Exhausting first day of orientation. Basically listened to professors and deans talk all day about the different programs. Information overload. Zonked out. 

Then I came across this gem: "Outdoor events by political parties banned" (ST 28 Aug), which basically reported on how Prof Ho Peng Kee explained in Parliament why the application by WP to hold a cycling event at East Coast Park to celebrate its 50th anniversary was denied. The reason given was the usual rigmarole of security and public order. The esteemed Prof Ho said, "You may be well-behaving but other people whom you come across when you cycle, may stop you, may want to debate with you, and that may attract a crowd and therefore will result in problems that the police would want to avoid."

Erm, oookay if you say so.

But what really got to me was that he made a snarky remark about WP's Low Thia Khiang's supposed hearing disability - "If you listened very carefully, I don't know whether his hearing aid is with him because he wears one..."

Yah, and your point is? 

I mean ok, you are adversaries in the political arena but when debating in Parliament, at least treat your fellow parliamentary colleague with respect, even if they are the opposition. After all they are elected representatives of the people as well and they are not there to be sitting ducks to soak in your insults. Look, people actually actively voted for them, i.e. queued up at a polling station and crossed out a ballot paper with their name on it, which is more than can be said for MPs in walkover wards. So insulting them is tantamount to disrespecting the people who voted for them. And even if you really need to be insulting (perhaps to distract others from the fact that your speech has no substance? Or for cheap thrills?), at least do it with more wit and flair. Making fun of someone's disability is just not on, man.