Arthur’s political ambition remains burning as brightly as ever.

**************

No more than I’ve always maintained! Don’t think we’ve seen or heard the last of Arthur at all – not by a long chalk!! i.e. no way!! he’ll be back!! ‘Mia, get ready to step aside’!! ent dat right, Arthur!!

Arthur was my hero until I read BFP and discovered some, shall we say, misdemeanours!! (or is dat too lenient a word) he’d committed!! Anyhow, tek care wid yuh criticisms of my Arthur!! I still got some sort of a liking fuh he!! and, I don’t know how to account for the errors he made, as, otherwise, he seems a brilliant man!! – rather like me!!

To become Prime Minister of Barbados is tantamount to committing political suicide. as muchas P.M Thompson is admired right now, whether it is a two or three term stint that he is given, at the end he too will come under the executioner’s hammer. This is the nature of politics in Barbados; it takes a brave man to aspire towards being Prime Minister of Barbados. Mr Arthur made some grusome mistakes, or should I say discisions but like ALL the other P.M’s of this great country,he played a pivotal role in the development of Barbados. I’m one who was glad to see him go, but I will not join with others and deem the gentleman a failure, nor would i say that under his watch nothing was done for this country. My fear right now is that one day Mia Mottley will become P.M of Barbados, I honestly hope by then I would have pass to the next phase of existence in another “world.” i hope my offspring would be able to adapt to the kind of Barbados this country is destined to become under her leadership. My wish is that this NEVER happens. Mr Arthur doesn’t look well at all and being familiar with his family, I know there are some medical problem there.

The Scout // August 20, 2009 at 5:24 AM

To become Prime Minister of Barbados is tantamount to committing political suicide. as muchas P.M Thompson is admired right now, whether it is a two or three term stint that he is given, at the end he too will come under the executioner’s hammer.

*************

Scout, 2 to 3 terms of office is fantastic and, hardly, ‘political suicide’!!

Do u think Arthur posts here and, if so, under what name??

Scout, u in gine nuh way fast and, neither is Arthur!! He’ll b back!! Ull see!!

@Scout
“To become Prime Minister of Barbados is tantamount to committing political suicide. as much as P.M Thompson is admired right now, whether it is a two or three term stint that he is given, at the end he too will come under the executioner’s hammer.”[Is a 3 term stint at PM ‘political suicide’? I would have thought less than one would be suicide, or some other -cide. Why would a people allow themselves to be ‘tortured’ for 3 terms? Because they are not.

The author wrote “Despite political affiliations most Barbadians if asked continue to hold former Prime Minister Arthur in high regard.” yet you say “I’m one who was glad to see him go…” I guess that is not inconsistent if you really represent minority opinion–the election in terms of popular vote was very close. But I wonder what a poll would show.

Oh noooooooooo!! he back again!!

In all honesty, I think Arthur’s pondering the bigger-field rather than local politics again and, is eyeing becoming President of the first regional, political-conglomerate, of a united states of the caribbean, aka the first President of Caricom, if nobody holds such a position, already!!

“Former Prime Minister Owen Arthur has accused the David Thompson Government of placing the country in serious turmoil.

“Barbados is going down rapidly”, he told a Barbados Labour Party (BLP) branch meeting at the Roland Edwards Primary School, St. Peter, last Sunday night.

Charging that lack of planning, given the current economic climate, was the nucleus of Government’s failings, the member of Parliament for St. Peter said the situation required intellectual militancy.” – Taken from the Daily Nation, Tuesday, August 18, 2009.

Now, the People’s Democratic Congress’ Leader , Mr. Mark Adamson, using a copy of this said Daily Nation newspaper – did show or refer this said news story from which the above extracts were taken to about 250 persons in Bolton Lane/Victoria Street, to elicit their responses to some of the issues being raised by Mr. Arthur – esp. the one that relates to his charge that Mr. Thompson is “running the country down”.

And would you – you the readers of this post – believe that about 248 persons out of those 250 persons acknowledged that Mr. Arthur had instead run the country into the ground when he was in office; that about half of those agreed that Thompson has been running the country into the ground; and that a small number of people ( about 10 0r so ) stated that Mr. Thompson is NOT running the country into the ground, because it was already run into the ground by Arthur. Would you believe it?

Anyhow, just as our leader told most of them that Mr. Thompson, Mr. Arthur and Miss Mottley would have been “heartlessly cruelly running this country into the ground”, at different times since 1994, we hereby repeat the same that Mr. Thompson, Mr. Arthur and Miss Mottley would have been heartlessly cruelly running this county into the ground at different times since 1994.

