DENNIS JOSEPH WEEKLY: Backbenchers on the debate bus

Dennis Joseph

We watch with nearly fanatical interest the political debates on our TV sets backing one debater  or the other and arguing over their performances.  There are those who hurry home forgetting their groceries just so as not to miss one moment of the affair.   The thing is these political debaters on our TV sets do not come from Vielle Case or Marigot but the USA; it is Obama versus Romney not Skerrit and Edison James that ramps-up our adrenaline.  When it comes to debates at our own election time  we face a ‘no-no’ problem,  because many  actually  prefer for selfish political reasons to hint or even boldly remark ‘no-no’ that it is too risky for their side and ‘no-no’ it  should not happen at all.

During the 2005 election campaign  I was president of  the Media Workers Association of Dominica (MWAD) and at a meeting set up between MWAD executive members and the then newly appointed PM Roosevelt Skerrit we made a request to host debates  and received a positive response.  I then wrote similar letters formally inviting both Edison James leader of the UWP and himself to debate with a mutually agreed moderator when they could present their plans for development   and explain  how they would fulfill their election promises.    James immediately consented but the PM eventually responded with a ‘no-no’ letter. I informed Edison James of the PM’s decision and that should have been all and done.  However a tsunami of condemnation was hurled at MWAD propelled by the PM himself on a party  political platform  that this was just a trick to denigrate him.   Well Ok, then why did the same  ‘no-no’  happen when another non-partisan organization made a similar request?

But his fans saw little wrong with that and so apparent from the silence did the rest of we the people.   Are we therefore to look to a debate-less future in our electioneering and an increase in ‘sewo’ campaigning and trite deafening insignificance coming through humongous  hi-fi speakers?  Perhaps,   since evidently, “We like it so.”  But why after the elections do we the people express disappointment with the level of development and other things?    We never listened for development plans and other things during the campaign, we were too busy ‘sewoing’ and trashing our neighbor who backed another party..

What usually makes the headlines and sound bites  from an election campaign has little to do with development but mainly personal silliness; wild promises and fiction that passes as truth.   Yet with no knowledge of how, when, and why and  where  the candidates intend to lead us or even our constituency  we the people dutifully cast ballots.  Such knowledge of plans and programs could have come through a debate even though  just one time.  One careless vote in our first past the post  system can change or reinstall a government and as was said by John F Kennedy,  ’The ignorance of one voter in a democracy impairs the security of all.”

As a boy I recall the Literary and Debating Club which at school was a big thing.  Topics that sent us doing research at the Public Library which is a valuable aid to learning but the place is now treated as if on permanent time out. Out of that grew champion debaters at the Dominica Grammar School  like Julian Johnson now chairman of the IPO from whose lips  I first heard the term “terminological inexactitudes” which  wowed the school audience, had the instructor’s eyes popping and dictionaries protesting until we learned it was just a neat way of simply saying, “Man you lying,”  and a host of other talented students from whom grammar flowed unhindered like honeyed water.  From that wellspring emerged some of the best speakers who can think on their feet and would not be afraid, running for cover at the mention of the word ‘debate’  but would in fact welcome it. Our candidates  however seem quite content to remain as  backseat drivers in the  debate bus feeling safe and confident that all we the people want is ‘sewo.’.

The word ‘parliament’ originates from the French, “parler” (to talk, discuss) and the voters have a right to know that if elected their Rep could have no problem presenting their case in the House or in any forum. The lack of personal commitment which could be wrangled from  them on the record during  a debate allows parliamentarians to just sit back, collect a salary, drink milk, eat honey, and do what they are told just to flatter the leader.  Platform shouting  statements  can get the crowd screaming hysterically but  is not the place to find out about a candidate’s ability or even capability to grasp, present and dissect issues.    It is  the  debate  which allows a formal contest of argumentation and discussion of opposing views. In that instance no party would dare run a campaign without offering a   manifesto.   As the world economy dumps  we cannot ‘ sewo’ through an election as before.

