Went to the Bastusang Pambansa to see the action but most of it took place not on the floor, where Romulo Neri was sitting in a panel defending the CHED budget as members of congressmen took turns asking pointed questions to beef up the budgets for their districts. It was a very nerve-wracking three hours for all concerned.
Had a chance to prowl the galleries and the floor and get scuttlebutt from members of the House.
One account of this morning’s meeting at the Palace was that the main bone of contention was the upcoming baranggay elections. Congressmen were very anxious that the polls not be postponed, as it was an opportunity for them to spread goodies around. Demands were supposed to be 50,000 per kagawad or a total of 5 million for each congressman to dole out. The President had given assurances but had even been pursued with calls while she was in China, to assure that the written assurances that the polls would push through, were genuine. The badgering continued this morning, with congressmen supposedly in a foul mood and threatening mischief if the President didn’t do the doling out right there and then.
Another account was simpler, which was a Palace guarantee of 45 35 million per congressman, 25 million in “soft” pork and 10 milion in “hard” pork, whatever that means in congressional terms. In exchange, the congressmen pledged cooperation with the President in terms of pursuing her agenda.
But the figures discussed are impossible to verify (and every congressman could have been lying). The main topic of interest was, what was the Speaker going to do, and what were his options? Opinions among members of the House varied. They ranged from the Speaker had the numbers, to the President had the numbers, to the problem that Friday, it turns out, is a holiday which is why the President wanted matters settled by tonight.
The problem was that the Speaker was not inclined to refer the impeachment complaint prior to the recess. The question then was whether this would precipitate a showdown in the House, and who, exactly, had the numbers; also, there was the very real problem that if the complaint wasn’t referred prior to the break, the October 25 Senate hearing would take place, and if anything ended up revealed in that hearing, the revelations could lead to the complaint being amended and possibly fortified.
The Speaker’s options, as discussed by various sources, ranged from his having pulled a fast one last night by checking himself into the hospital for whatever reason (gastritis, LBM, etc.) and told the House to go on recess early, to his suddenly fainting in his office this afternoon and being rushed from the House in an ambulance, thus causing pandemonium, to the Mace either disappearing or being grabbed by his loyalists, thereby disrupting the session, to someone questioning the quorum, suddenly ending the session. But then the entire budget would have been imperiled.
Or the Speaker could publicly state he would not refer the complaint until the maximum period allowed, November 11.
Or the Speaker could decide that he faced an ethical dilemma, and announce he was inhibiting himself from the whole matter. This was the solution, apparently, put forward by the Palace as a face-saving gesture but involved its own risks. The Speaker’s lawyer, Raul Lambino of Sigaw ng Bayan fame, gave the Speaker similar advice, couched in terms of his right not to participate in forwarding a document obviously aimed more at the Speaker and his son than the President. The Speaker, by taking himself out of the game, would then pass the ball to Deputy Speaker Raul del Mar.
Del Mar could then easily say that it being his call, he would hold the ball until after the recess. Or, del Mar could then send the complaint immediately to the Committee on Rules, which could then sit on it; or the Committee on Rules could instantly send it to the Committee on Justice…
For an hour, from around 3:30 to 4:30 talk centered on whether the Speaker would take himself out of the game or force a showdown. Then at around that time came word there would be a press conference at the Speaker’s office. Up to that time there were still members of the House proposing that the Speaker should pass the ball to del Mar but that del Mar shouldn’t do the Palace any favors.
Like war, members of the press spend a lot of time just waiting then suddenly heaving into action. By 5 pm the media was huddled outside the door of the Speaker’s office as various congressmen trickled out and basically refused to say anything. Finally the doors opened. Mad stampede as everyone rushed in.
The Speaker looked remarkably calm and relaxed. Arrayed around him were various House members and the Speaker’s people, including Atty. Lambino.
At one point, the Speaker got up and disappeared; call of nature, I asked a reporter? Probably a phone call from the Palace, someone else said.
