I am just enjoying this particular thread started by George Brathwaite. The contributions by Checkit-Out, Scout, George himself, “Yet Another Thompson St. John Development Plan” , Hants to a lesser extent, and of course, with the fires being constantly stoked by BU’s David, make this blog the most enlightening, analytical, provocative, and real funny too!

And the funny part is serious business too, because look at what heavy Vodka drinking probably did … the reverberations from that excessive exercise have delivered a pot pouri of interesting and unique circumstances, never before seen on the political landscape of this country!

MR. Checkit-Out, Regarding your question ….. “Freundel – Could you tell us what is his favourite drink?”

I will hazard a guess that it is BUSH TEA! “Cause the man real BITTER! Attacking everybody vicious then …… even calling Right Honourable Owen a RAT and accusing the man of being “LONELY” even though Mr. Arthur has a young, beautiful, and clearly loving wife, plus children at home.

So, as SCOUT OPINED, the place where LONLINESS really pervading would be up at ILARO during these cold cold nights and that RING ON THE MARRIED FINGER don’t mean a pang ….. cause the speculated wifey seems non-existent! Could that be the REAL cause of the BITTERNESS, and not the bush tea? Serious.

By the way, so many serious economic and social issues facing the country, and the DEMS decide to hold ANOTHER FETE , I think designed to blindside the young people!

Charlie
It is not the car in every household that has the road gridlock. It is the household that has five and six vehicles parked out front and the occupants can come out and decide which vehicle they feel like driving today. Are you suggesting that ordinary bajans should not be driving a vehicle? Are you suggesting that artisans and gravediggers, etc should not be driving a vehicle? There is a lot of foreign exchange wasted daily in barbados by vehicles on the road and it ids not by the ordinary person, it is by the “big boys” who driving their big expensive vehicles with the powerful engines that waste the petrol. It is their children that drive recklessly on the roads and if reported they know who to call.

I was trying my utmost best to avoid discussion pertaining to a fantastic lady who now finds herself feeding along side with the wolves. Knowing the protectionism of the late Prime Minister and the way he believed in Family First and the love he portrait to those three lovely ladies, I find difficulty in the aledged pronouncement to Hartley Henry in having the apple of his eyes involved with the heartless power play of politics. I am saying without prejudice that David would not have given permission to anyone for his wife to be involved in politics, knowing the lies, hatred, prejudice, past injustices, the denigrated behaviour by politicians and certain electorate and most of all the way bajans react to anyone that is “NOT BAJAN”.
David loved his family too much to leave them on a lonely road without him being at their side.

What say you Hartley?

Tell me Why @ January 15, 2011 at 6:33 PM;

Nice!!!

Following up on Tell-me-why’s post above that I interpreted as beautifully tongue-in-cheek but which also encapsulated a fact that should have been obvious earlier. If HH’s recollection of how DT proposed Mara as succeeding him is true there can be little doubt that DT would have been proposing a dynasty. It makes no sense for Mara to have been cast to the wolves merely for the sake of an MP position. To have her working towards setting up a dynasty is the only thing that makes sense.

Therefore, it seems to me that the PM can prove fairly conclusively that the Dynasty talk is pure conjecture if he does not offer Mara a Ministerial post. She would therefore be just an ordinary MP and who ever heard of a common MP being part of a dynasty. Unfortunately, the DLP would also have to stop referring to her as their “queen” as with 2 DLP ladies in the house, it would seem somewhat incongruous to continue to refer to the obviously junior one as their “queen”.

The lie would therefore be given to the HH generated rumours of David wanting his wife to take on the rigours of real Political life and HH mobilising the St John folk to put that rumour into effect. The Dynasty talk would die a natural death as an ordinary MP could not a dynasty make.

On the other hand, if she were given a Ministry the rumours might possibly escalate and we might even see her replacing Freundel as leader in a coming general election in 2 or 7 years time.

This could be the conspiracy theory to end conspiracy theories. Would Freundel collaborate so extensively in his own putative removal from office?

Could the BLP be complicit in such moves? Could they be trying to trick Freundel into refusing to go to the next step of anointing Mara as a Minister? or are they seeing it more strategically.

Could the BLP Mara attack campaign have been designed to ensure that Freundel, in a petulant move, makes a Minister of Queen Mara fairly soon. Wouldn’t this be exactly what the BLP should want as they need a sitting target in the Cabinet to wilt under their attacks on David’s record on CLICO and other matters, for them to have a chance of winning the next general elections.

