, physically and psychologically healthy, or i might even include socially and spiritually healthy etc - only the best get to the top.
***please note that these should be taken no more than generalizations.
Thus are many other reasons why there are masses remaining in the lesser schools. Sometimes, students who "didn't make it" are despised. The reasons why teenagers can't make it doesn't necessary mean that they are unintelligent, unhealthy etc...and they are "worthless to the society". Note the inverted commas. Once I was in a conversation with 2 girls who were from the elite schools. Suddenly, we went into the topic concerning our education system. Both of them unanimously remarked that students who "didn't make it" were "stupid", "unintelligent"...while i was able to make them understand my point that student falling short of the mark are due to many reasons...they maintained that whatever reasons for the "failure", arguing proves to be pointless. Because such people are "useless to the society".
They were unable to see that people not making the mark, doesn't imply that they would become useless. To put it in a more humane way, everyone is human, even if unintelligent, even when on can't attend a top school. Economically, socially, everyone is integral to the society...by drawing lines, applying labels only serve to create conflict. From conflict, anything can happen.
My point is of bringing up the conversation I had with the 2 students, is to say that:
1. whether or not one attends top schools is not important. Neither are people who are not as endowed/wealthy any less useful.
2. people deserve respect, intelligent or not, rich or not, healthy or not.
3. practice restraint when applying labels, especially when the label is potentially hurtful or even derogatory like "stupid", "useless"
4. the elitist themselves should be aware that not everyone is as fortunate as they are - of being wealthier, brought up in loving families, more intelligent...
5. be sensitive to other peoples feelings. even when practicing restraint doesn't make you any money, oneself becomes a better person, more likable, more approachable. it can open many doors [without knobs]
6. if you can, understand that there are people who are borned into troubled families which greatly affects a person's ability to perform - Freudian psychology. note that being aware of and to understand are 2 different things.
Finally, people tend generalize...read not too much into it; it is what it is - a generalization. -
quite frankly i dun really care. elitist or not, what matters is that I AM going to do something i love.
-
haha agreed.... haha.. we cannot change it one lah... ppl want to think what they one.. we cannot control your mouth or mind.. haha..as long as u are happy.. then why care so much. hahaOriginally posted by HENG@:quite frankly i dun really care. elitist or not, what matters is that I AM going to do something i love. -
and THAT, is happiness.Originally posted by I-like-flings(m):haha agreed.... haha.. we cannot change it one lah... ppl want to think what they one.. we cannot control your mouth or mind.. haha..as long as u are happy.. then why care so much. haha -
Al i can say is, the most successful entrepreneurs in Singapore are not from RJC. Some of them are school dropouts... I've got a cousin doesn't even have an N level cert, sec 3 dropout. And he is now a boss of his own company... So i dun see RJC people as smart, haolian, xialan, intelligent or watever. The most impressive talents often comes from the most unexpected places...
-
I think the important point, and one that has already had something of an airing before, is that these arrogant and inept twits are probably going to end up wielding huge and unjustified influence over our lives.
They're going to get hotloaded into powerful administrative and political positions, via government scholarships and the like, by a political elite that in all likelihood graduated from the same school and harbours the same arrogant, elitist and highly presumptuous attitudes as them. It's true, many of them are nothing but petty bureaucrats in reality, worthless in the commercial world...but this means that the fact that the idiot government is going to be giving them the keys to the nation is even more disturbing. We're going to be ruled over by people who will probably not only treat us like peasants, but also do an incompetent job of running the country. So, we're doubly screwed.
That, if anything, in my humble opinion, is the reason why this whole immature and infantile attitude on the part of a lot of Raffles people is something worth paying attention to. Countries like the UK and France have had, and continue to have, raging debates about their own parallel situations, where arrogant, cloistered and ineffectual eunuch mandarins from schools like Eton / Winchester and the Ecole Nationale d'Administration run the country from top to bottom. The dangers here are far from illusory.
This is only to be expected of any country that was set up by academic over-achievers and chao-muggers, and therefore had its power structures monopolised by these people.
