Dear Editor,

The Headline in the Tribune on Thursday, 21st August 2014 read “PLP MELTDOWN” in bright yellow…or was it gold?

In the mind of the Tribune’s News Editor (or Managing Editor or Editor or owner), a difference of opinion between Dr. Andre Rollins, a PLP backbencher, and the senior leadership of the PLP constitutes a “meltdown” in the PLP. Let’s take the view of the Tribune at face value and apply logic to it.

The leader of the FNM, Dr. Hubert Minnis opposed Stem Cell research and therapy, but the deputy leader of the FNM opening supported it.

Dr. Minnis opposed the legalization of webshop gaming, but the chairman of the FNM, Darren Cash, believed that webshop gaming should be legalized.

The deputy leader of the FNM felt that Bahamian home owners whose mortgages were in distress should demonstrate and protest against the PLP government (even though 4,000 of them were left distressed under the watch of the FNM, but never mind the facts). Dr. Minnis disagreed with the demonstration.

And then the 4 constitutional bills. Dr. Minnis agreed first, saying that the FNM should speak with one voice. A few weeks later, he changed his mind and preached a parliamentary sermon of fear, concern, gloom and doom and disaster. He also told some tale about some quagmire that the government had gotten itself into that as leader he was not going to let the FNM get dragged into. Meanwhile the deputy leader of the FNM remained supportive of the bills that will afford both men and women equal rights under the law. It was just your simple run of the mill, garden variety difference of opinion among the FNM leadership that literally threatened the whole constitutional referendum based purely on misinformation.

Now here comes the application of the Tribune’s logic: If a disagreement between a backbencher and the leader amounts to a meltdown, then what do frequent disagreements between the FNM leader, the deputy leader of the FNM and the FNM chairman constitute? It certainly cannot be just a mere meltdown. Based on the Tribune’s logic, the FNM crashed and burned long ago, reduced to rubble – to ASH and CINDER.

This has to be the only logical conclusion because it is inconceivable that the Tribune would NOT be fair and balanced, with a blatant, jaundiced and biased political view and agenda. Why that’s simply impossible because they swear to the dogma of no master.