Platform, plez™ is officially on-line!
Election in and election out, the quality and level of the National “Debate” around the crop of politicians that happen to be vying for name recall slots in the minds of Filipino voters remains disturbingly the same. The analysis is always mainly around the whats and what-nots of one bozo’s decision to run, his “winnability”, and what kind of “higher power” is behind whatever moral or idealist ascendancy a politician may claim to be his. But there is one simple principle that needs to be the focus of any challenge an intelligent electorate needs to routinely make to a politician making a campaign pitch to them:
Platform, please.
It’s simple, really. Having a vision for the Philippines is the whole point of being a candidate for public office as far as an intelligent electorate is concerned. And the only reliable evidence that such a vision exists is if a politician is readily able to articulate it. Check out our platform from which we will launch this campaign to pick Filipino politicians’ brains intelligently by clicking on the following link:
GetRealPhilippines.com/PlatformPlez
Watch that space as we piece together a picture of the nature and extent of what intellectual substance (if any) undepins the personalities that our country’s “experts” so love to “analyse” and speculate on and what the public so eagerly laps up.
A comprehensive Executive Summary of Candidates’ Campaign Platform is up and running and cites known instances of statements made by these candidates that remotely resemble some kind of plan or vision for Philippine society. Check it out here!
Let’s all contribute to raising the bar around the way we conduct ourselves as dignified members of the Free World.
=========
Join us on Facebook!
Popularity: 3% [?]
We have never seen any Platform of any kind from any of the aspirants. All they do is to wave to the crowd; distribute rice,
noodles, tuyo, etc…; give a little statement for answers. Some
dont even give statement at all; like Manny Villar and Noli de Castro. Bayani Fernando hardly can explain himself. So, he hires some
Bloggers as his Spokespeople. To sing praises for his good works.
And to conceal his Kleptomaniac tendencies.
These are the kinds of candidates we have been voting for office in
every election. No wonder, when they are elected. They are confused as we are, asking themselves why they are elected.
Is this that Bayani Fernando can hardly explain himself why some of his followers adore him????
Saddam Hussein was adored by his followers in Iraq.
Hitler of Germany was adored by his NAZI folowers.
hay naku, pag naupo yan sa UN General Assembly,
anong silbi nyan – committee of silence?
para mapakinabangan, mautusan nga na kumuha ng tubig
oops… mahal naman ng ticket ng waiter –
paid by philippine taxpayers pa
ayos lang, e si erap nga e…
oops… oo nga si erap pala
The amount of empty (literally and figuratively) space on that table is kind of amazing, isn’t it? Sadly, there will be a lot of people who will consider ignorant pap like “Uphold legislation that focuses on integrity, freedom, and peace” a real answer for something.
wanted to do something like this but couldn’t find the time. thanks, benign0.
Benign0, according to google trends, Villar and Roxas are the most googled/spidered philippine presidential candidates. Reading your table, you have a blank entry on Villar… does this mean you haven’t gotten around to it… or there is just no information to put in?
Funny you’d say that, Cocoy. There was a blog entry you wrote a year or two ago where, after reading it, I came to the conclusion that you were already working on something like this!
Actually, I also thought it was gonna be a hell of a slog to come up with something like this as well. And then I started to do some quick googling around and found that material that fits my criteria of what a platform or vision should be is actually quite far in between (as BenK’s quick stocktake on the amount of space in the matrix reveals).
Yeah I’ve gotten around to Villar. He’s actually got the flashiest website among the candidates (the best that money could buy is the likely case here).
Unfortunately for Villar I came up with zilch in my first safari into his stuff. All of what you see in the current version (as at 1-ish a.m. 24th Jul 2009) is a quick-and-dirty pass. So the material in there at the moment pretty much represent the ones that readily stood out. To be fair, Villar was the last bozo on the list. And at 1 in the morning with my bed beckoning and my day job just 8 and a half hours away, maybe I did not do him enough justice…
Then again, money spent does not necessarily equate to substance delivered.
Filipinos become nostalgic of a past that is misunderstood. It is good to want a better life, but it is dangerous to begin with wrong assumptions. Like the better life, but understand how it was attained, and who attained it. We are not being asked to rebuild our nation as we never built one; the Americans did.
We must build our nation because we have no other choice. We cannot continue to dream the wrong dream, to want what never was. What many among us laugh at, like the move for US state-hood, is the most accurate expression of wanting to return to an era when it was perceived to have been better. If we do not wish to take that path, then there is no other alternative but to admit we are not a nation, we are not a democracy, and we are not sovereign and independent.
When we have read our truth clearly, then we can intelligently design our pathway towards nation-hood, towards democracy, towards true freedom independence. This pathway is very, very different from any design that assumes we already are a nation, already democratic, already sovereign and independent. The difference in nuance may seem slight, but any social or behavioral scientist will quickly see what will fail from the very beginning because of wrong assumptions or an understanding that will give birth to options which have a reasonable chance of succeeding.
Politicians must admit that their messianic bent might be better transformed to the ideals of empowerment. Leaders play an unusually strong role in a society where people have a culture of subservience, and this reality often influences leaders to lead more than empower. Yes, if we wish to be a feudal society, then leaders can simply lead well and demand obedience. But if we wish to be a true democracy, then the people must take the brunt of the responsibility of building our nation.
There are many who are concerned and wish to see great change and improvement in Philippine society. They are verbally expressive but need to be as expressive in action. It is not anymore the time to simply criticize yet enjoy the comfort of a non-poor home, or the Internet, or the safety net of the United States. It is a time when those who claim they want a better Philippines to walk their talk, or not talk so much anymore.
