The Long View: Nakpil’s gift to the nation

THE LONG VIEW
Nakpil’s gift to the nation 

 

By Manuel L. Quezon III
Inquirer
First Posted 00:44am (Mla time) 12/28/2006

Published on Page A11 of the December 28, 2006 issue of the Philippine Daily Inquirer

THE STORY I LOVE TO TELL OF THE DOYENNE of Philippine journalism, Carmen Guerrero Nakpil, is a testimonial she gave to the wonders of Melatonin. She said it worked wonders in helping people sleep–particularly if gulped down with a generous snifter of brandy. But no story about Chitang Nakpil could ever possibly match her own stories about herself and those she has known and loved over the years. This holiday season, she gave the nation a present, the first in what promises to be a trilogy of an autobiography. The first volume, which takes the reader from the year of her birth to the end of World War II, is titled “Myself, Elsewhere.” It’s no recycled collection of old columns; it is all-new, though what it contains is the valedictory of a vanished way of life.

Writes Nakpil of the holiday season of her youth: “If a case for quaintness had to be made for Ermita, the first item would be the ‘Tres Reyes Magos,’ the feast of the Three Kings, the sixth of January, the day children got their presents. Our Christmas season was out of sync with the rest of the Anglo-American world that had recently adopted us. We had never heard of Santa Claus, there were no Christmas trees in our houses and the Christmas presents on the day Christ was born came from our godparents (only one or two each and not droves of politicians) as a carryover from baptism. We observed the novena of early morning Masses, midnight Mass and media noche, but the big day (gifts-wise) was January the 6th….

“We did not care about the new-fangled Christmas trees, because we had the belen, not just a creche of the Holy Family, but a whole landscaped model of the town of Bethlehem, with the focus on the stables below the Star …. I had my own Infant Jesus in a manger filled with straw, by my bed, and spent much time rearranging the swaddling clothes. There were silk banners with long tassels, blue and white and red, hanging from every window that faced the street, so that the whole town looked like a medieval court before a joust. And there were two town fiestas, the Bota Flores and the Fiesta del Pueblo, with Christmas in between.

“The earlier town fiesta, on the seventeenth of December commemorated the yearly campaign, which had been waged for 200 years, consisting of a procession to Intramuros to protest the taking of the image of the Nuesta Señora by Legazpi’s soldiers in May 1571. It was a massive, colorful demonstration, addressed to the Archbishop and the clergy in Intramuros, who had retained the image since and installed it in the Cathedral. Every year, Ermitenses, strewing flowers along the way, marched to Intramuros, pleading for the return of the Virgin and called it Bota Flores (bota being an early form of throw, a pelting of flowers).

“When the image was returned sometime in the 19th century, Ermita continued the tradition of the annual procession within the town, without the march to the Walled City, with the young men in sailor costumes and the girls in Filipino dress …. Instead of Santa Claus or ‘Jingle Bells,’ we had authenticity.”

And it is authenticity that makes her book so powerful; her authentic affection for what must be so alien a way of life as to seem impossible to present-day readers. But this isn’t a book of tales of happy parties, doting parents, dashing, debonaire friends and the gossip, whether amusing or scurrilous, of those prewar years; in other words, this isn’t the book version of an embalmed corpse. This is a look back at the way people really lived, loved, even hated; with details no novelist could have invented and yet we know must have been true.

A Spanish friar who played the Spanish royal anthem in the Church patio every Sunday, despite the Revolution having been fought 30 years earlier; families that marked the Feast of Saint Joseph by bringing out their best silver, and cooking their most luxurious dishes so they could wait hand and foot on beggars brought in from the streets; courtship preceded by what today we would call stalking; and an annual carnival in which the normally conservative would don masks and cloaks, and flirt.

It was a world, a country turned colony aspiring to be a nation, a metropolis, a town, a neighborhood, a family arbitrating between the patriotism of the revolution, the modernity of America, and the sense of tradition and urbanity that was the best hallmark of Spanish influence. In her book, Nakpil tells it not only as it was, but tells it as someone who has lived through those times ought to do: with a sense of the important things that have been lost–the things that may not matter on the whole but the loss of which still seems unfortunate; and the things that shouldn’t be missed and are mercifully long gone.

One passage, in particular, demonstrates this best: how the Spaniards kept their distance from the Filipinos, and how the Filipinos returned their social reserve; how the Americans, too, kept to themselves and didn’t mix socially with their colonial wards; and how Catholics and Protestants eyed each other with mutual suspicion though there were the occasional mixed–yet successful–marriages.

Nakpil looked back on them all and wrote: “Strangely enough, after the war and the destruction of Ermita, bigotry faded and we all became warm and loyal friends. It had only been the diehard Ermita protocol that had kept us revising the Spanish Conquista and the Protestant Reformation and the Filipino-American War, imposing anachronistic strictures on ourselves. I recall, with embarrassment, the frissons of antipathy to Spanish and Protestants that we harbored. Their disappearance was one of the welcome consequences of the war. After facing terror and destruction together, we came to our senses and became confirmed liberals. There were no bigots in the ensuing rubble.”