The Speaker reemerged, the press conference formally began. It played out pretty much as everyone had expected:
De Venecia inhibits self from Arroyo impeach rap; Arroyo impeach case referred to panel; JDV inhibits himself; JDV inhibits self from impeach rap.
I asked a couple of questions, because the Speaker said he was withdrawing from participating in the process, even though he had misgivings because of bribery allegations, etc., etc., but he urged del Mar to attend to his ministerial duty. Del Mar smoothly said he would transmit the complaint to the Committee on Rules. Art Defensor chimed in and said as chairman he was going to calendar the referral before the plenary that very night, for referral, in turn, to the Committee on Justice.
The sending of the paper from Deputy Speaker to Rules Chairman to Justice Committee of course constituting the start of the one-year countdown of the ban on further impeachment complaints.
So my questions focused on asking del Mar why he was rushing to refer the complaint, his answer was, it’s ministerial, and then I asked Defensor if he, as Chairman, could act on behalf of a committee he only chaired but which had more than himself as members; Defensor was offended and said the whole procedure is normally concluded as he said it would be, that he was confident in speaking for the committee, etc.
Questions from the reporters present concentrated on this rush to start the Constitutional countdown while others focused on relations between the Speaker and the President.
But I had to keep asking myself, why is the Speaker, who, depending on whom you asked earlier that afternoon, had been browbeaten by the President, or threatened with being deposed, or otherwise facing a momentous event in his political life, so relaxed, so calm -and what did he have to gain from surrendering to the Palace?
Fine, he actually did the ethical thing, but I have to wonder if his inhibiting himself was the best legal advice. Fine, he gets to keep the Speakership, if the President did have the numbers. He may even think he did the country a favor by heading off the possibility of an impeachment, and the President maybe, owes him another favor.
But what does he have to gain, politically, from caving in like this?
He has to have something up his sleeve, I kept telling myself as I left the press conference.
But I have to figure out what that could be.
Update 7:58 pm and 9:08 pm Got a report that on radio it was pointed out that there’s a problem with what the Speaker did. The Constitution, according to some lawyers (and Rep. Rufus Rodriguez is apparently already raising hell about it on the floor of the House as I write this), does not give the Speaker any discretion.
The Speaker, and only the Speaker, must do the referral. He cannot delegate it, he cannot inhibit himself, it can only be the Speaker and no one else. So goes the argument.
I asked some lawyers and they concur: when the Constitution is clear and specific, and cites no exceptions, then it must be done in the manner and by whom the Constitution says. One lawyer gave a Solomonic answer: is the Speaker the only person who can refer the complaint, and if the Speaker didn’t, is there a justiciable case?
Here are their various answers:
Yes, based on the constitution [article XI. section 3.[2] and the rules of the house on impeachment [section 3. Rule 3.]. But note section 14 [h.] of the Rules of the House. authorizing the speaker to designate a member as tempo presiding officer. after informing the deputy speakers in case he/she temporarily unable to do so.
Yes the supreme court can resolve it. Note Francisco vs. House of Rep case in 2003, supreme court ruled that the power of judicial review includes power of review over justiciable issues in impeachment proceedings.
Yes. Its really a subject of justiciable review, based on Francisco decision. In this case any person may initiate it as a taxpayer suit or have a congressman question it in SC…
I think it is a jusiticable controversy but i doubt referral can be described as defective [cuz] SC will look at the House Rules in addition to the constitution. SC will try to harmonize house rules and charter and i think if they do so, they will rule this referral valid.
Because the constitution does not envision situations where speaker is unable to perform and so SC will take a look at house rules and see if speaker did the right thing. if under house rules, speaker did the right procedure, then SC will rule referral valid.Nature abhors a vacuum, the house rules filled up that vacuum.
Better question is: Can a constitutional duty be delegated? Its like the prez asking somebody to deliver SONA.
But you know justice committee can also order amendment of complaint but that’s a stretch.
So those are the contending views. But if it’s true that a legal wrinkle exists….
It’s a possibility too delicious for words.
