In discussions over recent days, some ideas have ended up widely discussed: here’s the substance of some discussions I’ve had.
1. The President: what is her end goal? In the past, there were more who felt it was to step down in 2010. My view is, she can never afford to. Also, some argued she wasn’t emotionally, politically, and financially invested in charter change. Contrary view: she has to engineer it sooner rather than later, because she cannot step down, and needs to firm up her control and ability to succeed herself as 2010 approaches. If she doesn’t have constitutional change by 2007, once the mid-term elections take place she’s a lame duck, and it’s open season on her, forcing her no choice but to step down or impose martial law (which wouldn’t be good for her public relations).
President doesn’t want elections. Neither does the Speaker who may lose his seat. Both would receive a bad political blow from failing to achieve constitutional changes before the May elections. The Speaker knows full well, though, that if push comes to shove, the President has more options than he. So while he pushed for a constituent assembly in the past, to gain credit for a shift to the parliamentary system, now, he has to push forward the so-called people’s initiative. The President’s pet party, Kampi, is reportedly fed up with a House dominated by Lakas veterans since the Ramos years. It’s their turn, their time in the sun -under their leader, the President, and not the Speaker. Seems Prospero Pichay’s revised proposal, which he and his partymates want adopted “by substitution,” to replace the Jaraulla amendments, would maintain the Speaker, and fuse the offices of President and Prime Minister.
One option to keep the peace, so Speaker de Venecia can fight another day and the President doesn’t have to tip her hand too early: postpone the elections to November from May, which gives wiggle room (if no one gets upset by postponement, then the postponement can be postponed). It all depends on the Supreme Court: for or against so-called people’s initiative? If it decides for it, we go to a plebiscite in January or February 2007, which government will win. If it decides against it, the House might make an attempt to force the issue, also resulting in a plebiscite in January, or February or even March.
But election fever sets in for the political class by November or December, as candidacies must be filed by February (for local positions) or March (for national positions).
My view: if a plebiscite is held, it will expend people’s energies so no one will be in the mood to really care about an election. If a plebiscite doesn’t take place, there must be elections.
Either way: a plebiscite and an election requires a cooperative Comelec, and what better way than for Ombudsman to give everyone in the Comelec a get out of jail card.
Technorati Tags: philippines, politics
rego, it seems to me that cvj among the regular commenters here is one we can all agree on as generally rational and sober in what he says and how he expresses himself. i think he is the last person one should point to as an example of the kind of arguments or thinking you dislike.
with regards to bencard’s points, i must confess an inability to comprehend those who protest and oppose either passion or emotion when it comes to any kind of expression, political or otherwise. government and society isn’t chemistry or metallurgy or anything that can or should be considered a cold, impersonal, science. these are things best approached, instead, from the point of view of deeply held convictions, while of course aspiring to compromise if both sides show an inclination to mutually respect each other and hold back on escalating things. but if not -then the fighting is not only natural, but healthy for at the heart of it is the battle of survival of ideas and ways of life.
what i also find puzzling is constant appeals to the proper forums, and the law, without even a nod to the imperfections of the law and most of all, those who man the apparatus of the law. and the spirit of the laws -which, incidentally, can only become irrelevant when one insists on law being like politics cold, impervious to feelings and emotions, and thus solely viewed according to procedure.
for example, what proof of either fraud or abuses of power on the part of president, they ask. and then they maneuver to shut off all avenues to investigation; in particular, they point to the lack of discernment on the part of the opposition in terms of impeachment rules that prevent the bringing out, discussion, sifting and weighing of evidence before party-votes are held. which is true enough except it ignores the culpability of the president’s allies in an anomalous situation.
when the opposition pointed that president quirino’s impeachment charges were handled more transparently and fairly, with an ultimate defeat of the impeachment attempt but a vindication of quirino because the charges were fully discussed, the administration was reduced to arguing that it was fine for quirino but the opposition proposed the present, perverted rules, which the administration obligingly approved. without pointing the cyncical motivations of a majority that recognizes the rules as flawed, and approves them to spite its enemies.
a majority truly concerned with fair play, etc. etc. would have used its majority to insist on decent rules, knowing that only through fair play can those honestly believing in the president’s innocence achieve a a vindication.
so to insist on evidence that will stand up in court -while closing one’s eyes to the nature of the courts -whether impeachment, or other courts including that of public opinion- being either perverted or repressed, neither understands the true spirit of the laws, nor properly comprehends what democracy is all about. which is, as i’ve repeatedly pointed out: that delay is precious to it; that it is best judged by how minorities and their views are treated; and best maintained by the ability of those with power to hold back in exercising power or attempting to use it beyond limits imposed by precedent.
i also believe that if you go back, at the heart of the calls of various critics of the government are attitudes far more reasonable and democratic, than the counter-arguments and willful blindness, deafness, and muteness, of those defending the president.
Mes compliments, mlq3, excellent discours!
Her goal? Make herself a queen and try rubbing shoulders with the remaining monarchs in the world today like the Imperial Family of Japan that she must have found out to be not easy to infiltrate or the easier to penetrate, the British royalty through divorced Prince Andrew, who has been to the Philippines in the past on some British Navy ship.
