Before…
…And after.
Ding Gagelonia’s recent entry in his blog, At Midfield, got me thinking. As well as some comments by readers for me to consider their view that there’s not enough time to pursue Charter Change (I think there is).
But both got me to reflect, once again, on this: Timing is everything in politics, the saying goes. Yesterday’s Inquirer editorial points to the political timing of oil price rollbacks, for example.
You can calculate your moves to be timed in such a manner as to throw your opponents off-kilter. You determine the timing of events.
Or you can time your moves to coincide or take advantage of events no one could preordained, but which you foresaw as being predetermined, that is, they would occur sooner or later, and once they take place, better-prepared, you can seize the moment.
Time is seasonal; for example, in terms of political time, impeachment has its season and other things, like Charter Change, have their own season.
What happens when two seasons coincide or their timing seems to operate at cross-purposes to each other.
After all, the only thing that can seriously derail the marshaling of forces for Charter Change is impeachment. Or is it?
What if you put it another way, the other way around? The only thing that can derail the marshaling of forces for impeachment is Charter Change.
The only checkmate on the President is impeachment, not the official end of her term; for her term expiring is at best, a moveable goal-post (create a new job, and the expiration of your term isn’t consequential; retiring isn’t a problem if besides an obliging Ombudsman and a friendly Supreme Court, you have a new President you swung the election to). Only impeachment means sudden death, politically. And things can happen very fast, when people see a check mate unfolding, for capitalizing on it requires only a committed and nimble minority with its eye on the prize.
The long, hard slog of trying to exact accountability through constitutional means since it was first attempted in 2005 has only served to sap the will of those attempting it and makes cynical those who favor it as a means of replacing a president above all others. As Cocoy wrote in The Political Machinery and Infrastructure Of President Arroyo:
But I submit, to you my dear readers, that the cases against President Gloria Arroyo, are strong, very strong, based on command responsibility, based on misappropriated funds, and so much more, but the smoking gun has never been found, except for one, which I mention in the next paragraph. Call it genius, I say it’s something else. You decide. And even when it led straight to the top, it has had to be based on testimony, for example, that of Romulo Neri. He told her about the alleged bribe attempt, she confirmed her knowledge about the NBN deal, in no less than on a radio show, but still, nothing came about.
Even, when the strongest case, election fraud, was brought to The Senate, in the whirlwind that we now know as The Garci Tapes, we still could not deliver a death sentence to this Administration, it was not only a failure of our government, and all those involved, but it was the death of the trust that our people had in this government.
President Gloria Arroyo, blame her all you want, because I certainly do, has built up so many safeguards, has made the political moves, and has the deep political team, and bench, that even in such a time in which Joc Joc Bolante is now testifying before The Senate, she may be a bit nervous, but in the end, she has to know, her machinery, and her political infrastructure will shield her from any form of accountability. Each and every time, she has been cleared, either by witnesses, by government institutions, or by providing another fall guy to take the fall.
It’s a sad realization. That even, while, I am sick to my stomach, watching the Joc Joc hearings, that, nothing seems be coming out of it, that it is important that The Filipino People realize, just as when Neri testified, the messed up system of procurement, appropriation, project planning, etc, that our nation is in.
But, when people close their eyes to such anomalies, declare a saint out of this woman, I take notice, and I take offense, because such denial, such defense, it can no longer can be based on logical reason, but on a mere partisan reaction.
So, we are in a quandry, the obviousness of the whole affair, this affair that we call The Arroyo Administration, as to how to hold her responsible. But we have not the political climate to exact the punishment that is due to her. The strongest hard evidence, The Hello Garci tapes, led to nothing, but a now popular term - “Noted”.
Hard evidence is there, I say, but even putting this aside, the most damning is when you take the bulk of these anomalies, add on to it human rights violations, kidnappings during this regime, and now a resurgent Fertilizer Fund Scam investigation, these all scream Arroyo, and political will is strong to bring her to account, but the numbers, however, and the machinery sides with Arroyo.
In light of the above, let me propose, further, that the only people really in a position to put teeth in the proceedings, are not her long-standing foes, but her more recent foes: those who were once very close allies and partook of presidential plenty during the happy days of old. And who was closer than Jose de Venecia, Jr.? Arguably three individuals spelled the difference between a breathing spell and a second wind, politically, and resignation and exile in 2005. They were: Fidel V. Ramos, Jose de Venecia, Jr., and Gaudencio Cardinal Rosales, Archbishop of Manila.
FVR and JDV thought they’d saved the President in exchange for her bowing out gracefully by means of a transitional parliamentary being put in place by 2006. By the time that deadline rolled around, FVR had been publicly sidelined in his own party; the Speaker had been stalled by a last gasp of People Power summoned by the Catholic hierarchy in December, 2006. So in 2007 mopping-up operations took place courtesy of the NBN-ZTE controversy which led to de Venecia’s being deposed.
Every time de Venecia previously showed signs of spilling the beans, the Palace ferociously asserted there were no beans to spill at all; failing that, that they would be self-incriminating beans, too; and failing that, that the beans ought to be spilled “in the proper forum,” which the Palace of course controlled. In other words, a thick smokescreen is laid down, as the Palace checks and re-checks the chain of command, counts votes in the House, summons and obtains manifestos of support from governors and mayors, sends emissaries with sweeteners to the bishops, puts together cabinet and other clusters to game out scenarios, and so forth.
A smokescreen buys time, and time allows you to look for opportunities. Laying down that smokescreen -with its great, rolling clouds of appeals to “objectivity,” to “sobriety,” for “stability,” and the other noxious rhetorical vapors of the official media machine, has been perfected over time, as Write Rhythm recently pointed out, showing how the institution most people rely on to get their news and comprehend the topsy-turvy world of politics, can be gamed:
Aside from the number of issues to report about this administration, The Age of Gloria is a challenging time for Filipino journalists because of another characteristic of this era. The Age of Gloria… okay let’s be more specific, Gloria is known for her strategy of divert and obfuscate. Aside from diverting funds, Gloria is a master of diverting the public’s attention to another issue (i.e. usually the economy, national unity, etc.), thereby obfuscating the original issue by bombarding people with one issue after another. Unfortunately, this has worked to her advantage as the media and civil society try to keep up with the many issues tied to her.
The difficulty in setting the agenda is that the Philippine media has to consider both what is new and timely, and what is a matter of public interest. Sometimes, the two do not go together. especially with the administration’s expertise of burying issues in the past. Sometimes, they do but not to an extent that the choice is clear. And oftentimes, one has to yield to yet another consideration of choosing the other, sexier stories.