That it will ever happen is up to you, up to me, but we shall see.

Listen to audio version of column below.

Opinions expressed in this article do not necessarily reflect those of Dominica News Online or its advertisers

Copyright 2012 Dominica News Online, DURAVISION INC. All Rights Reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or distributed.

Disclaimer: The comments posted do not necessarily reflect the views of DominicaNewsOnline.com and its parent company or any individual staff member. All comments are posted subject to approval by DominicaNewsOnline.com. We never censor based on political or ideological points of view, but we do try to maintain a sensible balance between free speech and responsible moderating.

We will delete comments that:

  • contain any material which violates or infringes the rights of any person, are defamatory or harassing or are purely ad hominem attacks
  • a reasonable person would consider abusive or profane
  • contain material which violates or encourages others to violate any applicable law
  • promote prejudice or prejudicial hatred of any kind
  • refer to people arrested or charged with a crime as though they had been found guilty
  • contain links to "chain letters", pornographic or obscene movies or graphic images
  • are off-topic and/or excessively long

See our full comment/user policy/agreement.

54 Comments

  1. Konspiracy
    October 12, 2012

    Stupes Joseph what is all this…you think I have time read this…anyway you know you wrong…the right party will always win…you will see the right-colored light eventually

  2. ROSEAU VALLEY
    October 11, 2012

    DNO- I thank you for allowing me to join the debate with this contribution. I look forward to this article every Thursday and this week, the wait was worth it. Great article!

    First of all, let me once express congratulations to DNO and Mr. Joseph for the addition of the audio. This is definitely a progressive move, while we await the resolution of the technical glitch that took away the public rating thumps up/down button. When one listens to the recording accompanying the article, one understands that some are gifted writers, others are great orators and presenters- I am none but Dennis can boast of being blessed with both.

    As far as I am aware, this is a column in which Mr. Joseph expresses his personal views not the views of DNO or any media group. That gives him a lot of leeway in expressing his personal views. Mr. Joseph is well aware that it matters not how hard he may try to be fair, balanced and objective, there is no way that he could please everyone. There are those who would oppose simply for the sake of opposing, because of the way a thought is expressed or simply based on who is the messenger. For that reason, those with a different political, religious or social agenda will impute motive and be critical even though there may be general agreement on the quintessential argument.

    The objective of the article is simple. It is to highlight the need for more educational, professional debating and the benefits that can be derived to the society from such activity. The type of debate that I think Dennis is promoting is not limited to the level of party leadership but debate at the constituency level, and at the village level- the type of debate that takes place in the Botanical Garden or under a mango tree in communities.

    It is not about who was or is the leader of a political party at a particular point in time nor is it about the level of debating skills or ability of a particular leader to debate at a point in time. It doesn’t matter whether Edison was deemed a better debater than Skerrit or whether Skerrit would be a better debater than Spags. It is not personal. It does not matter what one may think Mr. Joseph’s intention may have been as the President of MWAD or who he may have been supporting. The fact is as a media person or group, calling for a debate is a noble gesture. Period. That is one of the basic functions of any media group and I wish MWAD would today insist on having these debates irrespective of who are the persons who present themselves to us as leaders.

    The emphasis ought to be on the benefits of debating across the board and accepting the concept of debating, the ability to convince others of a point of view in a respectable and professional manner, the ability to thinking clearly while one is on his/her feet and demonstrating mastery of a subject matter. It is about communication of programmes for development in addition to manifestos, public meetings, radio talk shows and sewos etc, the idea is not to advocate debates in lieu of the other means of presenting plans. It is the inclusion of debates in addition to what we have become used to. It is about the virtues of debating in society and learning to respect the views of others, agreeing to disagree as citizens who all want to bring about socio-economic development but may have different ways of achieving that objective based on our limited understanding of the problems and our capacity and/or ability to implement.