Proof is the silly claim that she was descended from Lakan Dula whose more plausible descendant is ex-ICJ Judge Romy Capulong, a critic of the Bansot, and worst her own father’s hallucination that he was descended from Alexander the Great!
Ang tindi talaga ng tupak sa ulo ng isang wannabe Muntinlupa/Mandaluyong inmate na ito!!! It’s the main reason why she wants the ChaCha so much. She wants to reign as queen until she dies and she passes on the crown to her eldest son, and so down her line.
This I am told by someone who knew about the attempts by the Philippine Embassy in Tokyo to make an appointment for even 5 or 10 minutes with the Emperor and Empress, whose annual schedules are set a year or two ahead of time, and in accordance with protocol.
I pity the Filipinos for allowing themselves to be burdened with a lunatic and a bogey (for bogus) for president. PATALSIKIN NA, NOW NA!
cvj,
I agree with you. However, how to empower the people as individuals, and then for them to act as one to achieve a common goal remains elusive. Realizing their sad state of affairs is not enough. They must care and be convinced of the fate of their own inaction. This must be true not only for the common tao but also for people in power.
The opposition must put aside self-interest. There are many anti-glo factions. Each one has their own agenda. On the other hand, there is one and only one ate glo group, and it has one and only one agenda. It is never distracted from its goal, always a few steps ahead of the opposition and takes no prisoners.
Ate glo knows what she is doing. Calling attention to her transgressions by bad mouthing her is not going to change things. Sound arguments will. For now, ate glo is unbeatable.
Mabuhay si ate glo.
magalang, mahusay at masinop na argumento, mlq3.
mahirap pabulaanan, maliban kung sa patuloy na pagbubulag-bulagan, bingi-bingihan at maang-mangaan dadaanin.
ipagpatuloy!
vic said: “Carl, the light may shine at the end of the tunnel, but just how long the tunnel is, no one is sure. Heat instead produces fire, dangerous.”
– – – Très bien dit!
carl, merci vraiment. Appreciate it very much. I’m not very good with our other official language though, but i always like listening to the kids, trying to hide to us older folks what they are talking about by speaking French.
bencard,
“Cayetano’s character assasination of the President’s family” ????
Makaglo,
“There are many anti-glo factions”…Pero dapat mong malaman kung meron mang basta lang galit kay GMA o gusto lang talaga siyang mapatalsik kahit na anupamang dahilan, konti lang siguro ang mga iyon. Alam kong sasang ayon ang nakakarami dito na karamihan sa amin ay hangad lamang na malinawan ang lahat. Siguro kung magkakaroon man ng kalinawan ang lahat, isa kami sa susuporta kay GMA kung wala talaga siyang kasalanan. Marami ng proseso ang nagdaan at hindi nabigyan ng tama at marangal na kaganapan.
Bakit di natin hayaang dumaloy ng maayos at bigyan ng kalinawan ang lahat. Kahit na siguro sino ang nakaupo ganito ang dapat nating panuntunan. Hindi kami basta nangugulo lamang. Susulong tayo sa tamang paraan at hindi dapat na basta sumulong na lamang. Hindi tayo dapat basta kampi-kampihan lamang. Kung tayo ay magkakaisa, magkaisa tayo na hindi natin dapat payagan ang mga maling gawain at ang pagsira sa ating mga proseso at mga institusyon.
Kung sayo mabuhay si ate glo, sa akin balang araw pag tumino na ang lahat sana maisigaw ko rin ng malakas na MABUHAY TAYONG MGA FILIPINO.
“willful blindness, deafness, and muteness, of those defending the president.”
at the end of the day, it is us who is to blame. look at the kind of people we elect. poliicians who only know self preservation and accomodations. our institutions is fine. it is us as a people who has a problem. we never matured as a voter. it is so easy to put blame on others but have we tried looking at ourselves. collectively, as a people, we are where we are because of our own doing. unless we act collectively, to change collectively, to put our country’s interest above pakikisama, utang na loob, nothing will change.
Makaglo, achieving a common goal remains elusive because beneath that ‘common goal’ are multiple competing objectives that differ according to a person’s station in life. As in any complex society, what needs to be achieved is common action towards a common goal despite these differing objectives. It is the task of the major groupings (or factions) within society (i.e. civil society, the elite, and the masses) to reexamine whether their objectives will be furthered by maintaining the status quo [which favors Arroyo].
Civil Society who represent the middle forces that make up the EDSA 2 crowd has the most soul-searching to do as Gloria Arroyo represents its hubris. That hubris reached its apex in 2001 when it tried to arrest Erap and drafted its own luminaries like Dinky and Solita Monsod into the Senatorial race. The former resulted in EDSA3 while Dinky and Solita were solidly trounced. Those two events should have given us a sign that our entry into government was premature, something that i think Gloria herself realized at some point which may be why she gave that Rizal day speech. As it stands, a lot of its members have been co-opted into the current power structure which has largely sapped it of its moral ascendancy. To achieve its primary objectives and regain its moral standing which is the source of its strength, the elements of Civil Society who remain in government have to withdraw and refocus on their core mission which includes preparing for the coming post-Arroyo battles.