For, the incontrovertible evidence is there that both the DLP and the BLP have been for years wickedly running this country into the ground. Indeed, Arthur’s reported comment about Mr. Thompson running the country down calls to mind the idiom of the kettle calling the pot black. Even some BLP supporters yesterday agreed with our Political Leader that Arthur would have run the country into the ground as well.

So, therefore, what Arthur has clearly done – by way of his comments about Thompson running the country down – is to have mainly embarrassed himself, chiefly embarrassed his party, and really and truly embarrassed the Opposition Leader in parliament, since he does not have ANY MORAL AUTHORITY OR MORAL STANDING to say so. None whatsoever, since he himself – when he was political leader of this country – had been running it seriously down.

What he has also done in the context of having made those comments too is to clearly prove that he can still with the participation of some sections of the media rightfully undermine the Opposition Leader in parliament. And the truth is – and this is something that Mr. Arthur clearly knows – that the current Opposition Leader is NOT sufficiently intellectually nor politically equipped for the role of Opposition Leader in parliament esp. as it relates to the provision of alternate national political leadership of this country.

Thus, Miss Mottley continues to fail massively as an Opposition Leader in this country with her Henry Forde-type leadership, and esp. at such a time as is now when this country needs very strong decisive dynamic visionary leadership, and at this time too when the country’s political material and financial affairs are – as we have many times previously stated on this blog and elsewhere – rapidly going downhill.

For a start, Mottley does NOT even use the political economics language properly in her official speeches and utterances, so as to convince many persons who we talk with that this is one crucial way of evincing that she is capable of leading this country and of commanding wide spread attention and respect from so many thousands of people in Barbados as a paramount or undisputed leader. Too, this is one of the major reasons why Mr. Thompson’s own so-called leadership of this country right now, at such a tumultuous time in this country’s history, is so dismal and backward. He has clearly NOT mastered the the political economics language and therefore CAN NOT and WILL NOT convince the vast majority of Barbadians that he has mastered the intricacies of the political economic beast. Even Dr. Richie Haynes sounded better and was more astute as Opposition Leader in the late 1980s and the early 1990s than Miss Mottley is today, and had commanded far greater respect from major national stakeholders as Minister of Finance in 1986-1987 than Mr. Thompson is getting from such persons and interest groups as the present Minister of Finance. Obviously, Dr. Haynes, though NOT a so-called trained economist, had the ability still to speak the language and at the same time to convince many thousands of Barbadians that he knew what he was talking about.

In closing, though, we in the PDC wish to point to the fact that in this said Daily Nation news story, Mr. Arthur stated emphatically that Mr. Thompson does NOT have a plan for the growth of the country; that he does NOT have a programme for stabilizing the country, …. that he does NOT have a plan for stop this downward turn. But, we would like in turn to say to Mr. Arthur most factually that he himself does NOT have a plan for the growth of this country or to stabilize it whatever and that NEITHER he, Miss Mottley NOR Mr. Thompson has any of these kinds of plans that he referred to in this news story. NONE Whatsoever.

Well, Thank God that more and more people in Barbados are realizing the need to get the rid of the DLP and BLP from out of the parliament of this country. And, yesterday, out of those 250 persons or so, about 100 agreed with that type of position that the majority of the electorate need to elect other governing parties into the parliament of this country!!

So, down with the damned DLP and the blasted BLP!!

PDC

I can see no real reason why Mottley should believe that she has an entitlement program to be leader of this country, I know thru her family connections she may feel the Mottley name is that reason but I must tell her it is not so.

With her dubious track record remember her involvement with the VECO PRISON and VECO OIL STORAGE and DANOS 3S ROAD WORKS and a lack of a moral compass.

She needs to do the honourable thing and resign after all the Senator resigned for cutting up his wife’s car seat what would you say to Mottley who has cut up more than car seats????

@Veritas
“Non sequiter in terms of first-past-the-post.” [I made no mention of ‘first past the post. Note that I wrote “…the election in terms of popular vote was very close…” that’s about numbers of votes cast/percent of people voting not seats gained/constituencies won. Wikipedia shows the results, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barbadian_general_election,_2008. The 53%/46.5% split is to me ‘very close’, considering the 2:1 ratio of seats gained. I see no non-sequitur. I need to check that Wiki ref. is correct, though.]

Tell us all what the DLP has done for the economy. What has become of the Cox report on the economy.

David

I refer to your statement on Owen Arthur that he was “Fresh from national embarrassment over his near-miss from speaking in the budget debate..”

Was this “near-miss” not orchestrated by the DLP???? Come on be truthful!!!!