    I thank Mr. Joseph for introducing this subject this week. .Let the debate continues

    Respectfully
    Roseau Valley

    • 1979
      October 13, 2012

      “Mr. Joseph is well aware that it matters not how hard he may try to be fair, balanced and objective, there is no way that he could please everyone. There are those who would oppose simply for the sake of opposing, because of the way a thought is expressed or simply based on who is the messenger. For that reason, those with a different political, religious or social agenda will impute motive and be critical even though there may be general agreement on the quintessential argument.”

      My god man. Valley, I do hope that one day we can meet so I can express my heartfelt appreciation for the time, effort and ELOQUENCE with which you put forward your perspectives, interpretations and opinions. Dominica would DO WELL to have more men and women of your caliber, taking up the mantle to foster debate and healthy discussion, and the essence of what can bring true democracy and progress to the speck in the Caribbean sea.

      words cannot do justice to the positive impression you have made on me, much less any other rational thinking person. your comments provoke those who have never thought for themselves, to do just that! I appreciate your submissions just as much as I appreciate Mr. Josephs efforts to challenge Dominicas electorate to think critically and to for their own OBJECTIVE perspectives….

      I applaud you Roseau Valley…. continue to challenge others to THINK!

  3. 1979
    October 11, 2012

    Are we therefore to look to a debate-less future in our electioneering and an increase in ‘sewo’ campaigning and trite deafening insignificance coming through humongous hi-fi speakers? Perhaps, since evidently, “We like it so.” But why after the elections do we the people express disappointment with the level of development and other things? We never listened for development plans and other things during the campaign, we were too busy ‘sewoing’ and trashing our neighbor who backed another party..

    WOYYYY that joke sweeettt. Ill be laughing this one for DAYS….soooooooooooo effin true!

    “The ignorance of one voter in a democracy impairs the security of all.”

    I wonder I the electorate ever considered that, do they even think that far??

    “The word ‘parliament’ originates from the French, “parler” (to talk, discuss) and the voters have a right to know that if elected their Rep could have no problem presenting their case in the House or in any forum. The lack of personal commitment which could be wrangled from them on the record during a debate allows parliamentarians to just sit back, collect a salary, drink milk, eat honey, and do what they are told just to flatter the leader. Platform shouting statements can get the crowd screaming hysterically but is not the place to find out about a candidate’s ability or even capability to grasp, present and dissect issues. It is the debate which allows a formal contest of argumentation and discussion of opposing views. In that instance no party would dare run a campaign without offering a manifesto. As the world economy dumps we cannot ‘ sewo’ through an election as before.

    That it will ever happen is up to you, up to me, but we shall see”.

    Oh how I love a good debate…. well put together Mr. Joseph…a very welcomed piece.

  4. Pato
    October 11, 2012

    Yes DNO dont post my comment, the main problem wasnt the PM refusal to debate, it was the set that send us to print the manifesto on the morning of elections. Debate is good idea but manifesto have to distribute on time.

    • lapat dough
      October 13, 2012

      u eh supporting nor voting de party yet u want thier manisfesto. What kind of majee dat?

  5. Doc. Love
    October 11, 2012

    Many times we have heard the Labor party red boyz bellowing if not Skerrit then who.We have also heard Skerrit himself criticise Mr. James because of his age. I hope Skerrit will watch the debate between Mr. Biden and Mr. Paul Ryan.If you know your facts, if you are an intelligent person age doesn’t matter, neither does the moderator nor the place of bebate, but if you are a chicken it matters. If Skerrit is afraid of Mr. James we will send Mr. Spragges John.Like Mr. Joseph said,all major schools, at some time or the other will a have debate, therefore,when Skerrit was Minister of Education,did he go hide himself in a closet whenever he was invited as Education Minister to attend a debate. This man must get out of the closet and get on the stage.

    • kit kat
      October 12, 2012

      agreed

  6. T mama
    October 11, 2012

    I always hope that a debate or discussion Should take place between the parties….i think it should be tried and done…

  7. lol
    October 11, 2012

    Just 2 days ago, IMF said that global recovery from the recession was weakening. Why dont you expend your efforts on writing heavy paragraphs on that, instead of scratching up your sores with PM when you were President of MWAD? What’s up with your sudden debate malaise?, concentrate on the subject of the debate- the coming economic crisis.

