Blogger Schumey over at The Philippine Experience projects what a Manny Villar presidency will be like based on what the crook does in his kingdom of Las Pinas.
Schumey wrote:
Subdivisions in Las Piñas not owned by the Villars are celebrating. The reason, they are now freed from Villar’s water company with the entry of Maynilad. Unfortunately for the people who live in Camella, they will have to continue paying for high water rates. Villar refused to allow Maynilad to service his subdivisions. Maynilad’s rates are way below what Villar’s water company charges its subscribers. He clearly does know how to put his interests above that of the public.
Let me show you how expensive water coming from Villar’s company can be. Maynilad’s basic charge is P106.77 while Manuela 4A-4H charges P 190.00. The difference doesn’t end there. Maynilad’s rates gradually increases and plateaus at P45.28 at 200/cum and over. Villar’s is P47.50 for 51 cum and over. Spot the difference? The poor residents have no other alternative. If they want cheaper water, they should live elsewhere. “Iiyak talaga ang lahat kay Manny!”
I don’t think Manny Villar invested as much money as Maynilad did. If he really cares for the people, he will help them lessen the burden by allowing Maynilad to enter his subdivions. We all know how high the cost of living is. Without competition, those residing in his developments will not have any option but to pay what he charges them. And I thought that monopolies are illegal in this country? This is the kind of businessman Manny Villar is. This is the kind of person who presents himself as coming from the poor or even pro-poor. This is the kind of person who would like to become our president.
Sure he develops low-cost housing but here’s the catch. Take the case of Camella Homes which did not have its own drainage system. It was the government who spent for its drainage. Can you imagine living in a house witjout drainage? Every time you took a bath, it drains into some other part of the house, usually the kitchen. No wonder Villar is rich, he doesn’t complete the job, he let’s others spend for his projects’ completion.
Villar ran away from a host of ethics complaints when he was Speaker of the House. Now a senator, he is again running away from ethics complaints. The common thread that runs through those complaints is Villar used his position to enrich himself.
When they were both in the Lower House, Joker Arroyo said of Villar, “If he wants to be a congressman, then he must not be in business which deals with the government.”
Manny Villar may have the greatest platform ever but it’s who he is that really counts. People who listen to the sales pitch without taking a good look at the salesman always end up as fodder for the unscrupulous. Look at what happened to those who bought Bernie Maddoff’s spiel.
PS. Schumey also adds a little story (READ HERE) on one of the many ways Villar helped Typhoon Ondy’s victims.
Popularity: 1% [?]
Indeed, it’s who he is that really counts. And who he is is a reflection of the electorate that voted him into the office he currently sits in today.
That’s what democracy’s all about. And that is what a platform is for. You compare his performance against what he stated in his platform. And if he got away (and ended up voted into office) without having a detailed enough platform, who’s fault was that?
So now, folks, we have an opportunity to DEMAND that the next generation of politicos provide a DETAILED ENOUGH plan of governance — a platform — that will guide the kind of constituents we aspire to be: one that is (a) vigilant, (b) focused on issues, and (c) makes a thorough evaluation of what their politician stands for. Of course, one cannot exercise those three initiatives without a BASELINE against which to measure and compare.
The following statement in the above blogpost is quaintly illustrates the misguided view that a lot of those who support candidates running on pedigree platforms espouse:
“People who listen to the sales pitch without taking a good look at the salesman always end up as fodder for the unscrupulous”
On the contrary, I believe the more appropriate way to state the true principle we should uphold should go like this:
People who listen to the sales pitch without taking a good look at the product always end up as fodder for the unscrupulous.
The product here folks is the governance and leadership service that the politicians we are evaluating will be providing from 2010-2016.
Let us instead focus on the nature of that service rather than on the gloss of his website and the pedigree of his lineage.
In this way, we Filipinos earn the right to call ourselves democratic.
Benign0,
Character, capability, intent. Villar can’t be trusted to deal in the public interest, it seems to me. Trust is a big deal, I think.
Seems to me you made that point elsewhere, here.
Joe
“You compare his performance against what he stated in his platform”
[caps emphasis added]
for the first sentence, you cant do this for all the candidates, coz some of them will have different backgrounds, so there is no “history” to compare the platform to.
Kung walang history, then bato-bato sa langit at ala tsamba. It is allowed. Democracy allows voters to make ala tsamba to vote for empty suits.
In the Probe Profiles of Manny Villar, his own wife said that when Villar first entered Congress “nahirapan siya sa kanyang time management. Palagi niya akong sinisisi why I convinced him to run. Kasi yung time management… kasi naghahanap buhay ka tapos nag aano….(Cheche Lazaro finishes her thought) nagkocongressman ka pa… Oo.”
So from his wife’s own mouth, Congressman Villar did not terminate his involvement in the low-cost housing business that was almost entirely dependent on government financial institutions for financing. That’s against the ethics rules of Congress and against anti-corruption laws.
If you know the person is a crook, would you even bother to look at his platform?
If the investors knew what they know now, would they even talk to Bernie Maddoff?
Platforms are good for the reasons you gave. But one has to measure that platform against the person espousing it.
In order to make an objective assessment of a candidate’s platform, one must spare no effort to check into the background of the person.
Is he honest?
Can he be trusted not to use his position for self-aggrandizement?
Those are the things one must investigate first.
Villat’s deportment as a congressman and a senator shows that he has used his position to benefit his business. That’s why I say his platform is not even worthy of a glance.
“If they knew then what they know now”. Assuming that’s the case, then they’re right. The question is, how much do you need to know to make that judgment? (That’s rhetorical – everyone gets to decide that for themselves) And it works both ways: so you’ve satisfied yourself that Villar is no good, you must apply the same standard of ‘discernment’, so to speak, to the other candidates to see if they fall into the same bad category or not.
The problem is, it seems there are very few people here willing to submit all the candidates to a uniform scrutiny.
“..so you’ve satisfied yourself that Villar is no good, you must apply the same standard of ‘discernment’, so to speak, to the other candidates to see if they fall into the same bad category or not.
The problem is, it seems there are very few people here willing to submit all the candidates to a uniform scrutiny.”-BenK
Anyone can subject a candidate, or even all the candidates, to scrutiny. manuelbuencamino had done his scrutinizing and found Villar in such bad category and therefore there is no need to read his platform, he said. If any one can scrutinize Noynoy and find him in such bad category, what then is the logic of looking into his platform.
The problem is, some people here just would want to wait for someone to post the platforms of the candidates, to scrutinize them. That’s like waiting for the guava to fall…ay, Juan Tamad.
Uhuhhuh… Kaya nga eh… etong diskusyon dito, that’s the scrutiny. The question about Noynoy is was the scrutiny sufficient – was the basis of the scrutiny logical at all? Eh kung gut-based yan, gutter na naman.. ayayayay.