The only real remedy for this that I have seen so far? Go into the private sector, and make it really big. Even civil service / government eunuchs have to bow to pressure from mighty commercial interests these days, particularly in Singapore. This, I suspect, is at least a partial explanation for the ancient Raffles-ACS rivalry; the Raffles people believe they have the mandate of heaven to rule, but they get really peeved when they realise they have to play toady to the rich sons of commercial / merchant families or self-made, successful businessmen.
As I think we can generally agree, the fact that these private sector powers favour things like a more liberal lifestyle, more vibrant nightlife, etc has been the singular greatest factor responsible for even the slight opening-up of Singapore that we've seen in the last few years.
So, the plan is: go commercial; get rich and protect your fellow citizens at the same time. Sounds like a good life. -
i really couldn't give half a shiat if they are xialan or bolan. as long as they are not my direct superiors or holds high post as some minister.
-
Actually Hwa Chong Junior College was first for the past few years. In 2002 they got 49.2 % of the cohort with 4 As too, with Rjc lagging quite far behind. So frankly i dont really see how they are pulling away from the rest.Its just a cycle, some years they do exceptionally well, some years they dont. Just my two cents..
-
I've said it before in a thread once and i'll say it again.
Stop spreading your hate mail in here. It doesn't help the current situation. There's always the minority among the majority who tarnish the reputation and send out a poor image of the college.
Are we to judge the masses by the actions of these meagre few?
All your mail has managed to do is to inform the public that RJC is once again the best in terms of paper grades. How on earth does that translate to arrogance? As for the dating topic, those responses could well have been proliferated by the very bigots who wrote that mail you attached. Under guise of a pen-name, who's to know their real identify? Are we to take their pen-names at face value?
Some of my best frens are rafflesians and they harbour no egoistic behaviour, eccentric maybe. And all are open-minded people.
It's high time our society see pass their hate and misguided insecurities. We need level-headedness, not smear campaign managers. -
The point being made is not that ALL Raffles people are unsavoury characters, but that enough of them are such that they will pose a problem. We are not judging ALL Raffles people by the actions of a select few; we are simply judging that select few, and the whole reason why we're focusing attention on them (instead of brats with similar arrogance in other schools, for example) is that the System is inclined to put Rafflesians, in particular, in positions of great power and influence. Would you want incredibly arrogant people, without the ability or intelligence to justify that arrogance, ruling over you, deciding how you live your life?
I'm sure your Rafflesian best friends are lovely, and we'd all really like to meet them some time. But the fact of your own fortunate personal experiences does not invalidate the very real, practical concerns being voiced here.
It would be nice if we all lived in a nice pink fluffy world where we could all be friends. But unfortunately, as you may or may not have noticed, there are many people out there who don't want to abide by simple rules of human conduct or conscience. We need to be on our guard against such people, instead of deluding ourselves into believing that Everything Will Be All Right In The End Even Though We May Do Nothing.
And I think the tenor of many posts has contained the very clear implicit message that if any elitist arrogant but yet so inept Raffles goons would like to wake up and join the human race, they'd be more than welcome among our ranks. We're not condemning anyone unto perpetuity, we're only laying down basic, fundamental rules, which are the terms of friendly association with us and the rest of humanity. Not an unreasonable thing to do, surely. -
I think not only the few RI kids are arrogant, quite alot of Singaporeans are also like that too. Didn't an ex PRC trade rep and Mr Ngiam pointed that out? But I believe the on going economic developments will eventually knock senses into them. Life is the best teacher .....
-
The way i see it, the lot of you have already decided to burn the 'raffles' community with your narrow-minded reviews. Clearly these are not the comments of impartial observers. They are more likely the voices of ppl who sense an innate fear. Fear of being subjugated by an elitism among the cream of singapore's student population.Originally posted by subudei:The point being made is not that ALL Raffles people are unsavoury characters, but that enough of them are such that they will pose a problem. We are not judging ALL Raffles people by the actions of a select few; we are simply judging that select few, and the whole reason why we're focusing attention on them (instead of brats with similar arrogance in other schools, for example) is that the System is inclined to put Rafflesians, in particular, in positions of great power and influence. Would you want incredibly arrogant people, without the ability or intelligence to justify that arrogance, ruling over you, deciding how you live your life?
I'm sure your Rafflesian best friends are lovely, and we'd all really like to meet them some time. But the fact of your own fortunate personal experiences does not invalidate the very real, practical concerns being voiced here.