    • kit kat
      October 12, 2012

      so you are saying that there should be no debate???

      what are you saying???

      • Anonymous
        October 12, 2012

        Debate is wonderful idea and desired but dont go on as if without debate we lost, this is the point

  8. lovely dominica
    October 11, 2012

    That being so, sewo done, what about some commentry on the good and positive things that have taken place in our counrty over the past years.

    • kit kat
      October 12, 2012

      ohh brother. okay, the house build plaster, paint, windows in and everything. so lets go inside and sleep and feel POSITIVE, but wait, we forgot the roof….wow how positive. a pretty house with no roof….. boy our roads pretty, we have big college and stadium. Big state house, but the people are BROKE and JOBLESS…. well at least our roads pretty…. that’ll do I guess.

  9. believer
    October 11, 2012

    Just a quick note, the term…”terminological inexactitudes” was coined by the late Sir Winston Churchill, early in the 19 hundreds.

  10. winston warrington
    October 11, 2012

    Wesleyman, there is a season for all things. The age of political idealism went south and died with the collapse of the Berlin wall. Different systems are put in place with the same objective are usually compared for efficiency. When a system fails, we are left with the experience; the ideological potency dissipates.

  11. Anonymous
    October 11, 2012

    I support the idea of a debate,
    but lol Mr. Joseph, in the US the emphasis is on debates, in Dominica we fuss over Manifestos.

    Next election propose the idea again, but dont try to technically erase what is Dominican – the Manifesto. That was the real issue of last election, having to print our own copies on the eve of election.

  12. Met Yo
    October 11, 2012

    oh allu fraid Edison, but allu doh fraid Hector?

    Its party leader vs. party leader, BRING IT ON

    Skerrit, work for me!..lol

    • No Name No Warrant
      October 12, 2012

      Not in Giraudel you will see debate

  13. Reader
    October 11, 2012

    @ Wesleyman – I can’t tell you how many times I have said the same thing. One election Hon. Saverin contested on a DFP ticket, the next he’s DLP. Same with Hon. Timothy. What that says to me is that our politicians have no convictions and it’s all about “what’s in it for me”. Allegiances and loyalties changes just like the weather.

  14. No Name No Warrant
    October 11, 2012

    Roosevelt Skerrit will not debate the UWP…they can’t handle the truth. Why would Dennis Joseph be even be bringing this up.

    Out political system is very different from the US….The masses will only get to see these people on TV.

    In a small population like Dominica, we get to ask our question one on one, we shake their hands, we attend their rallies, we go to small village meetings.

    Why is Dennis Joseph so bent on having some debates where Edison and the uwp can lie even more with all their fabricated nonsense.

    Let Edsion debate Lennox, Matt, Dennis Joesph and Groovy Bat…and then Hector John last

    Not PM Skerrit…Dennis you will not see this happening, so please end your fake voice clip nonsense.

  15. Anonymous
    October 11, 2012

    I agree that winning a debate does not indicate who is better able to lead a country but for the record Skerrit is not able to lead the country as has been proven since he has taken the reigns.

    Crime has escalated. Drug trade has escalated. Unemployment has escalated. Cost of living has escalated. The failure of businesses has escalated. Lay-offs have escalated. Taxes doubled from 7.5% to 15%.

    What has declined? Investment has declined. Manufacturing output has declined. Agricultural output has declined. Stay-over arrivals have declined. Cruise ship arrivals have declined.

    So it’s true who wins or loses a debate definitely is no indicator of capability.

  16. possie long time
    October 11, 2012

    this is a well written article..we Dominicans need to look way beyond the dirty, silly and petty politics our politicians play and wake up. I clearly remember the scenario when the pm rejected the debate offer and when he also reject the offer from the LIONS Club, claiming they were of politically bias. Wake up ppl Wake up!!!