Let me suggest that there apparently may have been political rhyme and reason to de Venecia’s loudly proclaiming he’d spill the beans, but stepping back or never letting more than a stray little bean escape -a mere hint of the pork and beans he wanted to spill. He is by temperament and instinct, I think everyone agrees, a consensus-builder, an operator, not the kind who leads cavalry charges. It certainly exasperated those egging him on to come out swinging. Of course even as people thought they were taking the measure of the man, whether from the ranks of the Palace or the various factions of the opposition, he was taking their measure, too. Having been in politics longer than most of them, it’s entirely possible he held his peace and did his Dopey act to buy time and fend off the more aggressive among those importuning him to weigh in.
If you are up against a numerically and logistically superior enemy, you do not make a frontal attack at the time and place chosen by that enemy. If the spider and the fly had been politicians, the spider would have said “bring it to the proper forum!” instead of “welcome to my parlor.”
So what do you do, if you are, in Sergio Osmena Jr.’s words, “outgunned, outgooned, and outgold”? You probe for weaknesses. You foster, in the superior enemy, a sense of its overwhelming superiority, so that the enemy begins to believe its own propaganda.
You also marshal your own forces, whatever they might be, and do what you do best: build or re-build alliances.
Both take time, and craft, not boldness; or more craftiness, at least in private, and less boldness, at least in public. Both require biding your time so you don’t play entirely according to the game plan of the enemy.
Still, while things can happen pretty fast, plots require time to be hatched. One major strength of any administration is its access to information, aided by our national propensity to boast and gossip.
For months now, it’s been talked about that de Venecia consulted other disgruntled elders, such as Fidel V. Ramos, and others, all of whom are chafing at the interminable durability of the President, as well as other power players who are inclined as much to think one step ahead as the President, whether it’s potential presidential candidates like Manuel Villar, Jr. or people fully intent on continuing to play the role of king maker, like Eduardo Cojuangco, Jr. One such meeting took place around September, where FVR is said to have received JDV in order to determine if provincemate really had the goods, and could really put up a fight.
The two supposedly reached a tacit agreement involving JDV throwing the bomb, and if it had the intended effect, it would provide the two -FVR and JDV- with a pretext to call for the scrapping of the Lakas-Kampi merger, and take an FVR-JDV loyalist rump into union with the NPC of Cojuangco and the NP of Villar. An application had been been filed with Christian Democrats International to accredit the NP as a Christian Democratic party, providing an ideological pretext for the new coalition, while the NPC could simply state that as a child of the NP, it was simply patching up the quarrel among partymates that dated back to Danding Cojuangco and Doy Laurel’s disagreement over who should have the party franchise.
All very neat, tidy, potentially formidable, a real game-changer, and one denying the President’s uncouth Kampi blowhards and the perpetual Opposition losers the satisfaction of victory. A true victory for the veterans. At least, this is the delicious scenario as they might see it.
In recent weeks, it’s been talked about that the NPC began to stall on Charter Change talks, and that the Palace decided to accelerate the killing of the impeachment complaint not only to forestall opportunities for new revelations, but also to maintain their political momentum and stampede representatives into joining the Charter Change bandwagon. The way things ebbed and flowed in the House going into the last Charter Change effort in 2006, indicates how congressmen can be mulish just when the mule drivers want them to trot. As it is, the Palace has had to give the impression it’s backpedaling a bit: Palace: No to lifting of term limits really says nothing, though. the Palace, procedurally and politically, can “exclude, dismiss, and reject” whatever it wants in public, but so long as the behind-the-scenes green light stays lit, the ultimate aim of something for everyone can be achieved. Part of the smokescreen.
And there are other leaders perpetually circling around, sniffing for opportunity. Which is why I’m inclined to think Uniffors is on to something. What do you think is a bigger motivation, and calculation, for someone like Juan Ponce Enrile? To wrap up his political career “para siempre un muchacho,” as his generation might put it, or as possibly, the transitional President of the Philippines, his portrait permanently on display in the presidential palace? Amando Doronila, who has had decades to observe his former jailer, Enrile, says a sudden toppling of a President who views him as an elderly toady is just the sort of thing to make the old schemer grin in anticipation.
Everyone knows timing is everything in politics. If everyone has begun to think of a post-Arroyo future, how do you, as Arroyo, keep yourself front and center, to continue enjoying a maximum number of political options? The President has always shown a marked preference for thinking tactically and not strategically. Her elders pride themselves on thinking strategically. The tactician has proven herself the mistress of the strategists so far.
The way to keep everyone off-kilter is not to wait for them to throw you off, but to throw them off, obviously.
How?
Start having the machinery you control belch out another smokescreen.
It seems Secretary Jesus Dureza confided to persons close to him that they were going to do “something” the next morning, to gauge the public pulse. The next morning, Dureza said his famous little prayer and what had been previously sewn up at Rep. Romualdez’s house, could begin to be delivered -Charter Change.
Charter Change primarily as smokescreen, but also, since there’s nothing to lose, as yet another item in the menu of presidential options.
Charter Change immediately swept the central story -impeachment, with all the accompanying side plots, from Bolante to the Eurogenerals, to NBN-ZTE-deal, off the table, as far as public attention was concerned.
Something beyond the Palace’s control had refocused the story not on the President’s insistence that all was well, but on everything that had made her administration unpopular in the first place. That thing was Bolante’s return, and impeachment season coming at its heels.
That thing includes reminders of all the many issues that have antagonized the public, including, I might add, the question of the BJE-MOA deal, which even the president’s critics didn’t want to touch with a ten foot pole.
Charter Change could have been resumed, with a lot of fanfare, two months ago or even two months from now. But why go great guns now?
Because it’s the only way to stop being on the defensive, and instead, go on the offensive.
But it seems the timing was not, exactly, right. Because the timing had been determined not by the Palace, from the start, but by other things.
Charter Change essentially remains a reaction to the embarrassment Bolante represents, and someone else proved capable of mastering the timeline, too.
Yesterday’s Inquirer reported on the revelations de Venecia’s already made -by means of his authorized biography- and which the House has to prevent being further elaborated upon and amplified in the House deliberations on impeachment. See JDV details secret Arroyo-ZTE meeting:
Again, timing is everything in politics. Those deliberations, at least in the Justice Committee, were supposed to be wrapped up last Friday. But the hearings on Thursday and Friday were canceled.