As Manuel Buencamino pointed out in his ‘You Snooze You Lose’ piece last April, the enlightened members of the political and economic elite should know better than to give free rein to Gloria and her political and military warlord allies. If they want to take a peek at what’s in store for them if we continue down this path, they should look at the fate of Mikhail Khodorkovsky, former CEO of the Russian oil giant Yukos. If they want to see what might happen to their sons and daughters further down the line, then they should watch what is happening to the political warlords of Somalia who are making their last stand in Baldoa, a small town near the Ethiopian border. If they still believe in having a future in the Philippines, an actionable program to hand over power and share the wealth with the greater majority needs to be put in place.
By sheer numbers, i believe it is only a matter of time before the masses will regain political power and this is as it should be. However, its leaders should temper its coming triumphalism (and possible ideological dogmatism) by recognizing that both the elite and civil society possess a degree of veto power over their aspirations at least in the short to medium term which is about 15 to 30 years. It should also take care to ensure that it does not replace the current elite with another new batch coming from among its members.
Randy David in his Inquirer column today (‘Institutions’) basically concurs with your assessment above and points out that Ate Glo’s genius lies in her ‘[mastery] of the science of patronage’. While i recognize her present position of seeming invincibility, i believe she is just one economic slump away from being ousted, and given our dependency on world events there are many ways for the sh*t to hit the fan. The task of every person who is capable of reflection is to prepare for this eventuality.
History will tell us that were more leader seemed much more invincible than The current Philippine President. One good example is Milosovec of Yugoslavia. Not only he lost his power, but also the dissolution of his Federal Yoguslavia into different independent states. There was the Shah of Iran. President Ceausesco of Romania, took only a few days of turnmoil to turn his power into nothingness and his head into the gallow and so many others. But for every tyranny dead and burried one is always born to carry on. it seems that old adage the “taste of power is so intoxinating,damn the consequence”, is true to our very own leaders.
vic said: ” . . . i always like listening to the kids, trying to hide to us older folks what they are talking about by speaking French.”
Quelle coïncidence amusante . . . My nieces in Geneva do the same thing.
I lisyened to Hloria’s speech at the competitiveness summit sponsored by AIM. It reminded me of her Sona. Throughout her entire speech, I could not banish from my mind the thought of “sayang she is not fit to be a leader.” She spoke of political will, fiscal discipline and anti-corruption measures and they sounded hollow because the words were being spoken by her.
Gloria is just not fit to be president, Even if she were to perform a miracle and turn our country into the richest in the world, she still has to face the question of her moral fitness. Food on the table is a basic physical necessity but what makes us human is our soul, our spirit and that’s something that Gloria will never be able to nourish.
mb,
“Gloria will never be able to nourish”.
starve and poison, she does.
I sometimes get the impression that half the bloggers on this site are overseas, to include vic/true-north du canada and vic/book-collector-and-donor “du Connecticut”. [Which may mean that manuelbancamino posting in malalim na Tagalog is just as exclusionary as old man Gokongwei saying Sun Yat Fai Lok! or el Presidente saying Mayap a Kebaitan.]
UP student,
the book donations and other projects are the endeavor of the whole Alimodiananon Association Worldwide, where about a year or so ago, our sister organization in the East Coast was able to Bridge together thru our Web site. Our association was started long time ago, back in l986 by a handful of us early migrants and now has successfully able to merge together to be truly meaningful and can launch meaningful projects for our hometown and our townmates, who are new immigrants or OFWs. so far I am the only known member that actively participate in forums in the Phillippines involving political commentaries, although most of my townmantes visits my blogsite for a bunch of jokes to be thrown on me everytime we have a get-together. I also participate in PCIJ under my grandma’s name “naykika”. And I read and understand quite well all comments in Tagalog, and we use Ilongo in ours, any other sound chinese to me. thanks..
Manolo,
I do find most of cvj, comments interesting, passionate and I find him very intelligent . That’s why I read all of them. I just don’t react on the points that I agree. I feel that there is no need for it. As matter of fact I will credit cvj, for my addiction to blogging pasrticular to your site. Because he was the very first one who reply to my very first comment I posted in your blog. However , we also don’t see eye to eye on some points, especially his biased towards any ideas that favors in some ways to the status qou or Gloria no matter reasonable it is.
The inability to comprehend I believe can be traced to not taking time to really understand each other passion and conviction. Sometimes I feel that this could also be due to our different experiences and background and how we focus on principles. I believe we are all fighting the same battles and aiming for the same territory. Your battle is my battle as well. So your win is my win too. There should never be that much hostilities. Instead I wanted to see more sharing of the learnings that either side gained in the battle to conquer the same territory.
I agree on your view about government and society. That its should never be cold and impersonal like the pure sciences. However, I would like to approached it in a more proactive than reactive way, and more principle based than emotional
I insist on using the proper forum and laws on removing Gloria. Because I believe that s the way to expose and understand their respective defects that needs to be fixed. Even the evils of those who manned them.
What I believe that should be done after the two failed impeachment, to really work on the errors that were committed. We already impeached Quirino and Erap, so don’t believe it is impossible to impeach Gloria. If the second impeachment was found to be insufficient in substance then work on that. If the impeach rules is the problem then focus on revising the rules.