JDV: “But Madam President, I did what you told me…”
del Mar: “But Madam, I did what you and the Speaker told me…”
Defensor: “But Madam, I did what you and the Speaker and del Mar told me….”
Everyone’s ass is covered except the one who was supposed to benefit from the inoculation!
More from Uniffors and from Ellen Tordesillas.
Technorati Tags: constitution, House of Representatives, impeachment, philippines, politics, president
Do the people really still care about all this? Is there even national indignation? (Parang wala yata?) Ba’t parang mas nagalit pa ang pinoy kay Malu Fernandez at sa Desperate Housewives?
———————————————-
wala, tameme na lang o dedma sa pinas.
Overseas pinoys ang nag-umpisa kay malou at Desperate Housewives. yun ang pagkakaiba.
ramrod :
Dirk Pitt,
There is national enlightenment already, the voting public sees (and hears) all these “drama†on TV, from the radio, from the local barbero, taxi drivers, tricycle drivers, public markets, office cafeteria, resorts, the internet, and mlq3’s blog. Even the results of the recent senatorial elections show the Filipino electorate is capable of making intelligent decisions.
—————————————————-
tama, naiboto ang karamihan sa oposisyon – pero ang tanong, ano na ngayon si cayetano? si villar?
inodoro ni emilie :
mlq3,
question: this practice of doling out pork lard to tongressmen when they exit the pigsty by the pasig river, do they sign receipt of it? [my next question shall proceed after your reply].
————————————————–
sa tingin ko, ginaya ito ni gloria kay marcos.
“tama, naiboto ang karamihan sa oposisyon – pero ang tanong, ano na ngayon si cayetano? si villar?”
Its just been a few months, lets wait and see, trust the Filipino…It we made mistakes, then so be it, we try again, and again, and again. But please do not insult the Filipino, wherever we are, even if we adopted other nationalities, Filipino blood still runs through our veins…
This apparent obsession with politics I believe is an integral part of Philippine society which is probably one of the main reasons why the country hasn’t decayed in the way Burma has. ramrod
I agree. A political system stabilized by responsible politics, one where both the governors and the governed abide by the commonly accepted norms for the exercise of power and for reaching electoral or policy decisions, is essential for “nation building, the economy, the environment, peace and order, real education, social services, health, better infrastructure and transportation, etc.†and in general for sustaining the quality of the lives of the people or their very existence.
On the other hand, truth indeed is not mere “unsubstantiated gossips (that) are disseminated and readily bought by a gullible publicâ€Â; it is, as Justice Holmes said, something you can’t help believing, much like the still unrefuted GMA voice on the Garci tapes and the bribery of certain members of Congress as denounced in the House floor by those stricken by their sense of public duty. Truth or fact, such as the intersection of plutocracy and dirty politics in the Philippines, is also “a coercive experience†that need not be proven in a court of law.
The way I see it, some people will opt for legal means and rightly so. But what if the “powers that be” are the ones perpetuating wholesale plunder, murder, and deception? Hiding behind the law they rationalize everything they do as constitutional. This brings to mind one of the greatest minds of all time, inspiring even greater minds like Mohandas Gandhi, Leo Tolstoy, and Martin Luther King Jr. (Civil Disobedience)
HENRY DAVID THOREAU
“I went to the woods because I wished to live deliberately, to front only the essential facts of life, and see if I could not learn what it had to teach, and not, when I came to die, to discover that I had not lived. I did not wish to live what was not life, living is so dear; nor did I wish to practice resignation, unless it was quite necessary. I wanted to live deep and suck out all the marrow of life, to live so sturdily and Spartan-like as to put to rout all that was not life, to cut a broad swath and shave close, to drive life into a corner, and reduce it to its lowest terms, and, if it proved to be mean, why then to get the whole and genuine meanness of it, and publish its meanness to the world; or if it were sublime, to know it by experience, and to be able to give a true account of it.”
Ramrod (at 9:12am), very well said. In that comment, you’ve stated very well why the ‘Singapore model’ (i.e. an elite vanguard model) cannot be for us and why all the noise that others complain about is really not just noise. For now, resistance may be futile, but it is nevertheless necessary. If only we can take it to the next level and not treat 2010 as some sort of line in the sand. By then, the current powers would have had three years to prepare.