Timing is everything in politics. And it’s just as well that the gastrointestinal troubles of the President’s husband has him home in time to mind the store as the House of Representatives wrestles with what to do with its former Speaker, Jose de Venecia, Jr.
With the President absent (a benefit of her absences, if you’ve noticed, is that out sight means being out of mind: reducing the effect she has on public opinion, which is galvanize it, against herself), the man everyone, even her own loyalists, dislikes but needs, can take up the slack because he has nothing to lose. Ergo, First Gentleman: JDV a ‘liar’. Hey, it’s a crappy job but someone has to do it, and the President’s husband does it pretty well, in public and more crucially, behind the scenes.
JDV had wrestled with the problem of his lacking the numbers to prevent his being gagged by the House. Recall how he’d tried to do so, but coverage was cut off by the new House leadership. If one assumes he’s capable of a certain amount of introspection, he knows full well that among his many liabilities as a politician, is how he cannot make pithy remarks in front of media, he tends to meander and his rambling undercuts his effectivity. He is more suited to cajoling people in back rooms and, from time to time, making more carefully-structured speeches.
Which makes his decision to publish an authorized biography a pretty clever political move, one which undercuts his administration foes, and centers the discussion on his allegations. Critics would have to repeatedly make reference to the allegations, put forward in print; those references will make people curious; curious people will want to read what’s been written, and throughout the process, the debate will keep returning to the source document -de Venecia’s book. For this reason, I disagree with smoke who wrote, yesterday:
As far as bombshells go, this was a certifiable dud. Certainly didn’t reveal anything new, nor even added any sort of nuance to the story that’s been told over and over and over by everyone and his dog. JDV’s recollection of these events merely invites the reader to make the connections for himself – something which we’re all pretty good at; a strategy guaranteed to generate the most salacious conclusions possible.
There is a calibrated effort going on. Smoke’s entry was in response to his restating some of his original revelations. That’s just one story, in a book no one has had time to fully read, but whose contents are slowly -and surely, with timing in mind- being dribbled out by the one who authorized the book, JDV.
So, going into today’s hearing in the House, other revelations were made: JDV confirms P500,000 Palace bribe: Says cash for ‘weak’ impeach complaint. You can bet your bottom dollar that will dominate the morning news.
Again, not much by way of a revelation except it provides in-house confirmation, so to speak, of something everyone saw because the congressmen waddling out of the Palace in 2007 didn’t bother to hide their gift bags. And it confirms the testimony of Gov. Panlilio of Pampanga, another official on the Palace hit list.
But Joey de Venecia’s already said he expects his father to spill at least some beans on the issue everyone thought JDV would always remain mum on: North Rail.
We shall see how it unfolds today if it’s explosive or if it’s a dud. The Palace has to ride it out today and going into the rest of the week, trying to kill impeachment by midweek and ensure this by publicly ramping up Charter Change. JDV says he’s leaving Tuesday for Washington -where he has friends, unlike the President- which gives him a chance to peddle his book to foreign media, and leaves the Palace with no target to vent its ire on: it will have to face the accusations by its lonesome, when it’s usual tactic is to turn the tables on accusers by unleashing the attack dogs. But Washington is the last place to send those attack dogs, because the brunt of the asking will be done here at home.
Brilliant, if you ask me, true guerrilla hit-and-run tactics.
So if the de Venecias pull this off, and today turns out politically explosive, it should then be described as the day that revenge was truly proven to best be served cold. That’s another hoary old chestnut, but for some, it’s true.
If some of us would take inspiration from a Shakespearean call to sally forth, “Once more, unto the breach!” There’s the the little old prune who could just as much say, “Do or do not, there is no try.”
Update:
I find it interesting that the President’s husband had to sally forth and face the cameras. Flanked by his two sons. The President’s congressional allies have been rather subdued.
As Mon Casiple puts it in his entry for today:
Actual impeachment may be a lesser possibility based on the numbers in the House of Representatives but the political implications are certainly big enough. The revelation guarantees the focus on GMA’s foibles and constitutes further political pressure to make her resign.
The GMA majority in the House of Representatives actually rests on the fragile loyalty that money can provide. It is only feasible as long as the continued stay in power of the powers dispensing the largesse is assured. This is the reason why the current charter change move by Malacañang is being watched by all sides. When it fails, no money can dissuade the congressmen from seeking new patrons among the presidentiables. Their own survival imperative to stay in power will trump the money.
Before then, the pressure on GMA to resign is expected to increase. What is unspoken in this message is the “or else” clause. This is brought about by the interesting anti-GMA positioning of the de Venecias who are still very much a part of the ruling Lakas-CMD coalition party. Malacañang cannot anymore be certain of the loyalty of the majority in the ruling coalition, particularly the non-GMA Lakas-CMD, the NPC, House LPs, and other smaller groups. This was not present before in previous opposition initiatives.
This is an elaboration on the possible scenario I indicated above. And brings up all sorts of interesting permutations, including a cabinet declaration of presidential incapacity, which if contested by the President, leads to the question being thrown to Congress.
Blogger seven million goldfish in exasperation and alarm asks why not just shoot her? Those in a position or with an inclination to do so, are in jail. The truly big political players are not inclined to invest in or promote permanent solutions. And the question is not to eliminate her at all costs, but to save the Republic even if it means the President preterminating her term.
***
My column for today is, Congressmen respond, with the responses of Rep. Risa Hontiveros-Baraquel and Rep. Teodoro L. Locsin, Jr. to my my last column.
where did you ever find a revolution in which opportunity was not a factor -the motive of course being revolution itself? so you have the russian monarchy collapsing under the weight of its incompetence, but the real revolution happening because lenin managed to sneak back in riding in a sealed train; you had ninoy being shot when he could have been whisked off to jail; there has never been a revolution where organizing and skillful sensing of opportunity weren’t factors in the outcome.
Not to be inscrutable again, I’ll restate.
Can’t we just make it simpler. Corruption does not pay in WHATEVER circumstance.
“where did you ever find a revolution in which opportunity was not a factor -the motive of course being revolution itself? so you have the russian monarchy collapsing under the weight of its incompetence, but the real revolution happening because lenin managed to sneak back in riding in a sealed train; you had ninoy being shot when he could have been whisked off to jail; there has never been a revolution where organizing and skillful sensing of opportunity weren’t factors in the outcome.”
This is how historians and political scientists see it.
