Was the ousting of the former Christian Council Chairman, Bishop Humes, and the "out of hand" third place "rejection" of former BUT teachers union head, Ida Poitier-Turnquest, an early refferendum and response to the FNM and their "people" and the policies they support?

Let's take a look at it. 1. Bishop Humes, came out with scathing, hell fire and brimnestone attacks against the PLP. Supported the last PM to hang anyone in this country, in hopes he would encourage him to re-instate capital punishment, under some idea that the PM would follow the law.

In addition to taking a position, on behalf of the church- a weak one spiritually at that- on gambling and rose to the occasion, to champion a fence sitter's cause at a public forum....letting a shcool boy, read him and the opponents of wholesale gambling, a "prepared" riot act, while he sat there and took it and did not do the honourable thing, and corrected the young man on the issues! All in the same time, being given no heads up from his board members, on what position to take for them on their behalf? He lost by a close vote, being a 1 term BCC head.

2. Ida Poitier Turnquest, the brazen and courageous former BUT head. Led stiff civil opposition to the former PLP. Was a political unionist, to say the very least. So much so, she came to the union elections, dressed in red. Waffled on positions she had against the government, when the PLP was in power to now showing to be a horse of a different color, when the FNM is in power. To say she was a politically driven unionist, is an understatement. She lost and came in third, in a four way race as the incumbent. With elections held in the height of examinations time, where many teachers, could not make it to vote and stay on the line, to vote. Through all of the surpression of the voter the events caused, she still was rejected on the marginal vote---when the turnout is highly charged, the incumbent is most in trouble.

I say all of that, to say this; the irony of the PM, not wanting a refferendum on anything and he being afraid of a refferendum, because of his former political gaff- which had more to do with timing, and the manner in which the effort was presented, over the idea of a refferendum- has led us to TWO, proxy refferendums, where folks who appeared to share his political stripe and color, rejected!!!

The first election, was close and nicey nice, considering the conservative nature of Christians in all--dear God, Humes could not even work the crowd in his favour, on the capital punishement stance, with room full of old testament scholars. He must have done too much, too soon. The second, was an all out rejection; some feel it was for good measures. I happen to like the new BUT head's direction and positions myself.

So, the PM may not want a refferendum. But, he is getting one. Whether he likes it, or not.

Take it as you wish. I only report what I see.
:)

sux teeth at thread.

sux teeth at thread... but the alien/clown may have a point.. only problem is the fact that the persons elected does not support the PLP....

and in the case of one who was recently elected... they are dying to get an FNM nord.. and see this as a spring board... :taped2:

sux teeth at thread.

what u suckin teeth at in particular?
:confused:

what u suckin teeth at in particular?
:confused:

suxxx teeth at silly thread too:realmad::sparky::hammer:,

sux teeth at thread.
Basically.

If one asked Bishop Humes his political affiliation, he would quickly and proudly tell you, like many others, that he is a supporter of the Progressive Liberal Party.

If one asked Bishop Humes his political affiliation, he would quickly and proudly tell you, like many others, that he is a supporter of the Progressive Liberal Party.You carn mean Jeanimae husband, John aye? :dgi:

How Alien them going to make it for another four, and then five more years?! They will lose their minds, or join up, one or the other, because I agree with Rigby that the FNM is now the majority party and will be until at least 2017, if not beyond. These are exciting times to be alive, so spend that money, and bring us out of these hard times, eh....

How Alien them going to make it for another four, and then five more years?! They will lose their minds, or join up, one or the other, because I agree with Rigby that the FNM is now the majority party and will be until at least 2017, if not beyond. These are exciting times to be alive, so spend that money, and bring us out of these hard times, eh....








Flatlines!

Flatlines!


I know you loaded Rockwell, why not invest in Exuma?

