“An optimist may see a light where there is none, but why must the pessimist always run to blow it out?" — Rene Descartes

Photo by nilexuk

I can almost swear "someone" is cursing the upcoming presidential elections in May 2010. It's as if "someone" is killing all chances of emergent hope -- "someone" is out to sabotage this one shot we have at clean, honest elections.

Although the existence of that "someone" is hard to prove and coming up with strong evidence is hardly possible at the moment, what seems to be 'a clear and present danger' is the unabated doubt creating an atmosphere of general distrust.

There is widespread doubt in the effectivity of the system. Doubt in the reliability of technology. Doubt in the trustworthiness of the candidates. Doubt in the 'maturity' of the electorate. Doubt in everything elections-related. Essentially, doubt in the possibility of Philippine political redemption.

It is so easy to spread doubt and plant fear in the hearts and minds of our fellowmen. I can't think of anything easier to do in a time like this. When faced with the task of choosing what to promote, the average salesman would always opt for those that are easy to sell.

Which idea is easier to sell: That fully-automated elections would be 100% successful or that it would fail?

You get the point.

***

Have a little faith

I am a proponent of vigilance and a promoter of justified and regulated doubt. But in no way will I consent to being a conduit of fear-mongering. I have better things to do with my time (and I have a lot of time, mind you).

My dear friends, casual and accidental readers, one and all, I urge you to have a little faith in this much-awaited political exercise. Let not the sensationalized news and overblown negative write-ups deter you from participating in this democratic process that is part and parcel of who we are and who we intend to be.

Of course there will be glitches, there are flaws, there are questions that need to be answered -- but all will be resolved in due time. That is what these tests are for -- to see what works and what doesn't -- to separate the reliable from the not.

Trust the system -- a good measure if not entirely. Trust that technology can and will work. But most of all, trust yourself. Trust that YOU dictate your vote. Trust that it is you who will dictate your destiny and consequently, this country's. Trust that unless we take a chance, there is no way of ever finding out what will and will not work for us.

Think about it. If we can't trust ourselves? Who else will?

Besides, if all else fails, there's always manual elections. So douse that fear. Besides, I'm sure you have better things to do than worry, so get over it.

Popularity: 1% [?]

Photo by Stitch

"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.

Popularity: 1% [?]

Suddenly everyone claims to "have been poor".

Suddenly it's the best campaign slogan.

Suddenly being "poor" is "cool".

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 →

Popularity: 3% [?]

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

Posible!

Disclaimer: This is not an endorsement.

Popularity: 9% [?]

Well, former president and 2010 elections presidentiable Joseph "Erap" Estrada thinks your vote costs anywhere between 20 or 50 pesos. Not.

Photo by שאול חנוכה Shaul Hanuka

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.

Popularity: 2% [?]

Last updated: January 5, 2010

The Philippine Daily Inquirer reports in today's Sunday paper of the existence and proliferation of a so-called "Maguindanao (Massacre) 11/23/2009" video footage done in the semblance of a documentary which sells from around 70 to 120 pesos each. The video, it was said, is about four hours (2 days) worth of taped footage of the retrieval operations (at the crime scene where the back hoe was found beside the shallow grave hurriedly dug up by the perpetrators to bury the victims, some of them still alive).

There is no script, no background music, no sound but that of the back hoe as it digs for victims. There were vendors of these dvds claiming the ones they're selling are clear copies since they were taken by
Photo by chefrandenSOCO (scene of the crime operatives) themselves.

I don't know about you but I think it is very insensitive to sell, buy and watch these DVDs.  Considering that the people being unearthed in all their stripped glory and humanity are real victims and not actors -- the red stains on their violated bodies are of real blood -- whoever sold these taped videos to be reproduced and peddled in the very streets and public markets of Maguindanao spits on the memory of these poor souls whose lives were taken mercilessly on that fateful Monday.

If it weren't even considered okay to publish gory still photos online or offline, why would anyone think that it's okay to watch the retrieval operations over and over again at home?

The mourning families of these victims have suffered enough. The memory of that gruesome event is hard enough to erase. Let us be sensitive enough to spare them of the endless grief of reliving the Maguindanao massacre over and over again.

Please do not buy, sell or watch these "Maguindanao 11/23/09" DVDs.

Update:

I've recently read this heartening report that as of Monday, January 4,2010 some 600 "Maguindanao 11/23/09" DVDs have been 'surrendered' by Quiapo vendors to Optical Media Board Chair Ronnie Ricketts. This is a wonderful development. Let's hope more vendors follow suit.

Popularity: 3% [?]