Some DLP ministers are making the same mistakes that the BLP administration made. One of the mistakes that drove a nail in Arthur’s coffin, was echoed by a DLP minister, I think Chris Sinckler; Arthur said he would do everything posible(or words to that effect) to see that the DLP never regains the government.This remark infuriated some voters and were determined to vote the BLP out and prove Arthur wrong. It hurted my ears when I heard Min. Sinckler repeat similar words when in the House of Assembly said that the BLP should never( orwords to that effect ) be allowed to gain this government again. Fortunately, Min Sinckler’s remarks were made early in the DLP’s term of office and it would most likwly be forgotten when elections are called. The one thing that stands out in Barbados’ fsvour is that irrespective of which party is in power, this country has always had stable government; I hope it remains like that. All P.M’s, including my hero His Excel The Right Hon Errol Walton Barrow , made their mistakes while in government, some more blatant than others but in general they all assisted in placing Barbados as the envy of the rest of the region. It is on these matters that I differ vastly with many diehards from both parties. I have been called a BLPite by some and a DLpite by some, it depends on my response to certain matters. That’s O.K with me, al least I’m honest with my opinion even though I’m not always right. Those people who knows me respects me for being honest. My loyalty is with the DLP but when , in my opinion they err, I would say so, that is my democratic right and that was engrained in me by my political hero. When I look into the mirror, I done feel ashame of myself on the contrary, I’m usually proud of myself despite being criticised by others. In other word, I done say what anyone wants me to sat but what I believe.

Arthurs credentials CANNOT be compared to Opposition Leader Mottley. Extraordinary times call for extradinary actions by our leaders. Correction, we should regard them as leaders when they show leadership!

Let the government flounder, no problem, Barbadians will be the better for it.

Not many votes separated the BLP from the DLP IN THE LAST ELECTION. Remember that !

We like to diss our cricketers, our politicians, musicians and artistes. We are a cruel people. Here is a man who has give 25 years of his life to Barbados. Kudos to him. I salute him for his contribution. He was part of the team that took Barbados from the brink of despair in 1994 to stability. RESPECT THE MAN.

David Thompson has become Prime Minister and whatever his shortcomings, we should be happy that we can pass the mantle of leadership so smoothly to another person , who has the capability to lead and function as Prime Minister.

The job of Prime Minister of Barbados cannot be easy and it is to the credit of any person who aspire to the position.

This is little Barbados and we should value our people, all of our people. I dont give two wukk-ups who is Prime Minister or which party is in, this is my country Barbados and I will make my contribution for love of country.

Respect everybody ! everybody !

When the election is over, its all hands on deck. I dont support no nonsense. Political cleaning versus Politics of Inclusion—–Give me –Inclusion

@David
“Arthurs credentials CANNOT be compared to Opposition Leader Mottley. Extraordinary times call for extradinary actions by our leaders. Correction, we should regard them as leaders when they show leadership!”[In some senses you are correct, but Miss Motley has clearly mandated status and that cannot just be bypassed because the PM would like it. It is the kind of thing that can drive a wedge between, or expose a wedge within, a party, and that might have been part of the intention–pure guess by me. It’s not so dissimilar to what has now happened in the USA with POTUS using former Pres. Clinton to do foreign policy work while Mrs. Clinton in the Secretary of State–just look at how that is being played out and the confusions it has created.]

Two questions in the interest of fairness:

1. Was the method of calculation of the unemployment rate used by the Arthur administration consistent with that used previously?

2. Did the Arthur administration sell any public land or was the land sold by private owners?

And, forgive a third and rude question:

3. Is this yet another brazen attempt to twist facts to suit a different agenda without due regard for the truth?

I ask again , what has the DLP done for the economy since jan 15, 2008?

Why is it that the DLP followers are so silent on the performance of the economy to date?

Are we getting the QEH refurbished or is a new one being built. Remember the Minister of Finance said he was selling our shares in BNB to ICBL to pay for this work. What has become of all of these plans?

Has anyone benefited from the recent 3% interest loans from the NIS? These are loans representing the amount of the NIS deferred on the employers contributon.

ROK said….

In doing some recent research in low income communities, it was found that the unemployment rate in these communities range from 33% – 47%. You know what that makes those declared central bank figures?

You do realize thats the same thing as saying “Gee I did a survey of unemployed people and the unemployment rate was 100%!”

The rate amongst any smaller subset of the population cannot be use to invalidate the larger national survey. That’s basic statistics. In fact the use of that information I would say is deliberately misleading..

@Anonymous
“The rate amongst any smaller subset of the population cannot be use to invalidate the larger national survey.”

I see that you miss the point. Who is trying to invalidate the national figure?

So what then are you saying, ROK?

@ROK

Your discussion with anonymous is not new. It is the economist and statistician arguing with the social worker. We need to have the balance, unless there is social cohesion the numbers mean nothing.