Rego, i agree with you when you said that ‘we are fighting the same battles and aiming for the same territory’. In part, that is because we both belong to the ‘Center’ that Manolo referred to in his essay from more than a year back (“The Center Must Hold”). Unfortunately, the fact that we are now at odds is an indication that the ‘Center’ did not hold, and in that same essay, he has outlined the possible consequences of such division – all of them not good.
In any case, it is always good to keep the lines of communication open even if it is just to express conflicting positions as i believe this is all part of an honest deliberation. We all have our blind spots and we normally rely on those whom we do not agree with to call them out.
I’m also in agreement with your pointers with regards to the third impeachment attempt. In your comment back in April You were also right to emphasize the role of pork in influencing the impeachment outcome:
“…If she is using the pork barrel allocation to bribe teh congress men. Then pork barrel should be removed…”
As it turns out, that observation (which i did not pay that much attention to at that time) was on the mark.
“…If she is using the pork barrel allocation to bribe teh congress men. Then pork barrel should be removed…â€Â
Unfortunately, until such time as IRAs become automatic, districts will have to rely on pork . So in the meantime, we cannot do away with pork without hurting the people. However, we can do away with Gloria and not hurt anybody.
How?
The pork barrel will never be removed if we keep on electing the kind of people we now have in congress. Bayan muna and company is an excellent example. Prior to their election in congress they were campaigning against the pork barrel. NOw that they benefit from it, they are not giving it up. Let us elect people who will propose laws with regards to pork scrapping and end to political dynasties.
It looks like this latest piece my MLQ3 has generated a lot of passionate arguments from a lot of well meaning and patriotic Filipinos. I like to especially commend rego, cvj, bencard and ofcourse our gacious host MLQ3 for their inputs.
I think forums like this show that a lot of FILIPINOs do care and although we have do not all have the same philisophies how to make things work at home, we can debate about it as a CIVILIZED race of people able to offer passionate but constructive differing points of views.
I am concerned however, that debates like this can sometimes be hijacked by hecklers like that Uncle Tom, joma apologist and coup mongerer “a-do-bo” (anne de brux).
Kabagis
iraya,
for the record, ‘Bayan muna and company’, at any given time, is more than willing to give up their pork. its their other colleagues, both from the admin and opposition alike, who is averse to the idea.
if you check scams upon scams on which the House of Thieves is easily known for, not a soul either from Bayan Muna or Akbayan is involved.
btw, delays in IRA: they always end last in the receiving line, when queuingin for their share. besides, they never have the chance to hold the cash itself unlike other members.
by way of example; the Congressman from vic’s district in Iloilo has only a lone recipient of his IRA share: the municipal gov’t. where a direct family member is the mayor.
‘Bayan muna and company’ disburses their’s by way of identifiable projects, approved by COA, covering the entire archipelago.
…oppsss… queuing…that is…
cvj, you expound on our common points. We don’t disagree. This thing, however, of “a question of time” will always be. Change is always a matter of time.
The time constraint at issue is 2010. Will the heckling of ate glo continue through to 2010 and beyond?
makaglo, on the future ups and downs of heckling, i can’t tell. In these matters, i take guidance from mlq3 and in a recent post he gave the following assessment and corresponding line of action:
“Anyway, I told my friend, my view since last year has been pretty simple. The real fight will begin after 2010. Everything going on now is a skirmish. So I’m willing to hold some of my fire and even go into hibernation, advocacy-wise, after the plebiscite (which the government can be expected to win, unless something unexpected happens) for a couple of years.”
I find the above prospect of a lull after the plebiscite before 2010 and then an escalation afterwards quite frustrating, but perhaps a realistic assessment. In the meantime, i suppose the masses (as Doronila has advocated) would have to come up and set their own agenda and timetable. I’m also interested in your take on feasible or desirable actions.
cvj, mananatili si ate glo sa kapangyarihan hangan 2010 and beyond. Tulad ng haka-haka ng marami rito, it is a question of survival.
Babagsak lang si ate glo kung traydorin siya ng sarili niyang tauhan. Marami naman tayo niyan, tulad ni enrile at yung me tabaco. Tinawag na mga bayani ang mga yan. Maybe so? Pero, technicaly, traydor ang mga yan.
So ate glo is here to stay. Hawak niya sa leeg ang kongreso. Hawak niya sa bayag ang pulis at military. Hawak niya ilong ang mga obispo. Hawak niya ang kaluluwa ng comelec. Hawak niya ang ulo ng OMB. Ano pa? Ayos na!
Mabuhay si ate glo.
“So ate glo is here to stay. Hawak niya sa leeg ang kongreso. Hawak niya sa bayag ang pulis at military. Hawak niya ilong ang mga obispo. Hawak niya ang kaluluwa ng comelec. Hawak niya ang ulo ng OMB. Ano pa? Ayos na! -makaglo”
After 20 years in the wilderness we now have a strong President who is in control of all the forces that have traditionally thwarted the nation’s advancement.
Many of us outside looking-in can NOW see a lot of economic improvements brought about by her leadership.
More power Ate Glo! It is not always easy for an Ilokano to acknowledge the greatness of a member of another clan but in this instance, I rise above all that to say you do me proud to be a Filipino.
I eagerly look forward to your guiding hand shepherd us beyond 2010.