It would be nice if we all lived in a nice pink fluffy world where we could all be friends. But unfortunately, as you may or may not have noticed, there are many people out there who don't want to abide by simple rules of human conduct or conscience. We need to be on our guard against such people, instead of deluding ourselves into believing that Everything Will Be All Right In The End Even Though We May Do Nothing.
And I think the tenor of many posts has contained the very clear implicit message that if any elitist arrogant but yet so inept Raffles goons would like to wake up and join the human race, they'd be more than welcome among our ranks. We're not condemning anyone unto perpetuity, we're only laying down basic, fundamental rules, which are the terms of friendly association with us and the rest of humanity. Not an unreasonable thing to do, surely.
And the manner in which you have said 'I'm sure your Rafflesian best friends are lovely, and we'd all really like to meet them some time.' are obviously cynical and sarcastic at best. The reverse is probably true.
Apart from the pathetic example illustrated (or not illustrated) by the email, no one here has really stated a strong case as to why rafflesians in particular draw flak for sheer arrogance and egoistic behaviour.
No one likes elitism. But be careful not to carelessly associate the wrong parties with it. That amouts to hearsay at best, slander at worst. It is exactly these kind of irresponsible comments that we dun need. -
i dunno about you but to me it seems that all my JC\poly friends look down on people who are not in JCs and polys, i often hear them making snide remarks on their other friends' educational levelOriginally posted by BillyBong:The way i see it, the lot of you have already decided to burn the 'raffles' community with your narrow-minded reviews. Clearly these are not the comments of impartial observers. They are more likely the voices of ppl who sense an innate fear. Fear of being subjugated by an elitism among the cream of singapore's student population.
And the manner in which you have said 'I'm sure your Rafflesian best friends are lovely, and we'd all really like to meet them some time.' are obviously cynical and sarcastic at best. The reverse is probably true.
Apart from the pathetic example illustrated (or not illustrated) by the email, no one here has really stated a strong case as to why rafflesians in particular draw flak for sheer arrogance and egoistic behaviour.
No one likes elitism. But be careful not to carelessly associate the wrong parties with it. That amouts to hearsay at best, slander at worst. It is exactly these kind of irresponsible comments that we dun need.
-
people here especially top r just elitist .... just like Hilter
RJC xa lan?? u should see how reckless luxury car drivers drive more xia lan!! -
Well, the way *I* see it, you've gone to the other extreme and adopted a posture whereby the slightest casual comment is interpreted as a vicious attack on anything and everything Rafflesian. Sure, there are some posters here who have gone a bit overboard with anti-Rafflesianism, but your response to that shouldn't be to swing to the other extreme.Originally posted by BillyBong:The way i see it, the lot of you have already decided to burn the 'raffles' community with your narrow-minded reviews. Clearly these are not the comments of impartial observers. They are more likely the voices of ppl who sense an innate fear. Fear of being subjugated by an elitism among the cream of singapore's student population.
And the manner in which you have said 'I'm sure your Rafflesian best friends are lovely, and we'd all really like to meet them some time.' are obviously cynical and sarcastic at best. The reverse is probably true.
Apart from the pathetic example illustrated (or not illustrated) by the email, no one here has really stated a strong case as to why rafflesians in particular draw flak for sheer arrogance and egoistic behaviour.
No one likes elitism. But be careful not to carelessly associate the wrong parties with it. That amouts to hearsay at best, slander at worst. It is exactly these kind of irresponsible comments that we dun need.
Cynical and sarcastic, and "the reverse is probably true"? There you go with your paranoia again. My comment was intended as sarcastic *only insofar as* I was trying to tell you that you may be fortunate enough to have nice Rafflesian friends, but your own good personal experiences do not invalidate the argument. Taken to another level, what I was saying was that you should not allow your personal experiences to *completely* colour your views on the matter and lead you to a zealously pro-Raffles viewpoint that is totally lacking in objectivity.
