Listen to “One Day More.”
Itaguyod ang Katotohanan.
It is time to be COUNTED!
Join us at the Friday Inter-Faith Prayer Rally
Ayala cor. Paseo de Roxas — 4:00 to 8:00 PM
Where former President Cory Aquino and Jun Lozada will join us as we make the call for Truth and Accountability.
Black and White Movement, together with Hyatt 10/La Salle 60, MBC, MAP, Manindigan,
and other professional and church groups will assemble at the
AIM (Paseo de Roxas) Parking lot at 3:00 PM.
Please join us.
Sa Totoo Tayo. Now Na!
Today there will be people from all walks of life and different generations and varying political and non-political persuasions, coming together to make a stand.
It’s unfortunate that the focus on Makati will obscure the efforts being made elsewhere in the country. Whether a rally in Cebu City, or elsewhere, the only divide I see is between urban and rural Filipinos: though the majority, for some time now, of Filipinos are urban dwellers. I strongly believe the sentiments among urban Filipinos are converging while rural opinion won’t be far behind.
Returning to today’s rally, the authorities are pulling out all the stops: PNP renews warning about communists, terrorists at rally. They’re spooked.Yesterday, something remarkable happened at PUP, see: PUP bomb threat fails to stop Lozada. And something else happened, see: Dirty Tricks in Uniffors.
But two bloggers say it best.
Market Manila declares he will be there:
Because we live in a democracy by choice. Because not speaking up when you know something is wrong makes you an accomplice to the wrong. Because I think everyone must be held accountable for their actions, particularly where their actions impact the welfare of millions. Because of the increasingly brazen disregard for the laws and even basic ethics that should apply to educated individuals. Because in many ways, I am embarrassed to be in the same gene pool as those who are perpetrating and then possibly getting away with such outrageous actions. Because of dozens of other reasons I will keep to myself as I know you get the point.
A reply he gives to a commenter is zeroes in on the issues even more:
mapster, I agree that we have to do everything we can everyday. I pay my taxes and a LOT of them. I have never ever slipped a policeman lunch money. I have voted with a conscience and watched at the polls. I have volunteered services for politicians or candidates which I thought rose above the rest, and I have never accepted any gifts, compensation or positions for the effort. So yes, I think we have to do our daily bit. But I also used to believe that we had a high corruption rate because we were poor… and that somehow the petty corruption of the streets and licenses, etc. were a function of poverty. But that is simply not true. The folks who are implicated in multi-billion scandals are well to do, and as someone above says, how much money do they need to live a decent and comfortable life? And the Hello garci scandal was offensive precisely because it suggests that the elections themselves are rigged, hence the votes of the people are ignored. At the very least, we have to indicate a great deal of displeasure and let everyone know they can’t get away with these kinds of behaviors.
As for being in the company of crooks and wannabees as some intimate above, I think in all democracies people from all walks of life will band together for similar causes, though they all may not look, sound, or be the same. While some of the folks who will be there at the rally this afternoon are opportunists and perhaps not folks I would normally look up to, many others could or should be every day folks who simply want to say, TAMA NA! And while I am not the biggest of Cory fans, I think she IS someone to look up to and her presence is only one of the minor reasons I would show up this afternoon.
I agree with other sentiments about changing the system et al. But I would agree more that we need to change the people on a massive scale with folks that really want to do the BEST for their country, a noble and difficult scenario, I concur.
As for others, you are definitely entitled to your opinion and free to choose what you will, can or want to do. With Marcos it took 20 years to reach the “boiling point.” In subsequent administrations the flare ups occurred with less time required. But at some point, when we all are personally so incensed or affected directly, you too will feel the need to do something.
If you re-read the post above, I would like to point out that I only said that I WOULD BE GOING. Not that I thought all of you should as well, that is obviously your choice.
Touched By An Angel says,
Though not a popular choice by our Catholic Bishops, I believe, GMA has to go. Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo has to go.
