NOYNOY’S HYPOCRISY

It is finally out of the bag. Senator and presidential wannabe Benigno Aquino III or Noynoy is a highly experienced hypocrite. His impromptu retort to a question posed during a presidential debate on January 9, 2010 at the Dela Salle Santiago Zobel School in Muntinlupa City Zobel revealed this much and only emphasizes this conclusion.

In a nutshell, Noynoy has this to say during the debate: if survey results favor his candidacy – with him leading the pack of presidentiables - then the polling organization that released the report is credible, but if survey results prove otherwise – showing a decline in his number – then the survey firm is a fly-by-night company and any report published by it should be shot down entirely by the voting public.

Is this just hypocrisy or simply self-serving politics that is being exercised and proven by Senator Noynoy? His inability to police even his own remarks, that is, even to merely appear as a likeable candidate which is normally expected from any traditional politician does prove that although he may not be lying, he lacks civility when caught unaware by the public. Worse, this also proves that he really is a neophyte politician who is not ready to take on the more tasking responsibility of leading the country.

In his speeches and political ads, we more or less often just hear Senator Noynoy exalting the achievements of his parents, using this to remind us all that without his parents there will be no democracy to speak of. We have already honored – and quite expansively – both Ninoy and President Cory Aquino for their catalyst roles, but enough is enough.

Noynoy should not insistently use the legacy of his parents’ name to gain our votes. Just like any politician who would want to prove himself to the public, he too should enumerate his political achievements, that is, if he has them.

THE NEXT PRESIDENT UNDER MICROSCOPIC EYES

“Who can be the worst possible plunderer among the 2010 bets?” That was the question posed by William Esposo in his Philippine Star article last January 5, 2010. For years and years, in the electoral history of Philippines, the mass has always shown different tastes in choosing their next president—exceptional educational and political experience, popularity, charisma, personal background, character, credibility, and influence are only some of the obvious criteria the people sought after our past leaders. The Filipinos are in a continuous search for an effective leader after so many disappointments in the past—Filipinos are eager to choose the best possible leader in the coming 2010 elections that could bring about genuine and positive social transformation in our country. Ironically titled, Esposo’s article simply stresses that the next president of RP should be relied on trustworthiness and honesty. Esposo’s idea is agreeable but his reasoning, at the same time, is somewhat flawed.

Esposo’s essay underscored that “…our national salvation relies not on competence, as four of the five leaders have it—but on trustworthiness and character.” True enough, good moral background and character are ideal characteristics for a president. However, reality bites that a leader chosen solely because of trustworthiness and honesty is like giving birth to a political puppet easily manipulated by the more knowledgeable and erudite government officials. The country is in dire need of a more effective, performing government and the coming 2010 election is a critical point of acquiring it, thus, our choice should not only rest on a trust or loyalty basis but also and more importantly on capabilities and competence.

In his article, Esposo also subliminally conveyed his support to Sen. Noynoy Aquino, by merely mentioning that “the sons of genuine heroes are not inclined to join organized crime” pinpointing the senator as the most suitable presidentiable without having to mention any name. This could be of an advantage on the part of Sen. Noynoy however, if we are to look at it on a different perspective, it could also be interpreted as an insult stating that the latter is not as competent as the other presidentiables are.

The Filipino masses have witnessed too many faux pas in the outcomes of our national elections—a brilliant leader turned dictator, popular and dearly loved president turned plunderer, and so on and so forth. The mass clearly would not want to have a trustworthy and loyal, yet incompetent leader turned to a political dummy in the future. If we are to set a criterion for our next president, character, experience, and competence is deemed necessary for our economy to move forward and progress.

2010 COMELEC CITIZEN’S ARM, CHEATED?

Shortcutting the legal process is plain and simple cheating. This should not be taken out as a matter of desperate surgical steps in order for the Commission on Elections (COMELEC) to look “all buckled-up” and ready for the forthcoming elections especially when it involves the accrediting of poll watchdogs that would replace NAMFREL or the National Movement for Free Elections. The 21-days given to the newly-installed election watchdog- Parish Pastoral Council for Responsible Voting (PPCRV) was barely enough to give the public a glimpse on just how dependable and equip they are as the election takes off. That is, as the 2010 projects the first ever computerized election in the country.