Yup, like commenters/authors on FV who wait for the platform plez matrix – scrutinize it – instead of also going out there, grabbing the information, and coming up with their own matrix. Then asks – where’s Villar’s platform – kinuha na nga e, wala nga e, ganun din si Noynoy, wala rin e, actually silang lahat na frontrunner – lahat walang plataporma – kung meron man puro empty sloganeering, pwe.
some naman are over-lazy, they just kept on begging for platforms of the candidates from fellow bloggers or from fellow commenters to have something to scrutinize. Platform plez daw. Sobra na to-its, sobrang Juan Tamad, kaya beggar. hindi na lang pumunta sa miting-de-avance, ‘o kaya sa mga blogsites, ‘o kaya makinig sa mga broadcasts, ‘o magbasa ng diaryo. haaay, tamad talaga.
What’s worse, alam na nilang bulok, gusto pang tingnan ang platform, siempre, the platform will look brilliant, because it’s made in Ateneo, if not in Recto, or Morayta.
Still, some commenters will make their own platform, just to make an impression, what else, not even a candidate for barangay kagawad, ahayhehehe.
Yup, it is to make the impression that one can provide a platform if one exerts the effort. But the candidates are not exerting the effort. Nor do voters exert the effort. Then they wonder why the country is going nowhere. Hayyy… tamad talaga.
miting-de-avance is not a platform.
blogsites that don’t have a platform – don’t have a platform.
broadcasts aren’t platforms.
diyaryo’s don’t contain the platform.
hayyy.. tamad talagang gumawa ng platform. and you expect us to believe you can govern – platform pa lang kulelat na, governance pa.
Character first before platform…..
While we’re on metaphors, it shouldn’t be limited to taking a good look at the salesman because he could present himself deceptively to the buyer. His prospective buyer has to take a close look at what he’s really buying, and that is the product or service the salesman offers. Such product must be examined closely for flaws or any possible cause for disappointment. To remain fixated on the salesman distracts from the product, and that alone sets the buyer up for getting misled.
This also applies to how to listen to endorsers (like when mestizos or mestizas endorse a skin whitening product), but it may be a whole other discussion thread.
Kaya nga e. If you think Villar is cr@p, then of course you won’t go to the next step of calling for his platform.
Noynoy obviously isn’t an alleged “crook”. Having decided that aspect of his character, the next logical step in the process of evaluating his candidacy is to demand that he show us a platform.
The very fact that you are considering voting for someone all the more puts the onus on you to DEMAND a platform. When you decide to let a salesman into your home, the next step is to ask that he show and describe the product he plans to sell you.
benigno,
the topic of this post is villar not noynoy.
I know. I only use Noynoy as a reference for the point I make with regard to your citing Villar as evidence that a platform is irrelevant to a politicians’ success in da Pinas.
Benigno,
A platform, as I said earlier, is necessary for reasons you have cited.
A platform is relevant when it comes from someone who passes the trustyworthiness and honesty test because then you can have a discussion on policy and programs.
A platform is irrelevant when it comes from a crook like Villar.
Manuel Buencamino,
Whether a person is a “crook” or a “good guy you can trust” is somewhat like a multiplier – a number you can multiply another number with. Let’s say “crook” is a negative number, while “good guy you can trust” is supposed to be a positive number.
The other factor in the campaign is quality of the Platform or “Manifesto” or the “list of what the candidate claims to stand for and/or what he or she plans to achieve and how.”
That factor is also a multiplicand… Thus, a platform would be something that is like a positive number.
(Character) X (Quality of Platform) = Projected Performance
Now, what happens to those candidates who DON’T HAVE PLATFORMS?
Multiplying a number by zero results in zero.
Thus, you can say that guessing that their so-called “character” as good, or bad becomes irrelevant. Not having a platform just shows that they don’t know what they’re going to do when they’re in office, and shows that they most probably don’t intend to achieve anything other than get pushed around by the many interest-groups that will flatter them to get concessions.
So yes, you may wish to say that a “platform is irrelevant when it comes to a crook like –insert name here–”, but likewise, the converse goes as well:
“Perceptions of a candidate’s character as ‘honest’ or ‘trustworthy’ become irrelevent if the candidate clearly has no platform.”
Dude, you just repeated what I said earlier:
If you think Villar is cr@p, then of course you won’t go to the next step of calling for his platform.
Noynoy obviously isn’t an alleged “crook”. Having decided that aspect of his character, the next logical step in the process of evaluating his candidacy is to demand that he show us a platform.
fantastic! both of you agree! (as you should, this is a reasonable position)
hehehehe.
Senator Villar:
Please explain your official position on Con Ass in the context of your now famous declaration at the height of the Con -Ass controversy:
“Charter change advocates still have enough time by our calculations and create a parliament… I will then run for Congress in Las Piñas so I may run for prime minister.” Senator Manny Villar
Villar clearly doesn’t understand how the Parliamentary System works AT ALL.
You can’t RUN for Prime Minister!!!!!!!!!!!
How the system works is that the following changes will happen:
1. Congressional Districts become “constituencies”
2. Congressmen become “Members of Parliament.”
3. The members of parliament will have to organize among themselves as to who align with whom: and by default, this is done by Party Affiliation, so that Parties will have to be in talks with Other Parties in order to form coalitions
4. Once coalition blocs are formed into two (there can only be two coalition blocs), counting is done to find out which of the two coalitions has more seats. The one with more seats becomes the majority, and the one with less seats becomes the minority
5. The Prime Minister, by default, is the leader of the largest party within the Majority coalition bloc.
.
.
.
Noting these facts, especially fact number 5: It is clear that the only way for Villar to become Prime Minister within the Parliamentary System is for Villar to actively and properly build up the Nacionalista party so that it ends up with highly skilled and high quality members who can continue to get elected as members of parliament and continue having a huge majority in the Parliament.
Or, alternatively, Villar will need to build up the Nacionalista party just well enough to continue to have a numerically large enough number of members of parliament and form meaningful coalitions with just enough smaller parties (with less parliamentary seats), so that he – being the coalition-builder having the largest number of MP’s directly under his own party – will be named leader of the Majority, and hence by default become Prime Minister.
Here’s the question: Is the Nacionalista Party strong enough to numerically dominate the Parliament (or Congress)? Is Villar known to be a powerful coalition-builder within Parliament (or Congress)?
Only if the answer is yes does Villar have a stab at becoming Prime Minister.
.
.
.