I truly believe that The President and her people have engaged in so much lying that they can no longer recognize the truth even if it stared them in the face. (PDI) As to the next step to take, I will take one step, one day at a time. I do not have the answers yet but in time, I will discern it. Our Filipinos will discern it. I will be there at the The Interfaith rally…
Among young people, there will be those, like on a red day who will be there, as will Tristan’s Mental Assylum ristan’s Mental Assylum and Jamel Ignes who is attending a rally for the first time! (for the religious, see melo touch). Other young people share their views, and efforts at discernment: a slice of wine.. and a shot of cake.. points out the dividing line and respects those who have decided to speak up against the President. There are others who are still uncertain, yet watchful, like Prudence and Mandess, and such as student Timmyland or who remain ambivalent, who will not go but who will be keeping those gathered in their thoughts, see OFW jihAn.zillA. Sh, and Yeweifang’s blog .
Among more senior bloggers, Red’s Herring puts everything in perspective:
If the events that have led to People Power I (EDSA Revolution of 1986 or EDSA I) are any guide, revolutionary uprisings go through certain levels (of consciousness): First, the underlying belief by a sizeable segment of society that the rulers and certain institutional arrangements have lost legitimacy; second, certain intense participants or change agents have gotten around their sense of powerlessness and come to realize they have the power or capacity to effect the needed changes; third, the disaffected members of society have more or less formed a consensus as to the nature and or scope of the changes they desire to occur in lieu of the illegitimated rulers or arrangements, whether be it about a total systemic overhaul, a “regime change,” an extra-constitutional overthrowing of a corrupt or immoral government, etc.
My sense is that People Power III has already reached the first and second levels of consciousness described above. However, before the Great Beast “could take care of itself” today it has yet to hurdle the third level of consciousness.
For one, I have noted even the reformists in the military and the progressives in the civil society are still tentative about the scope and the nature of the changes to be sought (note should also be taken for instance that the mere suggestion during the Manila Peninsula “uprising” that a military junta was being contemplated has not sit well with potential supporters), while other veteran people power practitioners are apprehensive the next exercise “could again end up repeating a vicious cycle of simply ‘moving on’ in circle, and not leaping onward or to a higher ground” or a “new qualitative state.”…
…Now, the question once again: Why is People Power III taking its time?
My own take is: There is yet no general consensus among potential people power participants and activists, as has been in EDSA I or EDSA II, as to what change to aspire for and institute.
Arguably, proposals for reforms or transformations, at odds with each other for the most part, still abound. To cite a few: some who believe the two EDSAs were both a failure aim this time to act against a failed system and plan to overhaul it either according to some rigid ideologies or based merely on the “best practices” of ongoing successful experiments; other groups are just angry and frustrated because of “relative deprivation” (middle class weighed upon with a looming downgrade to the next class complain how come only their counterparts in other regions are having all the fun); still others are focused only on struggling for control of the state apparatuses and effecting “regime change” while keeping both the political and economic structure intact; and specifically, accused coup leader and now detained senator Sonny Trillanes is eager to transform the nation “without reinventing the wheel” or whereas Bishop Francisco Claver can only entertain the belief that “our problem comes down to this: how to correct the aberration that is the present administration without destroying the stabilizing structure that is our democratic system of government.”
…As a result, reactionary moves from old and once reliable alliances, the CBCP in particular, are silently taking place in the form of tokenism (a plea to President Arroyo to take lead in the fight against corruption) and diversion (a call for a new brand of People Power through “communal action”).
Mon Casiple on the part of the political pundits, observes,
The nature and circumstances of this political crisis is such that it can only have one resolution: the end of the Arroyo regime within the context of the existing electoral democracy. From there, it may result in the affirmation of this electoral democracy and thus the integrity of the 2010 elections. Or, more remote, it may lead to the ending of the electoral democracy itself. At any rate, these are the days of reckoning.
The people’s consciousness and readiness to action are developing by leaps and bounds. The usual tactics by the GMA administration are not working anymore and proved to be ironically pushing faster the momentum for change. From the JDV triumphal ouster to its present travails, the Arroyo administration has rapidly traversed a half-circle towards a downward spiral.
What’s Casiple referring to? I can only guess, but think of this. Did you notice the article, 52 governors troop to Palace to show support for Arroyo ? A friend encountered one of these governors on a plane bound for Manila, and the governor prattled on about how he was going to Manila on business -only for my friend to see the governor on TV lurking near the edge of the gathered governors. Said my friend: you see, they’ve begun to get embarrassed over their support for the President (the governor knew my friend’s an oppositionist; but a mere month ago, the governor would needle my friend and crow about the President every chance he got). And the news leaves an even bigger question hanging: what of the other 29 governors?