The nippy selection of COMELEC with regard to the replacement of NAMFREL is not the only thing that made PPCRV’s intents nonetheless dubious. The timing of PPCRV’s so-called application for the watchdog position is something that cannot be discounted as a major plot for a looming sham. Its application last October 5 was more or less part of the “alarming” pretense. That is, as PPCRV officials manage to side wink public interest opposite their direction. They have rather exploited the Ondoy cataclysm to out win their “pre-occupied” oppositors. The banging headlines on rescue and retrieval operations not to include the country at mourning made it easier of PPCRV to “cheat” their way on COMELEC’s mandate.

After October 5th, PPCRV was directed to publicize its filed petition simultaneously on major newspapers in the country. This is done to make their application official with the public knowing about it. Thus, opposing views to include disparate parties could argue with said petition that may lead to further hearings. But who in their right mind would be interested on PPCRV at a time of disaster? Else, how many was able to read the publication of their appeal? Camouflaging behind state perplexity such as Ondoy had been a “trick” PPCRV had used. What else would they have underneath their sleeves?

Other than the “quick count” on PPCRV’s accreditation, one of its Board of Directors- Johnny O.R. Cardinas happens to be the incumbent president of the Kapatiran sa Pangkalahatang Kabutihan (KPK), an interfaith movement that formed the Ang Kapatiran Party (AKP) that serves as official political party of 2010 presidentiable Eddie Villanueva. Obviously, PPCRV is already somebody’s guard dog.

COMELEC seemingly pushed us to trust PPCRV by riding on the said group’s “trick and treats”. PPCRV is given the “duty” to safeguard our ballots. But whose duties will it be to protect us against PPCRV; the group that downright conned the system and is apparently swarmed with presidentiables’ wingman?

PRESIDENTIAL FORUMS OR TANTRUMS? “The Debate that turned out to be a Read Script”

What the voters need is a presidentiable who walks the talk and not just speak it. The recent forum sponsored by the largest media network in the country was all for show to simply make a good stand point for presidentiables they obviously favor. Was it not too obvious that aside from asking plausible projects that one would-be president should work on once elected, the questions were natured to drop a bomb at the administration bet DND Sec. Gilberto Teodoro? Like a sparring of anecdotes between Opposition stalwarts and an Arroyo ally, the public simply witnessed a wrestling of political affiliations. If we hate to think of the idea that Gloria takes another shot at the legislative, then what better way to downsize her clout by not speaking of her entirely. Getting her name on the headlines is simply a trick that holds no water in the public. The public is damn tired of her and the Opposition should start a new “opening act”.

Frankly speaking, the presidentiable forum was a total waste of public interest. It was a magnified Senate privileged speeches that created more doubts than answers. In fact, the topic was anchored on nothing but Gloria, which by nature gave the “forum” its fancied “hype”. Besides, it is not every day you get to watch solons to think narrower or else dumber than they all already do. Best example of which is Erap who had the guts to question Gloria’s Congressional bid while he parades his intent to run for the same post that he won and lost out of graft. If it was for the sake of delicadeza, Erap should have kept his ambition to himself and saved himself a pint of self-esteem. What makes him think a convicted plunderer has the right to bag Malacañang once again? If Gloria is daydreaming, then Erap is sleepwalking naked in the 2010 polls.

Even LP’s standard bearer who made a bursting joke of “I am incapable of lying” showed his not too appealing alter-ego. Like an elitist who praise himself, the presidentiable with the least feat in his political career whines about being a good but dormant public servant. Who would trust a senator from a long-list of influential clan members that actually bent democracy to fit their entrepreneurial interests? If issues on human rights draw cards on the table, why did the sponsors overlook the case of the Hacienda Luisita massacre that adds up on the inventory of the unsolved “politicize” deaths.