Now, I’m hoping that perhaps my explanations have shed some light on how the Parliamentary System works because very unfortunately, too many Filipinos (and Americans too!) DO NOT UNDERSTAND how a Parliamentary System works:
We have to first and foremost realize that in any country that uses a Parliamentary System, a certain kind of tough and stringent political Darwinism (survival of the fittest) exists with the dynamics of the Parliamentary System to ensure that the Prime Minister IS ALWAYS AN EXTREMELY INTELLIGENT, EXTREMELY KNOWLEDGEABLE, and EXTREMELY DRIVEN, HIGH ACHIEVER.
Unlike in a Presidential System where just any Tom, Dick, and Harry with enough monetary backing and popularity/charisma (and “stage presence”) can run and can easily WIN (esp. in countries with too many stupid people), the Parliamentary System requires that anyone who aspires to be Prime Minister be heads and shoulders above his/her peers within his/her own party for him/her to be the party’s leader. And in multi-party Parliamentary Systems, not only must this person be heads-and-shoulders above his/her own partymates, he/she must be heads-and-shoulders above the leaders of other parties which he/she plans to deal with in forming a coalition.
There are actually way too many advantages in favor of the Parliamentary System, and at the very least, it just means that whoever the Prime Minister/Chancellor/Premier turns out to be will not be an empty suit who can’t talk about the most important topics relevant to a country’s development.
If the Philippines ever shifts to a Parliamentary System, Filipinos will never ever have to worry about Erap-types (or “you-know-who” types) who can’t answer questions properly and make all Filipinos look like stupid fools to the rest of the entire World.
“Manny Villar may have the greatest platform ever but it’s who he is that really counts.”
does he have a platform? did he have one when he ran for the senate?
Exactly. Villar does not have a platform.
President ReVILLARme:
PLEASE DO NOT CONVERT THE PHILIPPINES TO A VILLAR INC .
For perspective :Las Pinas, your kingdom, is completely dominated by you and your wife’s relatives (the mayor is your wife’s brother,the ex-mayor is your sister in law, the congresswoman is your wife) .
The city is filled up with all your business interests (Star Mall,Camella Homes,Golden Haven Memorial park).
“What’s Good For Manny Villar Is Good for The Philippines.”
If good meant being shortchanged, the title would be appropriate.
Back in the mid 90s, I purchased a property developed by Countrywide (a Villar company) in Monte Maria, Catalunan Grande, Davao City. The development was supposedly “Executive Living”, dang I wound up organizing the Homeowners Association so that we can have the drainage system completed and the access road cemented.
Scratch Villar.
Scratch Noynoy.
Two down – more to go.
Erap on Mindanao says Peace from strength:
http://politics.inquirer.net/view.php?db=1&article=20091020-231258
Catholics still thinking about it — talk to your priest about the Reproducitve Health Bill and Gibo and Noynoy:
http://politics.inquirer.net/view.php?db=1&article=20091020-231260
Do people know Villar’s position about rice self-sufficiency or land reform? I don’t know his approach to creating jobs in Pinas, but one thing Villar can say — he can get laws passed thru Congress.
UP n grad:
Villar’s approach to creating jobs is through the development of more entrepreneurs.
Cory’s was active in microfinancing Grameen-type loans; I don’t know if any of her children were actively involved.
The GMA administration brags about its microlending, too.
Villar still owes me a bridge 15 years after I bought that house and lot in Muntinlupa.
Manny Villar may have the greatest platform ever but it’s who he is that really counts. People who listen to the sales pitch without taking a good look at the salesman always end up as fodder for the unscrupulous. Look at what happened to those who bought Bernie Maddoff’s spiel.
Fair enough.
But I hope this won’t make it an excuse for skipping the ‘having a platform’ process. That’s probably why Madoff took the market rather than other honest ones: he had a solid plan. Well maybe that’s just a confidence builder right? Same thing as basic campaigning.
So far we learned something:
Having a platform
Trustworthy character.
We’re on our way.
Madoff got away with so much for a long while because of
one word — “trustworthy”.
Madoff had pedigree. Madoff had a trustworthy name
and he used it to his advantage.
Would you believe that over 50% of the people who invested
in Madoff made a profit? [The early believers in pedigree of
Madoff's name made money. The later losers? They lost huge.]
Seriously speaking, it takes brains to be a Madoff.
A few Pinoys have the pedigree and trustworthiness. By themselves, they can’t be a Madoff. With cronies, relatives and advisers, they can.
Madoff. The first thing I thought of was Made-off. As in he ‘made off’ with a lot of money. jk.
I think trustworthy name is different from trustworthy character as the former denotes popularity or reputation.
Would you believe that over 50% of the people who invested
in Madoff made a profit? [The early believers in pedigree of
Madoff's name made money. The later losers? They lost huge.]
Wow. So it was honest in beginning or maybe it was just to establish a name. Just like other Investing scams.
Edward,
All candidates must present their platform by February, that’s when the official campaign season starts. That, and not Benigno’s timeframe, is the deadline for platforms.
And honesty of the candidates and his trustworthiness must be the bottom line of all those platforms
If candidates present their platforms by February, they should refrain from campaigning on the side.
considering the push for noynoy – it is a defacto campaign – when it walks like, talks like, quacks like – a campaign then a platform will be demanded BEFORE february.
that’s kinda dishonest when you are pushing the emotional buttons of people making emotional appeals – and then just push the aspects of reason and logic because it’s not campaign time yet. ang dating mo e mandurugas.
BongV,
“considering the push for noynoy”
si noynoy na naman ang nakita mo. Lahat sila kumakampanya na, lahat sila wala pang platform
exactly – silang lahat nangangampanya na – since kayong lahat ay nangangampanya na – where are YOUR platforms – ALL OF YOU.
If you are a Billion Peso man aspiring for Presidency. You put your
ethics in your closet. Then, pretend to be a friend of the poor.
The way the man SIDESTEPS the issues against him. This means he is
hiding something. Then came “Ondoy”. He distributed relief goods
with his name on it. The man has no concience. He uses the sufferings
of others to promote his political agendas.I think he is a Political Opportunist on the lowest level.
If Villar aims to become president with the end in view of “enriching” himself, then that amounts to classic case of “conflict of interest”.
That must have been graphically dramatized by the fact that when he was Speaker of the House of Representatives, he pushed for the passage of a law that would benefit the housing construction sector.
Developers get paid by government and the government collects from the applicants in approved loans. In other words, government is made a conduit to collect the money outright.
Back to that water business monopoly, it is clear how a Villar violates what is already an existing law. Owners of subdivisions must allow Maynilad to construct water systems inside these subdivisions.
Well, clearly, Villar will not get the votes of the more intelligent in our Great Cultural Divide.
Forget their sweet promises,forget their empty slogans,forget their campaign jokes.Judge the 2010 presidentiables by THE GUT ISSUES if you elect them.
1)Noynoy:Honesty and genes:Good enough ?