Recall that one of the officials proclaimed a convenor of the Loyalist rally in Manila on Feb. 25 pointedly told the media, “oh, I’m in Manila doing shopping.”
While Amando Doronila notices that:
Speaking to a joint meeting of the Makati Business Club, Management Association of the Philippines and PinoyME Foundation last Feb. 26, Aquino did not make a pitch for another People Power uprising, to the disappointment of many people. She merely called on President Arroyo to step down, saying it was the least disruptive way out of the “severe moral crisis” facing the country. She said, “She must give way to a credible government that could lead by example. Given our concern to protect the moral pillars of democracy, the extra-constitutional removal of the President is not an ideal we would want to aspire for.”
Aquino’s call for restraint was echoed by the Catholic Bishops’ Conference of the Philippines, which in a pastoral statement on Feb. 26, called on the President to allow her officials to tell the truth about the slew of allegations of corruption related to several government transactions, but fell short of demanding her resignation. Instead, the bishops urged the President to be “part of the effort” to seek the truth.
The coyness of Aquino and the disappointing position of the bishops restraining people power highlighted the departure from the dynamics of 1986, when Aquino rode the crest of a forceful people power movement driven by the activist archbishop of Manila, Jaime Cardinal Sin, and the mass civilian participation in street protests in support of the military mutiny led by Marcos’ Defense Minister Juan Ponce Enrile and Constabulary chief, Lt. Gen. Fidel Ramos.
Today’s configuration has lost the fervor for mass action of 1986. It tells us that today’s movement is not based on mass action to bring pressure on the key support institutions of government to defect, such as the military and the bureaucracy. Today’s movement has changed emphasis. It has shifted its cutting edge from confrontation in the streets to bringing moral pressure on government. The shift is not exerting a powerful pressure on government officials to step down. It emboldens them to stonewall.
Though as the Inquirer editorial today points out,
We realize that, in itself, the language of the recommendation (“Urge the President and all the branches of government to take the lead in combating corruption wherever it is found”) seems to be neutral. But in the present context, it actually disregards a fundamental reality. In the scandal over the National Broadband Network, the President and her men have been less than forthright in telling the truth. That, in fact, is one of the reasons we have a crisis in the first place.
Apropos of the bishops, read An Open Letter to the CBCP at Brown SEO.
(courtesy of pedestrianobserver)
Bencard,
Stop bragging about your abilities as a lawyer. You talk down to non-lawyers. Stop it. You’re not only a coward, you are an arrogant shyster.
I’m still waiting for your response to Manuel’s challenge. And unless you do, no one will believe in your “credibility”. In the same manner that you dont believe that Lozada is a credible authority on justice, the readers dont think you are a credible representative of the legal profession.
You’re a coward and an arrogant lawyer!
you? a lawyer? you could have fooled me! you sure don’t sound like one. you sure you’re not jambay madrigal?
btw, as i said, further debating “sovereignty” and “ownership” with your friend, buencamino, will not benefit either of us. we are not on the same plane of thought, not speaking the same language, not the same level of understanding. you call that arrogance or pomposity, suit yourself.
ca’t, sorry, i broke the rule. but this is the last time i’m addressing this troll who calls me “panero” (lol).
Bencard,
ha ha ha. that was funny. but you’re still a coward and an arrogant lawyer. I will keep posting that thread wherever you post in this blog just to remind you that the lawyer’s oath does not include haranguing other people with their legal knowledge.
And yes, I am sure I am not Jamby Madrigal and I may not have even earned my legal spurs in this jurisdiction but I’m pretty sure you’re a coward and an arrogant lawyer.
From hereon, I will call you Bencard-CAL. It is an apt description.
