I must admit that DP was a bit pushy…she should have given him a chance to answer some of her own questions put to him. But I must admit she had a lot of valid points.

About JM: I have now made up my mind. The guy seems to be enjoying his position for a few reasons, it seems. One, he can sway a crowd, even though the content of his speech may be poor. It seems his followers are VERY big on loyalty, the content seems to make little difference. How sad. That is one problem that i have with this country: Allegiance and loyalty. TOO many follow blindly. A liberator of the oppressed DOES NOT automatically qualify one to sequentially lead a country. That has been proven time and time again here; the country is in chaos! compare the likes of Mandela to Zuma. Mandela (M) is a qualified lawyer, Zuma (Z) has no education. M reaches out to all races, Z seems to favour Zulu culture. M conducts his life quietly and decently, Z seems to stir up public irritation with his actions (multiple sex partners, taxpayers money goes to financing his family). M wins presidency by sincerity and popular vote only, orchestrates the ousting of Mbeki first, and a little while later brainwashes for popular vote). While M has garnered popularity with his natural warmth, charisma and professional struggle, Z seems to have garnered his presidency by swaying the crowds (of which his own Zulu race is most populous) with materialism. Thus it can be shown that true leaders of a country display true leadership qualities earned. Forced leaders bring about turmoil.

JM seems to be power hungry, materialistic, and not very educated. He seems to want the best for his own people, and does not have the general south african population at heart. He accuses white of being racist, but ironically seems to bear the same traits. there has never been any mention from him of the poor colorded in the Western Cape, who have been JUST AS oppressed as blacks in the aparthied regime. I praise JM for wanting to alleviate the struggles of certain poor in the country, albeit blacks. One person (irrespective of colour) being helped out of poverty is an achievement. My objection is the BIAS that is displayed. He seems to lack the intellectual capacity to make calculated decisions to empower the struggling. There seems to be an arrogance in him which can be kind of embarrassing. Objectively, he seems to venture topics of which he has no real background knowledge, instead of just deferring the topic. If he was a little more subdued, he would perhaps be more alert to try and avoid answering certain topics, tactfully. A little tact would definitely go a longer way.

But WHAT comes to the fore most strikingly is the fact that I am analyzing this man and coming up with so many fundamental discrepancies in his leadership abilities. Which makes me wonder if it would just be better for him to do introspection, and decide if he should continue or just simply hand over to a more capable being…