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.”
Tuesday, April 21, 2009
Friday, April 3, 2009
AN INVITATION TO THE WHITE HOUSE
Imagine what it must have felt like to receive an invitation to the White House. Images of sugar plumbs must have been dancing in their heads, when the CEOs of the most powerful financial institutions in the world received invitations from President Barack Obama.
But it wasn’t that kind of party.
Arrayed around a long mahogany table in the White House, austere and barren to the bone, save a single glass of water for each, without ice, the CEOs had not even a morsel of bread to be washed down with their water. And, “For those who finished their glass," writes Eamon Javers of Politico, "no refills were offered."
One of the attendees described it as a “Spartan message” to the bank executives. This was not Santa Land or Disney World, as in good ole days, with cocktails all around, and laughter and plenty of idle chatter and backslapping.
This had the feel of something ominous.
From the White House, there were five principal attendees: chief of staff Rahm Emanuel, who arrived a few minutes late, Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner, Council of Economic Advisers chairwoman Christina Romer, senior adviser Valerie Jarrett and director of the National Economic Council Larry Summers. Uncharacteristically, Summers said almost nothing, and it appeared to one participant as if he had been told to remain silent.
To break the ice, JPMorgan Chase CEO Jamie Dimon offered Geithner a fake check for $25 billion, the amount of Troubled Asset Relief Program money that the company has accepted. Although many of those in the room laughed, Geithner didn’t keep the check.
The president entered the room a few minutes later and made a lap of the table, shaking hands and saying hello to the CEOs, several of whom he called by name.
Taking his seat at the table, the president said, “So let’s get to it.”
The president spoke of public outrage over the high-flying executive lifestyle. “The anger gentlemen, is real,” Obama said. He urged pay reform and said rewards must be proportional, balanced, and tied to the health and success of the company.
And, so the story goes. They offered to give the TARP money back. In fact, they begged to give it back... almost as if anything would be better than regulation that would cap their salaries and bonuses.
JPMorgan’s Dimon insisted that he’d like to give the government’s TARP money back as soon as practical, and asked the president to “streamline” that process.
But Obama didn’t like that idea — arguing that the system still needs government capital.
The president offered an analogy: “This is like a patient who’s on antibiotics,” he said. “Maybe the patient starts feeling better after a couple of days, but you don’t stop taking the medicine until you’ve finished the bottle.” Returning the money too early, the president argued could send a bad signal.
Bank of America CEO Ken Lewis cracked a joke at the expense of his peers who’d lavished praise on the administration: “Mr. President,” he said, “I’m not going to suck up to Geithner and Summers like the other CEOs here have.”
Obama gets the respect, but his advisors get the heel. Why would Lewis feel as though he would have to “suck up to Geithner and Summers”? It sounds personal to me.
But it wasn’t that kind of party.
Arrayed around a long mahogany table in the White House, austere and barren to the bone, save a single glass of water for each, without ice, the CEOs had not even a morsel of bread to be washed down with their water. And, “For those who finished their glass," writes Eamon Javers of Politico, "no refills were offered."
One of the attendees described it as a “Spartan message” to the bank executives. This was not Santa Land or Disney World, as in good ole days, with cocktails all around, and laughter and plenty of idle chatter and backslapping.
This had the feel of something ominous.
From the White House, there were five principal attendees: chief of staff Rahm Emanuel, who arrived a few minutes late, Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner, Council of Economic Advisers chairwoman Christina Romer, senior adviser Valerie Jarrett and director of the National Economic Council Larry Summers. Uncharacteristically, Summers said almost nothing, and it appeared to one participant as if he had been told to remain silent.
To break the ice, JPMorgan Chase CEO Jamie Dimon offered Geithner a fake check for $25 billion, the amount of Troubled Asset Relief Program money that the company has accepted. Although many of those in the room laughed, Geithner didn’t keep the check.
The president entered the room a few minutes later and made a lap of the table, shaking hands and saying hello to the CEOs, several of whom he called by name.
Taking his seat at the table, the president said, “So let’s get to it.”
The president spoke of public outrage over the high-flying executive lifestyle. “The anger gentlemen, is real,” Obama said. He urged pay reform and said rewards must be proportional, balanced, and tied to the health and success of the company.
And, so the story goes. They offered to give the TARP money back. In fact, they begged to give it back... almost as if anything would be better than regulation that would cap their salaries and bonuses.
JPMorgan’s Dimon insisted that he’d like to give the government’s TARP money back as soon as practical, and asked the president to “streamline” that process.
But Obama didn’t like that idea — arguing that the system still needs government capital.
The president offered an analogy: “This is like a patient who’s on antibiotics,” he said. “Maybe the patient starts feeling better after a couple of days, but you don’t stop taking the medicine until you’ve finished the bottle.” Returning the money too early, the president argued could send a bad signal.
Bank of America CEO Ken Lewis cracked a joke at the expense of his peers who’d lavished praise on the administration: “Mr. President,” he said, “I’m not going to suck up to Geithner and Summers like the other CEOs here have.”
Obama gets the respect, but his advisors get the heel. Why would Lewis feel as though he would have to “suck up to Geithner and Summers”? It sounds personal to me.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
