Gratuitous and confusing

Dear Editor,
I do not know of an instance where a Minister has called the actions of a President “gratuitous and confusing” in Guyana’s political history. The audacity, boldness, and impertinence are without compare and got my cognitive wheels turning. When these words forced David Granger to reverse his decision not to name a Prime Ministerial candidate before elections, they assumed more importance. It is an odd pairing of words; was/is there a threat contained therein?

Is the President suffering from bouts of confusion? At age seventy-four, this would not be unusual, add to that the pressure of a political campaign and a difficult year fighting for physical and political survival, I can understand if a toll is being paid.
What is neither honest nor decent is members of Granger’s coalition using this ‘insider’ knowledge to engage in political blackmail and also allowing a candidate they know is not ‘fit and proper’ in the truest sense to compete for the highest office in the land. Granger at his peak was no great shakes; Guyana cannot afford to have a confused leader at this juncture in history.

Then, there is ‘gratuitous’, an adjective to describe actions done without good reason, uncalled for. The two words combine to paint a picture of a man unfit for office. The haste with which Granger’s reversal of decision followed the release of AFC General Secretary David Patterson’s statement leads me to believe a strong-arm was applied. As if to confirm my growing suspicion that something might be mentally amiss with Granger, an influential PNC persona took to social media to vent.

PNC advisor Rickford Burke’s statement on social media was just as stunning in what it said as in what is implied: “Lesson to Guyana’s youth: Don’t worry with what we teach you. If you want to achieve an objective in life, adopt the AFC strategy of bullying, sabotage, and terrorism. You will get what you want”.

The AFC could not threaten to walk away from the coalition at this late stage as it would mean sitting the upcoming elections out on the sidelines. What other holds could they (AFC) have over Granger that could be described by the ultimate PNC insider as “bullying, sabotage, and terrorism?”
If the AFC is comfortable calling Granger “gratuitous and confusing” so publicly, why do they expect us to vote for him? This language needs no gloss, the meaning is pellucid; we are being sold goods that are past the ‘best before’ date. Late caveat emptor (let the buyer beware).

Respectfully,
Robin Singh