DinaPinoy,
I hope your name is just that, a name, not a statement. I didn’t even vote for Cayetano and Villar, even Escudero and most of the opposition senators actually, I voted for the other guy Mike Defensor, unfortunately he lost. Millions of people made their decisions, I don’t think a country with 97% literacy rate (it can be more) are that stupid or gullible. Of course no one can stop you from saying so, enjoy your freedom to do so, thats the beauty of living in the Philippines…
Just like most Filipinos ,I am quite jaded about all the the corrupt antics of the Palace gang.She knows everybody has a “price”!
My only consolation is that in the “long continuum of time”,
Gloria,Mike,Ronnie Puno,Ermita,Mr.Esperon and the rest of the “CYBERed” gang will just be a sad episode in the history of our country.
I pity their descendants.Karma.
“Hard” pork – for infrastructure projects
“Soft” pork – for dole-outs (scholarships, medical assistance etc.)
“Hard” and “soft,” like porn.
cvj,
I am learning by the minute here, this blog may have educated me about the Philippines more than any textbooks, history, and political science teachers. Earlier my views on politics have been very vague indeed one that was tainted with “messianic complex biases of my youth” and “bottomline determinism” of my career. I learned that it is best to open my mind more, and see each and everyone’s point of view first before coming up with my own, an eclectic approach if you may. But you’re right, three years is enough to build strong fortifications and entrench oneselves.
For me, I’m consciously looking for potential leaders who have the following agenda:
1. “Eliminating the rule of the Oligarch” and implementing a genuine land reform.
2. Adopt a “managerial” yet nationalistic leadership style.
3. Industrial Reforms, to finally lead the country to graduate to producing real finished products (technology) rather than remain as an assembly area of specific components.
Of course I borrowed much of these from other bloggers (you included). From here I hope to come up with a list of names…
“My only consolation is that in the “long continuum of timeâ€Â,
Gloria,Mike,Ronnie Puno,Ermita,Mr.Esperon and the rest of the “CYBERed†gang will just be a sad episode in the history of our country.” – Mav
My sentiments exactly, life will go on, it won’t stop with them. If we’re lucky we can see how history will judge these people.
They can’t take it with them!
“what about nation building, the economy, the environment, peace and order, real education, social services, health, better infrastructure and transportation, etc.?”
We are all at different levels of functional illiteracy and that is why debating with people who obviously are on a different wave length is a waste of time. The economy is the basis for everything else. Nation building and the rest of the items mentioned above all arise out of the economy.
The issue being fought over between JDV Jr. and GMA is a fight over Congressional pork and Executive pork. Booty capitalism is the new term. The left call it bureaucratic capitalism. Others simply call it crony capitalism.
In past governments the BIR and BOC were the milking cows. The reason behind the imposition of fiat currency or legal tender was to give states a medium by which to fund the administration of a state through (Taxes)
Regalian doctrine in the past wherein the King owned all the lands in the state or principality and the harvest belonged to him and it was he who divided it. He in turn guaranteed the peace and stability of the place.
Hence Big Mike and GMA like Ferdinand and Imelda before them believe that it is they who decide on the division of the spoils of power.
The legislature gets theirs from the budget while the executive get theirs from executive fiat to direct line agencies and GOCC’s in their own off budget transactions.
Example – the BSP only has been capitalized at Php 10B. However it has in its reserves over $30B. Where did these assets come from? Simple- From the full faith and credit of the Republic…Future taxes…………..It created money in exchange.
A country can continuously kite its debt into the future.
The country with the largest public debt on its records as of today is Japan in relation to its economy is Japan.. The Philippines stands as one of the top five to ten countries in the same boat.
That is the magic of the technology of a monetary system.
Creating assets out of nothing.
inodoro, i don’t know, personally and no legislator has ever told me how they actually get their monies. i understand there is a lot that isgiven and received with no requirement for liquidation and that the habit is perfectly legal in such cases, for such funds.
my hunch is, receipts would only be demanded as evidence for future extortion, after the quintero expose during the 1971 concon.