  17. Gary
    October 11, 2012

    This article tells me two things about Mr Joseph one he does not understand that a debate between two political opponents seeking the highest office of a Country is different from a so called school debate between students.A political debate is more complex and sophisticated there is an occult aspect of it the audience does not have a clue, by occult i mean hidden especially the President debate in US, put it simply,it is much more than two opponents telling the audience what they will do if elected.

    The second thing this article tells me about Mr Joseph is how naive he is into believing that a debate is necessary between two political opponents running for office.Why is it he thinks the obvious is true.Mr Joseph needs to know that a Political debate between two opponents is just another forum where they tell their audience what they need to hear. For me the real debate would be for the two opponents to face the people they are going to serve let them ask the questions not a moderator, until then all this so called President debate is bogus.

  18. Choice X
    October 11, 2012

    Whether mr joseph was a member or supporter of the UWP or even labour at the time of the proposed debate is a non-issue. At the end of the day the both politicians would have debated on an ‘equal’ footing from their podiums. Mr. Joseph and his crew only proposed the idea but would not be the one putting words in the mouths of the politicians.

    It is shamefully retrogressive, that the sitting PM chose to back off out of fear of a sound whipping. More disgraceful is that many sycophants are out there dredging a cesspool of excuse for the inexcusable.

    • Concerned
      October 11, 2012

      If u were PM u wud have done the same or worst. I wonder where u guys get off. Who is in the kitchen feels the heat.

  19. Realist
    October 11, 2012

    Hi DNO that audio facilty to this column is a fantastric idea. It is ground breaking, innovative and useful. Congrats and kudo to the presenter and to DNO.

  20. bigger
    October 11, 2012

    I would really like to see a debate between the leader of the opposition Mr Hector John and the leader of the labour party Mr Rosevelt Skerrit bring it on

    • dissident
      October 11, 2012

      If u were following u would know that the leader of de opposition debates in parliament all the time. What u should be asking for is a debate between party leaders. Edison James, Judith Pestiana and Roosevelt Skerrit.
      Anything less is a roro mepuis red herring smoke screen. Don’t try to take me for a fool.

  21. Citronier Resident
    October 11, 2012

    I like the arguments about the need for our aspiring politicians to come together in a less noisy atmosphere to present, and disect their policies and program for development. After the debate the electorate and indeed the Dominican people may come away with a better idea about which leader is better able to articulate his plans. Mr. Joseph is making that specific point, but not without a few not so innocent innuendos That is fine. It is his right.

    In the case in point in 2005, PM Skerrit declined the invitation to debate Opposition leader Mr. Edison James, not entirely for the reason given by Mr. Jospeh. Some may be genuine though.

    Here is a my faint recollection of what transpired. Remember, the news about an upcoming debate at the time reached the PM via a radio broadcast of the UWP. Remember too in the few days following the announcement,it was the UWP’s supporters who were actively at every turn promoting the debate activity.

    The debate was to be held in a limited space at the Arawak House of Culture and the audience would comprise only of invited patrons. A segment of the debate would be opened for the public to ask a select number of questions.It is reasonable to deduce that the organizers and controllers of the debate would have selected who would be invited. It is a fair inference

    Mr. Jospeh has other views on what transpired. But at the time he was not only the innocent President of MWAD. It was generally known that he was an open supporter of the UWP to put it mildly.

    But to get back to the virtues of debates among our political leaders – at all levels and even at constitunecy level I must add.

    When President Obama and President hopeful Mr. Romney met in their first debate for the 2012 presidential elections, it is widely agreed that Mr. Romney won the debate hands down. President Obama had a lack lustre performance. The question for the American electroate remain. Who is the better person to manage the affairs of the US in these difficult times? Is it the debate winner or is it the person with the better plan to govern the country? that is for the Americans to answer

    In the Dominican context, there is no doubt that Mr. Edison James is still a better debater than PM Skerrit. He is articulate, witty, knows the issues and has experience at Executive level. Mr. Skerrit at the time had limited experience except for his short stint then as PM. Given the prevailing atmosphere in which the debate was to have been held, and given Mr. James’ experience, he (EMr. disonjames)would have won the debate hands down with implications for Pm Skerrit.