This is the moment for heroism – if, indeed, the motherland is in distress. Heroism has always used action with courage, action with intelligence, action with determination. In a few occasions, heroes use words which lift the heart and inspire the spirit, especially before battle. But the words have that effect only when they flow from the mouth of the heroes who have proven their extraordinary courage and nobility before they spoke to their people.
Filipinos are unerringly guided towards a point of confrontation, when they will be asked to cross their rubicon and experience their tipping point. We have held on to a dream. It sustained us through the bad times and gave us hope of a future full of hope. It is now time to build it.
Jose Ma. Montelibano
Phil. Daily Inquirer
24 July 2009
http://opinion.inquirer.net/viewpoints/columns/view/20090724-216942/Dream-It-Then-Build-It
Can I ask initially the author as to who, between a Villar and a Teodoro, will he vote for president consistent with his personal idea of platform?
For that matter, who will he vote for president from the field of presidentiables and why – with or without – the template presented?
that’s none of your business.
This version, of course, suffered from the same flaws as the one originally presented by yet another blogger.
They are all not what they seem before the other demographic classes such as Classes C,D,E.
So it becomes one desired ‘measurement tool’ by perhaps the self-professed Class A in our Great Cultural Divide.
What in the name of Taft’s left boob are you talking about? This is not a measurement tool of any sort! It is a summary table of information pertaining to several generic political issues, based on the public statements or other information issued by the candidates themselves. It does not MEASURE ANYTHING! It’s RAW DATA! Gods below, man, get yourself some professional psychiatric help before you hurt yourself or somebody else.
Obviously, you missed the point. Let me draw it for you, if I may.
Benigno speaks of personalities here, of his old advocacy of finding substance and if you connect very simply (the dots are all there), you will know that by the title alone, “Platform, plez”, a so-called “Executive Summary of Candidates’ Campaign Platform” is provided precisely because, with them one can start some work in measurement.
Unfortunately however, those that are relatively supplied more are certain personalities only, not all, making it then appear that the others may not have one or two, as the case may be.
For example, let us just belabor the obvious, in some (let me not mention them now), the boxes are filled with what are claimed to be statements publicly known to have been uttered but others, the boxes are empty.
Under the principle that “out of sight is out of mind”, it follows that it could mislead readers that Politician A is really better than Political B unless of course the whole rather ‘incomprehensive’ presentation is changed.
There seems to be so much hot air in your head, mister. You behave like you know me.
simple lang yan – come up with your tabulation.
This really escapes me.
Why are there too many spokespersons for the author himself of a blog?
Are you guys’ gangsters? That’s intellectual taboo. Let the author just answer the points of interpellation. Better that way not some second-hand views, we largely don’t need them now.
And if you wish to answer for benigno, why is the access to the link like that?
Let us just take a mental note of what ben k said:
“This is not a measurement tool of any sort. It does not measure anything.”
This, in reference to the those units of entry as are contained in the appropriate boxes of the “Executive Summary of Candidates’ Campaign Platform”.
That sounds really strange but let us see. Just keep this on record.
just want to know if you…
are totally against having any sort of comparative analysis of the candidates?
are just not amenable to the critera used?
feel that benginO’s and bongV’s efforts are biased?
please clarify as i am getting confused here.
as far as i can tell, the tables presented so far are, at the very least, attempts to raise the level of analysis of the line-up of possible presidential candidates. i can’t really see anything wrong with that. i may or may not agree with all the entries presented so far but i can appreciate the motive behind the effort.
i sincerely hope you would answer my questions because i’m really trying hard, really hard, to understand where you’re coming from.
i don’t mean no disrespect here.
Yes, please do your best to take mental note of it. The table lists a number of common topics relevant to government and politics. For each candidate, the comments he has made on each of the topics is listed in abridged form, along with the appropriate references to the sources of the information.
INFORMATION. SUMMARY. NOT. A. MEASUREMENT.
If your candidate(s) of preference display empty spaces, is not the correct course of action to either A) direct the attention of the compiler of the INFORMATION to the sources which have been overlooked or B) request that the candidate(s) make statements addressing those topics? Or is it C) respond with incoherently-written contradictions?
Just to prove to myself that I wasn’t completely off-base with drawing the conclusion that you may have some sort of mental disorder, I asked my maid (whose formal education ceased in Grade 5) to read the ‘Executive Summary’ to me and explain what it means (as part of her English lesson for today). She described it as “a list of things these people have said about those subjects.” No more no less. An overgrown fifth-grader gets it, and you do not. You have a problem.
Dang, mas matino pa yatang kausap ang kasambahay mo – maybe she should become the head of the permits and licenses division of Marikina, it might do one helluva good :)
Ann problema kasi nyan – if he doesn’t get it, then people are ganging on him…. :)
and he wonders, why :)
ha ha ha ha ha ..
omg.. made my day
O ano kayo ngayon?
Now that all the evaluation tools had been laid out and the utter sparseness of any semblance of anything intelligent offered by most of these bozos is now so glaringly evident, wala na kayong masabi.
Pinoy nga naman talaga;
Parang aso.
Matangkad lang kapag naka-upo.
I am curious as to this most basic question. Before one talks of policy platform for candidates for political office. In basic human societies no matter what is the stage of their development what is governments role in the scheme of things?
Politics comes from the Greek word for polity which simply means community.
If one does not know the role of government how can one move on to asking for the policy platforms of the individuals who are competing to head the government.
I ask the question simply because the heading for the matrix for candidates policy platform makes no sense.
It betrays a serious lack of appreciation of political economy. Political economy defined as the study of the anatomy of human society.