Bencard is right we must focus on development, economy, education, social welfare, healthcare, infrastructure, transportation.
But if Bencard’s vision from afar is applied to our real-life experience here we start with recognizing that Gloria is the biggest obstacle for us to move on and develop in a way that is good for Filipinos, not just for a few, not just for foreigners but for every one specially the poor, which is the OPPOSITE of what Gloria is doing.
That is why, much as we would really prefer to spend more time on other more enjoyable things, we are pre-occupied and so anxious about what you might call politics. In fact, the damages to our instituions which mlq3 had cited, the issues of patrimony and sovereignty make our concern about GMA not just about politics any more. We, who are here, feel deep in out guts that if we allow GMA to do as she will, unchecked, we would soon be down to the bottom line — our survival as a nation and the simple survival of millions of Filipinos. You know how many Filipinos work overseas just so their families can have something to eat?
“The country with the largest public debt on its records as of today is Japan in relation to its economy is Japan.. The Philippines stands as one of the top five to ten countries in the same boat.” – hrvds
I have to agree with you here. We are probably bigger fools if we tolerate leaders who perpetually put our finances in the “red.” If we dread the impact of financial mismanagement in our companies and its ultimate end – bankruptcy and closure, what more with our country and the future of our children?
ang lakas mag reklamo ng oposisyon tungkol sa umanong “depektibong” impeachment complaint, eh amp pala sila eh. taon-taon expected na tong mangyari pero hanggang ngayon eh pinapabayaan pa rin nilang maunahan sila ng administrasyon. sino kaya ang tanga? oposisyon ba? o ang tao na naniniwala pa rin ngayon na may oposisyon? maybe everyone in government is in this charade. at tayo ang niloloko.
di ko kasi lubos maisip na ganito kabobo ang oposisyon. na palagi na lang naiisahan ng Malacanang. kaya ang tanging iba pang rason ay: di sila bobo. nagbobobo-bobohan lang.
3 beses ba naman maulit ang filing na ito, why have no one bothered to file a stronger impeachment complaint then? sabi nga: fool me once, shame on you… (eh ilang beses na ba sila nagpauto?)
so, can we still trust anyone?
mlq3,
Many may have sunk so low as to even hope that old trapos will save us from a super trapo.
hrvds,
I our business, GDP per capita __Usd is always considered as it is proportional to that particular country’s estimated consumption of our product/s. If you take the Philippine GDP per capita 2007 (Wikepedia) of 5,682.17Usd as this is supposed to be taken from the GDP divided by the population, is it safe to say that theoretically, each person has 5,682.12Usd/year to spend if spread out evenly among the population? Or 21,307.95Php per month? Correct me if I’m wrong I’m just a glorified salesman.
pete, the president is not a trapo. the speaker is. and i’ll remind you of a long-ago case where the most trapo of them all, senate president amang rodriguez, managed to delay ferdinand marcos’s getting to be the senate president, and marcos was not a trapo. he was a dictator in the making.
the president has gone beyond traditional politics, there is nothing traditional in how she wields power, this is why you will hear her opponents who are traditional politicians perpetually shocked and frustrated: a traditional mind simply cannot comprehend people who break every written and unwritten rule, because traditionalists find comfort in tradition. certain things are allowed, certain things are not.
devils,
“so, can we still trust anyone?”
i don’t trust politicians to do the work for me. but that doesn’t mean we have lost the fight. the choice remains relevant: truth or consequence.
pete, a quote for you
“Man, you know politics are bad when you would prefer a known mobster in power rather than the current group because it would decrease the body count and increase respectability.”
and it’s a sign of the times when we’re asking JDV to save us. pathetic.
“we need a national enlightenment as badly as we did at the time of jose rizal. meanwhile, we just have to muddle through and feel our way in the darkness until then.”