    The question is. Having won the debate was he the better person to lead Dominica then? What is his party’s philosophy and how will the development plan be financed given the “declaration of war” that the UWP had made against the new friends of the governmet of Dominica?. Would the results of such a debate in 2005, determine who was the better person to lead the country post an IMF austerity packed program of fiscal management? It is widely accepted that it was as a result of Mr. James’ handling of the economy when he was on stage that lead to the severe austerity measures following his unceremonial departure from the office in the House that Johnson built.

    Talking about the value of debates and debaters in Dominican politics. There are great debaters. In Dominica for example, there are few other individuals who can debate on any subject matter,at any time, with little preparation, before any audience (big or small) like Mr. Athie Martin. He is articulate, well spoken, passionate and emotional sometimes, have more than a fear share of understanding of the issues. He can debate. Today, he can even convince you that the UWP is on a upward tangent rather than the decline it presently is experiencing. Somebody say it is more rhetoric than debating skill. More than anybody else, he can do just that. And so is Lennox Linton the upstart in local politics. Mr. Martin for example is likely to win a debate purely on his ability to articulate and speak the issues anytime against PM Skerrit.

    The question remain. Given Mr. Martin’s dismal record of performance in everything he has set his hands to, isn’t he an absolute poor choice for leadership of the country even if he continues to win public debates? His superlative debating skills are meant for only public consumption.

    But Mr. Jospeh is right to call for a more somber approach to our politics where issues and policies are discussed and examined. Where less emphasis is given to “sewoing” and character assassination. More community type gatherings would serve to bring out the quality of those who present themselves to the electorate. It may very well be that having employed such strategies, we might end up on polling night with a slate of winning candidates from across party lines with no one party winning the absolute majority (11 seats)needed to form the government. That would be a day to see.

    I agree we should debate the issues in a more somber manner, respectfull of all. We must agree to disagree and remain more civil with each other.

    As a closing note. Let it be said that the system of voting and winning sufficient parliamentary seats to form a government, even if by one vote was not developed by Mr. Skerrit. He met it there. It is his turn now (on stage) to take advantage of the system that others before him and there erstwhile advisors did when they had the opportunity. In fact soem of the advisors who today are calling the system to question assisted in developing the system. Say what you want. After so many years,the system may need to be reviewed. For that last point the system cannot be wrong now, but right back then. If it the actions of modern day politicians in using the system is wrong it was worng when past politicians used and abused it as well. let us say so without any tongue twisters.

    And so, if as a country, we see the need to change it, for example a system for proportional representation or otherwise, then by all means let us go that way. Let us start the debate. It is patently unfair for so many past operators in the political limelight of Dominica are now laying all the blame (subtle as it may) squarely on the shoulders of Mr. Skerrit. It is unfair.

    ADMIN: Warning – post is too long. Future posts of that length will NOT be published.

    • look
      October 11, 2012

      Citroner Resident, Well said, my sentiments exactly.

    • Concerned
      October 11, 2012

      Well said writer… while I respect Mr Joseph for his columns and contribution to the development of the media in Dominica, I cant help but note his biasness. Honestly, I wish Mr Joseph would be more objective in his presentations and preserve our respect for him.

    • Citronier Resident
      October 11, 2012

      DNO, Thanks for publishing this speice. My question though. Is this a new policy fro DNO to limit the length of the responses? I have seen similarly long pieces from Roseau Valley in particular with no “warning” attached. I shall however be guided accordingly

      ADMIN: We are cutting back on long responses from everyone…

      • ROSEAU VALLEY
        October 11, 2012

        FYI- Citronier Resident- I like your contribution and concur with the central theme that we need to promote more debate. However, I have concerns with some of your findings and conclusions.