There are a number of signposts (built from my Conspiracy Theory bricks) that could signal if the dynasty talk has any validity. They could also give us some idea of the strategy being used towards implementing that putative dynasty.

1. Watch for HH being reinstated as Mara’s advisor and assistant for constituency matters in St John.
2. Watch for Mara being offered a Ministerial Post.
3. Watch for Mara accepting that Ministerial Post in a reshuffle that will see Freundel taking on greater Ministerial responsibility.
4. Watch for Chris Sinckler being reshuffled to a less prestigious Ministry.
5. Watch for Freundel ultimately stepping down from the PM post.
6. Watch for leaks of signs of mutiny in the DLP.

This is the appropriate heading in which I would like to express the way I feel about two people who the electorate was looking up for an alternative to the economic crisis that prevail this nation.
These two people are Owen and Mia and I am mad, bursting with madness. Why should two grown people allow forces to destroy the work done by the opposition. Why should these two political gurus be in opposition with each other.
Owen, you are to blame, knowing your leadership capabilities you could have had dialogue with Mia and deal with any leadership problems. You could have brought Mia into your confidence and inform her that due to your age, you would use your ability to lead the pary and if by God’s grace the party wins the election, you would have pass on the mantle to her. That is political diplomacy. Now Mia, I ain’t done. I would have continued with the election for chairman of the party and stamp your authority. I would have worked with the political leader and show everyone that you are a professional. If Owen prefer to distance himself from you knowing that you hold the chairmanship of the party, the onus would be in his corner to explain to Bajans why he remain a stubborn politician.
Anyway, I must hand it to Mia for her stance to appear on the opposition’s platform and speak from the heart. What Bajans need now is these two powerhouse to hold hands and embrace each other and deal with issues. I hope that Barbados’ politics would never experience such callous political behaviour. The loser will definitely be the electorate.

Checkit-out
I agree with your statement of “stop referring to her as their “queen” as with 2 DLP ladies in the house,”
If you keep referring someone as “Queen” it will remain on the lips of all members of the party. However, the the other ladies will react after the elections and this can bring problems. Was Dr Suckoo dethroned? Suppose Irene wins the St. Andrew’s seat. Will she be installed as the new “Queen”? Stop the foolish talk of political Queen. My Queen is my wife and my daughters are my princesses. That’s my prerogative and no one can fault me for saying so.

Re. HAMILTON HILL @ January 15, 2011 at 8:37 PM and 8:52 PM;
I like the 2 watch-fors but the reference to THE Undercover supporter of the BLP has me scratching my head. When I’ve figured it out I’ll let you know.

Re. the parable in the second post. I’m completely mistified. But it seems that you have some very interesting IT skills worthy of a Christopher Halsall unless you are a BU insider. Is Truthman Burton the Undercover One?

Hamilton Hill;
Coming out of one of your watch-fors above. Perhaps the best indicator of success in this election might be whether or not the BLP candidate loses his deposit. Percentages or pluralities may not tell the full story. The loss of the deposit, even in St John, might.

BU understands there was a reasonable crowd at the last BLP meeting due mainly to Mottley being on the platform. We also understand several people left after she delivered. What can we read into it? A case of people expecting fireworks or…

What about Sylvan Greenidge, Henderson Bovell, Royal Rumble, Bajan Panday? Are to to conclude the Arthur regime does not intend to make use of the Internet to get their message out there? They have a website and a blog.

Hamilton Hill; You said “Barbados was treated to a marvellous display of semantics.” Having seen the web extract posted here. I tend to agree with you. But might they not have been her true feelings?

I am looking forward to seeing the clips of the speeches of the next few days on BU. primarily Freundel, Mia and Owen. The candidates’ speeches, even Mara’s, are of lesser importance re. gauging the future of politics in Barbados.

Hamilton Hill;

You’ve provided some interesting clues as to the identity of the BLP person who you suggest is lurking on this blog. Is it that you suspect that Truthman Burton is really one of the very top persons in the BLP?

“The Scout”
Visit the Rumshops,fish markets, Swan street. Walk bout in Speightstown on Saturday morning.

Then you will understand why the mass meetings will continue to be comedic entertainment.