Obviously, we do that, muddle through. It’s unfair to say Filipinos are preoccupied with politics. Most aren’t. The media makes a lot of noise about it, but it only sounds like noise because there are a lot of misinformed and uninformed people. The politicians think it’s noise because it produces a an interference to their tunnel-like frame of thought.
I read at least a couple hundred pages of words a day. These words do not sound like noise, because I understand them. Information is constant; some people think constantly. We have too many politicians and too many people who believe that politics is everything, but we are lacking in political participants. We cannot block politics from daily life, and we shouldn’t. What you are so jaded about, Bencard is not the noise of politics but the lack of follow through in real life. That is, what irritates you is the lack of continuity from the media to what is really happening in the streets.
INE, my questions remain.
who can file impeachment complaints? and why does it seem only characters of doubtful affiliations seem to be filing them? so many want to impeach Gloria, yet why isn’t anyone doing the hard work of actually impeaching her? you think by now we would’ve seen a substantive impeachment complaint agst her considering the amt of time they’ve had to pile up all those evidences agst her. yet time and again, we witness lawyers like Lozano and Pulido being allowed by the opposition to subvert the system. siguro yung mga nababayaran lang ang ginaganahan mag file ng impeachment. nakakatamad naman nga kung pro bono trabaho.
The actions of our current political leadership set-up will allow us (people who vote and pay taxes) to see who these people really are. The way the senators and congressmen weave in and out of this drama, we can actually see through all the “campaign hype” that they do during elections and see their “real” motives or their degree of “commitment” and even “competence.” The people can judge for themselves already…
Devils, i don’t think we really can trust our representatives in the sense that they will do right if we leave them alone. Within the Representative framework, this calls for more public pressure (via public opinion & media). A healthy public sphere is what we lost when Civil Society joined government after EDSA Dos. Those left outside government largely turned to local/community concerns (GK etc.). The more radical solution would be to implement Direct Democracy (e.g. your government by wikipedia approach) to eventually do away with these representatives but that won’t come so soon.
cvj, the problem is that we expend too much energy trying to compel these so-called “representatives” to actually “represent” us (instead of themselves) instead of just punishing them directly by not putting them back ever again. you can’t expect the people to show massive protests everytime. fact is, may sarili ring buhay na pino-problema ang bawat isa, and it’s tiring enough to be required to always watch over our “representatives” in govt. democracy is participative governing nga. pero how much power is really given to citizens in our system? there should be a vote of no confidence choice in our ballots. we don’t like any of the candidates, we choose a vote of no confidence. no one wins.
also, there is the problem of logistics. if it were up to me, plebiscites would be done anytime the citizens wanted to. all officials could be removed by just voting. no more of that impeachment crap. let the voters decide. after all, they were the ones who voted that person into office anyway. so let them un-vote him.
mlq3,
:”I believe the President has done great harm to all our institutions. I am personally convinced she will find every means to stay in power; her minimum political objective would be to find a successor who will protect her, but who can she trust?”
:”the president has gone beyond traditional politics, there is nothing traditional in how she wields power, this is why you will hear her opponents who are traditional politicians perpetually shocked and frustrated”
So, even traditional politics itself, as an institution, is not spared from the wrath of GMA-the-destroyer-of-institutions.
You know what, I had thought of asking you when you mentioned that the president had done great harm to all our institutions, what of all our institutions is the most important of all that she had done the greatest harm to?
devils, what you have at work is the law of unintended consequences. impeachment is the instrument of last resort, constitutionally, to oust an elected leader or high constitutional officer. the only other option is people power or armed revolt.
in the past, it was supposed to be such an extreme option that it would take a really despised leader to fuflill the requirements necessary to impeach that leader. usually, at least 2/3 of the house to formally file charges and then a similar proportion in the senate to convict.
the framers of the 1987 constitution decided to make it very much easier to do, instead of an overwhelming majority, a strong minority is required. when the supreme court found its chief facing impeachment, it specified an interpretation that opened up the mischief we’ve been seeing these past years.
but the way impeachment’s being used, by its potential targets, i think was never conceived as even thinkable by the framers of the constitution.