Was the ousting of the former Christian Council Chairman, Bishop Humes, and the "out of hand" third place "rejection" of former BUT teachers union head, Ida Poitier-Turnquest, an early refferendum and response to the FNM and their "people" and the policies they support?
Let's take a look at it. 1. Bishop Humes, came out with scathing, hell fire and brimnestone attacks against the PLP. Supported the last PM to hang anyone in this country, in hopes he would encourage him to re-instate capital punishment, under some idea that the PM would follow the law.
In addition to taking a position, on behalf of the church- a weak one spiritually at that- on gambling and rose to the occasion, to champion a fence sitter's cause at a public forum....letting a shcool boy, read him and the opponents of wholesale gambling, a "prepared" riot act, while he sat there and took it and did not do the honourable thing, and corrected the young man on the issues! All in the same time, being given no heads up from his board members, on what position to take for them on their behalf? He lost by a close vote, being a 1 term BCC head.
2. Ida Poitier Turnquest, the brazen and courageous former BUT head. Led stiff civil opposition to the former PLP. Was a political unionist, to say the very least. So much so, she came to the union elections, dressed in red. Waffled on positions she had against the government, when the PLP was in power to now showing to be a horse of a different color, when the FNM is in power. To say she was a politically driven unionist, is an understatement. She lost and came in third, in a four way race as the incumbent. With elections held in the height of examinations time, where many teachers, could not make it to vote and stay on the line, to vote. Through all of the surpression of the voter the events caused, she still was rejected on the marginal vote---when the turnout is highly charged, the incumbent is most in trouble.
I say all of that, to say this; the irony of the PM, not wanting a refferendum on anything and he being afraid of a refferendum, because of his former political gaff- which had more to do with timing, and the manner in which the effort was presented, over the idea of a refferendum- has led us to TWO, proxy refferendums, where folks who appeared to share his political stripe and color, rejected!!!
The first election, was close and nicey nice, considering the conservative nature of Christians in all--dear God, Humes could not even work the crowd in his favour, on the capital punishement stance, with room full of old testament scholars. He must have done too much, too soon. The second, was an all out rejection; some feel it was for good measures. I happen to like the new BUT head's direction and positions myself.
So, the PM may not want a refferendum. But, he is getting one. Whether he likes it, or not.
Take it as you wish. I only report what I see.
:)
***geein dis bouy da vaseline and da mop stick*** BUMP!!!!!!

why did i read that shyte ,my bad :tdown:moron..

2. Ida Poitier Turnquest, the brazen and courageous former BUT head. Led stiff civil opposition to the former PLP. Was a political unionist, to say the very least. So much so, she came to the union elections, dressed in red. Waffled on positions she had against the government, when the PLP was in power to now showing to be a horse of a different color, when the FNM is in power. To say she was a politically driven unionist, is an understatement. She lost and came in third, in a four way race as the incumbent. With elections held in the height of examinations time, where many teachers, could not make it to vote and stay on the line, to vote. Through all of the surpression of the voter the events caused, she still was rejected on the marginal vote---when the turnout is highly charged, the incumbent is most in trouble.
:)
wat does the color of her attire hav to do wit anything. so i guess if im an fnm i shud throw away all my yellor and blue shirts? dont come with that foolishness. same thing was done to the police association during elections. whateva their intentions, the associations shirt is red. they wore it 2 show unity among the police. y is that such a problem. what if their shirts was yellow. we need to move beyond color and look more at issues

wat does the color of her attire hav to do wit anything. so i guess if im an fnm i shud throw away all my yellor and blue shirts? dont come with that foolishness. same thing was done to the police association during elections. whateva their intentions, the associations shirt is red. they wore it 2 show unity among the police. y is that such a problem. what if their shirts was yellow. we need to move beyond color and look more at issues


U was doin fine b4 u get ta da po po...dey also ga white shirts cos I see it wit ma own 2 eye. White woulda been neutral. Dey was sendin a message and u no dat. Iffen u in law enforcement and ya govern by internal policies and procedures [just like ya job] and ya bigga boss da CoP, who responsible for solvin crime in we country, sen ya he order and u tun roun and diss him big time...den u een law abiding...so wat u expect jane and john public ta do...and u wonderin why da young ppl dem out a control. Dey een set no positive example.


I een mean ta hijack dis tread tho. Alien would come cross more fair iffen he leave out da politricks a da association/union cos dis really een hepin he referendum case none. I see wat he tryin ta do but he argiement een rite. It lackin substance.


Wonda wat He gern say wen BeRlInDa take she poll ta put da po po dem back in da skools. She didn't wan make it obvious, but she shirt was 1 shade down from red and she come out da vinner like she party and den da po po dem did wear red ta da polls and da red team win... BOL BTW, I is color blind, imagine if I could see...