“In The Philippines, they came first for the Communists, And I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a Communist;
And then they came for the trade unionists, And I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a trade unionist;
And then they came for the journalists, And I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a journalist;
And they came for Jonas Burgos,And I kept quiet because Jonas wasn’t my son:
And they grilled Joey on ZTE in the Senate,And I remained silent because I wasn’t as brave as my son;
And then . . . they came for me . . . And by that time there was no one left to speak up.”
Manolo,
Ang mapait na kayotohananan, sa pulitika natin, habang may mga pagbabago ay patulot lamang nanatili ang sitwasyong umiiral: ang pagka-api ng mga maliit na walang tinig. Pagkatapos ng headlines, pupusta ako na ang gagawin lamang nin Yoda ay ang tumakbo para sa Senado at sa huli ang mga paratang niya’s maibabasura lamang ng mga kaalyado ng pangulo.
Dapat bang itigil ang laban?
Hindi. Nguni’t walang silbi si Tenga KUNDI SA KANYA PA RING MAKASARILING AMBISYON
Anthony Scalia.
1. “the exodus have been continuing since Cory’s time” –
I know. The point is if Gloria managed the economy well, she would have at least reduced, instead of increased, the number of people leaving for jobs abroad.
2.”its not the task of the president to create the jobs”
Well you better tell her that because everytime she opens her mouth and in every SONA she talks about creating jonbs. Didn;t she promise 10M jobs?
3.”unabated population growth.”
unabated population growth is a convenient excuse for the inept. More people are hungry now because there is less money to buy food because there are no jobs and when there are jobs the pay is unadequate. So yes there are more people hungry now because, in addition to unabated population growth, we have an inept and corrupt Gloria.
3.”the poor oriented poicies and programs have been there for decades”
So what has Gloria done to take advantage of them or to improve social services etc?
4, “Ilan llang ba yang dyaryo?”
Both Gloria and the opposition have to play in the same field of IILANG DYARYO so your point is irrelevant, The question is what dominated the headlines, CHACHA or IMPEACHMENT?
ding, ako naniniwala sa plebiscatory aspect ng pulitika. kung pumusta si yoda at tumakbo bilang senador, at nahala dahil kumontra siya kay cruella, eh dapat lang. kesa naman may tumakbo dahil alipores siya ni cruella. kaya nga naging makasaysaysan yung mga mid term elections nung panohon ni quirino at fm kung saan natalo ang slate ng mga pangulong iyon. at kaya tumakbo si laurel bilang senador para patunayin na sa mata ng bayan. naging tapat siya sa kanila nung panahon ng hapon.
lahat ng politiko naman may ambisyon, lahat gustong sumakay sa isyu, problema lang hindi lahat ay may isyu at hindi lahat ay may kakayahang ipatupad ang kanilang ambisyon dahil wala ngang isyo o sobrang sira na sila. yun ang problema ni jdv. pero sa laban na ito better later than never. eh babanatan ba si jdv eh sino pa ba ang mas hopeless, tingnan mo lang sila gonzales at gonzalez etc.
di pa natin alam kung bomba talaga ang ihahagis ni jdv o hanggang kwitis lang siya. eh matagal na rin naghihintay ang publiko kong may tataya ba ng malaki o hanggang ingay lang. alam din naman nila ang unang babarilin at gugulpihin ay ang ordinaryong tao at hindi yung mga nasa itaas.
“Live bomb”
“It is easy to forget that using constitutional change as a formula to cope with crisis is a highly explosive element.”
“When the administration called for constitutional amendments seeking a shift to the federal structure as a means to defuse the Moro separatist rebellion in Mindanaoâ€â€after the Supreme Court aborted the memorandum of agreement on an expanded Bangsamoro homelandâ€â€it ignited a firestorm of indignation.”
“This was so because the federalism scheme fueled suspicions that Ms Arroyo was using it to justify constitutional change as a cover for an effort to extend her stay in office.”
“The new Con-ass campaign is a live TNT in Ms Arroyo’s hands.” Armando Doronilla
Who has got the deadlier bomb, GMA or JDV. My bet is on GMA… Will she dare light the fuse?
The entire world is participating in the financing the bankruptcy process for the U.S. economy.. No choice as the dollars reserve system backstops the financial system of most of the world.
Asset inflation then debit deflation and now the real threat of price deflation in the real economy.
Countries will be busy directing their policies inward to their own economies…
The consumption based model of Big Mike and GMA dependent on foreign savings and OFW might not be enough……Allowing foreigners to buy land is not going to create jobs to any great degree.
manuelbuencamino :
“Well you better tell her that because everytime she opens her mouth and in every SONA she talks about creating jonbs. Didn;t she promise 10M jobs?”
naniwala ka naman!
“unabated population growth is a convenient excuse for the inept. More people are hungry now because there is less money to buy food because there are no jobs and when there are jobs the pay is unadequate. So yes there are more people hungry now because, in addition to unabated population growth, we have an inept and corrupt Gloria.”
excuse for the inept? yeah right.
“So what has Gloria done to take advantage of them or to improve social services etc?”
you’re faulting the policies and making it appear gloria originated them
“Both Gloria and the opposition have to play in the same field of IILANG DYARYO so your point is irrelevant, The question is what dominated the headlines, CHACHA or IMPEACHMENT?”
no its not irrelevant. you’re trying to rebut the claim of muted public response/interest with the presence of headlines in the newspapers. “ilang dyaryo” is hardly the public. so there’s some truth to a muted public response/attention
Manolo,
Wala tayong debate sa kung tutoo man o hindi ang isisiwalat ni Tenga.
Ang galit kasi ako ay ang pagiging oportunista pa rin niya dahil gusto niyang mapahaba ang kanyang buhay pulitika at ang ginagawa niya’y nililinlang pa rin a mga tao sa kanyang mabulaklak na mga pahayag.
Siguro romantiko ako… naghahanap ako ng tunay na mga makabayan tulad inyo na ang layunin sa pag-amyenda sana sa impeachment complaint ay hindi pansarili nguni’t dalisay.
Kaya nga lamang napapaligiran tayo ng mga taksil sa Bayan at mga maiitim ang kaluluwa.
“Allowing foreigners to buy land is not going to create jobs to any great degree.”
no it will. to a great degree. absence of foreign land ownership is what’s holding back a substantial amount of FDI from coming in
personally i favor reciprocal rules. foreigners can invest to the extent filipinos can invest in those countries. what they permit us to do according to their laws and rules we should consider allowing in return. we have much to learn from the efficiencies and management style of the west and even our neighbors (think of all the filipino managers in indonesia).