personally, i’m all for plebiscatory democracy and always have.
my wish list for 2010: that ordinary citizens contest every elective position in government by running agst TRAPOS themselves or supporting non-TRAPOS.
my challenge to Ang Kapatiran is to fill up your slate so that there will be no uncontested seat in local or natl govt.
my challenge to all is not to vote for anyone who has ever held office in the past. they’ve all shown their incapacity. don’t put them back agn. the new vogue in town should be: let’s give others the chance to screw us instead of the same old faces screwing us time and again.
wag nating maliitin ang kakayahin nating maka tsamba ng isang huwarang opisyal. kahit isa lang, malaki na ang ganansya nito.
DevilsAdvc8,
Systematic assasination would be more cost efficient and result oriented. Unfortunately we can’t take that route, we can only continue to be vigilant, and in our own ways effect small changes hoping that an accumulation thereof will snowball into bigger ones.
Manolo, what specific interpretation did the SC cited? and again, unintended consequences.
“but the way impeachment’s being used, by its potential targets, i think was never conceived as even thinkable by the framers of the constitution.”
i think they did. why else insert a provision for a one-year ban?
ramrod, how does that systemic assassination work?
Devils, i think people power can be likened to one of Newton’s equations i.e. force = mass x acceleration (in a given direction). either you have few people expending a great amount of effort or many people expending a little effort each. During EDSA and EDSA Dos, i did not feel tired at all because there were many people doing the same thing. The problem now is that most chose to just grin and bear the situation while those who choose to protest, like the Black and White Movement, are ridiculed by otherwise decent folks. This mindset has to change and from this, we can learn from the French. If more people react, then the effort required per person will be less or at least, it would be less frustrating.
(Regarding your ‘vote of no confidence’, there’s a related proposal by blogger ‘DemosthenesGame’ i.e. ‘Net Approval Voting’ who is on the other side of the political fence. Maybe you can check his blog out. )
Aside from having too little ‘mass’, there is also the problem of basic conflict between EDSA Dos and EDSA Tres which prevents us from taking a common direction. Since Erap and most especially EDSA Tres, the upper and middle classes have made a compromise that accommodates Gloria to prevent the reemergence of populist passions that would threaten their way of life. So even if Gloria clearly cheated in 2004, many otherwise decent folks didn’t mind. That’s why i believe there should be a genuine dialogue between the sectors represented by EDSA Dos and EDSA Tres, but at this point, all i see are resentments thrown past each other.
devils, ramrod,
Much a as I would love to indulge myself in wishful thinking I would rather that we refrain from this line of talk as some ears could magnify the exchange out of proportion, mlq3’s blog is not out of their frame of target.
“ramrod, how does that systemic assassination work?”
Totally wiping out the “trapos” starting with the most influential ones, then work down to those with lesser impact politically. This way, they can be removed from the equation permanently, direct influence and indirect altogether. But that was just just foolish talk, don’t take it seriously. You scare me sometimes, and I’m in the firing range every weekend.:)
pete,
I’m sorry, as I said it was foolish talk. Never again…
Devils, on the problem of logistics, that’s where a National ID system with internet voting can help so plebiscites can be conducted more frequently on more issues.
Regarding Ang Kapatiran, i also lean towards them, but what makes us think that they won’t turn out like Gloria, who was after all, brought to power by Civil Society on promise of moral reforms? These people like Joker Arroyo and Raul Gonzalez were once heroes. Look at them now.
That’s also why i don’t think assasination would help because the raw material for people like them is the Filipino people themselves and the factory that produces them is our entire society. Once they are convicted, we need to turn over Mike and Gloria Arroyo to medical science to understand and dissect their underlying pathology.
devils, red’s herring, who is a lawyer, explains what i mean:
http://redsherring.blogspot.com/2007/10/francisco-father-of-lozano-and-pulido.html
“That’s why i believe there should be a genuine dialogue between the sectors represented by EDSA Dos and EDSA Tres, but at this point, all i see are resentments thrown past each other.”- cvj
I agree. I admit a part of me is still conflicted regarding these two events. Before reading all the comments here I really believed EDSA 2 was justifiable and EDSA 3 was an untrollable mob of misled people. Now I believe we can learn some lessons even from the latter.
