As i blogged before, I have good reason to believe that the GDP figures have been overstated because the growth final energy consumption does not reflect such increase in per capita GDP. It’s another case of smoke and mirrors.

Don’t you ever brag about your blog on GDP and Energy GROWTH.

IT’s WRONG.

Oh I won’t. Cheers, mate.

Yes, the ‘legitimacy’ issue has been settled. Congress can’t settle anything except legally, by fiat. “We declare the matter settled.” Yes for some people that’s enough. The Congress of our duly elected representatives settling the question of trust in the president is another matter, though. But Ive already pointed out an acid test for that: have her try to extend her term. If people ratify that in a plebiscite, so be it. That means we deserve her. (Fair enough, High Priest?)

Spoken like a true getrealist, Jeg. ;)

And don’t worry if you…

[...] have to try hard to remember when the last time was. It’ll come to me.

As is the case with most subtle things, it takes a while for people to get it.

It’s the same principle that differentiates witty humour from the Tito-Vic-and-Joey variety.

how will we watch and be persuaded thereby?

Hahaha. Mr. HP, we dont need to make fun of you. You dont need any help in that department. (BTW, I didnt make fun of you before. This is my first comment that does. But dont let that keep you from coming back. Bencard needs a tag team partner.)

Benny: I believe that “question” has already been addressed by our duly-elected representatives as I mention in my post; to wit: blah-blah.

Argumentum ad statingem the obviousem? Yes our people abdicate their sovereignty too easily. You impress me more when you deliver some really new insight and not stating something everyone here already knows. But I have to try hard to remember when the last time was. It’ll come to me.

Yes, the ‘legitimacy’ issue has been settled. Congress can’t settle anything except legally, by fiat. “We declare the matter settled.” Yes for some people that’s enough. The Congress of our duly elected representatives settling the question of trust in the president is another matter, though. But Ive already pointed out an acid test for that: have her try to extend her term. If people ratify that in a plebiscite, so be it. That means we deserve her. (Fair enough, High Priest?)

By the way, I see you placed scare quotes around the word democracy. I can’t say I disagree with you there. Especially when democracy is equated with elections.

Tired? Nope. I’ve had it with fighting a phantom.

Here’s an open challenge, HP: You and me. Real live actual, gentlemanly debate. No blogs, no anonymity behind the Internet, no cameras, no nothing. Two smokers and drunkards arguing.

Name the time and place. The mood’s about to change.

Well, benny, as a matter of principle, there is something wrong with having GMA govern past 2010 because of the question of her legitimacy to be there since 2004.

Jeg, “question of her legitiimacy”?

I believe that “question” has already been addressed by our duly-elected representatives as I mention in my post; to wit:

Lest we forget, Gloria won back her right to govern legitimately as a previous bid to impeach her was dismissed in the hands of our duly-elected representatives in September of 2005. Deal with it. That’s what “democracy” is.

Which starts to answer your question here:

[...] Things like justice and freedom and rights and the sovereign will of the people, for instance. (Do you deny the existence of principles, by the way? Or are you one of those who think theyre a silly superstition? For some people, law is enough, order is enough.)

Law and order is a fundamental – respect for the Law, its application to all (everyone is equal in its eyes and all that…), and grasp of its spirit rather than mere invokation of its letter (kind of the same principle that differentiates the religious from the spiritual).

We are quick to invoke these “rights” and “sovereign will” when we are shouting down a sitting president from the comfort of our keyboards and the faculties afforded by our education. But if you look at it from the street level, what you see is a people who may themselves not live up to the ideals pompously expected of their leaders.

That we as a people have a shiny track record of perverting otherwise noble ideals is a testament to this reality.

Lastly I do agree that it …

Doesnt negate the fact that ad hominems and Tito-Vic-and-Joey arent fun. I think the people here dont mind the trash talk (what you call ad hominems) if you actually have something to say.

The key words in what you say above is this: if you actually have something to say — which harks to the snippets I highlight in my blog post above. An entire thread of cyber high-fives is to use the kind Dean’s words, “booooring”.

It’s one thing to be boring and still possess substance. But to be boring and vacuous is, well, quite typically Pinoy if you ask me. ;)

As you can see, what smoke and bencard observed about my argumentation style is spot on.

All roads lead back to getrealism — usually within five steps, right rom? ;)

It’s simple.

Really.