Videos and photos of Nacionalista Party and Manny Villar's campaign kickoff in Calamba, Laguna.
Today is day one of the official campaign period for national elections in May 2010. All roads leading to the main venue of Banga Plaza were decked with orange ribbons, flags and campaign posters. The venue itself which is the common poster area in Calamba was decorated with posters of the Nacionalista Party's senatorial slate. Wowowee TV show host Willie Revillame is expected to arrive around 5pm and some unannounced celebrity endorsers of Manny Villar. Villar's viral campaign jingle "Naging Mahirap" plays in the background alternatively with another jingle "Akala Mo".
"Who among the presidentiables will be bad for the economy?"
This is an interesting query I got through a random "googler" today.
Loading ...
Now, I don't know if it's some random thought or an actual question posed by God knows who but it sounds interesting enough that I wanted to write about it.
Unfortunately, this "googler" wasn't clear about this question. What does he/she mean by "bad"? And is she referring to pre-elections or post-elections economy? If he/she is referring to pre-elections economic effect, technically, whoever spends more would be good for the economy because it would generate jobs and faster movement of resources through rapid and frantic "purchases" of products and services.
Alternatively, if the "googler" meant "bad" for the economy post-elections, then I would assume he/she would be referring to a sitting/winning president because losing presidentiables can only make so insignificant a dent in the economy (if ever).
As much as I wanted to discuss this further, I realized that considering I'm not an expert on economics and "market forces", I ultimately decided to turn this into a poll instead.
So, go ahead. Vote! :) And yes, for the purpose of this poll, let us stick to a post-elections scenario. Theoretically, we are looking for that president-to-be who will likely make "unsound" economic decisions and send us back to the Stone Age.
Could be your local parish priest. Could be some random citizen. Could be anyone, I suppose.
But one thing I'm sure of, it's not the mother of the prime suspect -- who allegedly took the vibrant life of a young man.
If it is crime most foul to take another person's life, how then do you describe such insensitive statements from the most awkward of sources?
Maybe some friends can say that to the grieving family, maybe even the members of the family themselves can say that -- if only to comfort each other in shocking grief.
But from the "alleged" offender's mother? Not quite right.
It is human to share in the grief of even a stranger's loss in the same way it is human to go overboard in protecting one's child. It is human to feel sympathy at the misfortune of others as it is human to blame the offended for the offender's fate.
But never ever will it be human to say that a son's death is God's will when one's son might have taken it.
If Marlene Aguilar-Pollard is sure as hell that her son is innocent of the crime accused of him, without a witness to that incident but God -- then is Jason Aguilar Ivler guilty as charged or wrongfully accused? Who's to say?
If we think it human to give her and her son the benefit of the doubt, would it be too much to give Renato Ebarle Jr.'s family the right to grieve the way they see fit?
Is it God's will that Ebarle Jr. die that fateful day in the exact way he did through the barrel of some psychologically-disturbed guy's gun?
Who's to say? Could be anyone, I suppose. But certainly not Marlene.
Marlene dismisses all assumptions that she is mentally disturbed and showcases us books she's written to attest to her brilliance. Well, I say: Who's to say? That's irrelevant now to what's apparent to us. While she may not be accused of mental deprivation, she might just lack a "sense of morals". But why should you believe me? Who's to say, right?
You might actually think that the world has changed. But no, it hasn't.
You might think that Philippine politics has changed. But no, it hasn't.
On the contrary, it hasn't changed nary a bit.
It's always been like this during election period. Jingles. Slogans. The works.
The "vote-for-me-because-im-your-savior" sort of campaign posters haven't changed in many, many years. And each time election nears, it only reminds us how bad our politicians fared before -- how bad all of us somehow fared too.
Someone once said, we get what what we deserve -- that we get what we give. If that is true, I wonder what sort of abominable creatures we have become to deserve such incompetent and devilish leaders. I wonder what kind of miser we have become to get these parasites cum predators. I cringe at that thought.
And so every time a squeaky clean, well-bred, royal "gened" politician hugs and carries a poor child -- specially the "really" poor ones, I wonder what goes on in that politician's mind.