So the question remains what is government role? It is simple really………The simple thread has existed since man stood erect to present times when man is reaching for the stars. From hunter gatherer societies to the more complex forms of present day exchange economies. That is also more popularly known as markets.
Benign0,
Heavens almighty,
nice work . . .
Joe
Thanks Joe.
betterphil,
The first draft to this did not send, gliches maybe.
Straight to the point, let me answer:
Q1: no
Q2: yes
Q3: yes
Hoping that your confusion does not resist these answers.
Corollarily, those tabulations, offhand, filled partially or wholly with entries (‘units of value’, whatever)do not raise the level of analysis on the presidentials and based alone on the ‘configuration’ (some filled, others not), the motive is suspect. It can confuse the readers as to believe that those with filled boxes had earned the more “pogi” points. Why? Let us just subscribe to the idea of “out of sight, out of mind”. So if we read nothing in those boxes, how can we even tend to vote for the presidentiables coming empty. This is just one point.
Further, the more contemporary criteria across social classes which means from people of all walks of life have not been captured by rather big chunks of theoretical nonsense. They are, most honestly. At cursory glance though, the matrix or table becomes deceivingly passable but we wish to discuss the contents and finding them out to be “nebulous”, why live in the clouds?
Thank you betterphil for your none disrespect of me. Others here are quick consultants. Please note that the link of benigno is rather strange, it cannot be accessed.
Can you check whether there is a toll fee something and if there is, the more anomalous?
Corollarily,
but isn’t it clearly stated that this is work in progress? the title says (highlight mine):
“Philippine Presidential Elections 2010
Tabulation of KNOWN POSITIONS taken by candidates on selected areas of national concern”
and that it will be updated as soon as new information comes in?
“LAST UPDATED: 24 JULY 2009″
Also, what of the ‘categories’?
“Economy, Culture, Human capital, Foreign affairs, Infrastructure, National Security, Governance”
I have no personal knowledge who among the possible candidates BongV or BenignO support and I don’t see how I would be able to get wind of that by just looking at their tables. I can, however, see quite clearly who among the possible candidates have already taken some kind of position about the issues stated above. Hopefully, those blank spaces will be filled out soon.
I think it would really help if you would just come out with your own version.
Primer is providing evidence to the wisdom of the adage:
If you say that you can’t do it, you are right.
… which is why teachers and parents should be vigilant about thoughtless use of these words before their wards :
you don’t throw jewel to poultry – they don’t know what to do with it :)
I was wondering if COMELEC can require teh candidates to provide an attachment or fill in a bank space for their platfrom during their filing of candidacy. Then the comelec should publish it be in TV or posters.
Currently I notice that, that instead of platforms, the candidates provided monickers, like “Mr Palengke” or “Erap para sa Mahirap”, etc so the candidate got elected because of their monickers not because of their platforms?
I know teh masa loves monicker or even entertained by it. But shoudl we always cater to the need of the masses? shoudl election alwyas be for teh masses?
I think Benigno and Bong are doing a really great initiative. Thank you guys..
That’s a good idea, but the problem with it is there are people like Primer who would assume that because COMELEC is a government entity, there is some sort of bias involved in the simple second-hand presentation of information. As I assume would also be the case if the Church did that sort of thing, or any other group or individual who is perceived to have some particular point of view. Thus, the method least susceptible to prejudice is, ironically, to compel the candidates to publish their views on their own. That’s what I see as the best possible use of these various ‘tools’, and the whole point of the ‘platform, plez’ movement – to get the candidates themselves to see the wisdom of cutting the crap and elevating the level of their oratory.
The bad news is – Primer is symbolic of the ineptness and mediocrity that now pervades the government.
The good news is – there’s presumably a lot more folks smarter than Primer who can figure out a 1×1 matrix without having to name drop a self-proclaimed ivory tower that idolizes a sectarian school’s high school drop-out.
Damn the <strike torpedoes talangka , full speed ahead.
Damn the
torpedoestalangka , full speed ahead.Ben K:
The Eraps of the world will move to downplay the use of comparisons and platforms and will try to get away with emotional appeal. Having comparative matrices will put the candidates in a glaring spotlight and expose their flanks. Consider a candidate who tries to present his persona as the solution when in fact his persona is only as good as the solutions he has undertaken and propose to undertake.
The candidates will first observe the terrain, and if they see they are a big fish in a small pound – they’ll be beating their chests like a one ton pink gorilla.
However, when these same candidates are placed in a larger pond, where they are no longer the big fish – and there’s a bigger gorilla than the pink gorilla – then you’ll have a lame arse – we don’t need comparisons because there’s only one qualified. The nerve – the idiot thinks he is talking to fellow idiots.
The candidate instead of getting into the details and presenting his case and articulating his position, retreats into a cave and throws a tantrum? punyetang kandidato yan – umuwi ka sa bahay mo, magjakol ka na lang.
i think the comelec shouldn’t be against this sorta thing. its already been doing stuff like this.
Mr. J_ag:
Government’s role (at least the one I envision) is to create an environment where one can peacefully pursue their aspirations in a manner respectful of others’ own efforts to pursue theirs.
It’s simple, really™
And that’s the way simple is done, dude. ;-)
i read in an mba book (i’m no mba though) that one of the biggest responsibilities of a manager is to define or shape the culture of the organization.
i think this also applies in this context. the government is the manager. whatever it does will always have an impact or influence on the country’s culture.
I am an MBA, and I heard that too, somewhere. That’s a good point.
bO after all is said and done all you have is a ideal vision of what governments role should be?
Idealism alone does not cut it. This thing called governance has taken literally thousands of years to evolve. This thing called justice…
When will you move to discuss the actual practical role of government?
All you can give is rhetorical firecrackers.