Duwag! Such a nice term in Filipino, stronger than coward!
nash, wallow in your own ignorance for all i care! end of discussion.
btw, as i said, further debating “sovereignty†and “ownership†with your friend, buencamino, will not benefit either of us. we are not on the same plane of thought, not speaking the same language, not the same level of understanding. you call that arrogance or pomposity, suit yourself.-bencard
my dumb question would be- how come debating to determine who’s position is best is not beneficial? not speaking same language? not same level of understanding? not same plane of thought?
what language do lawyers speak?
what plane of thought are lawyers in?
and what level understanding are lawyers in?
is it something a common individual here cannot reach or fathom? only lawyers such you can?
i feel those statements the least are insulting if not a show of arrogace or pomposity.
i bet even the least educated individual here will agree with me.
i think it would be best if you can enlighten us with you thoughts and knowledge and expertise then. it would be very beneficial to everyone here.
or simply “just answer the question”! is it that hard?
Bencard,
You said: “btw, as i said, further debating “sovereignty†and “ownership†with your friend, buencamino, will not benefit either of us. we are not on the same plane of thought, not speaking the same language, not the same level of understanding. you call that arrogance or pomposity, suit yourself.”
Excuse me, bencard, I call that cowardice! After talking down to buencamino not to lecture you on legal principles and then suddenly backing off after realizing he is a diplomat. thats cowardice. In Filipino, duwag!
Arrogance is when you tell other people to wallow in their ignorance or get their own attorney.
Either way, you’re still a coward or duwag and an arrogant shyster.
let us not have lawyer talk here just to confuse the other. let us speak a language where everyone can understand. please. no fork tongues please. enlgish or filipino is preferred.
istambay,
Don’t bother asking bencard. He is in another league – the league of extraordinarily arrogant but cowardly shysters.
The truth is gauging by his answers, his knowledge of international law is nil, he answers on the basis of the law on obligations and contracts and spits a bit of what he learned in international law in his maybe 3rd year of law school.
That is why when confronted with what is a treaty, executive agreement or a moa or an mou, he is at a loss and suddenly retracts and tells buencamino, there’s no point in debating. Gee, and I thought he said somewhere that it is always fruitful and a learning experience to debate with others. Yan pala, when confronted with someone more knowledgeable about the topic, he clams up and says, it wont benefit anyone. Istambay, you had a very good observation of what Bencard-CAL said.
Yan ang problema sa mga madudunong. They think that just because this comment thread are peopled mostly by non-lawyers and non-accountants, they think they can lord it over you guys. Well, this has to stop. Bencard-CAL’s arrogance, pompousness, shrill propaganda in the guise of legal eck eck must stop. Dont listen to him, he is just, as he calls it, UTOT!
But as far as I am concerned and in my book, he is the FIRST COWARD of this thread and a duwag!
hear that manolo? somebody is laying down the rules here as if he owns this blog. he has been doing that since he materialized from somewhere in hell, insolently appropriating your blog for himself. and he calls himself a lawyer, an avenging one at that, what a shame!
he has been egging me to “answer” somebody as if i am his uto-uto. the nerve!
c’mon don’t hide behind manolo’s pants! now that will be construed as cowardice. be a man!
enlighten us!
dahil sa hamak na tambay sa kalya lamang ako ay nakakaintindi rin sa mga bagay bagay na gumugulo sa ating bayan at mga surilanin na bumabagbag sa bawat mamamayan na may malasakit sa inang bayan na nilalapastangan nina arroyo at mga kasabwat sa paghahasik ng lagim at kasakiman.
“kalye”
we are still waiting for an answer and asking for one is not making one an uto-uto for answering . that if you have an answer. is it a valid question? is the answer going to be beneficial? i think both answer is yes!
Amazing.
Manolo said.
The more the manyier or something to that effect.
Bencard, a rightfully question was asked to you by manuel buencamino. He replied to your statement then asked you that question befitting a supposed to be lawyer like you. Don’t you think it’s only proper to answer it back?
estambay, in my profession i get paid to answer questions. in this blog, i answer only if and when i want to. in both cases, i can be selective. any complaint? sue me!
Heheheh, guys take it easy, someone here might declare Executive Privilege then hole up in Camp Crame
mlq
You still gambling your 2 cents with this ‘took your money the last time but spent it all, sorry’ guy
here is a brilliant article from pedrosa: Fascism in the streets
excerpts
‘The American fascist would prefer not to use violence. His method is to poison the channels of public information.