2)Erap:The Philippine Presidency:Erap-Gloria-Erap???
3)Chiz:The Philippines:San Miguel Inc.???
4)Gibo:”Six More Years Of Failed Gloria Arroyo Policies?”
5)Manny:”What’s Good For Manny Villar is Good For The Country?”
What if their candidates WIN? Nobody seems to care about the unintended consequences of the victory of their candidates that will ultimately harm Philippine society.
With platforms, voters can discern the direction of the essential first steps in transforming ideas into laws, and in determining the party’s trajectory. Scholars estimate that platform amendments of winning parties have been enacted into law at least 50 percent of the time. Furthermore, where competing platforms agree—and disagree—continues to reflect points of consensus and conflict in the political system.
Perlas na tayo, BongV! Pero, what if Perlas changed tack after sitting on the throne inside the palace, then go Gloria’s way. As you know, Gloria was clean before she became president. If Perlas go Gloria’s way, are you now prepared to go with us “surge-the-gates”, or, are you as limp as before, mumbling “let’s move on” and “wait for 2016″? Or, if Oliver Lozano do another Oliver Lozano, would you do a JDV, or, a Nograles, as before?
Tsaka, hindi kaya pulutin sa kangkongan ang boto natin?
I disagree. She lied in public – in my book that’s not clean, that’s dirty. I presume lying is clean in your book?
BongV,
You said before Gloria lied when she was vice-president, did you change your mind?
Therefore Gloria was clean before she became president. Yes? Ok.
BongV,
No, lying in my book is not clean. But in your book changing your mind is lying, why would you want to change your mind by saying Gloria was not clean before she became president?
Equalizer,
Questions:
for 1, about Noynoy, are you sure he got the genes? The verdict among Noynoy’s own blood relatives is that he didn’t get the genes, Kris did.
for 4, about the “Six More Years of Failed Gloria Arroyo Policies” – wait a minute, what makes you so sure that those policies are “Failed?”
- Moody’s upgraded the Philippines’ credit rating due to the Arroyo Administration’s sound fiscal management policies. Call that failed?
- The Arroyo Administration successfully reduced/eliminated government budget deficits. Call that failed?
- The Arroyo Administration has been praised by international economic agencies and bodies such as the World Bank and IMF as having had the highest growth rate of all presidencies. Is that failed?
- The reduction of budget deficits and the relatively higher economic growth rate resulted in a more stable currency exchange. Is that failed?
This is the problem with the Cory Constitution (God rest Tita Cory’s soul)… The Constitution ratified under her watch was flawed because it:
1) Removed the strict two-party system and created a multi-party system
2) Did not create a provision for a run-off election as a result of the multi-party presidential elections (even Afghanistan understands the importance of one!) –> a run-off election is done when there are more than one presidential candidate, and once the election results come out, the candidate who gets the highest number of votes STILL LACKS A MAJORITY VOTE of more than 50% of the entire number of votes. A run-off is a “second round” that pits the top two candidates against each other, so that the winner gets MORE than 50% of the entire vote.
The problem of the Cory Constitution is that it created the PERPETUAL MINORITY PRESIDENT SCENARIO.
Every single president elected after Tita Cory has always been a minority president.
1. Fidel V. Ramos: Minority President
2. Joseph “Erap” Ejercito-Estrada: Minority President
3. Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo: Minority President
Guess what Minority Presidents have in common…
MAJORITY HATE THEM!
Time ni Ramos, majority hated him. People kept saying bad things about Ramos. Those who voted for Mitra, didn’t like Ramos. Those who voted for Miriam, didn’t like Ramos. Those who voted for Danding, didn’t like Ramos. Name whoever else ran for president in 1992, and whoever voted for them, didn’t like Ramos. Everywhere you went, you’d hear all sorts of complaints about Ramos. Buti na lang the Military was loyal to him, so walang coups. But despite all the hatred against Ramos, Ramos was effective and successful. And it’s only AFTER his term that people contrasted the kapalpakan of Erap versus the efficiency and success of Ramos.
Time ni Erap, mas maraming ayaw sa kanya, but there were too many candidates running against him, kaya hating-hati yung vote. Worse than almost everyone hating Erap, almost everyone except for the tanga masa were EMBARRASSED by Erap’s katangahan.
Now we are in Arroyo’s term, where she’s had 8 years in office… As a minority president once again, “majority hate her.” Pano, may mga bumoto kay FPJ, ayaw kay GMA. May mga boboto sana kay Roco, ayaw kay GMA. May mga bumoto kay Lacson, ayaw kay GMA. May mga bumoto kay Bro. Eddie, ayaw kay GMA.
Ipagsama mo lahat ng mga di bumoto kay GMA, marami sila. Pero highest scorer pa rin si GMA kaya panalo. But still, she’s a minority president.
EVERYONE AFTER TITA CORY is a Minority President!
Do you think that’s good?
It’s foul! It’s lousy! It’s stupid!
The 1987 Cory Constitution CREATED A MONSTER because it allowed the winner of the Presidential Elections to be a minority president, and therefore, majority of the people would claim “I never voted for that President”, so that the losing opponents of that sitting President (and most of them would be politicians like senators or other high-profile politicos) would always criticize and sow hatred among the population every time they come out on TV or get featured in the papers.
Since the President (every president after Tita Cory) “was not chosen by majority of the electorate”, it is easy to manipulate those who didn’t vote for the president into believing all sorts of black propaganda.
So here we are in GMA’s term. So many people “hate” her.
But why? Totoo ba talaga na palpak siya o puro lang ito black propaganda ng mga kalaban niya? Ng mga Erapista at ng mga crony ni Erap?
Hindi kaya ang mga taong ayaw kay Gloria ay medyo media-manipulated lang pala? Don’t you think that your emotions were played with?
Come to think of it, relatively SUCCESSFUL naman ang economic policies ni Ate Glo. Relatively successful naman ang performance ni Ate Glo… Bakit kayo PUMAPALAG?
Kasi minority president si Ate Glo.
Palibhasa, many of you DIDN’T VOTE FOR HER back in 2004 at doon kayo kay Roco, Lacson, FPJ, or Bro. Eddie, kaya every time you hear complaints on TV against Gloria, DALANG-DALA KAYO, kasi biased kayo against her TO BEGIN WITH!
Now, all I’m really saying, people, is that WE NEED TO DO AWAY WITH A SYSTEM THAT CREATES MINORITY PRESIDENTS!
It is a stupid system because a minority president can’t properly govern. Kahit magaling siya, e lagi naman siyang kokontrahin because of partisan sentiments. Kesyo ang iba sa inyo gusto niyo kay Roco sana (sorry, namatay siya), o kaya gusto niyo kay Lacson, o kaya kay FPJ, o kay Bro. Eddie, well SORRY NA LANG, but they didn’t win and GMA won…
Dapat kasi may RUN-OFF elections eh.