When you go to a dentist to be treated do you question him on his opinions of dentistry? You assume you know what he is doing. you trust he will work for your physcial interest.
How can you ask a candidate what his policy platform on governance is?
It is too bad you and a most who post here speak in pure theoretical terms as I would hazard a guess your engagment in politics would be limited to voting and nothing else.
The danger is here is all so obvious…
Assumptions being defintive… It is sad and tragic that the quality of the present crop for Presidents sadly reflect the low standards of the government. That being We the people……
but when you go to a dentist you do your due diligence. before you sat down on the dental chair, you have already done due diligence. for example, you ask your friends:
* is he a good dentist? who are his previous clients known to you?
* what is his dental specialty?
* does he charge high or low?
* does he have installment plans?
* is his office conveniently accessible?
same thing with a lawyer, accountant, surgeon, engineer – you do your due diligence before hiring their services.
now, wouldn’t you do the same with a politician who is aspiring to take a position that will affect more than just your your teeth? he will be making life and death decisions that will affect not just you, but your family, your community, your city, your country – and you don’t want to do due diligence?
if you do the same due diligence on the professionals whose services you will retain, then why shouldn’t you do your due diligence on the politicians? ask what they stand for, look up their track record, ask the people who know them, listen to their enemies too – and most of all, keep stock.
the danger of making uninformed decisions works to the favor of politicians. we make peanuts of due diligence and we get more baboons in government.
Tsk tsk, Mr. J_ag. You say all we can come up with is a theoretical framework? Well look around you, dude. It seems no such coherent framework even exists in the minds of these candidates nor any of the traditional “experts” here — at least no evidence of such — to begin with. So how, may I ask, does one criticise someone who comes up with one, then?
For that matter, why don’t you show us one, or at least build upon what’s already been presented? Up to the challenge? Of course you aren’t. Because you’ve got dozens of excuses not to step up to the task.
Too bad. :-D
ignorance is remedied by providing knowledge.
katangahan - ala pang vaccine na naiimbento, pasensya na lang po :)
i think i need to correct myself. it’s not clearly or expressly stated but it is clearly suggested that it’s a work in progress. and considering the ongoing discussion, it’s all out in the open — it’s a work in progress.
better:
it is quite clear to nearly all of us (you included) that:
1 – it is a work in progress
2 – the boxes which are empty need to be filled in – and that is left to the reader as an exercise; upon finding the desired information and filling in the box with the appropriate entries, then the reader can make a more informed decision
3 – the matrix is a sample, readers can come up with their own personal criteria and build their own matrix
except one – definitely ain’t ignorant or maybe is ignorant,
but if not, then go to http://filipinovoices.com/executive-summary-of-presidential-candidates-campaign-platforms/comment-page-1#comment-77459 ;)
Primer,
The whole drift of Benigz little project is this:
Immediately followed by this:
Now that all the evaluation tools had been laid out and the utter sparseness of any semblance of anything intelligent offered by most of these bozos is now so glaringly evident, wala na kayong masabi.
See? It’s so simple. The whole parade of clowns presenting themselves to be the next prez are nothing but brain dead bozos with vacuous platforms.
Ergo, the coming electoral fiesta is nothing but an exercise in futility. Let us instead establish a dictatorship of rightist enlightened geniuses with Narciso Benigno as the imminent model.
Wanna enlist?
Nota Bene :
Please also note that Benigz changed the layout of his GetReal Philippines website. One noticeable change was that he removed his manifesto advocating authoritarian rule. And he also removed the articles of Teddy Benigno.
Nice try Benigz. Are you changing your mind on authoritarianism or you’re just being dishonest as regards your real political advocacy?
Ergo, IF the coming electoral fiesta is nothing but an exercise in futility – choose the least evil.
Even though tranquil is a pea from the same pod as Primer, a point about the democratic exercise has accidentally been made. Really, choosing a candidate is a matter of picking the one who (from the voter’s individual point of view) requires the least compromise of one’s principles and ideals. Nobody’s perfect, as they say.
But before the two waterheads say AHA C I TOLD U SO LOL, the voter obviously can’t (well, some apparently can) make that decision without knowing what those principles and ideals are, both from their candidates and from themselves. The only bad decisions are uninformed ones.
I think, BongV, BenK’s maid already demonstrated something quite significant — that a person who finished Grade 5 level education can actually make a sensible evaluation compared to a supposedly educated professional educator like Primer who can’t think his way out of a paper bag.
Those smarts are out there. It seems to me that it is actually the traditional political “experts” that infest the “intelligentsia” that are out to deny them the tools to intelligently evaluate by inundating the Media with their vacuous speculations. You can see even here in FV where blogs posts filled with hollow insinuations are routinely published.
I think we need to open up a new era where candidates are forced to speak for themselves, the electorate are provided (and not spoon-fed) the appropriate tools to evaluate, and those who produce and channel information focus on what is important, relevant, and of substance.
Tranquil,
Imagine this: the year 2010 saw the battle between Archetypes against Platformers, indeed the fight to the finish between the Praying Simpletons against the Perfect Analysts. Hail the Transformer!
As in Mazinger Z (Zer0):
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZvEBf828cYU&feature=related
What are you talking about, tranquil? All of the Teddyman’s articles are still where they are. Check out a stocktake of them all on the right hand panel of this page and a number of them can be accessed from our About Us page.
[NB: GetRealPhilippines.com is currently migrating off its Geocities account which will go offline by the 26th October 2009. In the future, the above link can be accessed here (that page not migrated as of this writing). Watch this space for updates on our migration project. - benign0].
As to this “manifesto advocating authoriatrian rule” are you referring to this article? Or this article?
