Wednesday, June 27, 2012

Dr. Abu Sakara mounts the bogus IEA stage

at this juncture, if you can't stand hard-hitting debate then don't read. You have been warned.

So when am I going to write about the particular rot of the Ghana's judiciary as I promised myself? I'd leave you to answer this for me.

Meanwhile the angling for the post of presidency of Ghana come election 2012 has taken some fashioned Q&A turn as done by the bogus IEA institution that deserves no respect in the body polity of Ghana until they answer to their gross misdeeds and bias for the NPP. Meanwhile, the ruling NDC party says it's candidates (the current prez and vice) would not partake. ask me and I'd tell you 'no big deal'. it's not 'by-force'. and the IEA is a misbehaving institution anyway!

But be it as you may like or dislike, today the CPP presidential candidate was given the IEA platform to talk-shop and take and answer some questions. I intend to present to you my sum analysis of his performance and I hope to do same for all the others who'd present themselves on this platform no matter that it's staged by the bogus IEA that gets no respect from me.

So Dr. Abu Sakara mounted the stage and first talked plenty aplenty! about this, about that and focusing mainly on his specialized area agric. Pal, Agric is ok but me I'm not one taken in by all the loose talk about higher yields and fertilizer while little is said about maintaining quality of nature (you can say I mean organic farming!). Enough of the poisoning chemicals in the form of fertilizer, pesticides, herbicides...

For me, of all he said in his initial presentation, the only significant policy direction Dr. Sakara put out was his call that Ghanaians with dual citizenship should be allowed to hold public positions since there's the need for skills and not just money for the economy. That is brilliant talk. simply, BRILLIANT! But the rest of all he said were really like jazzzz bla bla bla. The presentation ended and then followed Q&A.

So some questions were asked. Among them was this one from some guy about how Sakara would ensure reliable data on employment so that his minister would not come mentioning some 2million figure which would be left for political talk or game! wait pal, when people say this sort of thing about politics I have a feeling they suffer from indigestion. How can it ever be that you'd have some data about the body polity of Ghana and yet that would not or could not be used for political talk? What do they understand by politics at all? But well that was the bogus question asked by some gentleman whose name I don't remember. And the answer? Bla bla bla... as if to just say something to occupy the space.

As usual some woman came asking for special favours for women! And what answer would you expect? the usual women are these champions or that powerful and so deserving of special treatments. ok. there were some hoooohaa questions to fill the space. someone even asked about Sakara's view on the new single spine salary structure and Sakara started answering by telling us that he does not know why the name 'single spine'! and why not 'double spine or ...' how so sad a case for one wanting to be president! why such a jest and bogus comment that only belittles the situation? was that some joke or what? bad!

For me the most sensible question asked came from one gentleman who called himself Steve Manteaw (something like that). He said to Dr. Sakara that the current govt had said it accepts from the Constitutional Review Commission that there should be some sort of 'national policy' to guide successive govts but no administration or president should be bound by that policy. A fair point to make, given that this is after all a governance system sifted from the contest of ideas, priorities etc and changing time may dictate focus on some particular needs anyway, whether planned for or not! But this brilliant question got the most bogus and bizarre answer. Sakara claimed govt position was 'unfortunate' and his justification for that claim is that ideological differences must not matter anymore! Who told Dr. Abu Sakara that only ideologies could cause shift in policy direction? Clearly Dr. Abu the Sakara did not appreciate the position of govt properly before talking-shop on this matter. bizarre verbosity is an understatement!

Pal, to bring this to a long close, Abu Sakara the Dr., I'd say performed far better when he mounted a similar platform by this same bogus IEA as the vice presidential candidate of Paa or Papa Kwesi Nduom (the concert man) of the CPP for the 2008 elections. And I remember I wrote about Sakara then that to me he was an example of who should be president. I still largely hold that view (compared to the misbehaving 'all die be die' bigot called Nana Akuffo Addo), but its limited to his personality as in his mannerism, etc. I have issues with some of his ideas. Serious issues! He does not even hold onto the philosophy of the CPP which is socialism properly. He sounds like he wants to please some people with his particular claim that ideologies do not matter. I have personally said ideologies do not matter in some respects but it's not in all stuff. Sakara cannot tell us ideologies do not matter and hence presidents or govts should be bound by some static so called 'national policy' formulated by some people at some particular point in time which may not respond to needs of another time.

Pal, like they say (and don't ask me who are the they) Dr. Abu Sakara must come again!


akuya said...

interesting. the event left me uncertain about what the main thrust of Sakara's agenda for Ghana would be if he became president and yet very certain that he would not exactly be the president i look for. too many loose ends. "i think that"..."we would make sure"....and yet it was not clear what the plan of action is except for the central OICs.
"I was smiling plenty because I recognize my own when I see them". what was the meaning of that?

Jerome said...

Didn't listen/watch. I hope his performance was better than what you have recounted here

novisi said...

Yeah, he was largely loose with his claims. And he used the platform to make mere promises like that claim that he'd make a disabled person a minister of state. I was like ahhhggggrrrr! what if he found no disabled person at the time suitable for ministerial portfolio? and that bit about 'smiling plenty because I recognize my own when I see them', what was the meaning of all those indeed!

I have heard people claim strangely to me that he did wonderfully, superbly, bla bla bla. and yet when I ask them simple questions about whatever they claim he did fantastically they fail to answer. We really do have crises on our hands!!!

novisi said...

you missed some. Certainly I have done some exaggeration of the event per my view but the facts of what he said as I've presented are just that.

remember you and Nii Ayertey were wondering if I still hold the view that he was suitable for president as I did? Well, he still has his personal attributes which I hail and contrast with the bigotry of Nana Addo. But like I've pointed out he seems to have some funny ideas which I can't share in. And he seems confused to me about what the ideology of his own party is. Is he just using the CPP platform or he genuinely believes in the CPP agenda? If he has an agenda to shift the ideology of the CPP then the least I'd have expected from him to do in that regard was to use this bogus IEA platform to ring that bell. I'm suspicious about his direction.

novisi said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
novisi said...

On this day the 4th of November, 2012, I do state that I retract my opinion that Dr. Abu Sakara's claim that Ghanaians with dual citizenship should be allowed to hold public positions is brilliant.

It's not a brilliant point to make because there are carefully thought of considerations that prevents that from hapenning. For example, there's the case of allegiance, which ministers for example swear on before taking office. Such principles cannot be wished away in the establishment of nation states.

Hence I rather conclude that Sakara's claim is blunt and not brilliant at all.