If we had run-off elections (please watch the news about AFGHANSTAN RIGHT NOW), there would be a “second-round of elections” that put the TOP TWO contenders fighting against each other.
In Afghanistan’s case, the top two contenders are incumbent President Hamid Karzai and Dr. Abdullah Abdullah. Karzai scored the most during the first round, but his votes did not reach the 50% mark, kaya kelangan ng run-off.
So in a few weeks, there will be new elections pitting those two guys against each other. This time kung panalo si Abdullah, then he would clearly have more than 50%. And if Karzai wins, he would also clearly have more than 50%. Kahit 51% versus 49%, 51% is STILL A MAJORITY.
Ganun dapat ang ginagawa sa Pilipinas, pero tanga sina Fr. Bernas, SJ at ang grupong nagsulat ng 1987 Cory Constitution because they never made provisions for a run-off election.
Kung sa 2004, may run-off sana between FPJ and GMA, then ALL FILIPINOS WHO VOTED for Bro. Eddie, Roco, Lacson, etc would be FORCED to make a decision whether to vote for GMA or FPJ.
Alam ko naman na ang mga maka-Bro. Eddie and Roco would most probably choose the “lesser evil” and go with GMA, kasi nga tanga at walang alam si FPJ, while maybe some Lacsonistas would go for FPJ and some would go for GMA.
The point is, malamang, panalo pa rin si GMA, but this time with a bigger margin, kasi bobo lang ang boboto kay FPJ and all the thinking votes would unite to vote for GMA.
In the end, baka 60 versus 40 lang ang labas, but AT LEAST MAJORITY ang pumili kay GMA.
With an explicit decision made in favor of GMA, majority of the electorate CAN NO LONGER SAY “di ko naman binoto yan eh.”
Gets niyo na?
GMA is a minority president because the Cory Constitution has no provision for RUN-OFF elections, despite the multi-party nature of the elections.
A minority president IS ALWAYS AN EASY TARGET FOR HATE-MONGERING.
As proven earlier, even during the term of RAMOS, he too was hated and villified. And yes, Erap too was always hated and villified.
And why is it so intense against GMA? Because she’s been in office LONGER. Kaya mas grabe at matindi ang panggugulo na ginagawa ng mga kaaway niya.
Scrap the 1987 Cory Constitution. FIX THAT GOD-DAMNED SCRAP OF PAPER. CHANGE THE CONSTITION! AYUSIN! Bawal magkaroon ng Minority President EVER AGAIN!
A brilliant piece! But does it need a constitutional amendment to institute run-off elections?
BTW, I don’t entirely believe that all the animosity toward PGMA is due to her being a minority president. Her sins (read: scandals) are manifold and would require an entire blog to discuss. The real root, though, I believe is her illegitimacy. As to her economic achievements, they are real, I give her that. But they are only real for a minority. What about the people in the bleachers? Well at least those people have cheap tickets and they can at least see the spectacle from a million miles. But what about the vast multitude who can’t get in? Sali namin natin sila.
Still, you’ve delivered a great point about electing a majority president through run-off elections.
Apanfilo,
As much as I had wished to agree with the too many people who were throwing dirt at PGMA, the economic results (as well as her administration’s numerous successes) speak for themselves. She has actually – in the eyes of international observers – greatly surpassed her predecessors, even her own mentor, FVR.
The scandals, for instance, have no real evidence backing them up. They’re all just allegations and publicity stunts.
However, because PGMA is a MINORITY PRESIDENT (as have all her post-Cory predecessors been), it’s “easy to hate her.” The fact that it is easy to hate her (plus the fact that Filipinos are extremely emotional, hormonally-controlled, and tend to be illogical, and are prone to believing rumors, the hatred against her very easily intensifies BECAUSE OF HER DEFAULT STATE OF BEING A MINORITY PRESIDENT.
And those economic achievements are real for EVERYONE. In fact, if these same economic successes she has achieved are CONTINUED by similar-minded successors, then that economic growth can and will multiply much more so that it reaches more people in a much more amplified way.
Search your feelings… Look at all the OBSERVABLE FACTS: People hate, villify, and concoct scandals against each and every president, including the incumbent, precisely because any POST 1987 elected president has ALWAYS BEEN A MINORITY PRESIDENT!!
As I said, even Fidel V. Ramos was extremely hated and villified by far too many people.
Do you know why hardly anyone dared do anything stupid or scandalous against him (like act as some stupid whistleblower)?
Because Ramos had Jose Almonte as his right hand intelligence guy… Almonte could easily destroy any whistleblower’s credibility with the dossier of intel information they had on anyone planning to do anything. Basically, Ramos was “hated” because he was a minority president too, but hardly anyone COULD DO ANYTHING ABOUT IT because his military intelligence with Almonte was just formidable.
And for run-off elections, YES IT DOES NEED A CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT, because it is the Constitution ITSELF that explicitly says that there is to be a SINGLE (only one, not two: no run-off), multiparty, multi-candidate election for the office of President.
There is ABSOLUTELY NOTHING THERE to outline a run-off election in order to prevent a Minority President from being elected.
So therefore, in order to change the situation and institute a RUN-OFF ELECTION,
…YOU HAVE NO CHOICE BUT TO AMEND THE CONSTITUTION!
Now…
Let me tell you something, friend:
Elections are expensive.
One round of elections is already expensive as it is…
But MOUNTING A SECOND ROUND “RUN-OFF” ELECTION means doubled costs!
Do you know what would actually be a much much much better alternative to having a “multiparty presidential election WITH A RUN-OFF in case no clear majority arises from the first round of elections?”
TADAA!
The answer: A Shift to the Parliamentary System!
Reason: The parliamentary system requires ONLY ONE huge general election which is, in reality, local elections for each and every constituency.
Each district (or constituency as they are termed in the parliamentary system) will count votes PER DISTRICT, to find out which PARTY’S CANDIDATE won in each district or “constituency.”
Each constituency means one seat… Every seat, therefore, will be collated on the national level to see WHICH PARTY HAS THE HIGHEST NUMBER OF SEATS.
After tabulating the parties by number of seats, if there is one single party that has a simple majority of seats (more than 50%), then that party BECOMES THE RULING PARTY (aka “The Majority.”)
If, however, there are so many parties and no single party gets more than 50% of the entire number of seats, then there will be a “grace period” given to all parties to FORM COALITIONS.
By the end of the grace period (in some countries it’s 2 weeks, others longer), the coalition formed that holds more than 50% of all seats in parliament becomes the “ruling COALITION” aka “the Majority”, while the rest get collectively termed “the minority.”
