Tonight I’m appearing on Y-Speak more or less defending reality shows. Was a fun experience (the episode was pre-taped). Watch it on Studio 23.
Scuttlebutt is, everyone commenting on the supposed anti-terrorism law, are making comments not on any definitive bill, as approved by both the committees on Foreign Affairs and Justice, of the House, but possibly on whatever version (including pet versions) individual members of the House may have, and release to the media. The definitive, official text hasn’t been released because Rep. Teddy Locsin hasn’t signed it (insider joke among those who have worked for him: pinning him down so that he’ll sign it is going to be a bit of an ordeal for the House secretariat). Anyway, yesterday’s Inquirer editorial asks the real question: what is the purpose of the law? Prevention, or punishment? The answer is significant.
The Tribune leads with what has also been scuttlebutt for a few days, a rumored Executive Order 467, which would call out the armed forces on the pretext of terrorist acts (or the impending threat thereof), which would coincide with the coming Congressional recess, which I understand starts a week early, and will go on to include the end of October-beginning of November 5 day holiday. The question is, whether the supposed order actually will attempt what the Tribune says it will attempt, or will try to simply institute more direct command over the AFP by the President in her capacity as commander-in-chief, will the armed forces accept it? My bet is, the armed forces will bow to institutional inertia and remain under the control of the Generals.
Art San Pedro in Sun-Star Cebu says, stop being scared of martial law! To which I can only reply what my father told me, apropos of Marcos’s declaration of martial law in 1972. “You know”, he told me, “if you read the 1935 Constitution, it was quite clear that its intent was to have martial law in specific localities before contemplating a sweeping, nation-wide declaration”. Basically, his point was, the fatal miscalculation people made about Marcos was that he would play by the rules, demonstrate restraint and self-control. He never did. But then, I guess it all depends on your attitude toward the incumbent. If you think she is interested in stepping down graciously, somehow, in 2007 or 2010, sure, give her the benefit of the doubt. As one colleague put it, though, “you have to think about someone who thinks she directly communicates with God.” Personally, I believe she has no option but to be president-for-life.
Reads for the day:
You know, for once, I agree with Winnie Monsod.
Isagani Cruz on what separation of powers really means.
Slate has a fascinating two-part review on a new movie on Edward R. Murrow. Heard about it from BuzzMachine who has thoughts of his own on Murrow, the movie, and the review (What? You don’t know who Edward R. Murrow was? Shame on you).
Horse’s Mouth has an amusing entry on what it’s like to return to the United States after living in the People’s Republic of China.
Live From USA.Philippines does this blog (and others) the honor of a mention in their podcast (a funny review, too: they basically don’t give a rat’s ass about politics, but if you do, then they say, read this blog.). Download it, it’s fun.