Kabagis
Makaglo, parang baliktad yung mga obserbasyon mo? Hawak niya sa leeg ang kongreso? Baka kamo hawak ng kongreso ang leeg ni ate glo? bakit? sino ba ang nagdedesisyon kung aabante ang impeachment o hindi?
Hawak ni ate glo ang bayag ng pulis at militar? Baliktad ulit. Di bat tila sunudsunuran si ate glo sa mga heneral. Esperon? dalawang promosyon sa isang upuan? ang tindi!
Hawak ang mga obispo? Ay oo nga, gaya ni Bishop Cruz na patuloy na lumalaban sa kanya.
Hawak ang comelec? Baka hawak ng comelec si ate glo? hahaha tingnan mo na lang kung gaano pinagtakpan ng ombudsman ang pagnanakaw ng comelec….Hawak ng comelec ang sagot sa dayaan.
gumising ka kapatid!
makaglo, sa tingin ko tama ka. Kung hindi kikilos ang taumbayan, nakakasiguro si Ate Glo na manatili sa puwesto puwera na lang kung traydorin siya. Malamang hihirangin din silang mga bayani. So…ano pa kaya ang hinihintay nila?
cvj, si Uncle Sam???
Kabagis, when people adopt a mind-set of sheep looking for a ‘shepherd’, it becomes all too easy to be submissive to those who currently hold power. After the economic collapse under Marcos, the “20 years in the wilderness” (under Cory, FVR, Erap and even GMA) is when we crawled out of that hole and got to our present state (USD 1,400 per capita GDP). Whatever economic developments you now see did not just happen all within Gloria’s term as she would like us to believe.
The prevalent mentality of relying on a ‘Messiah’, as exemplified by Kabagis, is what makes our people (whether elite, middle class or masa) easily fall for false prophets. To avoid becoming too gullible, it is important to recognize how economic growth has actually occurred and just not rely on self-serving pronouncements of the current holders of power.
Laonglaan, sa isang banda, tama rin ang iyong sinasabi, pero ang pagsusuri ni Makaglo ay sang-ayon sa sinabi ni Randy David sa kaniyang column sa Inquirer kahapon (‘Institutions’). Hindi natin mapapagkaila na ibayo ang kahusayan ni GMA kung ang pag-uusapan ay ang pagsamantala ng mga kahinaan sa ating sistemang politikal.
makaglo@1:49pm, mukhang tama ka nanaman:-)
A Messiah is a redeemer YET to come. On the contrary we are experiencing deliverance now under GMA’s watch.
I wrote 20 years spent in the wilderness deliberatley to include the first 5 year tenure of GMA of which I too was somewhat sceptical whether anything was really going to be different this time.
The difference between you and me is I choose to judge her achievements on face value without attaching any pathetic
anarchistic morality.
Kabagis, so you really think GMA is the ‘Redeemer’? Under GMA’s watch, it is dangerous to judge anything at ‘face value’ as this administration has made a well known predisposition to favor appearance over reality. I don’t understand what you mean about ‘anarchistic morality’. I think the difference between you and me still has to do with the willingness to act like sheep under the ‘guiding hand’ of a shepherd.
So dear Kabagis here says I am a Joma apologist and a coup mongerer – I don’t know how he positively can assert that “mais, passons”. Life is too short to have to waste on Gloria’s Joma and on her supposed coups…
Well, let me just figure out what you are in turn. A false prophet as in Ka Bo Bo prophet? By the way, where was “Beware of false prophets” written?
And here comes Gloria’s prophet Kabagis (got anything to do with Singaw’s Legions?), “A Messiah is a redeemer YET to come. On the contrary we are experiencing deliverance now under GMA’s watch.”
Deliverance under GMA’s watch? I’ll be damned! But of course, why didn’t I think of that? That deliverance under Gloria immoral midget literally applies to more than 750 people who have been delivered from their existence during Gloria’s watch, why, even an Aglipayan bishop was stabbed 7 times no less and delivered from this earth.
to those pipol who like to project an image of civility in the discourse of an argument…madali lang masalita ng ganyan dahil wala kayo dito sa pinas. u r in da US of A where ur problem is what to eat, unlike here in pinas problema ng mga mamamayan ay walang man lang makain. I suggest na manirahan ka dito sa pinas ng isang taon man lang at saka tingnan natin kung ganun ka pa rin ka civil. gutom. pagod at hirap can make a person very emotional, especially if u r fighting for ur life literally.
Kung pagod din lang ang paguusapan utoy, ang pakiramdam ko masa nakakapagod dito. I have never worked as hard in my whole life than here in New York City. Talagang napakabilis ng oras dito and before you knew it patong patong na ang mga bills nyo. The big difference i would say at least in may part is that hindi mahirap mag hanap ng trabaho dito. marami talgang pagkakakitaan basta masipag ka lang.
I understand that pag pagod ka at maraming problema mahirap talagang kontrolin ang temper ng isang tao . But then I also believe that if you dont control your tewmper the more that the problem get complicated.
Unang una na dyan, no one really listen to some who is shouting. In most cases it only provoke a fight….
