Sargeant

“The question is what do they have to hide?”

This thread is so comical.

A bunch of people hiding behind Monikers and screaming for transparency from others.

You guys are more fun than a barrel of monkeys!

@ac | July 27, 2011 at 6:31 AM | it doesn’t matter how many political parties we have it is the character of the politician that really counts . we the people must start with the first stage of getting to know their mindset before giving our approval. it is the countries lost or gain .it is our civil rigt and duty todo so.because after they are elected it is too late as is the case with IL.
====================
Such a simplistic view ac. How do you propose to get to know their mindsets? That is what election campaigning is suppose to do, but obviously they lie to us and deceive us everytime. But somebody has to run the country. What are you going to do if you don’t find enough candidates with mindsets that you approve of? Who’s going to run the country then?

@ David

No Hants, politicians in this part of the world at least are in it for the access it gives to money making and securing their power structures.
____________________________________________________________

ALL politicians A LL, ALL get into politics for POWER!!!!

@zack
Before you form a simplistic opinion you should have read my earlier posting, There is nothing simplistic about that.

The media in Barbados has been a disaster into uncovering which can been called unseemly behaviour by some of those who are seeking political office preferring rather to hid information from the public which would be helpful when the public go to cast a vote and this serves no purpose except to those whose interest it serves.no one should be allowed to manage the affairs of a country when their lives are subject to public scrutiny. The public should be made aware of their misdoings before we cast a vote .The vote is for the country and not for the politician because a person have a million degrees behind his name doesn’t make him trustworthy.

@CCC

This thread is so comical.
A bunch of people hiding behind Monikers and screaming for transparency from others.
*******************
There is a quote of unknown origin which goes as follows: “Better to keep your mouth closed and be thought a fool than to open it and remove all doubt”
The same people whom you referenced are among the many that were actively campaigning against the BLP on these blogs. Evidently anonymity was fine then but not so great now that the target is the DLP for failing to live up to their campaign promise. Where do you think Thompson got the idea for FOI and Integrity legislation?

That campaign promise is now a loaded gun against the DLP heads and the Electorate may pull the trigger next time.

Will you be laughing then? He who laughs last laughs best.

If the electorate is calling for transparency – we ought to verify the name, address of the ‘speaker’ and to ensure that the ‘caller’ has nothing to hide whilst calling for every one else to be exposed.

Tell me that we cannot understand what CCC is saying. If David is representing the electorate in calling for transparency and being adamant about his call … shouldn’t I know who David is and that he is a law abiding citizen of Barbados? And, should I not form my own opinion based on facts on David that I researched to affirm that he is who he says he is and is truly interested in my well-being and welfare.

If you are calling for transparency … what I am seeing CCC asking or stating is … BE TRANSPARENT FIRST THEN with due respect and benevolence others will follow suit without compromise and fear.
Can anyone in sound mind refute CCC’s comments. Note I say in sound mind.

David is not a member of government with the ready availability of being able to have his hands stuck in the public purse. So just why should he be asked to reveal his ID. Go fly a kite CCC, u dumb ass dlp asslicker!

Christopher Hatsall
It must be recognised that it wasn’t David who declared 100 days in office will see IL abd FOI enacted. The DLP under then leader, the late David Thompson was adament about this while campaigning and voters believed him, maybe now that he is dead there is a change of heart within the hearts of the elected DLP MP’s but certainly not in the hearts of the voting public. The DLP, under Mr Stuart MUST explain to the voting public why IL and FOI has been placed on the backburner and only brought forward just before elections and the heat lowered under it. I want the DLP to know they are dealing with intelligent people.It seems the only defense the DLP has is to let loose their yardfowls with their gutter politics

Established in 1843 to campaign on one of the great political issues of the day, The Economist remains, in the second half of its second century, true to the principles of its founder. James Wilson, a hat maker from the small Scottish town of Hawick, believed in free trade, internationalism and minimum interference by government, especially in the affairs of the market. Though the protectionist Corn Laws which inspired Wilson to start The Economist were repealed in 1846, the newspaper has lived on, never abandoning its commitment to the classical 19th-century Liberal ideas of its founder.

Who owns The Economist? Since 1928, half the shares have been owned by the Financial Times, a subsidiary of Pearson, the other half by a group of independent shareholders, including many members of the staff. The editor’s independence is guaranteed by the existence of a board of trustees, which formally appoints him and without whose permission he cannot be removed.

Why is it anonymous? Many hands write The Economist, but it speaks with a collective voice. Leaders are discussed, often disputed, each week in meetings that are open to all members of the editorial staff. Journalists often co-operate on articles. And some articles are heavily edited. The main reason for anonymity, however, is a belief that what is written is more important than who writes it. As Geoffrey Crowther, editor from 1938 to 1956, put it, anonymity keeps the editor “not the master but the servant of something far greater than himself. You can call that ancestor-worship if you wish, but it gives to the paper an astonishing momentum of thought and principle.”