If so, read them again and tell me if those actually “advocate” authoritarian rule.
Do your homework first before you sound off, dude.
Benigz,
Why even bother putting up an evaluation spreadsheet such as this when you are for authoritarian rule all along?
What I wanted to see from you is your authoritarian platform instead. Assuming that your authoritarian regime is in place, what would the chosen enlightened One do in his first 100 days of rule?
to tranquil: Won’t it be a waste of your time? How would you gain from a two-hundred-word-blog entry from benign0 in response to:
We dont like to porttray ourselves as cynics. But, a thousand years
ago a Cynic Philosopher named Diogenes walked in the streets of
Athen, Greece with a lighted lamp in the middle of the day. He told
onlookers, he was looking for an honest man.
The Filipino people are in the same condition now as the Philosopher
Diogenes. We cannot find an honest man to lead us. We are still
walking with a lighted lamp on the steets of the Philippines looking
for a good honest leader.
No Benigz, those are not the articles. Your manifesto is located on the left panel of your “old” homepage.
tranquil:
can you cite the specific sentence that makes you conclude about the advocacy for authoritarian rule?
also please provide the link of the page where you saw the sentence.
thanks.
It’s been removed Bong V. Benigz has changed the layout of his homepage.
Am not a techie so I do not know how to recover the URL of his old homepage.
But for Benigz to deny that he has had that manifesto would be, for me, plain and simple dishonesty. And Benigz credibility would go ka-boom. Sayang because am starting to give his advocacy a second look pa naman sana in light of his leanings to the writings of TCB and Ayn Rand.
Hmmm.
I agree with Primer. There’s a triple-B (Benign0, BongV, BenK) at play here.
BTW, BBB is considered low-grade rating (almost junk) where I used to work. Did I say in Wall Street, guys?
yeah..
and the fly that landed on primer’s etsas landed on the left side –
that’s why he votes fernando..
had the fly landed on the right side..
it would have been Erap
Ha! I like that. BBB. Not sure a trapo apologist from a country with an economy like this one ought to be making cracks about credit ratings, but I like the new acronym. I’ll keep it.
Hey BongV, we need to get in touch.
Ben K:
you can email me here.
I forgot to mention, I can see why you USED to work on Wall Street, since S&P and Fitch both list BBB as investment grade. Whereas the last bond issue I heard about (I think that was around the 14th or 15th) coming out of the PI scored a BB (junk).
Nice try, though.
Don’t fake it, BenK. But your Jewish fam name do not impress yours truly. I lived in Brooklyn you know.
Duh!
so.. you are from brooklyn..
lived in the pinoy ghetto of woodside queens
worked near the garden on 34th and 7th – :-)
Investopedia explains Bond Rating
Bond ratings are expressed as letters ranging from ‘AAA’, which is the highest grade, to ‘C’ (“junk”), which is the lowest grade. Different rating services use the same letter grades, but use various combinations of upper- and lower-case letters to differentiate themselves.
To illustrate the bond ratings and their meaning, we’ll use the Standard & Poor’s format:
AAA and AA: High credit-quality investment grade
AA and BBB: Medium credit-quality investment grade
BB, B, CCC, CC, C: Low credit-quality (non-investment grade), or “junk bonds”
D: Bonds in default for non-payment of principal and/or interest
****
kaya pala “used to” :D
Platform, vision, blah-blah, woof-woof!
I want to know first who is behind the vision and the platform.
Gloria has a vision and a platform, I suppose Benigno, Bong V. and the rest of the gang believes she deserves tp be heard.
After they convince evryone in this blog that platform and vision is the end-all and be-all, they will then present the platform and vision of the merged party of thieves and say let’s stick to issues, let’s ignore who’s talking and listen only to what he says.
Platform plez! Joskopo, that was the rallying cry of the administration in 2007. That’s like Celso de los Angeles selling you his pre-ned and telling you don’t look at me, look at my pre-need plan.
You want to do it right? Make an executive summary of the campaign platforms and a personal profile of each candidate. But don’t do one without the other,
Your agenda will be exposed if you present platforms without telling us about the candidates.
On the contrary, I wrote Gloria off.
I marked marked the moment she publicly said she will not run for the Presidency – and the moment she declared her candidacy. Offhand, platform or not – Arroyo was no longer in my book.
Any more unsubstantiated speculations that need debunking?
If you fill in the decision matrix provided at – http://filipinovoices.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/07/voting-matrix1.xls
and if in your MUST criteria, you have:
Integrity – a field where I rank Arroyo a No – Arroyo has not met my MUST criteria.
That takes her out of the running in my book
So, I really don’t know where you get your speculations about my position MCB – Would suggest you speculate on your own position – but defer from putting your words into my mouth.
Hope that clears things up.
that can’t be true, can it — that benign0 can do some things which will make manuelB vote per benign0′s “instructions”?
Even ifWhether or not benign0 and b0ngVmanuelB, Primer, PhilManila, tranquil and others have their own
consciencepriorities, personal agendas and interests that will determine who of the wannabe’s they will back for 2010-Malacanang.It will be hilarious given their antagonism, but I dare say that the bongV or benign0 “stuff” will allow manuB or PhilManila to communicate better (<brepeat : communicate better) why their kabayo is better than Bayani Fernando or Loren Legarda for 2010-Malacanang.
How would you treat the platform of the merged party of thieves?
MCB:
as previously stated
the candidate running under the merged party of thieves – will not make it past the MUST criteria – Integrity;
or in other words out na in Round 1 of the vetting process
The platform gets scrutinized in Round 2 (Desired criteria).
But, since the candidate is already screened out in Round 1, then there is no need to review the platform.
