You brought up heritage, not me. I only reminded you that greatness isn’t confined by birthplace. And if quoting Jesus offends you, maybe it’s not politics that’s dirty—maybe it’s how you choose to see people.

And where were you born, exactly? Funny how birthplace only matters when it’s someone else’s.

A third of the people holding Bahamian passports today were born in Haiti. By your logic, they shouldn’t vote, work, or belong here either? You hear how absurd that sounds? Nationality isn’t inherited purity; it’s legal standing and contribution. If Robert’s a Bahamian by law, then he’s as Bahamian as anyone else carrying that passport.

…and Jesus was born in Bethlehem, yet you hold him as god—so spare us the birthplace argument. Lynden O. Pindling wasn’t born in The Bahamas either, and no one questioned his right to lead. Plenty of today’s politicians trace mixed or Haitian lineage. Let’s leave the petty racial gatekeeping behind. Under Bahamian law, Robert is a Bahamian. That’s the only qualification that matters.

***

> The FNM’s Missed Opportunity and the
> Carron Paradox

***

If The Tribune’s newfound warmth toward the PLP through Robert Dupuch-Carron reads as ideological betrayal, the inverse question is more strategic: what if Carron had gone the other way?

Within the fractured landscape of the Free National Movement (FNM), Carron’s entry could have functioned as both a symbolic and structural revival. The FNM, under Michael Pintard’s cautious stewardship, is perceived as morally intact yet electorally fatigued — an organization with a memory of reform but no present charisma. Carron, with his lineage in a paper historically aligned with “clean governance” and “watchdog journalism,” could have personified the very renewal the FNM requires: credible, educated, and nationally palatable.

Political observers note that the FNM’s decline is not ideological but emotional — a party drained of urgency and imagination. Carron’s crossover to the PLP thus feels doubly consequential: first, it signals The Tribune’s symbolic surrender of its traditional alignment; second, it deprives the FNM of what might have been its one bridge between legacy integrity and modern innovation.

Seen through that lens,

> Robert joining the FNM may have been
> the blessing the FNM needed

— not as a tactical move, but as an existential reset. His heritage carries moral capital that could have reignited public trust, especially among moderate voters disenchanted with both parties’ stale binaries. Instead, the move toward the PLP amplifies the FNM’s identity crisis, leaving it ideologically adrift while The Tribune, once its de facto amplifier, now flirts with the rival it was built to challenge.

Ahh, so Davis is going around taking the “chickens”—no wonder I don’t see them running around the neighbourhood. But that Pintard “confidence” joke? Look around; no one is laughing.

Michael Pintard and the FNM aren’t offering a clear plan. Their message doesn’t connect, and there’s no vision to win back old voters or attract new ones. Calling for a general election now looks like a shortcut, not a fix. A by-election costs less than a nationwide vote, and the law sets the timeline. The PLP can hold the by-election, keep governing, and serve its full five-year term.

"Voters need results, not stunts."

“The Progressive Liberal Party’s shortcomings are evident; however, the Free National Movement does not presently constitute a credible or attractive alternative.”

> Soon the headlines will read, ‘Mail
> Boat Hit by U.S. Missiles in Drug
> Trafficking Crackdown’—only for the
> follow-up to admit: oops, it was boxes
> of crab, not cocaine.

'Watch Da Road', j@ckass driving.

America’s disputes with China are America’s alone. The Bahamas neither seeks nor welcomes imported hostility. We value peace, sovereignty, and the right to chart our own course. If your presence offers conflict rather than cooperation, then it has no place here—keep it, and yourselves, far from our shores.

> Report: Justifying BPL Nuclear
> Conversion and Cost Benefits for the
> Bahamas

In light of recent revelations, the transformation of the Bahamas Electricity Corporation (BEC) and Bahamas Power and Light (BPL) becomes an urgent necessity. This report aims to comprehensively justify the conversion to nuclear energy for BPL and highlight the substantial cost benefits that such a transition could bring to the Bahamas.

Current Landscape:
The annual reports spanning 2016 to 2020 have illuminated BPL's precarious financial situation. Negative cash flows, operational losses, and maturing obligations raise concerns about BPL's sustainability. In a climate of economic volatility, BPL's financial challenges magnify the urgency of finding a viable, long-term solution.

> The Vision of Nuclear Energy
> Conversion:

The prospect of nuclear energy conversion presents an unprecedented opportunity to alleviate the financial burdens faced by BPL and pave the way for sustainable development in the Bahamas. Let's delve into the compelling reasons behind the nuclear conversion:

1. Financial Stability and Predictability:
Nuclear energy provides a stable and predictable source of power. By transitioning to nuclear energy, BPL can mitigate the volatility of fuel costs and operational losses outlined in the annual reports. With an annual revenue of $380 million from 108,000 customers, the potential for financial stability and growth is evident.

2. Substantial Cost Savings:
The transition to nuclear energy promises to revolutionize BPL's financial landscape. The cumulative cost of providing energy to 108,000 customers over 10 years, estimated at $3.8 billion, underscores the scale of potential savings through nuclear energy conversion. These funds could be redirected toward sustainable development, infrastructure improvement, and socioeconomic progress.

Cost Analysis:
To ensure a convincing and detailed case, we've conducted an in-depth cost analysis over a 10-year period, comparing the current scenario with the potential nuclear energy conversion.

1. Customer Payments Over 10 Years:
Based on the annual revenue of $380 million and 108,000 customers, customer payments over 10 years amount to:
$380 million * 10 years = $3.8 billion

2. Estimated Fuel Cost Over 10 Years:
Considering BPL's annual fuel cost of $300 million, the total fuel cost over 10 years is:
$300 million * 10 years = $3 billion

3. Estimated Cost of Nuclear Plant:
Based on estimates, the cost of building a new nuclear plant is $1 billion.

Cost Comparison:
Now, let's juxtapose these figures for a comprehensive understanding of the financial implications:

Cost Comparison Over 10 Years
• Customer Payments to BPL | $3.8B
• Estimated Fuel Cost | $3B
• Estimated Cost of Building a New Nuclear Plant | $1B