Why is it anonymous? Many hands write The Economist, but it speaks with a collective voice. Leaders are discussed, often disputed, each week in meetings that are open to all members of the editorial staff. Journalists often co-operate on articles. And some articles are heavily edited. The main reason for anonymity, however, is a belief that what is written is more important than who writes it. As Geoffrey Crowther, editor from 1938 to 1956, put it, anonymity keeps the editor “not the master but the servant of something far greater than himself. You can call that ancestor-worship if you wish, but it gives to the paper an astonishing momentum of thought and principle.”

The paper, however, had to wait nearly half a century before getting another remarkable editor. He came in 1922, in the shape of Walter Layton, whose achievement, in the words of The Economist’s historian, Ruth Dudley Edwards*, was to have the paper “read widely in the corridors of power abroad as well as at home”, even if critics said it was “slightly on the dull side of solid”.

Good jobCCC. You again have masterfullychanged the topic at hand preffering to put the focus on yourself and the gullible on BU have fallen for it. onlyyou CCC! only You!

We don’t all live in Black Rock ! If anyone really believes that this present DLP government will pass transparency,integrity and FOI legislation they are obviously ignorant of the tactics our politicians,both of the DLP and the BLP,have used and will continue to use so as to ensure every elected politician is able to feather his/her own nest .They operate on the principle “today,it’s your turn,tomorrow it’ll be my turn so let’s not rock the boat !” One may ask the question,why has this government waited until almost the end of its mandate to talk about such legislation .They know full well it’ll never see the light of day ! It’s the same old story !

Hi David,
If you checked your register you would realise that I ain’t ‘bin nowhere. 🙂

Still here looking on, begging the Good BBE to ease the suffering l’il bit. 🙂
Thanx for the heads-up anyway.

ac,
I still hey, sweetie. But wuh ‘appen wid my “owner” Bonny? Haven’t seen her on for a long time? Any idea?

@ Chris

Based on your information sharing BU is taken serious and it is an important part of our growth and development. Nothing to dispute on the integrity of BU. George (real) and Caswell (real name) confirm and reassures that we can have great and greater insight via BU.

That is not the issue. We read of the Editor of The Economist by name. Bajan Reporter has a name, BArbados Free Press, its Editor gave his name. The Editor and the founder of The Economist is known and the successor of the Economist is known.

Honestly, I have learnt alot through this forum. I can speak publicly about what I read here without fear of BU amending postings. BU has its credibility – what it does not have is the integrity of an Editor who is saying do as I say and not as I do. I support BU ‘the blog’ and I appreciate the person (male or female) that started and continues to allow freedom of expression – may I add, however vile the expression.

The issue is, if I am asking and agitating as an Editor, for transparency I should also declare whom I am. That is the issue. Besides that, David can well leave the forum open for the agitation to come from John Public because he will not be practicing what he preaches and therefore will lose integrity although we are informed by his blog and engage in sound, logical discussion. Chris, that is the issue.

Again Chris I appreciate your sharing.

DAVID

Only you can’t see the irony of your position!

HOME
Right on brother.

David does not grant Government contracts.

David does not allocate taxpayers money to projects and events.

David does not vote on the spending of taxpayers money.

BU is a blog (not a newspaper) owned by David and can do wha he like, but those of you who really want to know his real name can find it at http://www.whoisBudavid.com

@Home

Your comment serves to inspire, to explain, when DLP and BLP start the process of attacking BU we take it as a compliment.

It also reinforces the view that the BLP and DLP are both cut from the same clothe, just like Ralphie stated.

@CCC
The irony of it all is that for all an sundry purposes the owner of the blog is being attacked unfairly. for one he is not a a high level or low level cabinet minister overseeing the affairs of the country and as of now not mentioned to the BU family his interest in such.SO what is the point of asking him to reveal his personnel information since that information is his to do whatever he pleases with until a time when he is asked to do so because of an interest in governmental affairs or subpoenaed by a court. Right now a ploy has been hatched to take the real focus away from the ministers of government and attacked the messenger ! so far it seems to be working, Can you CCC and others say what does David’s transparency have to do in any way to running the affairs of the country and would it in anyway serve to be of benefit to the people . This is all a smoke screen and a shot across the bow in a futile attempt to silence those who needs to know the backgrounds working of our politician. Until David becomes one of them . He should continue to plead the “Right to remain silent.”

Sir David, Sir Charles, Sir Kyffin, lead the way in showing your love of Barbados and motivate others to follow:
http://money.cnn.com/video/news/2011/07/29/n_ny_debt_couple.cnnmoney/