For example, yung writing style ni manuel buencamino. I really find it difficult to finish his pieces doon sa blog nya kasi offensive na kaagad yung opening paragraph. CVJ, pointed it out to me before that if you care to read the rest of the peices you will find out that some of the points raised in the peices will be similar to what ypour advocating. Na mimis ko yung real point nya kasi turn-off na kaagad ako doon sa bumubungad sa akin. Kaya tamad na tamad na tamad na tuloy akong puntahan ang blog nya.
Of course i also recognize the fact that, it could also be just a another form of expression or even a style of communicating
However, I feel that peopel are just so numb or even sick and tired already of all this name calling and shouting matches. Gee ilang taon na ba tayong ganito. In my part i found it distracting doon sa real issues at parang nagiging personal na.
And most importantly, I believe Gloria is using it to even perpetrate more kalokohan. I believe that teh more we shout to each other, the more na nakikita nyang nag kakagulo tayo. We become more vulnerable to his “rule and divide” strategy. The more she feel that her dirty tricks are working and therefore will easier for her to perpetrate more crimes. Remember her justifications for state of emergency???
So hanggang maari iwasan natin yang palitan ng masasakit na salita. If you can help it , please…..
On kabagis points, I use dto think like that too. Na OK na in si Gloria dahil may mga achievements naman. But then I realized na hindi naman justifications ang acheivements for doing wrong eh!
Someone who really comitted a crime, should be prosecuted with the full force of the law. No ifs and no buts!!! Thats fundamental, thats being principle oriented. And therefore non negotiable for me.
Rego, I don’t know if I’eve commented directly to your posts before but I’d always had this distinct impression that you were a mere die-hard Gloria supporter and apologist come hell or high water.
I must say I am finally in total accord with what you are saying and wholeheartedly agree that “Someone who really comitted a crime, should be prosecuted with the full force of the law. No ifs and no buts!!! Thats fundamental, thats being principle oriented. And therefore non negotiable for me.”
Gloria said basically same thing here about the spate of killings when she visited the EU, “I formed the Melo commission with the full power of my office. I’ve instructed Justice Melo to go after the accused, whoever they may be, wherever they may be, with the full force of the law…”
She said that verbatim, – (I have a copy of the little less than an hour tape of the interview of her by the Philippine Star in Brussels) yet, barely a month after saying that, a bishop was murdered apparently by “robbers”, the bishop was known to have been a severe critc of the Arroyo regime so it’s no longer easy to believe her.
kung huhusgahan natin si GMA sa mga economic and infrastructure achivements, eh si makoy maging magaling na rin na presidente. nandyan ang mga highways, PICC, San Juanico Bridge, Mactan International Airports! sana di na lang natin pinalayas si makoy! at saka kung and kinabukasan ng mga kabataan natin ang pag-uusapan dapat pinipersonal natin. ano na ang mangyayari kung puro na lang tayo lamig ng ulo? sa panahon ni makoy 20+years din malamig ang mga ulo ng mga karamihang pilipino. daming buhay na nabuwis ng ilang na mga personal at mainitin na ulo na mga kababayan natin! sa ngayon hindi pa ba sapat na halos araw-araw na lang may namamatay dahil sa iba ang paniwala at di sang-ayon sa gobyerno? ay! wala pala akong proyeba na si GMA ang maykagagawan. eh paano lahat na lang hinahadlangan sa konggreso! eg sa lansangan na lang! sana kung talagang seryoso ang mga kaalyado ni GMA bigyan ng pagkakataon ang mga taga oposisyon na maiprisinta naman ang mga proyeba nila tapos husgahan kung talagang may katotohanan ang mga paratang. hayaan si joc joc na umuwi na, susuriin ng independent expert ang hello garci tapes, etc.. at saka ang mga kapatid natin na nadyan si america…eh iba talaga ang hirap sa pinas, kahit anong sipag mo ay wala ka rin mahanap na trabaho kung meron man kulang pa sa mga basic na gastusin sa pangangailangan sa buhay. ang problema ng mga taga america ay masyadong “maraming bills”? bills sa kotse,credit cards at ibang mga bagay na dito sa pilipinas ay “luxury”, na maaring mabuhay ka na kahit wala ka. dito talagang pinakabasic. pagkain kahit 1 beses man lang sa isang araw/linggo. lahat naman tayo na pilipino ay masisipag, wala nga lang trabaho dito sa pilipinas.
additonal comment sa mga smart na kababayan natin..let us avoid those high faluthin words and sentences that politicians and lawyers love to use to confuse the common tao. ika nga nabasa ko sa libro mg americano na si tim russert, ang payo sa kanya ng dating senator patrick moynihan dapat ang ginagamit natin ay yung mga salita na naiintindihan ng mga karaniwang taong bayan (translated lang to ha…indi marunong managalog sina tim russert at patrick moynihan!). kung ang tao ay walang tinago sa kapwa nya dapat magsalita ng tuwid at malinaw. indi nagtatago sa mga technicalities at lawyer speak. yun lang. hanggang sa muli.
mlq3, I have to agree with your assessment about cvj being one of the more sober and rationally articulate commentators in this sphere. I think I know exactly where you’re coming from. Its really a pleasure discussing the issues that are gnawing the fabric of our nation without having to rant, rave or ridicule anyone, as though fighting words and mean-spirited epithets, (tried and tested tools of demagoguery) strengthen a weak argument.