Sen. Dick Gordon to include LAKAS’ Gibo Teodoro was relatively the ones with valid answers and reasons. One could say they were among the bunch who had their talks with perceivable walks. Furthermore, Bro. Eddie Villanueva’s “messianic call” or even that of the Kapatiran’s movement for pious leadership sounded materially stupid. It was way too obvious that they rely much on their religious clout to get the position and are naïve to think that a mixture of church orthodox and political tricks could work. The executive post is not a matter of homily one addresses to a listening believer. The state is not a podium for promising or sweetened speech of salvation. Yes, God and morality should form part of a clean and effective government but this does not mean giving religious honchos an edge. They are nonetheless seen as greedy devotees who only wanted to expand their controlled sect.

The forum is not a telenovela for presidentiable to play protagonist. The network should not turn the 2010 elections into one of its income-generating melodrama.

HATI NA BA ANG BOTO MO? “Hala I-Patrol Mo”

Hindi mo minsan masikmura ang lantarang panloloko hindi lang ng mga kung sinu-sinong TRAPO, kundi na rin ng dapat sana’y malaya at mapanuring pamamahayag. Simula kasi nang mag-igting ang iringan sa mga sensitibong posisyon tulad ng pang-panguluhan sa darating ng 2010 election, halos nagpapang-abot narin ang kalokohan ng mga estasyon at gimik ng mga di magkahumayaw na pulitiko. Isa na nga riyan ang matunog na kampanyang “Boto Mo I-Patrol Mo” na aniya tumutulong na mabigyan ng sapat na kaalaman ang mga botante sa susunod na taon. Litanya nga ng mga ”patrollers” nito ang samut-saring kawalanghiyaan ng mga taong nailuklok sa gobyerno ngunit sa isang banda naman ay patuloy na pinagkakaperahan ng estasyon ang mga dapat sana’y banned ads ng mga “presidentiables”.

Premature campaigning o ang mahigpit na ipinagbabawal na “electioneering” ang bumubungad sa manunood ng estasyon tuwing pinalalabas nito ang mga papogi ads ng kung sinu-sinong pontso pilato. Nahahalintulad ito sa mga naglalakihang poster o banderitas ng mga opisyal sa nakakalat ngayon sa mga eskinita at makikipot na pader ng lungsod. Nakapagtataka lang, nagagawang pansinin ng estasyon ang mga nakahilerang mga “posters” na ito habang pinahihintulutan naman nilang mag ere ng mahigit sa 3 hanggang 5 minutong campaign ad ang mga “presidentiables”. Kung susumahin daan-daang milyung piso ang kinikita ng estasyon sa mga pagpapalabas ng mga political ads na ito. Kaya naman hindi mahirap sabihin na nagkukunwang maka-tao ang estasyon lalo na’t isinusulong nito ang dapat ay clean and fair elections”.

Pera-pera nga lang naman ang tahasang dahilan ng mga tila pangguguyong ito ng mga kilalang estasyon sa bansa. At ang masakit nito, may malaking bilang na din ng mga botante ang nauuto nila. Kasi naman, habang nagkukunwaring “watchdog” ang estasyon sali’t-salitan naman nilang pinagkakaperahan ang mga pulitikong pilit na nambabaluktot ng batas kontra sa maagang pamumulitika o electioneering. Mantakin mong may isang taon pa man bago ipahintulot ang pangangapanya, nagsisimula nang ibandera ng mga pulitiko ang kani-kanilang mga mukha sa tv gamit na din ng “bayarang” media.

Kung susumahin, panakip butas lang ng estasyon ang kampanya nitong “Boto Mo I-Patrol Mo” para naman hindi gaanong mapuna ang walang humpay nilang pangnenegosyo tuwing eleksiyon.

Ngunit maliban pa sa bulok na pangangatwiran ng estasyon sa kanilang malugod na pangangampanya ng kung sinu-sinong “presidentiable”, dahan-dahan ding hinihikayat ng estasyon na i-boycott ang eleksyion. Patunay diyan ang maya-mayang pagpapalabas ng estasyon ng anila “butas” ng darating na automated election. Minamakina ng estasyon ang publiko na maging negatibo sa eleksiyon na nag-uudyok naman upang paigtingin pa ng mga kandidato ang kanilang mga jingle ads na pinagkakwartahan naman ng estasyon.

Kaya naman, madaling sabihin na ginigisa ng kapitalistang estasyon ang mga botante at mga pulitiko sa kani-kanilang mantika.