With a fascist the problem is never how best to present the truth to the public but how best to use the news to deceive the public into giving the fascist and his group more money or more power.†So is it in the Philippines
The Makati Business Club’s omnipresence in the rally (reportedly footing the bill for the rally) is not surprising. Italian Giovanni Gentile wrote in the Encyclopedia Italiana: “Fascism should more appropriately be called corporatism because it is a merger of state and corporate power.â€Â
“American fascists would have to lie to the people in order to gain power. And, because they were in bed with the nation’s largest corporations  who could gain control of newspapers and broadcast media  they could promote their lies with ease.
Their newspapers and propaganda carefully cultivate every fissure of disunity, every crack in the common front against fascism. They use every opportunity to impugn democracy.
They demand free enterprise, but are the spokesmen for monopoly and vested interest. Their final objective toward which all their deceit is directed is to capture political power so that, using the power of the state and the power of the market simultaneously, they may keep the common man in eternal subjection,†Wallace added.
That is not difficult to translate in Philippine terms circa 2008 and the interpretation of recent events by media owned or influenced by big business.
THEN RIDDLER IS RIGHT!!! i rest my case your honor.
and i thoght we just having a spirited discussion here for free! monolo, you’re not charging a fee here right? no texting fee or any of that kind to comment here, right?
Heheh, fascism in the streets? How about fascism in governance.
Air Transport Office: “No-fly zone over the rally…” (takot kaming mabisto ang bilang ng protesters)
Police: “Di namin hinaharangang ang rallyists…” (meanwhile a chopper films the police roadblock preventing rallyists from passing through)
Administration: “Let’s give them the Spratlys and lease between 1 to 2 million hectares of Philippine agricultural land as a bonus…” (malaking kickback dito)
Worse that a fascist government… a lying and corrupt fascist government
estambay, in my profession i get paid to answer questions. in this blog, i answer only if and when i want to. in both cases, i can be selective. any complaint? sue me!-bencard
really?!!! and how much that would be? maybe we could come up with that fee so we could here those precious words of wisdom that lawyers such as you could only have!
magcocolect ako sa mga kasama ko sa kalye at sa mga tsuper na dumadaan. piso-piso hanggang makabuo!
name your price. we will wire it via bpi o pnb. we talking here in terms of peso or dollar?
we could “hear here”….those word of wisdom!
Heheheh, guys take it easy, someone here might declare Executive Privilege then hole up in Camp Crame-kabayan
he’s digging his own hole and a very deep one. now he can’t come out.and asking for manolo to throw him a rope. maybe manolo sould, then he could hang himself with it. no need to dig a hole just tambakan na lng! he is already where he shold be anyhow of his own making. just like the arroyos digging their own holes. soon that is where they will all stay for eternity!
istambay_sakalye said:
Actually I have a “rope” here, but in my profession I do not throw ropes to anyone who likes digging deep holes.
I have been busy for the past couple of weeks, but I took the time to look over the testimony of Madriaga in the Senate.
The NBN project really stinks — the price and brand (i.e. Alvarion) of the WIMAX equipment they were recommending is a cheap last-mile solution, not the more expensive and reliable back-haul solution. NEDA sunk their technical team’s recommendation for a satellite-based back haul because satellite transponder space is just “too expensive” — baka dahil bubukol kung idadagdag yung patong nung mga amo nila.
This lack of concern for the reliability of this project is outrageous — this on top of allegations that the GMA government is selling us out to China. I think that every effort must be made to make GMA and her supporters accountable to the public, since this already constitutes “attempted rape” on the Republic of the Philippines, which is just too much.
manolo, what a hijack. see the scumbags infesting your blog now? pretty soon they will saturate it, if they have not already. then you’d be competing with tordesillias’.
Yes there are indeed scumbags, they like to hole up in Crame and dig deep holes
I still stand what manolo said.
The more the manyier!!!
Teka nag mumukha ng harapan yung pagbira kay bencard. Pang 1 on 1 harapan eksena na tulad nina abalos at lozada plus razon at kung sino pang isa. Ang kaibahan nga lang e bencard versus the mob at yung mob ang mas pinapaniwalaan ng tao LOL.