As a matter of fact, I think I *would* enjoy meeting your nice Raffles friends; but you don't seem to believe that, which is a shame, because this reinforces a rigid, black-and-white, us-versus-them mentality : just because I don't like elitism in the Raffles system, and I'm afraid of what awaits the country if and when these people become Cabinet ministers, it doesn't mean that I can't appreciate the company of *nice* Rafflesians, because it's not the nice ones I'm worried about. Two of my best guy friends are ex-RI (and one ex-RJ), and one of my ex-girlfriends (with whom I am still on excellent terms) was ex-RJ, so really, I'm perfectly capable of accepting shades of grey in my views on Raffles people, you know.
I've already stated my own reasons for why I've singled out arrogant Rafflesians, in particular - because the System is particularly predisposed to turning them into powerful civil servants, ministers or GLC executives, and therefore the potential damage they can do is immense. I hope you haven't chosen to ignore this.
"Be careful not to associate the wrong parties with it"?? Have you taken a look at the lineup of Gahmen people at an NDP rally? Have you noticed that most of them come from certain schools whose names begins with "R"? Have you noticed that the all-white uniforms they wear bear a striking resemblance to the uniforms of those schools? Have you noticed that a lot of folks don't have very good things to say about most of these Gahmen people?
Although I must say, I'm surprised to see that they let a lone ACS boy into the Cabinet. A sign of an embryonic progressiveness? Go, Tharman!
-
So it's paranoid now? Let's see...my initial interest in this thread came from the heading....I think if you claim that there was nothing 'extreme' in the opinions stated, perhaps you'd care to explain the 'xialan' term? Has it any place here?Originally posted by subudei:Well, the way *I* see it, you've gone to the other extreme and adopted a posture whereby the slightest casual comment is interpreted as a vicious attack on anything and everything Rafflesian. Sure, there are some posters here who have gone a bit overboard with anti-Rafflesianism, but your response to that shouldn't be to swing to the other extreme.
Cynical and sarcastic, and "the reverse is probably true"? There you go with your paranoia again. My comment was intended as sarcastic *only insofar as* I was trying to tell you that you may be fortunate enough to have nice Rafflesian friends, but your own good personal experiences do not invalidate the argument. Taken to another level, what I was saying was that you should not allow your personal experiences to *completely* colour your views on the matter and lead you to a zealously pro-Raffles viewpoint that is totally lacking in objectivity.
As a matter of fact, I think I *would* enjoy meeting your nice Raffles friends; but you don't seem to believe that, which is a shame, because this reinforces a rigid, black-and-white, us-versus-them mentality : just because I don't like elitism in the Raffles system, and I'm afraid of what awaits the country if and when these people become Cabinet ministers, it doesn't mean that I can't appreciate the company of *nice* Rafflesians, because it's not the nice ones I'm worried about. Two of my best guy friends are ex-RI (and one ex-RJ), and one of my ex-girlfriends (with whom I am still on excellent terms) was ex-RJ, so really, I'm perfectly capable of accepting shades of grey in my views on Raffles people, you know.
I've already stated my own reasons for why I've singled out arrogant Rafflesians, in particular - because the System is particularly predisposed to turning them into powerful civil servants, ministers or GLC executives, and therefore the potential damage they can do is immense. I hope you haven't chosen to ignore this.
"Be careful not to associate the wrong parties with it"?? Have you taken a look at the lineup of Gahmen people at an NDP rally? Have you noticed that most of them come from certain schools whose names begins with "R"? Have you noticed that the all-white uniforms they wear bear a striking resemblance to the uniforms of those schools? Have you noticed that a lot of folks don't have very good things to say about most of these Gahmen people?
Although I must say, I'm surprised to see that they let a lone ACS boy into the Cabinet. A sign of an embryonic progressiveness? Go, Tharman!
I have not ignored your considerations that not every good encounter equates to the whole picture. Certainly there will always be several rats who spoil the image. This applies to every institution and is not inherent to a single community, as many have gleefully pointed out.
I'm rather puzzled at this point as seeing the number of *** you have included in your post, your 'desire' to really meet the mentioned RJC frens of mine borders on hypocracy and geninue interest? I've never read a post as clear and as hazy at the same time....
I'm well aware of the gahmen frontrunners but while you insist on your RJC theorem, may i remind you LHL is a catholic high-NJC product And i'm not entirely sure teo chee hean is from RJC. Both are PM contenders FYI.
And yeah...go tharman!