So if the candidate of the merged party of thieves is out, whoever he might be, who passes the integrity test among Noli, Chiz, Loren, Mar, Dick, Manny, and Erap? I didn’t bother to mention Gibo and Bayani because they are fighting to be nominated by the merged party of thieves.
MCB:
Yes, based on the methodology, your results are spot on.
MCB,
these are MY (other individuals may have a different opinion – and have different MUST criteria, and they might define their MUST criteria differently from me) initial empirical conclusions and may change as more information becomes available.
The objective is to identify these Compulsory (Must/Round 1) and Desired (Wants/Round 2) criteria.
When you list YOUR criteria – you might even wind up questioning whether you are using the right criteria – meaning the criteria is aligned with your world view and personal value system.
Anyways, in this instance of the MUST Criteria, filling in the boxes could go this way:
Manuelbuencamino,
I’m surprised that you are condemning a constructive effort and wonder if your dislike for the messenger(s) is biasing your view. Or if you always require that people fit into your mold before they warrant commendation for helpful work?
You have a good point, an executive summary of the platform and a personal profile of the candidate together would be informative. But so is this profile, done without pay and with the aim of helping build a rigor to the assessment of candidate. Also, I did not know Teodoro had a web site, and was able to go there and find his plan for my region. It was a bunch of pretty words without innovative substance, but even that was new and helpful. It is also nice to have a basic listing of the “serious” candidates. We may not all be as aware as you about such things.
Why is it necessary to condemn this path and suggest “the only way” is your way? You could, for instance, recognize the constructiveness of the effort AND suggest an “additional way”. More harmonious, and moving the dialogue forward rather than hammering it into the typically contentious and unhelpful, ever spiraling downward, personal diatribe.
I somehow expected more from you because I tend to align well with your principles; but not on this ”tone”.
You, of course, are free to take up whatever tone you want. I am just giving you the bounce of it off my brain.
Joe
Okay Joe, I suggest it as an additional way.
Having said that, let me explain why I am skeptical of the platform plez project. Intellectually the platforming of candidates is good. Contextually, within the current Philippine political setting, it can be misleading. Today, one cannot evaluate the presidentiables on their platform if one does not put their character under a microscope. I’m sure Bernie Maddoff’s business plan and investment strategy looked great on paper.
Like I said in my previous comment, focus on the platform and the vision is a line by the Arroyo administration. This view was taken to extremes by Emil Jurado, a journalist who supports the administration. And he unwittingly exposed the absurdity of such a line, within the curent political context.
He wrote, “I agree it’s insane, what’s going on. Voters are compelled to vote not on what candidates represent, much less what they stand for, nor what is their party platform, but on what kind of people they really are.”
So I hope you understand why I am less than enthusiastic about projects that appear good, that appeal intellectually, but are not in tune with the prevailing reality.
So okay, I will support the project and consider it constructive when I see the proponents put faces to the platforms and visions.
What GMA’s platform, anyway — tax relief for OCW’s? Does anybody even remember what platform Ramos had campaigned on and what was the platforms of at least two of those that he bested?
Has not it always been the case that a whole lot of Pinoys-in-Pinas (enough to win elections!!!) have cast their votes in disregard of platforms and that they vote based on their understanding of what kind of person the candidates are (matulungin, relihiyoso, may pinag-aralan, mabait, artista)? Kaya nga kailangang may letrato ang kandidato na nakaluhod at nagdarasal, kailangan iyon ng character definition (relihiyoso). At kaya kailangang magaling mag-ingles (may pinag-aralan) at magaling mag-Tagalog (madaling lapitan) at makisig (may tindig) at magaling ang asawa (marunong mamili).
What standards would you apply in order to compare the ‘character’ of the candidates? I’m not necessarily criticizing your idea, because I think you’re on to something, but the problem that pops up right away, as I see it, is that it would be difficult to come up with a set of standards that would not be seen as biased by someone. Yes, there are probably a few universal ones that wouldn’t get any argument, but considering the gravity of the choice to be made, are those enough? I doubt it.
For example, any reference to religious affiliation or even simply a candidate’s propriety with respect to religion is going to get an argument from someone, no matter how you put it. And yet, it is a very important consideration for a lot of voters.
So, if your suggestion that a simple profile or CV should be included is as far as it goes, that’s non-biased, and is a good idea. But trying to come up with an objective comparison of ‘character’ doesn’t seem like a good idea. And suggesting that a profile will somehow lead to informing one about a candidate’s character is a non sequitur. I’m sure Bernie Madoff’s CV looked pretty good, at one time. GMA’s CV also looks pretty good. People would draw their own conclusions concerning the character of those two people based on the record, and people would draw different conclusions. Well, maybe not now in Madoff’s case, but that’s because his confession and conviction is now verifiable record.
So you see the problem. Profile – good. Assessment of character – subjective, and source of argument.
MCB:
The process is a work-in-progress.
I think you can provide the missing pieces of the puzzle and dig up all the personal circumstances about each candidate.
Afterwards, tie it up with the candidates proposition – from there we can identify whether he is walking his talk or is talking BS.
As I mentioned, what am I gonna do with a pious honest charming butthead who will lead us to the middle ages while the rest of the world speeds to the 21st century.
So, the Vulcan duo are still at it, heh?
Can’t you get into you all reason-and-logic (duh?) brains that all this Platform Plez wouldn’t work in PI at this stage because the means of delivery of vital information is not open. I agree with Manuel,
Huwag ninyong i-career yang PP. I remember Renato Pacifico saying, mga labing-lima (15) lang tayong nag-kukuwentuhan dito.