“Siguro romantiko ako… naghahanap ako ng tunay na mga makabayan tulad inyo na ang layunin sa pag-amyenda sana sa impeachment complaint ay hindi pansarili nguni’t dalisay.
Kaya nga lamang napapaligiran tayo ng mga taksil sa Bayan at mga maiitim ang kaluluwa.”
My observation is that you don’t have to be truly evil to be corrupt in this country. Punishment is rare for big-time criminals, which makes being one, given the opportunity, tempting. Criminals also have social superiority over law abiding citizens. Good politicians tend to have a lot of complainers and are easily intimidated by criminal opponents. Dates back to Spanish era when criminals, the few thousands sent here by Spain, lorded it over the peace-loving natives.
Bravo, Manolo!
“no it will. to a great degree. absence of foreign land ownership is what’s holding back a substantial amount of FDI from coming in”
The conquistadors and taipans are in the way. But let’s think of CONDITIONAL land ownership. I can imagine foreigners buying land and setting up their expatriates-only enclave.
“personally i favor reciprocal rules. foreigners can invest to the extent filipinos can invest in those countries.”
—mlq3
“I can imagine foreigners buying land and setting up their expatriates-only enclave.”
—BrianB
You guys mean like in California?
We now have all the evidence we need to indict “The Butcher” . We have mounds of testimony and memos and public statements. We have lines of witnesses and experts, photos and newsreels. We have everything we need to charge Palparan and his cohorts with some of the most heinous acts in our nation’s history. And yet, they all will get off scot-free, without facing a single charge against them.
Did the Arroyo administration file charges and order the arrest of Palparan to show its adherence to the Constitutional provisions of protecting human rights and the rule of law?
mlq3,
To belatedly respond to your mutimedia extravaganza of a post (11/24 12:17am)…..
You forgot to respond to my challenge — that I questioned your overall claim that the “only solution” to impeachment is Cha-cha.
You can’t reveal your sources, OK. But then your “proof” is mainly links to anti-GMA personalities and something they wrote. For example, Doronila knows that for Enrile:
“a sudden toppling of a President who views him as an elderly toady is just the sort of thing to make the old schemer grin in anticipation.”
I dare you to walk up to Enrile’s face and repeat that claim.
You also cite ABS-CBN and Newsbreak articles as “proof” as well. C’mon, man. You probably helped write those stories!!!
I still don’t see any evidence that the SC has been noticeably pro-admin. Let’s go through those cases one by one and we’ll see that many decisions were basically no-brainers.
I think you need to show better evidence than that to condemn the institution. Though I know you said that I only want evidence because I want to protect Gloria (???? — I’m not going to go out of my way to protect any politician, thank you), you really need to show how they are crooked.
That’s one major accusation you are throwing around. Can you prove it? Or am I just trying to protect them as well?
The trouble with having the likes of JDV as star witness to impeach PGMA is Integrity and Credibility.
He may be an insider, but he’s probably as guilty of Graft-Laden Deals as he is Trapo.
So much for his late Rude Awakening.
Anthony,
1. naniwala ka naman!
Eh ang punto ko dyan na hindi mo nakita ay ito: inako nya ang responsibilidad sa job creation. Hindi sya nakadeliver so inept siya.
Ngayon government can create jobs by creating a good investment environment. In the same way it can destroy job opportunities because its policies, programs, and practices drive away business
2. “unabated population growth is a convenient excuse for the inept. More people are hungry now because there is less money to buy food because there are no jobs and when there are jobs the pay is unadequate. So yes there are more people hungry now because, in addition to unabated population growth, we have an inept and corrupt Gloria.â€Â
Wala kang masagot.
3. “So what has Gloria done to take advantage of them or to improve social services etc?â€Â
you’re faulting the policies and making it appear gloria originated them
I am not making it appear Gloria originated them. I am faulting Gloria for not finding a way to make them work. And if they are really unworkable then it’s her responsibility and duty to introduce programs that work. Unfortunately she is inept.
4. “Both Gloria and the opposition have to play in the same field of IILANG DYARYO so your point is irrelevant, The question is what dominated the headlines, CHACHA or IMPEACHMENT?â€Â
no its not irrelevant. you’re trying to rebut the claim of muted public response/interest with the presence of headlines in the newspapers. “ilang dyaryo†is hardly the public. so there’s some truth to a muted public response/attention
The public gets its news from ilang dyaryo. The response you want to mute is the response the public has given pollsters. The response you want to mute is the beating Gloria’s senatorial slate got in the 2007 election. The response has been expressed in a civilized manner, the reaction of the administration to the public response has been to mite it in the most barbaric manner
GEO:
When bad men combine, the good must associate; else they will fall one by one, an unpitied sacrifice in a contemptible struggle.Edmund Burke
“GMA’s [the President’s initials] critics claim that she is so unpopular and her endorsement or association is a kiss of death to a politician’s reelection. Do you think [that] if that is true, these congressmen will put their careers on the line to extend a supposedly unpopular president?†Mikey Arroyo
geo, that’s what’s out there, and obviously insufficient for your bar of evidence which is so high, no one would ever be pinned down for anything, i guess, unless you were as incautious and uncomprehending of basic legal and financial precautions as, say, joseph estrada.
it would be jolly indeed to rewind the clock and see, had there been the internet in the 1970s, how you’d have vigorously defended marcos every step of the way with pretty much the same arguments.
you’re faced with research and hard work by a lot of people and your response is to pooh-pooh it. the natural reaction would be for you to go through those cases one by one yourself if you’re so confident, and rebut the research presented.
why wouldn’t i say that to enrile? or write that? i’ve hit him before and he’s enough of an old pro to be nice to me, the few times we’ve met. he belongs to that generation.
manuelbuencamino :
“Eh ang punto ko dyan na hindi mo nakita ay ito: inako nya ang responsibilidad sa job creation. Hindi sya nakadeliver so inept siya.”
again- naniwala ka naman. that’s just a usual campaign rhetoric
“Ngayon government can create jobs by creating a good investment environment. In the same way it can destroy job opportunities because its policies, programs, and practices drive away business”
excessive enjoyment of constitutional rights drive away business more than inconsistent policies, programs and practices
“Wala kang masagot.”
wala? tama. wala nga. kasi yung sagot mo tells it all – rason ng mga inept daw
“I am not making it appear Gloria originated them.”
oh yes you are
“I am faulting Gloria for not finding a way to make them work.”
the policies have been put to work
“And if they are really unworkable then it’s her responsibility and duty to introduce programs that work. Unfortunately she is inept.”
a good number of introducing programs that work meant requiring new laws or amending old ones and undivided attention of gloria’s cabinet people
sadly, these needed legislation could not be passed because one chamber of the legislature always chooses the creation of a committee report
“The public gets its news from ilang dyaryo.”
you’re already assuming that the numerous/majority that is the public believe the headlines!
only one thing is sure – the headlines get read. but not necessarily believed
“The response you want to mute is the response the public has given pollsters. The response you want to mute is the beating Gloria’s senatorial slate got in the 2007 election. The response has been expressed in a civilized manner, the reaction of the administration to the public response has been to mite it in the most barbaric manner”
i thought your issue with one poster is the whether public response to cha cha and/or impeachment is muted?
oops, should read
i thought your issue with one poster is whether public response to cha cha and/or impeachment is muted?
i read somewhere (in facebook, i believe)…
“if it is a criminal that witnessed a crime, does it mean that what he witnessed wasn’t a crime?”