We like it so.

Mr.Arthur has a valid point, that elections and positions should be based on merit.

Maybe he said it wrong, but it is true. That said, I personally think that Mara Thompson has it in aces over the BLP candidate for St.John.

As I said, the BLP needs to carefully assess its candidate slate for the next election to be a viable choice.

I mean that with the best of intentions.

@David, What was the VAT a year ago and what is it now?

@enuff

If you have been exposed to political science you should know it is never always about rationality. The political party that can conjure up a perception and sell it as the real mccoy wins.

@ David

But i thought your aim was to promote the real rather than the perceived?

David, that is what the Nation and Advocate would say stupse

@Charlie: “Mr Stuart please pass the Integrity Legislation and FOI bills

Hear hear!!!

After all, The Honourable David Thompson promised these to his electorate (the People of Barbados) as a condition of his election.

Should not his wishes be honoured and obeyed?

And should they not, therefore, be enacted?

@ Charlie

FYI I really don’t care whether or not the Dems win the next election. Furthermore, I don’t write anything to justify why the BLP should be returned to power, I simply highlight the non-performance of the DLP and the FACTS are there to support my view: cost of living, unemployment, taxes, deficit, ABC highway, indecision on QEH. Now you tell me what policies the government implemented that worked/ing?

I am not blaming BU, because like the traditional media, BU also performs a justificatory function and supported Mara from the outset. Why elevate a campaign of “manipulation” and “perception” simply because it is streaming and using other internet-based strategy?

Enuff. Your post above encapsulates most of what I might have written in response to Charlie’s latest post. I would have happily endorsed Mara’s nomination and coming victory if it did not appear, quite persuasively, to come with the baggage of DT’s willing the seat to her and his family. When one adds to that the lack of accomplishments in the last three years by the present administration it would really have been contortionist behaviour to put on blinkers as Charlie seems to have done and support the DLP campaign.

Re. the BLP I have plainly stated that I admired Owen Arthur and his contribution to this country but that I was very disappointed in the manner in which he evidently conspired to remove Mia Mottley from the office of Leader of the Opposition. But that does not mean that I can’t point out on this blog what to me seems to have been contrived outrage against him for speaking the truth about Mara and the DLP’s campaign to elect her in St John.

I still think Mia Mottley is now the best politician in this country, followed closely by Chris Sinckler, but that shouldn’t stop me from pointing out that She needed to stop what seemed to be a scorched earth policy re. the BLP party.

As I pointed out in an earlier post, I eagerly await developments in the coming weeks and months arising out of this election and Mara’s handling of her new throne.

David

Point me to the facebook information and any clips on Chris Sinckler’s alleged attack.

However, without having seen the background information, it would seem uncalled for that Chris would attack Lynette Eastmond’s husband. He isn’t a candidate as far as I know. So bringing him into the platform discussion must be ineluctably beyond the pale. But as I stated elsewhere on BU, imho Chris is an uncut diamond with several rough edges that needs to be cut and polished. Yet he has the potential to be one of our great leaders. Mia is almost there in that regard with lots of experience under her belt. Owen is waning despite an apparent invigoration perhaps arising out of the R &R of his reported recent cruise. Freundel is not in any of the aboves’ class re. leadership potential or otherwise. Only my humble opinion. I might be wrong.

Charlie re. your post of Jan 18, 2011 at 8:47 AM;
I haven’t seen what Chris Sinckler said about Lynette Eastmond’s but your version above has a ring of truth about it. So I would accept that Chris did not curse “Cheese” and then say that it was customary political banter, no more. No attacking “cheese”. From your account, Lynette Eastmond is spinning what Chris Sinckler said. That is also par for the course. I posted a link where everyone could see exactly what Owen Arthur had said about “queen” Mara and conclude, if honest, that the general negative response to that statement was also spin.

AS a partisan DLP supporter you can see where Lynnette Eastmond is distorting facts but you can’t see where your party is also distorting the facts re. Owen Arthur’s platform address at College Bottom. You are definitely not a contortionist.

There has always been the practice of not mentioning the family of the combatants on the political platforms. Even if Lynette is milking this issue in reaction to ‘Cheese’ the point remains.

Someone told me that there was a news item on Radio this morning that Mara said on the platform that it was a deathbed wish of her late husband that she succeeded him in St John. Anyone on the blog heard it?