From within the ruling coalition, the Prime Minister is by default the Leader of the party with the largest number of seats.
ERGO, the Prime Minister (who is the Chief Executive of a country that uses a parliamentary system), RULES EFFECTIVELY because he/she automatically has a majority backing him/her up.
Contrast that to the stupid system that Fr. Joaquin Bernas, SJ and his bunch of so-called constitutional experts came up with where EACH AND EVERY post-Cory president is a freakin’ MINORITY PRESIDENT, hated, villified, and subjected to rumor-mongering, hate-mongering, and black propaganda by all his/her rivals.
DOWN WITH THE 1987 JOAQUIN BERNAS CONSTITUTION!!!
DOWN WITH THE GRIDLOCK and SLOW-PROGRESS (due to hatred against the incumbent) THAT RESULTS FROM THE DILEMMA OF THE MINORITY PRESIDENT SCENARIO!!!
Switch to the tested and proven system that works better statistically!!
Switch to the Parliamentary System!!
(and if you highly emotional, highly sentimental, highly-resistant-to-change people don’t want to switch yet to the Parliamentary System, AT LEAST FREAKIN’ SET UP A G@DDAMNED RUN-OFF ELECTION to avoid having a MINORITY PRESIDENT AGAIN AND AGAIN AND AGAIN!!!!!!)
Oh yes, even if NOYNOY WINS, he will be a minority president… Tae ni Joaquin Bernas yan.
Why? Because all the Erap supporters, the Villar supporters, the Gibo supporters, the Gordon supporters, the Chiz supporters ARE GOING TO SAY “We never voted that idiot Noynoy into office!!!!!”
Noynoy will probably get something like 30% of the entire vote, and so there will be an overwhelming 70% of the entire electorate who will be against Noynoy.
Every mistake Noynoy will make as President will be laughed at and magnified by Noynoy’s opponents. Every single tragedy of typhoons or earthquakes or landslides WILL BE BLAMED ON NOYNOY, and even if Noynoy tries his best to do a good job, KOKONTRAHIN PA RIN SIYA.
How much more na Noynoy is totally unprepared for the job? Talagang kokontrahin at kokontrahin siya!
Noynoy will be a MINORITY PRESIDENT, whether anyone likes it or not, because that is the effect of the 1987 JOAQUIN BERNAS CONSTITUTION which often bears Tita Cory’s name as she endorsed it, as she herself was totally unprepared for statecraft.
Noynoy will be a good president?!? No… He will be a MINORITY PRESIDENT: Hated by 70% of the entire population.
So, you know what to do, PEOPLE…
Either shift to a Parliamentary System, or if you are all too enamored and infatuated with remaining on a Presidential System, then freakin’ introduce a G*ddamned RUN-OFF ELECTION for Chrissake and avoid having another HATED and VILLIFIED MINORITY PRESIDENT!!!!!!!!!!!!
Real Deal,
Now, now, don’t all get too excited, my friend. A mandate backed by a majority of the electorate is, indeed, a very nice thing to have. It could be a step in the right direction toward the formation of consensus in several major issues confronting our society.
It is however an oversimplification to state that a majority-backed mandate would silence the guns of discord in our rambunctious society. FVR, remember, had the smallest of mandate among the post-EDSA presidents, but the opposition was not as rabid and intense as under Erap and PGMA. Erap had the largest mandate and we all know what happened to him.
I think you give too much credit to Almonte–and too little to FVR’s good governance–for the relative peace under FVR.
It’s all about good governance.
As to PGMA’s economic gains, like I said they haven’t trickled down. Don’t believe me. Believe SWS, which has on record that self-rated poverty and hunger have worsened under her watch.
It’s all about equity.
Still, a majority-backed mandate via ChaCha would be a nice present for the 2016 president.
APanfilo,
The effects of any solid economic program ALWAYS TAKE TIME TO TRICKLE DOWN. Never has it happened that One year’s spectacular performance affects the entire nation positively the exact same year (or the year after). Actually, it takes AT LEAST 4 years of constant economic growth for some of the effects of that to come out.
I’m not making up any of Almonte’s stuff. FVR had a solidly and tightly-run ship as far as making sure that any huge disruptions were prevented, and Joe Almonte was precisely what FVR had that Erap and GMA didn’t have.
Say what you want about GMA, but it doesn’t change the positive economic indicators. The point is, if media rants as much as it wants against someone, if it does it very very often, it can paint such an ugly picture of that person, DESPITE the fact that that person may actually be doing relatively well. For all the “scandals” instigated by numerous parties against GMA, ever wonder why no one can topple her? Because there is no real genuine dissatisfaction that can get mobilized because the economic indicators are good enough.
If the economy sucked, that would be a different story, and GMA would have been taken out by massive protests a long time ago.
Now again, let me CORRECT your mistaken assumptions.
You say that FVR had a slim margin and Erap had a biggest margin. Actually, it’s WRONG. All of them had “no margins” because, Apanfilo, NONE OF THEM HAD A MAJORITY!!!
All they had was “the largest number of votes”, but out of 10 people, there would be at most 6 people at any given time who would outnumber the 4 people who’d have supported GMA or ERAP. And in FVR’s case, there’d have only been 2 people for him, and 8 people against him.
But FVR was from the military and – once again – had Joe Almonte on his side helping him out with security, ensuring that no crazy activities (rebellious stuff) or the concoction of “scandal exposes” against him could happen.
Let’s look at the election results showing what percentage the top 1 (winner) got, with some (not all) of the percentages that other candidates got.
1992 Presidential Results:
1. Fidel V. Ramos – 23.58%
2. Miriam Santiago – 19.72%
3. Danding Cojuangco – 18.17%
1998 Presidential Results
1. Joseph Estrada – 39.86%
2. Jose de Venecia – 15.87%
3. Raul Roco – 13.83%
2004 Presidential Results
1. GMA – 39.99%
2. FPJ – 36.51%
3. Lacson – 10.88%
4. Roco – 6.45%
Again, you mentioned “the opposition (in FVR’s time) was not as active as it was under Erap and PGMA” – that’s precisely because FVR not only had good results, he also had good control due to his military background.
What can really help, Apanfilo, is if the Philippines moved away from this “Minority President” scenario on to a scenario where the leader of the country has a majority-backing.
Good Governance is great, but what exactly is it? How do you see it? Well, more often than not, Good Governance is visible from the economic indicators as it was during FVR’s time as well as it is in GMA’s time. But spin doctors (esp. if they have access to media) abound in the Philippines, and can fool people into hating someone who’s doing a good job. Worse, doing a good job ALWAYS means making hard decisions that won’t please everyone in the short term. Having a majority mandate (not just a pipitsugin “most number of votes” backing that is less than 50% of the entire vote) HELPS a leader get through the need to make hard decisions that will make some people unhappy (like introducing VAT), yet actually be for the benefit of the majority.