“it would be jolly indeed to rewind the clock and see, had there been the internet in the 1970s, how you’d have vigorously defended marcos every step of the way with pretty much the same arguments.”
good for you the clock can’t be rewound. because you’d be proven wrong – vigorously defending marcos? oh my the paranoia has reached that far!
“you’re faced with research and hard work by a lot of people and your response is to pooh-pooh it.”
you’re assuming that those “research” are credible, non-partisan, independent, and the products of detached observers! citing those “research” is like asking a communist what he thinks of capitalism
the hard work put into propaganda aka “research” is not denied
very well, scalia, where are your credible, non-partisan, independent, products of detached observers? lay them out here.
and i take my hat off to you for the most enjoyable line you’ve ever written: “excessive enjoyment of constitutional rights drive away business more than inconsistent policies, programs and practices.”
Nice photo of First unGentleman Mike Arroyo with all the props.
St. Luke’s must be making a killing with the hospital bills.
First jocjoc and his phantom disease cured by gatorade, and another secretary with his tuseran capsules, and now Mike Arroyo with his diarrhea masquerading as a heart attack.
mlq3’s right. One issue after another, coming in rapid succession or almost simultaneously, keeps us off track. Our energies are sapped as we try to deal with all of them. Yet there is only one issue: too much power vested on one man or woman.
We expect him/her to put food on our tables, and keep us healthy and educated. And when he/she fails as to be expected under a highly centralized structure, we can only agitate for resignation/ouster or file futile impeachment raps. Nothing more.
A change of the system is an option: federalism. Another is a change in the system: lesser power and wealth for imperial Manila, more to cities and provinces through legislation. Simple as it may seem, the latter requires a revolution, no less.
mlq3,
First of all, you continue to forget to back up your statement: “The only thing that can derail the marshaling of forces for impeachment is Charter Change.” After all, that’s what your main point of this entry was, right?
I guess I’m demanding too much when I ask for a shred of evidence to support your claim.
My counter-evidence is: previous impeachments (and this one) didn’t need Chacha to be killed. Furthermore, Chacha headlines are mostly being generated by oppositionists who are screeching about imminent Martial Law (an easy-to-use, never-can-be-disproven, fear-mongering tactic).
—————-
Second, maybe Enrile won’t slap you, but your agreement that Doronila can read his mind is inane. Enrile would love to see GMA toppled because she thinks he’s an old toadie? Puh-leeaze.
I guess I’m demanding too much when I ask for a shred of evidence to support your claim.
My counter-evidence is: Enrile has been a pretty staunch admin supporter over the last few years, as can be seen from his many pronouncements and votes. Right now he is saying that JDV and son broke the law on several occasions. He doesn’t sound/look/seem like an anti-GMA’er.
—————
Thirdly,
OK, you won’t reveal your source who claims that Dureza told him the evening before he would float a trial baloon for Chacha by “slipping” during a prayer. Let me guess: Harry Roque? Dinky Soliman?
And yes, it’s a silly claim. Dureza did that as a secret wink to the House so that they could start getting signatures? Oops — they were already mobilized. Maybe Dureza and gang wanted to gauge the public…but then swung into action before some polls/feedback could be enacted? Backwards timing, no?
I guess I’m demanding too much when I ask for a shred of evidence to support your claim.
————————-
Fourth,
You are now going back to claiming Gloria cheated in the elections.
I guess I’m demanding too much when I ask for a shred of evidence to support your claim.
Your claims of cheating are based on various articles written by anti-GMA entities. The evidence you cite is all hearsay, not evidence.
My counter-evidence: The Supreme Court actually opened the boxes in the areas where the opposition claimed there was cheating. They looked at both the CofC’s and ballots. They officially stated that there was no evidence of meaningful cheating. This evidence is hard evidence.
———————–
Fifth,
You claim that I’m demanding evidence vs GMA because I somehow know that you can’t find anything tangible enough to prove wrongdoing. I think that you, the accuser, is the one with the burden of demonstrating proof.
So let’s look at your latest accusation and see if we can find a pattern.
You claim that Gloria’s term is a “moveable goal post” because of a “friendly Supreme Court.”
I guess I was demanding too much when I asked for a shred of evidence to support your claim.
When challenged, you cited anti-admin sources who claim there is a supposed “trend” of the court going Gloria’s way and list a slew of selected cases which somehow prove the point.
My counter-evidence: See my next post. I want to seperate that one topic because it will probably require much detail and much back-and-forth.
——————————–
In conclusion, it still looks like you and your peers have concocted a woven story of unproven accusations. You cite each other’s articles as “proof,” and build your accusations on the foundation comprised of your previous dubious accusations.
Dude, that is the very description of “propaganda.”
And your defense is? I have raised the bar of evidence so high that it’s impossible to satisfy. Gee, maybe it’s not supposed to be easy to throw around accusations without proof? Especially when the accused are the public sector’s top management, no? The system was actually designed that way (by your pals like Fr Bernas, Liberal Party luminaries, lawyers you like, etc)…wasn’t it?
OK, so let’s move on to your accusations against the SC and see what proof you have…or to see if my “bar” is raised too high again…..
quezon,
“very well, scalia, where are your credible, non-partisan, independent, products of detached observers? lay them out here.”