Having said that, and with all due respect to you as “The Explainer” of ABS-CBN (a network that is by no means a friend of the President) and the erudite host of this sphere, I find your views (and that of cvj) uncompelling, despite the uarticulated concurrence of anna de brux.
Most students of legal history understand that courts of law and “proper forums” are set up by civilized societies to settle controversies among its members according to norms, rules and procedures (e.g., consitution, statutes, jurisprudence, rules of ethics, etc.)ordained by a duly-empowered authority, the ultimate objective of which is to find the “truth” the best way, we mortals are capable of and thereby render “justice”. Imperfect as it may be, as any human activity or institution is, under the standard of divine truth and justice, which we, mortals, would be presumptious to achieve in this life, this process of truth-seeking is by no means cold or impersonal as chemistry, etc. In fact, the rules of evidence (e.g., relevance, hearsay, competency, etc.) are tests of a declarant’s claim of “truth” according to human experience, including considerations of human frailties such as prejudice, hatred, motivations, flawed perceptions or just plain intellectual dishonesty. Inspite of their limitations, our rules of evidence are second to none when it comes to ascertaining the truth, and unless you can offer a better way, must be adhered to in the interest of an ordered society.
With respect to your complaint about “proper forums”, again these are mostly imperfect, fallible institutions but the reason they are called “proper” is because they are creatures of the law of the land. Whether or not you agree with their judgments or findings, you have to abide by them if you believe in the rule of law. As to your gripe that the respondent’s effort to prevail (a basic right of everyone, don’t you agree?), is “obstruction of justice”, the same law that we are all subject to has the power and mechanism to punish the obstructor unless, again, the accuser has no proof to support his charge of obstruction.
At the end of the day, the alternative to all of the above (which, sadly, you seem to advocate are: mob rule, kanggaro court cum “people’s court, trial by the media, and judgment by popularity in all its ugliest form. As one blogger pointed out, Jesus Christ was condemned to die on the cross by an overwhelming mob (preferring to absolve a common thief) hungrey for His Blood.
bencard, just to focus on your last paragraph: in politics, an action has a reaction. the president, upon being taken to task for recordings that emerged, narrowed her choices to only one: a muted apology followed by an insistence on the impeachment track, which her supporters countered in congress.
the citizenry, which sought to express itself in the streets as they had not only since edsa, but before, and continuously to the first massive manila demonstration in 1933 to prove Filipinos wanted independence, was increasingly denied what it had once enjoyed, closing off another venue which remains shut tight and with additional executive issuances to cork things up. Only a beleagured government calls protesting citizens from whose ranks it once came and were elevated to power, a “mob.”
i supported the citizen’s assembly but did get disappointed by the Stalinist nature of the proceedings. and i supported the 2nd impeachment attempt and i would support a third -the first two helping a possible reconfiguation in the House, if we have normal elections in May, 2007 (which I doubt we will). Last February’s restiveness by the military was already a warning sign of how things could spin out of control with a government adamant about closing off every avenue for inquiry or confrontation within institutional parameters.
and unless someone prefers only a state-controlled media, trial by media is an integral part of modern democracy and needs to be even more aggressive in a parliamentary system where the entire government is subordinate to parliament -even the courts.
And while popularity can be beneficial and be a bane, it is an essential part of democracy; it’s as good a measure as any on the performance and fitness of leaders. What is ugly is when popularity does not result in performance (estrada) or unpopularity fails to have any political consequences (arroyo) because the means to correct things -elections, or even a government that aims to have a contented people- are all in the hands of the state and can neutralize what should normally be the give-and-take.
the christ story is actually a good example. arraigned on trumped-up charges; castigated before the religious courts; submitted to the secular authority, which exercised weak leadership by pandering to the crowd: pilate washed his hands to transfer the guilt over ordering christ’s execution to a dish of water and by extension, the Jewish subjects of his province. And Christ did submit to the bitter end to the civil punishments imposed.
but you must consider precisely why the constitutional and legal options have been relentlessly pursued and why that pursut, thwarted at every turn (above and beyond what is expected and should be permitted to defend one’e self), only serves to further divide people, and strengthen their opposition or support for either side. You mistake the critics and opposition for the ones calling the shots. They never have. It is the Palace that uses ever means allowable -and not- conceivable -and not- in an effort to always escalate matters so that the meek will bow their heads, the nervous duck for cover, and whoever left against them is divided, dispersed, and if need be, liquidated.
the alternate is the rule of law, the public and the critics knows that; butevery move has been for the palace to redefine the law, reinterpret it beyond what’s previously been agreed upon are the parameters for political engagement, and finally, to eliminate laws and procedures and even institutions so they can be reordered and reinvented in a manner that eliminates the chance to even appeal to these things in the future.
on the whole, every defeat in the public arena has been met with a committment to doing better next time -as clear and resounding a dedication to the rule of law as can be demanded of anyone. every victory, however, by the palace has accelerated efforts to prevent those mechanisms ever being used again -and instead, try to put in place a new kind of rule of law, in which only they have and make the laws.
