Bakari’s Miscalculation May Not Cost Him, JLP’s Will Be Costly

People are asked to speak at events for any num­ber of rea­sons. Usually, because they may have some­thing impor­tant to say or that they may rep­re­sent the orga­ni­za­tion in a good light, based on who they are and what they are like­ly to say.
From Presidents to recov­er­ing drug addicts, speak­ers of all kinds grace stages to deliv­er their mes­sage. Some are paid hand­some­ly, oth­ers not so much and even oth­ers noth­ing at all.
Shoot, even I have been asked a time or two to speak to a cou­ple of peo­ple, though I nev­er knew if any­one both­ered lis­ten­ing to any­thing I said.

Sellers on the set of CNN with fel­low ana­lyst Ana Navaro

And so I will nev­er ques­tion the moti­va­tion of the People’s National Party ‘s deci­sion to have Mr. Bakari Sellers as keynote speak­er on open­ing night at their 80th annu­al par­ty conference.
No one should doubt the bona fides of the 33-year-old Mister Sellers. He is an accom­plished attor­ney, for­mer state leg­is­la­tor, a CNN ana­lyst and sits on the boards of sev­er­al com­pa­nies and organizations.

Naturally, a young up-and-com­er like mis­ter Sellers is an incred­i­ble draw for Organizations look­ing to deliv­er a mes­sage from some­one young influ­en­tial and even good look­ing who can poten­tial­ly attract young peo­ple to their cause.
It behooves those who would sum­mar­i­ly dis­miss Mr. Sellers as a know-noth­ing for­eign­er, to rethink that strat­e­gy, par­tic­u­lar­ly when one con­sid­er the res­o­nance the words of for­eign­ers gen­er­al­ly have with our ordi­nary folks.
A well-deliv­ered speech from some­one like Bakari Sellers, a young edu­cat­ed, accom­plished and per­son­able for­eign­er is hard to coun­te­nance with a lazy dismissal.

Members of the JLP, and fol­low­ers of the par­ty can ill-afford to make the mis­take of sim­ply dis­miss­ing, as an absur­di­ty, some­one like Mister Sellers can have on local politics.
I read today, Fabian Lewis’ bril­liant arti­cle in the local Observer in which he did a point by point rebut­tal on why Bakari Sellers would do bet­ter stick­ing to American politics.
In his arti­cle, Fabian Lewis did a mas­ter­ful artic­u­la­tion of the rea­sons he feels that Mister Sellers was either mis­led or bam­boo­zled by the PNP (my words).

Peter Phillips leader of the oppo­si­tion PNP

1. Furniture scan­dal 2. Shell waiv­er scan­dal 3. Sandals Whitehouse scan­dal 4. Operations PRIDE scan­dal 5. Motor vehi­cle scan­dal 6. Finsac 7. Foreign exchange scan­dal 8. Trafigura scan­dal 9. Cuban light bulb scan­dal 10. National Housing Development Corporation scan­dal 11. Rollins land deal scan­dal 12. Sand min­ing 1 scan­dal 13. Sand min­ing 2 scan­dals 14. Montego Bay street peo­ple scan­dal 15. Zinc scan­dal 16. Telecoms scan­dal 17. Net-Serv scan­dal 18. Outameni scan­dal 19. Bad gas scan­dal 20. EWI Scandal.

There is real­ly no need to yell at Bakari Sellers, except to say that if the young mis­ter Sellers intends to have cred­i­bil­i­ty going for­ward, he must pay keen­er atten­tion to the caus­es to which he lends his voice. Not only will he be embar­rassed by fail­ing to do so, but his speech­es will undoubt­ed­ly come back to haunt his career.
Mister Sellers whom I’m sure is right back here in the United States, hav­ing col­lect­ed his speak­ing fees, did not do due dili­gence in ensur­ing that the his­to­ry of the polit­i­cal par­ty to which he was lend­ing his voice was not anti­thet­i­cal to his own worldview.

As a Democrat who sup­port­ed President Barack Obama, the only President in our life­time who has had two terms in office with­out a scan­dal, I do under­stand how Sellers would have ” cor­rup­tion” at the top of his con­cerns before deliv­er­ing a speech in a devel­op­ing Jamaica.
The only prob­lem is that Sellers deliv­ered that speech in front of the wrong audience.
Clearly, Mister Sellers had not done the prepa­ra­tion nec­es­sary. Had he scratched the sur­face, it is less like­ly he would have gone to a PNP ral­ly to speak out against cor­rup­tion against the still rel­a­tive­ly new JLP Administration.