In my own survey of related “research” so far only your kind of “independents” have been doing those kinds of “research.” other than them, i don’t see any other “research” in the horizon
at least we are giving you the benefit of the doubt that maybe someday you can come up with “research” from an independent source, one that is not yet tainted like ABS CBN, PCIJ and Newsbreak.
your “research” is not corroborated by “research” from the real independents
you won’t see me citing NBN Channel 4 or the PIA or anything from the govt
i hope you’re not following the usual media gambit to “just allege and let the person defend himself out of it”
(im afraid this will boil down into “scalia-since-you-don’t-have-research-to-back-up-your-claims……”)
“and i take my hat off to you for the most enjoyable line you’ve ever written: “excessive enjoyment of constitutional rights drive away business more than inconsistent policies, programs and practices.â€Â
oh thank you.
did it already occur to you who are always “excessively enjoying constitutional rights”?
istambay,
“and what do you call brion to name a few? only in the perfect world or onli n da pilipins! and perfect example, neri’s conversation with president on NBN-ZTE deal being covered by executive privilege, a matter of national security.”
the presidential proclamations, the Sigaw petition, the BJE-MOA
HOHOHO!
“–yeah and malacanang can send that list back for names will have their choice in it. bet you’ve heard it before. it called stocking the SC. c’mon it’s too late to act naive in this part of game. i maybe older than most of you here, but i’m not senile yet.”
in short. you don’t want peace of mind, and simply persist in your paranoia
kuya, gloria is limited to what the JBC sends her. gloria can’t send the list back. kaya nga bantay korte suprema ‘no? Sen. Pangilinan is a member of the JBC, he can influence who gets in the short list of SC nominees
HOHOHO!
mlq3,
Re: the “GMA-friendly” SC you claim exists.
Right off the bat, I note that you cited an ABS-CBN in-house editorial as your source. Well, there’s an objective source!
The opening line of the article: “Sometime before the Supreme Court voted on the high-profile case of the homeland agreement with the Moro Islamic Liberation Front, two justices reportedly received calls from the Palace.”
Here we go again. Ummm, anyone have a source for substantiating these calls? I guess I’m demanding too much when I ask for a shred of evidence to support the claim.
Let me guess, Malacanang’s caller is the one who told ABS-CBN? No? Oh, then maybe the two Justices called up ABS-CBN? The Justices which the articles claim “were just taking orders from the Palace”??? Hmmm…….
And in journalism, I believe one needs at least a second source to verify or substantiate, no? The credibility of this article is already suspicious after only one sentence!
———————-
The article goes on to introduce us to un-named “court insiders”. They say that the admin’s LOSS (in the MOA case) is misleading, that the SC is truly pro-admin; pro-Gloria. “Under the Puno Court, there is a growing perception that the Tribunal is a co-opted rather than a co-equal branch.”
I guess I’m demanding too much when I ask for a shred of evidence to support the claim.
The article cites their findings “tend to support the perception that appointees of President Arroyo are protective of her.”
Well, the use of “TEND TO” and “PERCEPTION” already indicate the flimsiness of the accusation and any underlying evidence. Perhaps it’s a legal hedge vs libel?
But let us look at the 21 SC rulings which the article cherry-picked.
First, we can see that, in toto, 59% of individual Justice’s votes are “pro-admin” (according to the editor/author) while 41% is “anti-admin”. In the cases themselves, it seems the Government won them 12-9.
But wait…that’s pretty broad-brushed. Let’s look closer.
For example, here are some “pro-admin”, “Gloria-friendly” SC decisions:
1. ESTRADA VS. DESIERTO. Supported the CA which had dismissed Erap’s criminal charges vs the BIR and Citigroup.
2. EJERCITO VS. SANDIGANBAYAN. Supported the ruling allowing the production of bank account documents for Erap’s case.
Are these really pro-Gloria victories via a “friendly” SC? Or just reasonable rulings almost any court would make? Wouldn’t you?
——————-
There are also some “pro-admin” rulings which are actually less about the policy of the moment and more about the inherent rights of the government.
1. ABAKADA vs. EXECUTIVE SECRETARY. Upheld the constitutionality of imposing VAT.
2. PIMENTEL VS. ERMITA. Ruled that the the president can make ad interim appointments during the recess of Congress.
3. KILUSANG MAYO UNO VS. NEDA. Validated the government’s right to streamline the ID systems of the government.
———————–
Many of the “pro-GMA” decisions are tied-in to one overall law — The right to executive privilege…which all three branches enjoy.
1. GUDANI VS. SENGA
2. SENATE OF THE PHILIPPINES VS. ERMITA
3. NERI VS. SENATE
4. AKBAYAN VS. AQUINO (J-PEPA comms)
Obviously, the same basic right has been positively supported 4 times.
——————
So far, I can only see the EO464 rulings being — arguably — “pro-Gloria”…though one can argue that the SC simply upheld the law.
But there’s one other case I’m sure you will call “pro-Gloria” (even though it might be considered a tie):
1. DAVID VS. ARROYO. Upheld PP1017 and G.O. 605, though David’s arrest was deemed illegal.
—————–
Meanwhile, one case — which was supposedly an “anti-admin” victory — is a head-scratcher:
1. ITFP vs Comelec. Voided the 2004 automated equipment purchase contracts. This is anti-admin because Pimentel was the one to make a last-minute objection to the contracts? (And I thought GMA did NOT want the equip so that she could cheat easily????)
——————–
Last, but not least, let’s look at the “losses” GMA had:
1. TECSON VS. COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS. Ruled that Poe is not a foreigner.
2. LEGARDA VS. DE CASTRO . Denied deCastro’s resistance vs using PET to determine if there was cheating. (Legarda eventually lost the recount, by the way).
3. LAMBINO vs. COMELEC. Effectively killed the People’s Initiative.
4. BAYAN VS. ERMITA. Effectively killed the CPR policy.
5. CHAVEZ VS. GONZALEZ. Ruled that the airing of the Garci Tapes can not be prohibited.
6. COTOBATO Vs. THE REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES. The Mindanao MOA-BJE was ruled unconstitutional.
Seems that many key rulings went AGAINST Gloria and her allies.
—————————–
There you go, mlq3. I have laid out some of the counter-evidence. Please try to now use these cases to prove that the SC’s “unmistakable voting pattern” is “GMA-friendly”.
To me, it seems that your charges vs the SC are as legally, factually, empirically without evidence…just like your charges vs GMA. Will you again say that my need for evidence is ill-placed? Is the bar too high with the SC, too?
Again…if you have two opinions about what the truth is…how does one determine which opinion is correct? The objective weighing of evidence, yes?
By the way, the impeachment was on ANC all morning. Now, the coverage is the Senate’s investigation of Bolante. Oops, and now we go back to the House/impeachment.