Kamote said:
Nagaantay siguro mag-declare ng Executive Privilege para may lusot.
tulongan nyo naman. nakakaawa 🙁 walang iyaakan dito!
lol.
manolo, what a hijack. see the scumbags infesting your blog now? pretty soon they will saturate it, if they have not already. then you’d be competing with tordesillias’.-
bencard
justice league, i meant to post this for you but i was sidetracked by visiting assassins in this blog.
re- tragedies in camarines sur, of course a congressman’s presence would go a long way towards boosting the morale of the victims’ families. i agree, dato should have been there in person. however, what i was commenting on was about the bishops, priests and nuns (never mind the hypocritical, rosary-bearing men and women shouting “gloria resign”) who never even remembered offering publicly a prayer for the countless departed and their grieving families, whereas they would happily set up a “patriot’s fund” for lozada. is this how low my church has deteriorated? an “interfaith prayer rally”? was it a christian prayer, prayer that “gloria” be ousted and damned for “corruption” that they have already prejudged she had committed? my faith as a catholic is intact, but i want to have no part in the erosion of my church because of the questionable acts of this apostates and parishees.
riddler, mlq3
Then my question to you guys is this:
How can you assure me that, if GMA is removed, her residual power and influence (or that of FG) will not affect any future political movement, the way that Erap’s power and influence continues to pollute the current opposition polity?
My beef on the “resign now” camp is that it doesn’t ensure that it will diminish her influence and her legacy, the way that Erap’s ouster did not diminish his influence and legacy among his ilk.
I don’t want that to happen again.
If she is ousted *now*, what difference would it make when she would be out there claiming to be the duly elected and unlawfully ousted president and even posing that she could run for president again (come 2016?) in the same style that Erap is taking now re 2010?
Having her finish her term would ensure that the provision on the constitution where a president who has served a full six year term cannot run again is fulfilled. It is very much unlike Marcos who found extra-constitutional ways to extend his mandate. GMA’s mandate is not over yet — whether or not she cheated or not. That fact could bite us in the behind the way Erap’s is doing now.
If GMA even attempts to extend her mandate, I’ve said it in my blog, I’ll say it again: I’ll gladly join the protests, or if it needs be, take up arms.
My only point is that in calculating risks I think that ousting her *now* is much more riskier than letting her finish her term and then running after her thereon.
As per the economy, the opinion of the MBC is the opinion of the MBC, but experience dictates that every extra-constitutional ouster sends our market crashing. Even if it does not, a regime change still will not mean a direct trickling down of economic gains to the poor (seriously, how THAT can ever happen is a question I can’t answer myself). So is her ouster an assurance of increased economic activity and business confidence? If experience is any indication, the answer is no, but of course you are free to think otherwise.
we are still waiting for an answer to an unanswered question! you’ve got to face the music instead of asking for manolo’s help!
if you can’t and is conceeding your position then admit it. you’ll be a better man by admitting that you can’t win or be right all the time.
it took a while but nakahanap ka rin ng katapat mo kay
buencamino! he’s more than a handful for you!
YOU WANT THE TRUTH? YOU CAN’T HANDLE THE TRUTH! bencard!
cvj,
Point well-taken regarding the way HK, SG and CN handled their scarce land. However, would you really want to give government strict control and regulation over our real-estate resources, for the sake of encouraging manufacture, considering the level of corruption existing therein?
I have a feeling it will only cause more problems than it solves.
justice league, i meant to post this for you but i was sidetracked by visiting assassins in this blog- bencard
dramatic effect. very like gma’s minions! nice try but the fact still remains that YOU CAN’T HANDLE THE TRUTH!
and running away from it is not gonna solve it.
there are already attempts to extend gma’s term beyond 2010. charter change sounds familiar?
contrado de quiros said it time and time again, she will hang on to her power like marcos did! she’s already in deep caca with the rest of her minions that leaving malacanang will leave her open to any criminal proceedings and she will be hang for it!
i suggest you start joining the rallies now. the sooner the better.
Pero mayroon namang mga tao — siguro, sampu — na gusto nilang maging prime minister si GMA para mas matagal ang asenso (ng sampu).
2010 — go Manny Villar, fishtrader turned
1990 Most Outstanding CPA
by the Institute of Certified Public Accountants.