“the only other option is people power or armed revolt.”
not quite the “only other option” manolo.
whatever happened to the filino’s sense of delikadeza? when will we ever get a leader who will have the greater sense of decency to step down because s/he has caused too much division? that i my book would be an act of heroism. but even more heroic would be seeing him/her take his own life. that to me is matyrdom. [in the event, i promise to bombard the vatican daily petitions to declare her a saint. hmm, santa gloria nang makabalaghang balota?]
tnx for the link Manolo. that was great explanation by Abe.
ramrod, don’t be so scared. my extreme views are just the manifestation of repressed emotions by the silent majority.
cvj, his name alone means a lot to me already. perhaps i should change my nick to Locke and engage debates with Demosthenes? that should complete the Ender’s Game he’s trying to practice.
and being on the other side of the political fence, you may have noticed i’m not exactly innocent of staying on one side permanently. i have my bouts of schizophrenia as well.
Devils, yes a debate with Demosthenesgame would be good unfortunately his site does not allow comments. I had to google Ender’s Game. Sounds like a more intelligent version of Starship Troopers.
indoro, the problem with delicadeza is that it’s an informal code, it’s like being sad that chivalry is dead. it’s the same observation some historians have made about the rise of agrarian revolt in central luzon, etc. in the old days, the relationship between landlords and peasants was built on mutual obligations, which in its ideal sense, is what feudalism is supposed to uphold. agrarian unrest in luzon, for example, began to erupt when landlords abandoned those feelings of obligation while the peasants insisted on them; part of it was a change in thinking of course (you see the same dynamics in companies that used to be run in a paternal manner then the shock and confrontations that ensue when the old paternalist generation suddenly passes from the scene, and either labor or management suddenly engage in wanting to modernize things).
delicadeza is a cultural norm; but it is norm that belongs to a culture that’s long gone, if it ever existed. and being an unwritten code, its enforcement depends on everyone concerned adhering to it.
the replacement for delicadeza is the anti corrupt practices act, etc. and in the debates in this blog on how to apply the law on plunder for example, we’ve also seen the clash of traditional attitudes and modern aspirations.
i came to understand this clash and the problem you’ve pointed out by reading this editorial a long time ago:
http://philippinesfreepress.wordpress.com/2006/03/11/politics-means-and-end-august-29-1953/
i’m reading his blog right now. yay! brownie points for me for knowing the source of his nick.
*offers my hand to play the game*
Codes are all about distinctions that Society makes. Gloria Arroyo’s era is largely about breaking or subverting codes within each of society’s subsystems. In healthier societies, ‘ethics’ (i.e. the informal code) within each subsystem is supposed to prevent this from happening. The failure of ethics to perform this function means that the door is open for Morality (which is a code independent and even alien to each subsystem as a virus is alien to a cell) to come back with a vengeance.
cvj, commenting on his blog is not needed. in fact, it’s imperative that no connection at all should be drawn between you two. The Locke and Demosthenes exchange is actually just a subplot in the book. but it foresaw a time wherein online exchanges form citizen’s opinion, and where bloggers are part of politics’ movers and shakers.
Demosthenes was the Wiggin sibling’s strawman online character, while Locke was made out as the wiser of the two. you can characterize Locke’s writing as liberal and Demosthenes’ as conservative. part of what makes this collusion works is that Valentine (who’s a liberal) writes Demosthenes’ columns while Peter (a neo con at heart) writes Locke’s.
on the difficulty to resolve bolante’s coorrrruppppptiooooonnnn charges:
“Collecting the evidence is not as simple as what they think. In this case, 13 regions are involved,” Gutierrez explained.” -pdi, 12 oct
why, is this an all-or-nothing regional evidence gathering case? para din palang si lord voldermort itong si bolante, who planted his horcruxes in 13 different places.
not simple, or no will?