There are few things as frustrating as remembering a clever remark, something witty or nasty that you should have said to an opponent in an argument when it is over and your nose is still smarting from having been rubbed in grime.
Post-debate statements by President Uhuru Kenyatta to the effect that he did not need the debate since his development record speaks for itself betrayed a man whose conscience was troubling. Was it necessary to even explain himself after having disdainfully trashed a live debate, which he could have used to settle deeper into the saddle? That Kenyatta, a better orator than Raila if you ask me, could get petrified by the likelihood of being made to feel hot around the ears by an awkward question, was interesting.
Condescending attitude
It is presumptuous, too, of the President to assert that Raila cannot lead this country on the contention that the latter has no agenda. In all fairness, that is for voting Kenyans to decide on August 8. If anything, consecutive opinion polls have shown that at least 65 per cent of Kenyans worry that President Uhuru is leading this country in the wrong direction. Not to be lost on the President is the fact that over 5 million Kenyans did not believe in his ability to lead Kenya in 2013. Given the prevailing economic and social conditions, their resolves could only have hardened.
Last week, I deliberated on the reasons advanced by the Jubilee Party in excusing the absence of Deputy President William Ruto at the presidential running mates' televised debate; one of which was the possibility of a charged environment degenerating into a shouting match. Simply told, there was fear Kenyatta and Ruto could not stand the heat in the kitchen; that stressful situations occasioned by open challenges are not their kettle of fish.
That fear, judging by the calm, measured and assured manner Raila Odinga conducted himself, even holding back from pouring vitriol on his competitors when he had the advantage, was unfounded. That he parried subtle attempts by a moderator to have him go ballistic on Kenyatta for having called him a mad man at a political rally in his Central Kenya backyard exemplified the attributes of a consummate statesman.
I was reminded of an incident in which someone once boasted of being an accomplished driver in the presence of an elderly guy who owned a garage and had a thing for Volvos and Mercedes Benzes. The old guy smiled at the braggart, signalled him over and asked him to reverse his Volvo 244 GL. The fellow failed. Next, he was asked to do the same in a Mercedes 200E. After a few tries, he still couldn’t.
The reason was simple; he did not know that the ring on the gear lever of a Volvo has to be pulled up to engage the reverse gear while in a Mercedes one has to pull up the gear lever itself to engage reverse. That experience debunked what the young man had all along believed in; that he knew it all. A televised debate was the test Kenyatta needed to prove his leadership prowess and defend his development record. The SGR, electricity connections, thousands of kilometres of tarmacked roads, NYS, Eurobond and free maternity narratives needed a little prodding in the right atmosphere away from public rallies where leaders talk at, not to or with the mesmerised masses.
A university student presenting a thesis does not automatically get a degree for compiling the thesis if he cannot successfully defend it. Thus, the Jubilee thesis on development needed to be defended, and a televised debate presented the forum. Reasons the President's handlers gave for his failure to turn up betrayed their apprehension that their carefully tailored narratives could be torn to shreds by a self-assured Odinga who, time has proven, does not simply say things in jest.
He has been vindicated too many times I believe nobody in Jubilee was willing to take a chance with him on the prowl, ferreting into publicised scandals that have impacted negatively on the economy; saddling Kenyans with a high cost of living and an international debt that will deplete national coffers for a long time to come. That is the bottom line.
No aversion
Wednesday, Ruto was not averse to being interviewed by radio journalists in the comfort of his Karen home. Earlier, Kenyatta was at home answering silent questions on social media that he felt comfortable with. Who knows, maybe those asking the questions were robots, or individuals carefully chosen, or there was a filter somewhere.
I am still trying to figure out how the circumstances under which Kenyatta met his wife is of national importance; weightier than enumerating how free maternity services benefit expectant mothers when nurses are on a prolonged national strike.
Pinning that problem on counties as Ruto does is being dishonest. Unless county government allocations from the national government are increased, where are governors expected to get the extra cash to pay nurses? And, wasn’t it the national government that signed the CBA?
Mr Chagema is a correspondent at The Standard. achagema@standardmedia.co.ke
