The Undoing of Suzette Watkins

By Eddie Griffin

Tuesday, April 21, 2009


After last night’s debate, I laughed at Suzette Watkins and told her that she had picked a bad year to run for office. But I kept reminding myself to be nice. That’s why I chocked into laughter, trying to hold back. Lord knows, I hate politics.

Suzette is running against District 8 City Council’s incumbent Kathleen Hicks, the favored home girl. Suzette migrated into the ‘hood in the mid-1990s, but she had a host of supporters with her at the forum.

The event was hosted by the Historic Southside Neighborhood Association, and it was an event I could not miss. There was an overflow crowd, maybe 200 people. It had been billed as an opportunity to meet the candidates and ask them question.

District 8 is my turf. This is where I live. Anybody who represents District 8 must come through me. A candidate may be able to slide past the public and into office, but not in District 8.

The people in District 8 proved to be very well educated in political matters. Their questions reflected the depth of knowledge and awareness, above and beyond Ms. Watkins’ comprehension. She repeatedly asked, “Will you repeat the question?” And, she had a poor command of facts, data, and statistics. Wherein, her opponent, Kathleen Hicks swam in it, with a long list of accomplishments to boot.

The crowd was partisan. Pro-Watkins supporters applauded their candidate’s answers. Pro-Hicks supporters did the same. And, nobody was really listening, especially Suzette. Moreover, she wasn’t looking.

When people are not looking, they can get blindsided.

The moderator read my question last. It was a three-prong question, designed to confound the inferior candidate. The answer required focusing on three unrelated questions- that is, unrelated to the audience, but not unrelated to Suzette Watkins.

She babbled like an idiot. (I know, shame on me for saying so.)

I had borrowed a page from psyche wars against the CIA in the 1970s, and the Art of Confounding the Enemy. It is based upon the hypothesis that when the brain misfires, the mouth will follow. The 3-prong questioning technique was ideal for this purpose.

The first question would put the candidate in a damn-if-I-do/damned-if-I-don’t situation, where both a Yes or No answer is wrong. The second question aims at the subliminal area of guilt and self-defenses. The third question was the absurd attention breaker.

The 3-prong question stretches the attention span, sometimes to its limits and beyond. But by the time Suzette heard all three questions in succession, she lost it. She lost focus by a broken attention span.

Here is what happened.

QUESTION ONE: Do you support President Barack Obama’s Economic Stimulus Plan?

Clearly, all of District 8 constituents were in favor of the stimulus. Suzette could have simply said YES and, at least, win some brownie points in the crowd.

But she could not say YES while being recorded. Why?

QUESTION TWO: Do you support the Tea Party?

City council seats are non-partisan. So, the question was not about party affiliation, but Republican Party sentiments and Tea Party revolt.

(I have been secretly reading her Facebook and knew, beforehand she vocal in the protest against Obama economic policies)

QUESTION THREE: Do you support Gov. Rick Perry’s talk about secession?

The question evoked laughter throughout the entire room. This was a comic relief to all except Suzette.

“Will you repeat the first question, please?” The candidate requested.

“Do you support President Barack Obama’s Economic Stimulus Plan,” the moderator repeated.

Then it happened. SNAP!

“This is above my pay grade,” she started. As she continued, her arms flailed in the air like a bird flapping her wing, realizing probably just how stupid her answer sounded, and how weak it mimicked a similar Obama remark. But there was no laughter at her attempted joke. She bombed.

“I don’t know about all the millions and billions,” she continued. Then she moved on to the second question. I could only think that, if she does not know about millions and billions, how could she do a city budget, which is also measured in millions and billions. I gathered that she had no sense of large numbers as her arm flailed over her head.

Her opponent, Kathleen Hicks hit a home run on the questions.

“Yes,” she declared, pointing out the fact the Obama stimulus dollars were already coming into District 8, and where those dollars were going, and who was being helped by it. "Yes, we must fight for our share to tax dollars."

On the way out, Suzette Watkins got my attention: “Are you Mr. Griffin?”

I wished that I had said, “No ma’am I ain’t.”