Are you sure Chacha (which is on-going during all of this) is a “smokescreen” and is “The only thing that can derail the marshaling of forces for impeachment is Charter Changeâ€Â?
anthony,
excuses, excuses, excuses….
manuelbuencamino :
“excuses, excuses, excuses….”
right
what is the difference between the articles you dispute and deep throat during watergate?
and again, both of you can only dispute what is presented but not present anything of your own to support your assertions.
geo, there are cases the sc can be left alone to determine but look at the key, crucial, absolutely essential cases, on which so much hinges. e.g. executive privilege. you can live with bowing to international pressure on murdering socialists, you cannot yield on that. and in such cases the party line vote held in the sc.
“and again, both of you can only dispute what is presented but not present anything of your own to support your assertions.”
quezon, please be reminded that you are the one making an assertion, and you tried to back up that assertion with “research”
ours is actually a contra-assertion.
as told to you, the burden is on you, and not on us to prove otherwise.
rebutting “research” is no longer necessary if the underlying “research” for the assertion is weak
in some criminal court cases, the accused need not present evidence because the prosecution’s evidence is insufficient. that’s how Harrison Ford’s character in Presumed Innocent was acquitted
like gloria’s election. procedure was followed – the congressional canvass showed that she won. you say she didn’t win, so you have to show that.
the thing is, the only proper venue for proving otherwise is the PET. if the evidence of cheating is really that strong as its advocates would claim, how come the protests went pffft?
on second thought – the proceedings before the PET can be the “research” you are looking for.
well then. behold our rebutting “research” – the decision of the PET on the protests
im still awaiting your rebuttal on geo’s claims that the PET protests did not yield any evidence of cheating
“…there are cases the sc can be left alone to determine but look at the key, crucial, absolutely essential cases, on which so much hinges. e.g. executive privilege”
quezon, you don’t need the piercing of executive privilege to show that gloria gave the go signal on the ZTE deal with the full knowledge of Abalos’ bribe try.
remember, gloria had to cancel the project
the problem with the anti gloria school, especially the ‘united opposition’ is that they are still waiting for a repeat of a “chavit moment”
mlq3,
You wrote: “what is the difference between the articles you dispute and deep throat during watergate?”
–There are differences between straight reporting, investigative journalism, muck-raking, propaganda, embellishment, etc, etc. I think they teach journalism students about that. Hence a whole bunch of rules and professional practices and procedures.
Guess what? One of the major differentiators is — is it a corroborated fact?
The other major difference has to do with the writer — what is the purpose of writing and printing the article?
You still need evidence, mlq3. Your and Pia Hontiveros’ opinions aren’t enough to warrant turning the country upside down.
Meanwhile….I just laid out my counter-evidence in my recent two long posts. How can you claim that I don’t support my assertions?
Lastly, that list of cases was cited by YOU; I only commented on them. Anyway, the one issue — exec privilige — is the one and only key issue? Oh.
So the rejection of The People’s Initiative wasn’t a big deal? I remember you making a very big deal out of it.
And I thought Chacha is the one big, bad, boogeyman that is strong enough (and needed necessarily) to fight back against impeachment?
And what about the ruling against the MOA-BJE? Gee, you seemed to think that was very, very important.
C’mon, mlq3, your evidence that the SC is beholden to Gloria — and rules according to Malacanang — is weak…and that’s a nice description to use.
(BTW, what’s this about killing socialists???)
Woodward of “Deep Throat”-fame, back then and up to this day, Woodward still conveys that he searches for truth.
And then, there is Dick Cheney, having created his own truth about the US Constitution, managed to plunge the USA into a muck of trouble.
http://newsinfo.inquirer.net/inquirerheadlines/nation/view/20081125-174361/Plan-to-zap-2010-elections-exposed
–talking about perfect timing to deflect the heat of impeachment complaint from gma. certainly it keeps people’s focus scattered with several issues being bombarding the citizens at the same time. by design or will it backfire and fuel more heat? paranoia maybe but attempts are being made to keep gma past 2010.
istambay,
oh yes its paranoia.
that resolution is as effective as the BJE-MOA (even without the SC decision)
attempts are made to keep gloria past 2010? expected na yan.
but is there cause for alarm? none!
the road to cha cha requires the cooperation of the Senate which will vote separately.
the Senate will certainly block any proposal for extension
“the Senate will certainly block any proposal for extension”
–how can you be so sure? because the senators says so? how many balimbings and politicians for sale have you met lately?
certainly distrust of the politicians is not just common among those in the opposition movement.
you’ll be surprise what a bagful of money can do and add that with a promise of more powerful position. when gma becomes desperate and this is getting close to desperate times i bet she’ll try anything to hang to power. is she fails the she could just say “see i kept my word, i stepped down”.
Is the coming weekend the correct timing? Ipaghihiganti ba ni Bonifacio ang pagsisinungaling na ginawa kay Rizal? Abangan!
The members of the Senate were selected by the people of the Philippines — they have the mandate to speak for the people of the Philippines because these senators were selected by the people of the Philippines.
The Senators get to “speak for the people”…regardless if that’s as a seperate or joint body of Congress…or whether in Concon or Conass. I’m sure they will fight hard for their seperate status, though.
There are also a few reasons to expect most Senators to resist a parliamentary system:
1. Their status as Senators is “higher” and more uniquely identifiable (1 of 24) than being part of a broader unitary legislature. Widespread and individual recognition is assured.
2. The road to the President’s office is much shorter from a Senate seat than a “mere” parliamentarian. Who would want to give up this significant advantage?
3. A PM would probably have to be strong inside a strong party. Not all Senators are in that position, so why give up their power?
I also think there are good reasons for the Senators to vote against Federalism. Once again, many may not have strong enough support in a region, in their province.
In sum, the Seantors will make a lot of noise and will ultimately turn the SC.
And…even if Chacha makes it through all of this, there still has to be a plebescite, no? I’m pretty sure the people will be getting bombarded with info, both for and against change.
Seems to me that paranoia of a skewed, lopsided, unfair (including term extensions) constitutional change passing through all of these obstacles seems misplaced.
How come there’s no call to amend the constitution to abolish the lower house? I would like that to happen.
Regarding paranoia and conspiracy theories: they remain as they are until the fear becomes reality, di ba? Now if you fear something and you don’t take steps to handle the possibility then you suffer the consequences!
E.g. you fear that Citibank will collapse after all (even with the bailout), aren’t you going to take some if not all of your money out if somebody calls you paranoid? Hmm?