The PNP has been a cesspool of cor­rup­tion since it’s incep­tion. It is stun­ning that the Dinasours who have illic­it­ly fat­tened them­selves at the expense of the poor Jamaican peo­ple, still sit in wait­ing to once again hold state pow­er. That they would have the temer­i­ty to talk about cor­rup­tion is absolute­ly Trumpian.

Andrew Holness PM

Let me be clear, how­ev­er, Prime Minister Holness is doing a ter­rif­ic job as Prime Minister, nev­er­the­less, the incre­men­tal gains he’s man­aged will be swept away in a Tsunami of dis­af­fec­tion if he does not ensure that the Government he heads exer­cis­es full fideli­ty to the inau­gur­al address he gave upon being sworn in as PM on the sec­ond occasion.
There can be no mis­take about what the Jamaican peo­ple expect when it comes to the judi­cious exe­cu­tion of poli­cies and the effec­tive and trans­par­ent process which ought to exist as it per­tains to state funds.
The Prime Minister as head of the Government and leader of his par­ty has a respon­si­bil­i­ty and indeed a duty to act with utmost alacrity and dis­patch to head off any neg­a­tive press which would emerge as it per­tains to cor­rup­tion in his government.
As a con­se­quence, where there is any sliv­er of evi­dence that there may be unto­ward behav­ior by any of his sub­or­di­nates they must imme­di­ate­ly be removed until an exhaus­tive inves­ti­ga­tion is done to ascer­tain the facts.
No mem­ber of Parliament or Minister has a right to be in any posi­tion of pow­er. Public ser­vice is an hon­or, no one is enti­tled to it.

In the same way that mis­ter Sellers did not ful­ly acquaint him­self with the facts before address­ing the PNP’s 80 annu­al con­fer­ences, so too have many Jamaicans, [many with­in the JLP], hitched their wag­ons to the American Republican Party. They do so with­out the ben­e­fit of a full appre­ci­a­tion of the ways in which the two major Political par­ties have crossed ide­o­log­i­cal paths after the 1964 civ­il rights act was signed by President Lyndon Johnson.[https://​www​.loc​.gov/​e​x​h​i​b​i​t​s​/​c​i​v​i​l​-​r​i​g​h​t​s​-​a​c​t​/​c​i​v​i​l​-​r​i​g​h​t​s​-​a​c​t​-​o​f​-​1​9​6​4​.​h​tml]

The sign­ing of the civ­il rights act was fol­lowed by a mass exo­dus of white male Americans from the Democratic par­ty, the par­ty of Kennedy and Lyndon Johnson to the Republican party.
 It was Nixon who devised and pur­sued what came to be called the Southern strat­e­gy. This was, in the admirably con­cise word­ing of Wikipedia, an appeal “to racism against African-Americans.” Nixon was hard­ly the first Republican to notice that Lyndon Johnson’s civ­il rights leg­is­la­tion had alien­at­ed whites both in the South and else­where — Johnson him­self had fore­cast that Southern whites would desert the Democratic Party[http://www.nydailynews.com/opinion/nixon-bigger-crime-southern-strategy-article‑1.1891611]

The evo­lu­tion and jux­ta­po­si­tion of the two major par­ties and how the Democrats, the par­ty of the Dixiecrats and the Klan, came to be the par­ty of black Americans as a result of the civ­il rights and vot­ing rights acts is a good case study.
Sufficing to say that what­ev­er affin­i­ty blacks both in the United States and across the Globe may have had with the GOP, it must now be reex­am­ined against the back­drop of what that par­ty has become.
A far right-wing par­ty which ped­dles Racism, Xenophobia, Misogyny, Religous intol­er­ance, and hatred.

The roman­tic ideas some shared about the par­ty of Lincoln who freed the slaves must be tem­pered with the slave-own­ing Lincoln stat­ing ” If I could save the union with­out free­ing a sin­gle damn slave I would do it”.
The roman­tic ide­al­ism about Ronald Reagan’s hav­ing Seaga as his first head of state vis­i­tor to the White House and lat­er sign­ing an amnesty bill which gave legal sta­tus to undoc­u­ment­ed immi­grants must be care­ful­ly scru­ti­nized against Reagan’s advance­ment of Nixon’s south­ern strategy.
Sometimes the roman­tic notions and ide­al­ism we have about a per­son or a coun­try is just that, roman­tic ide­al­ism. Before we hitch our wag­ons to some hors­es we bet­ter make damn sure we know where they will drag us.