If you’re serious in helping, come back and run for public office. Maybe, you can apply your matrix in the barangay or town where you could govern in your small way.
I will change your rating to CCC.
Classic clueless careless.
Manuelbuencamino,
I agree entirely. In my personal scheme, there are three criteria for evaluating candidates, and the first of these is character. The second is ability to get things done (executive ability, organization, etc.) The third is platform, which Benign0 and BongV have helped me understand (and I look forward to further information as it either comes in from the candidates, or does not).
Character is indeed subjective, as Ben K points out, and is for me often “gut feel”, which leads me to appreciate, say, Obama more than Palin. hah Or Gordon more than Villar. It is well worth arguing, too, if that is the only way to sort it out.
Joe
Where exactly did anyone say that we should do this?
There is already enough talk and blurb about the character of the personalities but none about what they stand for. So here we are augmenting that traditional talk with that key ingredient needed for a well-rounded evaluation.
Trouble with you Buencamino, is that you are part of that whole complex of Old Farts that turned the Philippine National “Debate” into that droll unintelligent focused on the trivial mass of no-results, the-same-thing-again-and-again relic.
Where are the rest of your traditional “experts” now dude? Oh I know, doing a big love-in at DJB’s sanctuary for the increasingly irrelevant — a clinic for the chronically tunnel-visioned. Looks like they are out of their element when the discussion terms to that relevant substance that has so far eluded the so-called “intelligentsia” of our intellectually-bankrupt society for several decades, just as you, as evident in your “comment” above, seems to find no better re-course than to go around stomping your feet like a crybaby.
You guys have “analysed” the sh1t out of Edsa “people powers”, speculated the crap out of the “character” of political candidates since 1986 (and beyond), and dropped names of political “parties” that stood for NOTHING since time immemorial.
But the questions remain:
Where are the results?
Where are the learnings?
Tough luck, gramps. What is popular does not necessarily translate to what is of sustainable value. Maybe your kind manage to deliver the chicharon and the colourful candies to the undiscerning bungangas of society. Some people — a small minority who are not afraid to think — would rather deliver the meat and veggies to the discerning gourmets.
read my reply to Joe, Dr. Phil
Obviously there is a generation gap between Benigz ,Bong V and Primer and ManuB….
Of course I can relate more with Benigz and Bong V…
rego,
Of course you can and age has nothing to do with it.
hyden:
Just to set the record straight. BF did not hire bloggers as his spokespersons to sing praises for his – good works.
As you yourself has said, it would not have been necessary as the good works (your own statement) will speak for themselves.
But ironically from nowhere, you wish to throw that wild accusation of BF’s “kleptomaniac tendencies” without even as much an iota of proof.
Maybe it is high time you “prove what you allege”.
rego,
When you say there is a generation gap between benign, bong v on the one end and primer, manuel b on the other plus that you can relate more with benign & bong, well, anyone suits his own life.
However, it is far more important to justify or rationalize why it is so since as far as we all know this fact – ideas, opinions, views are the dish here not those who serve the dish. In short, do away with “personality cult” if we are to inch ahead.
primer:
bong v, benigno, are not the caniddates.
focus on BF – what can your candidate bring to the table?
bong,
On the unflattering remarks of BF in the UN General Assembly better off as the ‘committee on silence’ if not pass off as a ‘waiter’ to serve water to the guests, let me make a point.
That arrogant mental fear (disorder maybe) of yours is not insurmountable. We (or I, doesn’t really make a difference) who know how BF ‘gets things done’ are witness. From where I sit, we need someone from the executive like him to be the next in succession.
That is not even an endorsement yet. For now you can keep your cool on BF.
Primer:
that was being said in jest – and if you find that distasteful, my apologies. I am sure BF has worked hard to earn his position and status in life. But so have the rest of the candidates. BF has value that he brings to the table. People want to know what else can he do for the country. What is his vision?
The question being asked is for BF to present a comprehensive outline of his agenda or how he intends to govern for the next six years, if elected.
What are the goals and policy directions that he will set? The foreign debt? Food security? Regional defense and homeland security? Foreign investments?
At the end of the day, it boils down to the candidate and how he connects with people’s values.
Folks,
I asked benign who he will vote for president but here comes bong on attack mode telling me – “it’s none of your business”.
Tell me why I can’t ask that as a presumably more relevant question in the context of that “executive summar of platform” and why bong has to behave as some kind of intellectual snob.
Does it mean that if any other one comes along to ask, it would be dismissed as “none of your ——– business”?
There seems to be an emerging pattern of reconfiguration here – the committee on the whole is fast becoming a sub-committee and the chairs to their unfortunate members are acting not only ‘unparliamentarian’ but fundamentally, ‘out of order’.
Primer:
Would recommend that you provide the information about BF in benign0s matrix – the discussion becomes more productive, tnx.
When Primer and other folks give information about their kabayo (e.g. accomplishments, proposals about the economy, Mindanao, foreign affairs, taxes, etcetera), Primer/etcetera should include sources and references. A pro-Panlilio partisan can make an assertion about “… did not hire bloggers as his spokespersons to sing praises for his good works” but it makes a difference knowing if this was based on a news article in Malaya, a speech by Ping Lacson or by the dean-san Beda/Law, or a statement by the Payroll Chief of the Campaign Committee.
Susginoo ang OA mo talaga, Primer. Im not into cult personality as you have speculated. Its just an observation. And Im simply stating the fact whose ideas I can relate with.
If you wants us to move several inches more. The first thing that you shoul dod is to accept that fact that you and your ilk doesn’t have the monopoly of political ideas that abound in this universe. Ther are just much who doesn’t share your ideas and opinion.