So for now, a Palace victory over its critics -most of them being the ones committed to the rule of law, etc. to a greater extent than the palace -and proving, through their annihalation, that there’s precious little the country will gain by way of justice or peace and quiet. the one guaranteeing mob rule and an uncontrollable upheaval in the future is the government.
mlq3:
A licentious media, unable to police itself, and infested by “envelopmental journalists” whose only qualification is the ability to put sentences together and purvey half-truths, if not downright falsehood, cannot be a good judge of “truth” or dispenser of justice. This kind of media helps produce a “mob” that disregards justice. fair play and the rule of law.
Again, I refer you to my two-cents worth observation on the imperfections of human institutions, which includes the media, the justice system, the government, and the clergy. But why should the Palace be blamed for everything? Is the Supreme Court so inutile as to render their decisions irrelevant when they don’t agree with the opposition’s agenda?
bencard, i’d go as far as even disputing the put sentences together part. i don’t know if the media is supposed to judge “truth” -that’s for everyone to try to do. it covers the news and part of it presents analysis and opinion. the disreputable state of many of its practictioners is a reflection of the disreputable state of many of our professions.
i suppose it depends on your view of the public, the audience media reaches out to, and which others try to influence through the media. when media becomes wittingly or unwittingly a peddler or untruths or promoter of injustice, the news-cycle fatigue and general forgetfulness of the public becomes an advantage -no story lasts for too long and thus, can do too much harm.
on the other hand, there are those who believe as i beleive that the public is more discerning than it’s given credit for, can sift through who is credible or not in media, and merciless when it comes to rewarding and punishing media through readership and ratings. public opinion too knows a thing or two about justice -hence it’s very clear insistence both in the estrada and arroyo crises on constitutional processes being followed, whether anyone, admin or opposition, likes it or not.
i don’t blame the palace for everything, there’s lots of blame to go around, for everyone as i’ve pointed out often enough. but the palace bears a large blame because while most people are reactive and unfocused, and that goes for institutions used to a certain way of doing things and not the scorched-earth policies of the admin, the perpetual raising of the ante can be firmly laid at the palace’s doorstep.
as for the supreme court, it is as the rest of the justice system is of this country: spectacularly captive to whoever is calling the shots at the moment. you have to wonder just how long a supreme court can maintain its integrity with justices as controversial, for example, as presbyterio velasco -though of course once on the bench, we must assume sincerity and competence of our justices. and unlike the executive, the sc lays out its thinking for everyone to read in its decisions.
one danger is clear: the sc does face a historic challenge it last saw in 1973-76, and there is always the potential for it to spectacularly fail in defending the law. and if that happens, well… who will we run to, then?
sa disksuyon ng hinaharap ng bayan at mga kabataan natin ay dapat maging pinipersonal at madamdamin tayo. hindi naman na porke madamdamin at pinipersonal bastos agad. kahit nga sa pambansang awit hihihikayat na kung para sa bayan dapat tayo madamdamin, “alab ng puso”, ng bawat pilipino. ito rin ang dahilan at tayo lumaban sa mga kastila. yung maiinit na palitan ng opinyon ay kung sa ingles “spirited discussion”. dahil sa talaga namang personal eto dapat, responsable ng bawat pilipino na pangangalagaan ang hinaharap ng bayan o bansa. huwag hayaan na maapi na kahit kanino man ang mamamayang pilipino. at salamat sa mga media na hanggang ngayon ay tagapagsalita ng mga naaaping mamamayan at walang takot sinasabi ang katotohan at mga kabalastugan ng gobyerno at mga politiko. bakit tayo takot? tayo mga mamamayan ang bansa, tayo ang gobyerno, ang mga buwis natin ang pinagbabayad sa mga taga gobyerno. pera natin ang ginagasta(ninanakaw) nila. tayo ang dapat pagsilbihan nila, hindi na takot tayo sa kanila. dapat i-demanda natin na sila ang magsakripisyo para sa bayan hindi ang mga mamamayang pilipino lamang! the rule of law have corrupted to bone by the same poeple who are supposed to uphold the same law that we abide by. at last, what choice and venue is there left if any to voice our minds and hearts? kung tayo man ay tunay na pilipino sa isip, salita at sa gawa ay i-demanda natin ang tamang paraan na pagpapalakad ng pamahalaan para maisiguro ang magandang hinaharap ng mga kabtaang pilipino.
and why are we discussing how Jesus Christ was tried and crucified on the cross? this argument doesn’t belong here! if you understood your faith, Christ at the very beginning of His public life already foretold that the Son of God will die in the hands of man. So the argument of who and how Chrsit died is irrelevant, it is only for those who doesn’t fully understood his faith that assigns fault and guilt to those responsible to His death. Christ died so our sins will be forgiven! please let us not use Christ again to justify this kind of argument. Just pray to God that Philipppine will have better future in the end will be very helpful!
“anarchistic morality”
You MORALIZE on all that hate about GMA and come-up with outrageous conspiracy theories why things are so like this little gem from an-do-bo:
“…a bishop was murdered apparently by “robbersâ€Â, the bishop was known to have been a severe critc of the Arroyo regime so it’s no longer easy to believe her.”
You then use this MORALITY to justify your ANARCHISTIC bent to destroy all that is NOW good about the Philippines – with your coup mongering and egging on GMA’s supporters to turn on her.
So we get rid of GMA, but who do we replace her with? Or is it your thesis that since we do NOT need shepherding we can all do as we please – ANARCHY.