Are Zille's spin doctors obsessed with Malema's schlong?

The word schlong is an offensive and “dirty” word in Yiddish which refers to the male reproductive organ and naturally, being Yiddish, most schlongs are circumcised. However, while circumcision is a common practice it is nonetheless varied in its implementation. Some get it done at a temple, some in a mountain cave, some in a hospital and while thankfully there are no DIY circumcision kits available — some even get it done using Minora razor blades … ouch!

So naturally being the great congress wallah that I am I was amused when Zille’s speechwriters reached into their talking marionette and had her say (in isiXhosa) that Malema was a little boy — through the simile of Malema being an uncircumcised boy who has not as yet become a circumcised man.

I think it’s great that Her Worship Helen Zille speaks isiXhosa, after all it (along with her husband) are the only remnants of her activist days as a black journalist. Aeish!!! Zille was a black journalist? What? We knew that she was in the black sash, but we didn’t know she was BJF. Aeish!!!

Well actually Zille was, according to Biko’s logic, a white liberal who (yes, told us black people what was best for us, but who) fought against the superimposition of Eurocentric values upon the Africanised nature of our problems. That is what Zille was, an mhlungu who reckoned that we darkies had the sense to solve our own problems.

And so when Zille is the journalist who broke the Biko murder story wide open, thus ultimately forcing the apartheid regime to catch a serious wake up (which it did with greater zeal and brutality) — we must say that she was a black journalist.

So Zille is not a racist — sorry JM — that’s not going to fly — but Zille’s party is racist, that’s why their new ad campaign features Zille, a black woman, a bruin ou and a charou and the spiel from Obama’s 2004 DNC speech … One Nation (with) One Future … blah blah blah …

It is because the DA cannot see beyond race that each and every assessment of their failure to attain more than 2-million voters is ascribed to their being “too white” — please, I have met these people, their failure should be ascribed to their being “not too bright”.

Nobody dislikes the DA because they have more mhlungus per square metre than any other represented party. Nobody dislikes the DA because they are so mediated — please, we dislike the DA because they whine, moan and have no alternative plans.

Their policies, plans and solutions for efficient government are a joke, they look like they have been written (in managerial jargon) by rhetoricians reading the results of market-research focus groups … with no evidence-based research to support the DA policies for human development … and we must vote for them … why?

And yes though these grand plans will appeal to middle-class people because they are “fully costed”, and though I know that a single chappies chewing gum will cost me 20 cents — that doesn’t tell me that it will work.

So they are achievable, really? How? If the current civil service is (according to the opposition) inefficient and if the DA is opposed to political appointments, then how will a new DA broom usher in effective implementation? Where’s the “fully costed” plan for teaching the existing apparatchiks to handle “the white’s new magic” in the first place?

The DA talks about opportunity vouchers — where’s the plan to prevent the grey market discounting of vouchers for cash? Again the DA is not so strong with the lateral thinking, it must be sad to have tunnel logic.

The DA complained about the Scorpions being closed (because their old handlers at CCB, BOSS and NIS were going to lose their jobs) — and yet there’s no DA plan to disband SAPS, to strengthen Municipal Police Forces, to empower Community Based Constabularies, to establish the DPCI under the DoJ&CD — and to give ICD and NICOC oversight over it all — but the DA wants us to think that they care about our safety? Why? Do they own ADT Security?

But most of all the DA claims that it is above political corruption and the political insolvency created by donor funding — so why are they not supporting complete reform of political funding practices? We know why the ANC doesn’t want these new laws — but why is the DA agreeing with the (supposedly) corrupt ANC (as per the DA’s daily accusations) on this issue of political funding. Why don’t parties have to publish their donors’ names and interests in public? We have a right to know who’s pulling on the puppet strings, don’t we?

This matter between Malema and Zille is pointless — Zille is not a racist — yes the DA is racist, and yes the DA is imperialist — but the ANC should rather spend its time recruiting Zille back to the National Democratic Revolution from whence she (and all of us) came.

In respect of whether Malema has had his 25% foreskin discount or not, I have no idea and no interest in having an idea, but I’m sure that Zille’s speechwriters could request a photo from Luthuli House to satiate their obsession, although if Malema is a little boy, then any discussion about the way that his schlong looks in any respect is a conspiracy to create child pornography.