        Anyway, FYI- DNO has advised/warned and scolded me on numerous occasions. In fact, what you may not know, for every 3 contributions published -one is reject either based on length, style or contents.

        But I do not complain. I recognize that it is the prerogative of DNO ADMI and we are not paying to use the service. I comment at the liberty of DNO ADMIN.

        Suffice it to say, when a contribution is as educational and thought-provoking as yours, I think ADMIN should use its discretion, especially as you do not usually abuse the privilege (as you have intimated that Roseau Valley does). The truth is there are some short one-liners that do not deserve to be published.

        Ironically, while we are talking about encouraging more intelligent debate, restrictions are placed on your urge to debate. I guess everything must be in moderation and sometimes less is really more.

        Respectfully
        Roseau Valley

    • Concern Citizen
      October 11, 2012

      great commentary

    • 1979
      October 11, 2012

      DUDE, just write a feakin article, chaaaaaaaaaa

    • ROSEAU VALLEY
      October 11, 2012

      I understand Mr. Joseph to be challenging us to elevate our social discourse at all levels so that we are in a position to make more meaningful and informed decisions. No one is so gullibly suggesting that he who wins a political debate on a given day/night is better suited to be a political leader, have better plans to govern or would be better in implementing his plans and the loser would be a terrible leader. That is not the question. Being a good debater or talker like Athie or Lennox does not translate into a good leader.

      Let us brush aside all this superficial arguments and simply agree that we need more intelligent debate of the major, socio-economic and political issues that confront us as a small Island developing state. Yes, we like the loud public meetings, the talk shows, the blockos and the sewo- that is okay but there is a time and place for everything under the heavens. We do need to engage in sensible debates on the more important issues affecting the development of our country and this has to be done in a more professional, intelligent, somber and respectful manner. We must agree to disagree and to be more civil with each other. We need more community type gatherings and interactions to expose the true character of those who present themselves to represent us.

      I love the debate ..Keep it alive.

    • Papa Dom
      October 12, 2012

      your recollection is indeed faint and I may add a “terminological inexactitude” LoL. Skerritt didn’t hear about the debate via UWP news broadcast and what was wrong with UWP supporters actively promoting the debate? Roosie was one who first began talking about debate did you know that fact?

  22. Anonymous
    October 11, 2012

    This piece made no sense,for one that was a witch hunt then at that time we had a track record of what mr.James had plan for DA now look how far dominica has come some might say we went back wards but to each his own.T’ill its gone we wont miss it the guys that got killed in Antigua see how much people miss them and love them,asking how much of them told them that while they were alive?mabe a few.One day he will be in the past only then some will say how they wish he could come back to save them.To bad u all cant click on thumbs down lazy’s will have to write it hahaha.

    • Citronier Resident
      October 12, 2012

      Ms. Anonymous. The same can be said for PM Skerrit.

      Roseau Valley, Thanks for your response. I too like reading your comments, although I do not always agree with all that you have to say.

      Let us comment nevertheless. It is all in the interest of developing our people in the area of critical thinking.

  23. LATITUDED810
    October 11, 2012

    While a debate would be good but have you check the labour party’s manifesto if you had done so then you would see that we are following our plan.

    THE WEST COAST ROAD
    THE WEST COAST WATER SUPLLY SYSTEM
    THE NEW WATER SYSTEM FOR VIELLE CASE AND BENSE
    THE NEW WATER SYSTEM FOR WARNNER
    THE NEW WATER SYSTEM FOR CAMPBELL
    THE NEW HOSPITAL — SOON TO COME

    SHOULD I GO ON OR YOU STILL BLUE VEX TO SEE THE RED BLOOD FLOWING THROUGH YOUR VIENS.