“There seems to be an emerging pattern of reconfiguration here – the committee on the whole is fast becoming a sub-committee and the chairs to their unfortunate members are acting not only ‘unparliamentarian’ but fundamentally, ‘out of order’.”
Primer,
This is a classic of speculatitive punditry that has been domintaing the blog and mostly it came from your ilk.
And I thought you wanted to stick on teh opinions and ideas not on personalities
what i know so far about bayani fernando.
1. subscribes to the ‘broken windows’ theory (fixing small details to bring about bigger change)
2. has a penchant for ‘out-of-the-box’ ideas
3. very rigid to a fault in imposing his rules
http://opinion.inquirer.net/inquireropinion/columns/view/20070901-85966/Bayani_Fernando_and_the_urban_poor_
4. is not above using his agency to promote himself (tarpaulin issue)
5. is inarticulate (as was seen in the 2nd anc leadership forum)
… a pussycat…. BF apparently weak on law-and-order despite 6 MMDA personnel have been murdered — shot in the head — during eviction against sidewalk vendors (Muslims and others).
Two slogan-lines for a BF Campaign.
This means that BF will have difficulty with politicians from Quezon city and others who “nurture” the squatters. As Randy David commented, BF ordered
BongV,
“ . . . pious honest charming butthead who will lead us to the middle ages while the rest of the world speeds to the 21st century.”
Although I could argue that getting to the middle ages from the backward might be considered a step forward, I confess to admiring your ability to present your view with such undeniable clarity.
Stark truths have the ability to sway . . . and I rest uneasily, wobbling, tippling, toppling, . . .
Joe
Benigno,
Sometime before the Presidential 2004 elections were held, I remember at least one newspaper tabulated the candidates stand on a number of issues. I think tabulation of candidate’s views/platform is nice.
But do you know that when FPJ declared his Presidential bid; he also promised to come out with his platform of government? Even a political neophyte but popular figure like FPJ (or his advisers) knew that he had to come out with a platform.
http://www.sunstar.com.ph/static/net/2003/11/27/fpj.declares.presidential.bid.html
And from rich to poor, (ECOP, TUCP, Pambansang Mamalakaya ng Pilipinas (Pamalakaya), Kilusang Mayo Uno (KMU) and the Sanlakas , etc…) people stated that they wanted to know his platform or at least how he intends to solve the nation’s problems.
Eventually, FPJ did come out with it. Prominent was the idea of “Altanghap”.
And no, I didn’t vote for him.
First, to disabuse my mind, I want to gather reactions whether our commenters, bloggers, readers do subscribe or allow at FV
the use of profanities – examples would largely be those that come from the foul-mouthed bongv and his new recruit, self-professed ‘psychiatrist’ ben k who boasts of an MBA.
In this useless ritual of ad hominem exchange, I get the short end of the bargain when I could have written far more pieces that we all can ponder upon and debate. In any event, we all fall into a snake pit and we degenerate or regress far more quickly than advance.
Topics, themes, or new thoughts hardly move now maybe because, mere fellow bloggers like benigno and bong appear to want to rule over this little known ‘kingdom’.
I am one given to analysis in so far as unstudied tables, templates, matrices, or benchmarks like that are concerned but they don’t oblige that they be interpellated. This is real kaput.
Second, I am happy to see that the matrix that I am being asked is not under construction, what with those, “inputs” about BF. Maybe, one can even take the initiative now to formulate the new matrix, taking into account these inputs and let us discuss soberly and more intelligently.
Never mind those 5th grader maids whom ben k wishes to advance as an intellectual. The nerve is really striking. I have had countless number of maids and I saw this one reality – THE MORE EDUCATED THE MAID IS, THE BETTER. I had one graduated from BS Fisheries from a State University and one a midwife.
So if 5th graders are home to ben k’s “class household”, he better suits his life. Corollarily, one also boasts of his 4-year old son as even brighter than the more educated (with quotation marks) blogger of FV is again self-reflecting. Things wouldn’t have been said just to raise a point. Just stick to the point you want to prove.
I could have wished that those inputs on BF should have arrived earlier in the day – before some men have run amuck. Ok lang sana kung matatalino. The other one at least tries to be profound but unfortunately, he finds himself just working under the “pit” – drowning in his own basin of pure rhetorics.
Now, put on the brick.
“I could have wished that those inputs on BF should have arrived earlier in the day”
you could have provided them yourself earlier, couldn’t you?
Underemployment is a virtue? Oh right, this is the society that demands that the guy wiping tables at McDo has a bachelor’s degree. I’m not sure what the point of view does a better job of condemning — the pervasive bigotry, or the lousy education system.
Thanks to BenK for sending me the link to Political Arena last night.
I scoured the Q&A section of the site (a facility where people can lodge questions that the candidates can then respond to), and found a few more updates to our Election 2010 Executive Summary of Candidates’ Platforms.
Check them out here (matrix to be updated sometime tonight).
show the table to the maids, if they can figure it out – ….
:)
While I agree with MB that character is of utmost importance (along with, I must add, track record with regards to delivering promises), I have to agree that comparing the vision of governance of candidates will significantly raise the level of political discourse.
I disagree with benign0 95 per cent of the time, but I have to congratulate him for this project. I hope, though, that the mainstream media will also do something similar to this. The off-line masa must also be aware of what the candidates have to offer, not just of their track records or perceived personal integrity.
That sequel in Diyos at Bayan dubbed “Grado ni GMA: pasado o bagsak?”, as well as that interview with Mr. Tony Abaya should have been a ‘must’ listening to. We need to cast the wider net.
hmmm, noynoy totoo kyang kya lng mlkas si noynoy dhil kay KRIS?weiw, wla lng mention lng …