The Kenyan Presidential Debate 2013

Kenya stood still as the much anticipated Inaugural Preidential Debate kicked off. There was confusion earlier on in the day when a court injunction had halted the debate pending the petition by seasoned lawyer,Paul Muite on the exclusion of he and Mohammoud Dida. It was ruled that they should be included. Organisers must have been flustered on hearing this as accommodating two more candidates would change things logistically. They managed to pull two podiums from the Brookhouse school to accommodate them but it was evident that they were never planned for from the beginning. The debate began with struts along the catwalk as the candidates exuberated confidence and bravado as they walked to the the podiums where they would address and estimated 14 million viewers. The opening exchange was rather tame and the only talking point was Muite's eyebags(rumoured to be enough to build tents for a good number of local IDP's) and Uhuru Kenyatta's posh accent. I hope Chris Kirubi reads that last statement. Excitement began when the Ethnicity topic began and the two tribal chiefs were pulling the malarkey bunny out of a magic hat. All were in agreement that tribalism exists apart from Dida who said that politicians made it up. They all then claimed that they are not tribal after saying that Kenyans are tribal. On the point of tribal alliances,it is clear that Uhuru is largely banking on the Kikuyus and Kalenjins while Raila is banking on the Luos or anyone against Uhuru. By the almost sentimental comments by Raila and Uhuru about their relationship,the only thing missing was a hug and a peck on the cheek. The elephant in the room(The I.C.C process) was addressed and the fiery comments by Mr.Dida and Muite lit the furnace. I was about time anyway. Uhuru Kenyarr(tt)a spoke a lot but said very little about the issue. My summary of his comments was that "I can be a war crimes suspect but as long as the people have faith in me,it doesn't matter. The Hague has very good internet access and so ruling via skype,though a pilot project, can be achieved. Please listen to the eloquence of my performance and ignore the fact that I am trying to tell you that I do not care for the common good only getting into he presidency to avoid prosecution." Raila Odinga was the second most dissapointing man of the day. He looked dazed at best and someone needed to remind him that the debate was on. I almost thought that he would ask Ngilu for a blanket and join her for a nap. He discovered that little white lies turn into a web when the issue of the Healthcare Bill came and he was under attack from Martha Karua,Uhuru Kenyatta and Paul Muite over his claims that he had been advocating for the bill. He was lethergic and had absolutely no flare or passion.Someone needs to tell him that Uhuru's stash should be taken by professionals only. He proved to me that infront of an intelligent and educated crowd,he really does not have too much to say. Honourable Martha Karua recieved a gold star from supporter and critic alike. She gave a motherly touch to her introduction and answers and she was well versed in the law and the current situation on the ground. Musalia Mudavadi had an average performance but he did appear like a level headed and logical thinker in his answers. He didn't come to win the debate but he definitely did not lose. Professor Ole Kiyiapi did not perform too badly but did not show anyone he should be the fourth president. He is an intelligent man and knows a lot about education but that's just about it. Peter Kenneth was the greatest dissapointment of the night. I have listened to his previous speeches with awe and admiration but when put under the spotlight and asked direct questions,he faltered for the world to see. I expected inspiring passion,I expected him to barrage the rest with intelligent questions and objections,I expected him to show his mettle. My expectations were sadly too high. Paul Muite gave an impressive performance. He came off as a stern leader,more than Martha Karua and that is very hard to do. I loved the fact that he had a no nonesense attitude towards our national security,specifically referring to Migingo and his willingness to use our armed forces to defend our territorial integrity. He was outspoken without being rude and he certainly shows us why arguing with the former chairman of the Law Society of Kenya is an uphill task. He was mentally alert and asked the questions that were on everybody's mind but no one was brazen enough to ask. Mr Dida was my man of the day. In my opinion if you weren't taught by Dida then you were not taught at all. Asked on how he would improve our healthcare(the communicable and ever increasing non- communicable disease increase e.g cancer)he spoke of preventive medicine-1. we should only eat when we are hungry.2. We should not eat to our fill. We should fill our stomachs with a third food,a third water and leave a third for breathing space. This was his answer to all the minor healthcare problems we face-AIDS,malaria,cancer,tuberculosis,polio,jiggers e.t.c. I love a good thinker. He compared taking care of teachers to lactating a cow. Perfect analogy. He blames the violence in the Tana Delta to devil worshippers and witchdoctors(waganga). How did we not see it all this time? My cousin, Wambui Wang'ombe watching the live streaming from Chicago,said that she had her mouth open in shock and couldn't believe this was a presidential debate. Mr. Dida must have really impressed her. Julie Gichuru,I dedicate a moment of silence for how fine you are. Another moment of silence. She looked amazing from head to toe and from toe to head. On behalf of the entire male population,I salute you! Submission is a desirable trait in many different situations... As a moderator though you failed and you failed terribly. You did,though,give us eye candy to look at in the midst of all that serious talk. She were unnecessarily lenient,She was bullied notably by Uhuru Kenyatta,she was taking part in the debate and adding her comments and she gave a new definition to "thirty seconds left." Linus Kaikai did an excellent job. I was a bit apprehensive at the beginning because he is the most Kenyan sounding of all the presenters I know but he was firm and fair,moderated well and earned the respect of Kenyans. Political Scientist,Moses Okello Omiti has noted the failings on the part of the media. "They decided to ignore sound political scientists who would otherwise influence the quality of debate positively.This lack of engagement is epitomized in the questions posed to the candidates.The questions were highly tangential to the heart and standard of any political discourse which would have yield far much quality response from the candidates. Take for example issue of LAND.Nothing was mentioned at all. IDP'S?It was evident enough that all candidates were seeking refuge from merely quoting the constitution but none of the moderators was acute enough to ask about constitutionalism,rather how the candidates would actually ensure that the provision in the constitution is well adhered to not just mentioned.Nothing was mentioned about al shaabab and the foreign policies between Somalia,Ethiopia,Eritrea,e.t.c" Something that bothered me till the end-How does Uhuru Kenyatta look like that yet talk like that while Peter Kenneth looks like that yet talks like that?