I wonder.
There are those too smart to assert that one need not be "poor" or "have been poor" to know poverty. Wise guy, read this: You are so wrong. Continue reading →
Surprised that since its Youtube upload yesterday, January 7, 2010, this "Sulong" infomercial/commercial/TVC/campaign ad barely had 500 views. Pretty much shows how "unpopular" he is compared to cousin Noynoy Aquino.
Looks like the coming election is becoming more and more a "battle of the bands" than a "battle of brands". Don't be surprised. The electorate is mainly "young" with over 70% of voters aged below 39. This my friend, is how you connect to the young and hip crowd.
This one's from Rico Blanco's "Posible" song and apparently, Gibo failed to ask permission from Blanco that this original composition of his will be used for Gibo's infomercial. While Gibo's camp insists that there was no violation of intellectual property rights the issue just refuses to die.
As another public service of this blog, I'm publishing the words (narration/lyrics) here and of course, the video.
"Sulong"
Gilbert "Gibo" Teodoro's latest infomercial
Gibo:
"Mura at masaganang pagkain para tuluyang mapawi ang gutom..
College graduate sa bawat pamilya...
Libreng gamot para sa mahihirap...
Sulong Gibo Wag uurong
Pakinggan sa yong puso
Ang sigaw na dati'y bulong...
Narrator: Ang mabilis na pag-ahon, posible lang kay Gilbert Teodoro
That supposed "vote-buying" photo published on the frontpage of the Philippine Daily Inquirer yesterday is funny at best and cheap at worst. I will have to agree with Erap's spokesperson, Margaux Salcedo's comment -- "Get real."
If the cost of a vote can go as high as P500 on election day, then why would anyone think that Erap is "vote-buying" in that recent campaign sortie in Tondo, Manila. It could well be considered alms if you ask me. That's what politicians think we poor dumb voters need anyway -- alms . It's demeaning because we never needed alms. All we need are competent leaders. But I guess that's too much to ask for. Or maybe we haven't been working hard enough.
So if you want to charge him with something, maybe you can invoke the "Anti-Mendicancy" law. Lame.
I could not even say for sure if if that "tightly-rolled paper" is money. But if it is, who cares?
COMELEC? Jimenez himself said that "it's nothing" and yes it is! It's nothing because when the SC ruled that there is no such thing as electioneering prior to the official national campaign period which starts next month, we relinquished our right to complain about "catchy" informercials, building-sized tarpaulins and whatever else that this multi-billion peso campaign fiesta is generating and will generate further as we near the 2010 elections.
You, the voter? After the same also ruled that there is NO NEED for a current government official (who is a candidate for the upcoming elections) to vacate his/her post prior to elections we abandoned our claim to being "swindled" by smooth-talking trapos who may well be "cooking us in our own lard".
We want to complain but can we?
We want to claim our right to clean, transparent and honest elections but do we, after all this non-vigilance and complacency deserve it?
How much is your vote?Or better still, how much does that one vote mean to you? You don't have to tell me. Tell that to your kids.
When they go asking you for food you cannot provide. When they go asking you why they're not in school. When they, as adults end up slaving-off in some hostile country so far way from home in exchange for meager salary, if you can even call it salary -- tell it to them.
Tell them how much your vote costs and you'll never have to answer a tougher question from them for the rest of their vote-bought lives.
Our present -- this life we now live and everything that's in it is not ours. It is a borrowed life -- from our children, from our grandchildren. Don't think that we can just squander it as we please. We will have to return it someday. I know we can't return it now in its pristine state, specially because we've been careless and irresponsible with it most times. But please, let's pledge to return it "mended" if not whole.
You wouldn't sell your kids or their future. I bet you wouldn't even want to sell yours. Don't sell your votes. Vote-buying is illegal and immoral but more importantly, it's stupid. Period.
This site is offsetting all electricity use with wind-generated Renewable Energy Certificates which prevent the release of 2,660 metric tons of carbon dioxide from entering the atmosphere each year.That’s equivalent to planting nearly 2,390 acres of trees, or removing 510 cars from the road. Reinforcing my commitment to combating climate change.
Loading ...