Veepee,
Sigurado ka bang may 2010 eleksyon?
bencard, you can defend yourself and particularly when your credibility is impeached.
that being said, concerning your comment: everyone can and should render judgment on the legal system. and the simple principle is what is legal isn’t necessarily what’s right. we aspire to have both, a system of law that also promotes justice.
james, the less said about pedrosa, the better. we personally get along very well but her support of the president’s cha-cha blunder is one reason the administration’s where it is, now.
john, you can look at dr. mike alba’s chart of gdp and i think you will notice a boost to the economy after edsa 1 and 2. one simple reason is the return of optimism, and a mood of cooperation that comes from removing a large obstacle. the growth after edsa 1 was spectacular and only stopped by the gringo coup attempts.
recall that after edsa 2 estrada was finished as a political force until he got a second wind after being arrested. very possibly you would have had an edsa 2 landslide in the may 2001 elections if estrada had remained just another politico without a job at that time. and there’s one thing this president lacks compared to her predecessor: charisma, and people genuinely loyal. i continue to be puzzled by the paucity of those who proclaim themselves gma loyalists. why does everyone seem to preface criticism of her critics by saying “im no gma loyalist but…”.
mlq3, i couldn’t care less if my “credibility” is questioned by anyone who doesn’t count in my book. what i write, i write. anyone can take it or leave it, refute it or agree with it.
but i’m not gonna engage anyone in a pointless debate that i find to be a useless exercise. it’s my own call, and not even you, as host of this blog, can make me do otherwise. when i argue, it’s not about me “winning” or “losing”, or whether someone is “smarter” or not than me. i’m not here to prove that.
btw, between you and me, let’s not debate my “credibility”. you can respond to my post re- your “court of public opinion” vs. court of law, if you want.
Credibility?
Incredibility?
Court of law?
Court of lawyers?
Court of Raul Gonzales?
Court of the Queen of Crame and Malacanang?
Warning: The Surgeon general has confirmed that crying in front of a computer because of a rejected plea for an Executive Privilege protection is deemed dangerous to ones health. Consult your nearest Presidential Spokesman and the Armed Forces of Pidal Chief immediately.
Jon:
The biggest problem right now is that there is lack of regulation because of corruption.
Right now, we are looking at just one sector — government corruption. But there is also corruption in the private sector, where it is difficult to obtain credit because of stock market manipulations (aka the BW affair and Dante Tan) and DOSRI-type bad loans. Certain influential people abused the trust in the financial sector for their own gain, and when the financial system lacks trust, there is breakdown in raising capital in order to pursue profitable business activities (not to mention exorbitant interest rates). You can forget about setting up a local semicon or a steel plant for now, since it is virtually impossible to raise the necessary capital to make one. Even development banks require a large amount of collateral before you can get a loan, since the banking system as it is right now is very risk averse because of past abuses.
From a broader perspective, it takes any organization, whether business or government, three (3) factors to set it up: 1. governance framework (rules and policies), 2. leadership (people leading others in following the rules), and 3. core competency (the techniques and processes that add value). Trust is the major component that binds these factors together. Even if we churn out competent people in our colleges and universities, you cannot lead people if rules and policies can be bent, more so if there is no trust in your leadership.
Corruption works by reducing what should have been a trust relationship into a monetary consideration — pay me, and I will continue to be loyal to you. I can imagine that it is taking more and more money in order to prevent GMA loyalists from jumping to the other side. So by all means cut-off corruption, keep a strict accounting of money spent in government projects, demand transparency from all levels of government, pay particular attention to the allocations for congressmen (CDA) and LGUs (IRAs), and everything else should follow. It’s a tough job, but if more people work with civil society and NGOs, this mid- to long-term objective should be attainable.
In my opinion, this is the first step towards making an inflexible regulatory regime from government, making it possible for business to take risks where it counts — not from maintaining a relationship with a backer who is a general or a highly-placed politico, but business risks that comes from confidence in one’s excellence and innovation.
Si bencard nang Hamon na i sue daw siya, di naman siya kilala dito kahit nino man, pa-ano siya ma i sue? abogado nga talaga. di pag i sue mo ang tao ay kailangan i serve mo yong notice nang lawsuit, di pa-ano ma iserve yong lawsuit, ipopost ni Istambay sa kalye sa Blog, nakatutuwa naman.
Sabihin nya kilala siya ni MLQ, di ba nya alam na di puede nag may-ari nang blog na irelease ang pangalan nang manga posters dito liban lang kong may court order at yon ay ma-ari lamang kong naka concern nang National Security o kaya Serious Crimes??