Malaysia Math

SG-Friendly Ex-PM

Nabbed Najib pardoned

by King for kleptocracy—

will SG fund him?

Art by Daniel Murphy

Among Malaysian prime ministers, Najib Razak is arguably the most Singapore-friendly one.

Corrupt yet still seen as “competent,” it’s no surprise that Najib remains popular both at home and abroad.

Like comrade Trump, Najib too used the race-and-religion trump card to win votes among an often semi-innumerate or diehard electorate who were promised lots of goodies if he became Head of State.

The recent controversial royal announcement that Najib be allowed to serve his remaining jail term at home if he pays the RM50 million court-imposed fine has drawn both sarcasm and support from netizens.

Najib’s house arrest is good news for jailed white-collar criminals. It pays to take bribes, then use a fraction of the “corrupt zeros” as a fine so as to serve the rest of the sentence at home.

If only Malaysian prime ministers had been like kings and presidents who could pardon crooks, criminals, and murderers by using DJT’s money-making “pardon template,” ex-PM Najib could have become a Ringgit trillionaire long before Elon Musk.

Political Math

The “Najib Razak Solidarity Fund,” organized by his United Malays National Organisation (UMNO) party, has also been fertile fodder for math educators who recreationally pose real-life math problems to tickle their mature students.

Three such politically incorrect math questions are:

1. Political Math: If a towkay donates 1 sen on the first day, 2 sen on the second day, 4 sen on the third day, doubling the amount each day, on what day would all the donations exceed the RM50 million fine to free ex-PM Najib from jail?

2. Solidarity Fund: What are the odds that some MPs and ministers in the “fine” city-state might secretly donate to UMNO’s “Najib Razak Solidarity Fund” to help Singapore-friendly ex-PM come home?

3. Poverty Fund: Guesstimate how many homeless people or illegal migrants in rural Malaysia a RM50,000,000 fine could feed in a week.

Photo: Facebook/James Chin

If you’re moved to forgive a white-collar inmate, or think that Bossku has unfairly been politically targeted by his foes, the donation drive to transfer him from prison to house arrest is alive. It’s not too late to help pay his bigly fine. One sen on day 1, two sen on day 2, four sen on day 3, … will go some way toward getting him released sooner rather than later.

Gracefully & generously yours

Performance Politics

Bossku go home

I sure resign one

I go home too lah

© Yan Kow Cheong, October 4, 2026

Is Age Just a Number?

Cartoon © Anon. (being memeified)

I admit that I’m guilty of ageism, but I make zero apologies for exposing criminality or hypocrisy, especially among (past and present) heads of state.

For the majority of us, oft-reluctant law-abiding citizens of the world, few would admit that the criminal mind is a “creative” mind in disguise—one that we’d learn a thing or two from if we put aside our prejudices.

A Tale of Two Senior Presidential Candidates

What are the odds that the world might soon witness a presidential debate between a patient and a prisoner? If reelected, could either folk serve his full term?

Arguably, we’ve two power-hungry weak “leaders” that America could do without—when both seniors should be grandfathering (or con-sulting) rather than mis-leading or weakening the country for another four years (assuming their Creator doesn’t call them before their term is due).

Cartoon by Rick McKee (@Rick_McKee_Ink)

An Age Limit for Presidency

If the present president and his predecessor are too old to competently serve the challenges or demands of another term, shouldn’t lawmakers pass a constitutional law that no elected president shall be of a certain age on the date of inauguration?

What should that age limit be so that voters feel comfortable that any elected presidential candidate would fulfill his or her responsibilities of office? 65, 70, 75, or some other age?

Bitter Root ≡ Better Fruit?

If a bad tree can’t produce good fruit, it’s preposterous to see millions of voters expect a serial dishonest or corrupt “I-me-myself” candidate to deliver them from their years-old financial, social, and religious ills.

The theological or political argument that voters shouldn’t put too much emphasis on a candidate’s past manifold wrongs (who’s continually denied any wrongdoings) to assess or judge him sounds dangerously frightening. Understandably, the criteria to electing a president must be much lower than those used to choosing a pope. Really?

Cartoon by @DennisGoris (buff.ly/3VlEyaz)

King Saul 2.0

What are the chances that in Biden or Trump, we’d be witnessing a modern-day version of King Saul, whose rule would be cut short? Would those mostly morally bankrupt or corrupt appointees, who condone their lies and falsehoods, expect to operate in a blessed political environment? It looks more likely that political entropy would be the new normal come January 2025.

In politics, irrationality and hypocrisy often prove that a string of wrongs has near-zero bearing on the electability of a corrupt or rogue politician.

When one senior isn’t much younger than the other, the choice isn’t that difficult. You choose the one with (more) character, humility, and honesty. Voting for the alternative is flirting with ineptitude, dishonesty, and chaos—more pain and suffering for the majority of the population, who expect their next president to behave more like a priest or pope.

US Math: An Age Problem

Let’s end with a birthday joke on the two most senior presidential candidates in U.S. politics:

Q: Why even their diehard supporters see both Biden and Trump as old, who should be banned from taking part in a presidential election again?

A: At their last birthday, the candles cost more than the cake.

Electorally yours

© Yan Kow Cheong, June 27, 2024.