The only real remedy?
Prevent the Minority President Scenario. That way, you’ll always have at least 5 people out of 10 in support of the incumbent, instead of the “best scenario” under the current scheme which is 4 out of 10, with 6 out of 10 NOT in favor.
There’s really nothing more to argue here Apanfilo. What really needs to be done is TO HAVE THE SYSTEM CHANGED and scrap that monster-causing 1987 Constitution.
Either SHIFT to a Parliamentary System or – for those who are enamored and infatuated by calling their leader “President” – add the requirement for a RUN-OFF (second round) of elections in order to pit the top 2 candidates from the first round of polls against each other if none of the candidates in the first round achieve more than 50% of the vote.
CHANGE THE 1987 Constitution!
NO TO A MINORITY PRESIDENT SCENARIO!
Huwag lang magnanakaw ng pera ng taong bayan, huwag lang gawing “most corrupt government in Asia” ang Pinas, huwag lang “worst in human rights violations”, even a minority president will be love by the people, and will not get negative, repeat NEGATIVE 38% approval rating.
Bert,
Basta MINORITY PRESIDENT, talagang gagawan ng tsismis ang nakaupo. No matter whether the tsismis is true or not, a minority president is WEAK by default because there are “less supporters” than there are opposers.
There was a lot of tsismis about Ramos back in his day, as was there tsismis during Erap’s time and even GMA’s time.
Conversely, it also doesn’t matter whether the president’s performance is GOOD or BAD. Filipinos are an emotional, illogical, hormone-driven, personality-based group of people who will care more about who the person is rather than whether that person is delivering the goods and achieving positive results. Basta minority president sa Pinas, kung ayaw mo sa tao, walang kwenta ang mga achievements niya.
As mentioned, Ramos had his military background and Joe Almonte and the intelligence group helping him out to ensure that no “panggugulo” could happen or that the destabilization campaigns against FVR would not prosper.
Kahit sino pang ipa-upo mo basta MINORITY PRESIDENT SIYA, kahit angel siya kahit super galing siya, laging magkakaroon ng negative tsismis and negative sentiment ang mga tao laban sa nakaupo, KASI ANG RASON NG MGA TAONG KUMOKONTRA: “Iba naman ang manok ko noong halalan eh! Di ko naman binoto ang Presidenteng yan eh!”
So eto na lang para walang away-away:
SCRAP the 1987 Constitution with all its stupid provisions, protectionist economic policies, and ill-thought out systems like the MINORITY PRESIDENT scenario.
MINORITY PRESIDENTS WILL ALWAYS BE HATED!
NO TO SYSTEMS THAT BREED MINORITY PRESIDENTS! CHANGE THE SYSTEM!
twinkle twinkle little star
Apanfilo,
Here’s a useful analogy of how economic results trickle down to everyone:
Have you seen those movies where they have a mountain or a “pyramid” of empty wine or champagne glasses stacked up each other?
In that scheme, the sommelier needs to CONTINUOUSLY pour the entire contents of one bottle on the top glass (at the top of the wine glass pyramid), and when it finishes, pour the entire contents of another bottle, and so on and so forth until all the glasses at the bottom of the pyramid have received their fair share of wine. Stopping at one bottle means that only the top layers will receive wine, leaving the other wine glasses down below empty.
Such is how economic results or economic success become meaningful to EVERYONE: You need it to be sustained for a long enough time for all the benefits of economic growth to reach each the least motivated, least qualified, least able of the people in society.
As it is, the most capable, the most economically-astute, the most business-minded, the most entrepreneurial people, and the most qualified are often found AT THE TOP of the pyramid because they are the most receptive to taking advantage of the opportunities that economic growth presents.
It is very wrong to think that little economic growth spurts can make a difference to the entire population. And that precisely is why the Philippines needs sustained and UNINTERRUPTED economic growth – as in the wine glass pyramid analogy, not the kind of start-stop performance we have which often results from the rallies, rebellions, trouble-making, panggugulo, and all the negativity brought about by oppositionists and other stupid people who don’t know anything except “mangontra.”
Erratum:
“Such is how economic results or economic success become meaningful to EVERYONE: You need it to be sustained for a long enough time for all the benefits of economic growth to reach each the least motivated, least qualified, least able of the people in society.”
Change “reach each the least motivated” to “reach even the least motivated”
Real Deal,
Agree with you we are emotional, but we are not illogical. The Filipino people is a thinking people, we have our reasons why we should love our president, or why should we gave him/her a negative, repeat NEGATIVE 38% approval rating.
Remember it’s those international and reliable agencies that gave the Philippine government under Gloria the tag “MOST CORRUPT GOVERNMENT IN ASIA” and “worst in human right violations”, not the Filipino people. Tsismosa rin ba ang mga international organizations?
Worse, Real Deal, and you might not be aware of this and so I understand your stand defending President GMA, under Gloria’s long administration, long, as in second only to Marcos’ 20 years, the Philippines remains the basket case of Asia, one of the poorest. Where are now your vaunted claims of accomplishments?
Therefore, even a minority president, if he/she is just, hindi magnanakaw, can lift his/her country and people to greater heights, and honest, will be love by the Filipino people and not gave her/him a negative, repeat NEGATIVE 38% approval rating. Ok na? Good.
Real Deal,
Thanks for that wineglass analogy. I think I might just need a drink (Red Horse, not red wine, unfortunately) after writing this reply.
I have no quarrel with the need for more bottles of wine so everyone can have a drink. What’s particularly bothersome to me is the steepness of the wineglass pyramid–even as we struggle to place orders for more wine. I won’t even mention the fact that many others have not received an invitation to the party.
I don’t want to stretch the analogy to its breaking point so let me get straight to the point. We have had moderate economic growth under PGMA, highlighted by the 7.3% GDP growth posted in 2008. So I think it would be reasonable to expect some of that growth to dribble mercifully down the food chain.
Guess what, hunger has been on the upward trend since the beginning of the Estrada administration in 1998. Unemployment (as also measured by SWS) has been high — in the 20s! — since 2005. Poverty (based on official NSCB figures) is again on the rise since 2003 after a long period of decline under Ramos and Estrada. All this human misery happening at a time of moderate growth.
The stock market, meanwhile, reached its all-time high in October 2007 just before the financial crisis struck and put a stop to the party. But it looks though that the party is about to start again, thanks to American taxpayers.
Your ultra-Darwinian view of economics and society in general makes even the beasts of the wild a preferable companion. The lions of Serengeti, National Geographic informs me, at least have the decency to take care of the weakest members of the pride.