    • 4u2c
      October 11, 2012

      Boss 12yrs to accomplish what has been repeated in 3 manifesto…Its backward and ineptness…..Check other countries in the caribbean how they propel within 4yrs. Massive unemployment with your roads; dead agriculture with water system, no proper irrigation, hotel still dont have water; folks dieing of simply injuries or infection in DA, we call that progress? Boss go back to pre-school and learn to understand whAt u read!!

  24. Listening
    October 11, 2012

    I look forward to your articles. Keep up the good work. We the people are reading…

  25. Malatete
    October 11, 2012

    How ironic. The man who coined that memorable phrase
    “terminological inexactitudes” as a schoolboy now has to contend with “pathological inexactitudes” at an advanced age of maturity.

    • Just reading
      October 11, 2012

      Could not have said it better.
      I;d love to add he transformed from Black power advocate to Mamo’s BF for the Cab Sec position.
      Similar to our current president.
      What a 1/16 Nation!

  26. ?????????????
    October 11, 2012

    Whilst I like your articles Mr Joseph, Everyone knows who you support. You make no bones about it and in order that we have debates which I would welcome, we would need a non partisan moderator who Ithink cannot be found on our island. We need an outside moderator from far off not even close in the caribbean but someone who would care less who is the Opposition or the who is the Government.

    • Listening
      October 11, 2012

      The same way everyone knows who the Speaker of the House supports…

      • Concerned
        October 11, 2012

        What does that have to do with the price of rice? The Speaker of the House is not writing articles for public consumption… Mr Joseph is and he should try to be as objective as possible otherwise he is no better than the people he writes about!

    • Marcus Hill
      October 11, 2012

      Strange that you just repeating your same arguments made the last time they asked you to debate, Mr.Prime Minister!!

      • Anonymous
        October 11, 2012

        thumbs up concerned

  27. Wesleyman
    October 11, 2012

    Good piece Mr. Joseph, but you would think the oposite would be true,you would think we would move away from the gutter politics of yester years and evolve with the times. When you think back to the politicians of their time who were not as “educated” as the ones today, it puts into perspective the human nature, “if I can get aay with it, I will,” why would a people so much more evolved socially and academically not demand that facts be put before them inorder to make intelligent choices for the future of themselves and their children? I think I know the answer, politics is supposed to be about opposing idiologies, there was a time when you knew the clear distinction between the freedom party (conservative) and the labour party (liberal) and then the alliance party (socialist) was introduced, there was at that time clear choice and therefore political affiliation was determined based on idiological beliefs,Then with the coillition of the conservative party and the liberal party the water got muddied because they had a common enemy, so it became personal. Mammo and Rosie sitting down to defeat Edison is something that those gone before us would never have imagined. can anyone tell me today what is the idiological difference(s)between the three political parties in Dominica? That I think is the main issue, there is no clear distinction in beliefs (except for things like china v tiwan etc.)so herein lies the problem, the people have decided that I would rather be red or blue or green, than to be disturbed with the facts as to how someone intends to move my beloved country forward, and so we make excused for things that we know are wrong, because it wa done by someone we support. And thats the sad part.

    • Progres
      October 11, 2012

      No! I would rather support a party that have clearly made the most progress I have ever seen in Dominica over the years than a party of people who are just looking to criticize on technicalities which were ok when their party was in power. Action speaks louder than words.

    • Concerned
      October 11, 2012

      I think u have it all wrong. The DLP has a clear philosophy and so does the DFP. The party with no clear philosophy or ideology is the UWP. No one really knows what they stand for. I think that party needs to define its ideology and presents its policies and programs to the Dominican public in a tangible way. The UWP is its own worst enemy.

    • Gary
      October 11, 2012

      When you make the statement that you know the answer,that Politics supposed to be about opposing ideologies.What a narrow view believing such a thing to be true by you.First of the phrase opposing ideology used by you suggesting what politics should be is rather troubling and frighting.I say this because it only creates a sheep like electorate.

Post a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

:) :-D :wink: :( 8-O :lol: :-| :cry: 8) :-? :-P :-x :?: :oops: :twisted: :mrgreen: more »

 characters available