And we’re just discussing here PGMA’s economic legacy. I don’t think a million Almontes could have saved her from her rightful place in history. One of our worst presidents, ever.
Once Villar becomes the president, he will have full access and first hand knowledge of INVESTMENTS. He can flip real estate ( piece of land) to foreign investors , he can change zoning laws for development or he can copy proposal and the end result- closing the economy.
Real Estate Guru always follow investment growth and employment opportunity. One must have first hand knowledge of these. First is to buy the land when information is nearly accurate, then flip it to avoid conflicting interest.
Mang Juan will never know the biggest crime. Instead of allowing enterpreneurs to grow according to free market, enterpreneurs may grow according to growth from CONFLICT of Interest.
I maybe assuming but looking at Villar skills and how he made his fortune, I have to think the worst. Insider’s information is great for wealth and growing more money. Any projects always involve land and real estate to house employees and for office building regardless of size.
Reviewing Villars real estate development, most of its risk are burdens to the local community. I could be wrong but it looks like, it lacks the roads, no local incinerator of trash, no school built around it, no playground and flood plains, no proper zoning and disclosure to homeowners. As I said, I could be wrong but one must think this way…
Any Malacanang resident — Erap, Villar, Perlas, Gibo, Erap, even Binay, Zobel-Ayala or Walden Bello as president — if he or cronies want to take advantage of insider information, then being President has privileges.
————–
And here is a different take on the words “six more years of GMA policies” when talking about Teodoro. From a different angle, past SWS survey numbers still speak of a silent minority — Poll surveys point to 25% plus or minus X% as pro-GMA policies. Unless you can attach a C-5, jueteng- or “moderate-the-greed”-scandal onto Teodoro, Gibo SWS numbers will steadily rise especially when machinery and media-marketing go into gear.
Oct 9/2009 Inquirer reported:
The SWS 3rd Quarter 2009 survey, conducted from Sept. 18 to 21 and released yesterday, found that 62 percent of the 1,800 respondents polled were dissatisfied with Ms Arroyo’s performance, while 23 percent were satisfied.
No wonder we are trapped in a vicious cycle….. the tendency for the comments to veer and go everywhere and anywhere thus the crooks and their misdeeds gets lost in the process, lol.
PJ
Right. We should talking about Villar. But extraneous issues are brought uo to take the focus off Villar. It’s an old trick.
Food for thought : the latest SWS survey should put a smile to Villar supporters. Villar candidacy continues to gain strength despite the Noynoy surge and 60% magic number.
Manny Villar’s score was 37% in the Third Quarter 2009 Social Weather Survey, fielded over September 18-21, 2009.
This is a gain of 4% from the previous survey when
Senator Manny Villar took the top spot in the people’s recommended successors to President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo in 2010, according to the Second Quarter 2009 Social Weather Survey, fielded over June 19-22, 2009.
Being a rich tycoon was one of my doubts on his suitability. A businessman usually aims for profit. Presidency is about the opposite.
But at the same time I also saw him as a good candidate because of his managerial skills.
Akala ko madali! Yun pala mahirap!
Scratch Villar.
Scratch Noynoy.
Two down – more to go- Bong
Done that. I also scracthed Chiz and Erap, kaya natira na lang sa akin si Gibo at Nick Perlas.
Good luck, rego.
Lily Ramirez, one of Manny Villar’s top aides, has been placed in the Board of Trustees of PAG-IBIG Fund
Real Deal,
You have been grinding away at the form of government for over a week now, one issue, over and over again. Almost as if you are here on assignment, to promote it.
I get your point, so I see no purpose to reading you further on the subject of form of government. I would like to see you apply your excellent brain to other subjects.
Joe
Joe America,
Yes I am here to promote something that many Filipinos (and Americans) due to their BIASES, cannot fathom changing.
Filipinos and Americans grew up on American Hollywood movies of TV series that feature stories about American PRESIDENTS, Elections for president, etc.
What I choose to talk about is my G*ddamned business because the Philippines is my G*ddamned country. If I want to talk all about why the Philippines needs to change the constitution or shift from a fouled-up Presidential System to a Parliamentary System or to add a second-round “run-off” election to an existing Presidential System, THAT IS MY PREROGATIVE AS A PATRIOT.
You have no business telling me not to talk about something that is RELEVANT TO THE CONVERSATION. OK?
Hope you get this clear, Joe. If I’m not mistaken, YOU MISREAD A LOT OF THE STUFF I WROTE in another thread.
I don’t appreciate how you can misconstrue stuff that is so clearly explained.
Erratum:
“Filipinos and Americans grew up on American Hollywood movies of TV series that feature stories about American PRESIDENTS, Elections for president, etc.”
Look for:
“…American Hollywood movies of TV series…”
CHANGE “of” to “or.”
“…American Hollywood movies or TV series…”
Real Deal,
I hate it when people misconstrue what I wrote. I never said you had to stop writing about your obsession; I said I would not read it. I complimented you about having a good brain, which you passed over in favor of a curse-endowed blast rather that of a petulant child. You are entirely free to be you . . .
As I am free to laugh . . .
Joe
“Yes I am here to promote something that many Filipinos (and Americans) due to their BIASES, cannot fathom changing.”
First, let me just make it clear here that Charter Change is President GMA’s and her followers’ ardent advocacy. And yours, too.
Let’s be logical about this, ok?.
Let’s say that presidential (or Parliamentary) is the form of government, and the resultant product out of this kind of governance is the substance of government. Let us say, for example, that, under a presidential form of government, the government officials in power are crooks. And then we shifted to another form of government, the parliamentary, with the same crooked officials holding power.
Do you think changing the form will change the substance? What I mean is that, in a Parliamentary, do you think the crooked will become straight?
In a Parliamentary form of government, the elected crooks can elect the Prime Minister among themselves.
“In a Parliamentary form of government, the elected crooks can elect the Prime Minister among themselves.”-cvj
The Real Deal,
Is that correct, Real Deal? If yes, my question to you again is: Assuming that the elected official are crooks, or not crooks but became crooks after the election, does it matter whether we have a presidential or a Parliamentary form of government? Please explain why a crook in a presidential government will uncrook in a Parliamentary.
A parliamentary government can find itseOne of the necessities of a parliamentary government
“A parliamentary government can find itseOne of the necessities of a parliamentary government”
UP n,
Are you saying that you are also not in favor changing the Pinas government from presidential to parliamentary for the reason that crook’s “One of the necessities of a parliamentary government”? Hmmmn, strange. If that be so, the more reason then we should fight this ChaCha move by Gloria and The Real Deal. Because pala, even if we changed the form, the substance will be the same.
Then we are on the same side. CHEERS.
Real Deal,
Have you read of President Carlos P. Garcia and his election to a full term?