Season’s Greetings 2006

The political year ends in confusion for the President’s forces even as it also ends on a despondent note for everyone else. Is the plan a May referendum? Labor lauds a wage increase for the year end; Capital closes the year on a somber note because of it. But it only affects those earning minimum wage.

The Economist Intelligence Unit has this in its “Philippines at a Glance, 2007-08″:

The authority of the president, Gloria Macapagal Arroyo, remains fragile. During the past year she has survived demands for her resignation, an impeachment bid by the opposition, allegations of vote-rigging and a reported coup attempt.

Her hold on power is increasingly dependent on the support of the military. Congress (the legislature) is discussing options for constitutional reform.

The budget deficit will shrink in 2007-08. Private consumption will continue to be the main driver of GDP  growth, which will slow from an estimated 5.6% in 2006 to 5.5% in 2007 and 5.3% in 2008. Annual consumer price inflation will average 5% in 2007-08. Buoyant remittances from Filipinos working overseas will ensure that the current account remains in surplus.

The Philippine president, Gloria Macapagal Arroyo, is in a precarious position. In the past year she has survived a coup attempt, allegations of vote-rigging and an opposition attempt to unseat her.

Restiveness within the lower ranks of the military remains a concern, and opposition-led street  demonstrations could lead to her ouster in a “people’s power” revolution. Despite this, the president has retained the support of the top ranks of the military.

The possibility of her sudden overthrow cannot be ruled out, but, unless a credible alternative government emerges, Ms Macapagal  Arroyo should be able to survive as president until the end of her term in 2010.

Maitet Diokno-Pascual and Clarence Pascual examine economic prospects for the country, too.

Overseas, Andres Oppenheimer in a year ender says Latin America is shifting Right, not Left. History Unfolding points to a useful chart summarizing the year that was for Iraq: and a columnist who says Arab politicians are different: they tell the truth in public, but lie in private.

In the blogosphere, Holiday notes (annoying and good things) from baratillo@cubao. Holiday viewing courtesy of Now What, Cat?

Whispers in the Loggia points to Misa de Gallo as not only a Philippine, but global Filipino, phenomenon. At home, village idiot savant marvels at Mass attendance.

Morofilm looks at the holidays from a Muslim and Davaoeño’s point of view.

The Professional Heckler gives the world the best of his lists, including his most famous list of all.

This blog is going on vacation for the holidays. There really isn’t any need to agonize over vacations. Unless something earth-shattering happens, I’ll see you all after the New Year. Thank you for reading, for sharing your thoughts, for arguing with me and each other, for staying informed and keeping involved.

For everyone, a message from One Voice:

Season’s Greetings to all!

Technorati Tags: Blogging, Charter Change, constitution, Middle East, One Voice, people’s initiative, philippines, politics, president, Washington DC

Latest DCS conferment

Distinguished Conduct Star awarded to 1st Lt. Randy Galiza.

20 Peso coin

Word is, the 20 Peso bill is to be phased out next  year and replaced with a coin.

Best books, 2006

According to The Economist.

A Calabasa Christmas

Yesterday, for the first time in my life, I received a Christmas present from beyond the grave. Now I normally don’t receive many presents to begin with, but there’s one that I’ve always looked forward to as it would arrive without fail and would always be delicious -Vigan longanizas from Vicky Quirino. Her annual gift indeed arrived -weeks after she’d been laid to rest. They made for a particularly poignant breakfast this morning.

A couple of days ago, word started filtering out that the Legion was preparing to march again. Today’s papers confirm the proposal. Except this time around, the effort would be geared towards a unicameral presidential system. An impeachment-proof presidency that never has to worry about an upper house, in other words. When I asked lawyers and such about the prospects of this latest mutation of the people’s initiative, the consensus seemed to be that there was a lack of material time, and furthermore, the Supreme Court might be inclined to throw it out because unicameralism, to the minds of some justices, represents a revision and not amendment of the Constitution. As always, my attitude is: let’s assume nothing is impossible.

Mike Defensor’s trying to play interference has also made it to the news today. He says any effort at amendments before the elections would be a disaster, and broadly hints at a cabal egging on the President.

I also tend to think that the Daily Tribune’s flogging a dead horse with its reports on plans for martial law; to be sure, the prospects of some kind of emergency rule did come up before last Sunday; but if anything good came out of the rally turnout being disappointing, it’s that a pretext for a state of emergency would be hard to manufacture at the present time.

Incidentally, Connie Veneracion presents a proposal for what she believes would be authentic grassroots democratic participation. I do agree with her that as it stands, the people’s initiative provision of the Constitution (and the accompanying law providing for its mechanics) is virtually impossible; but I am more confident about its practicability in a local, even provincial, context.

Straight from the horse’s mouth: Lito Lapid’s running for Makati mayor.

My column for today is A Calabasa Christmas.

Alex Magno points to gambling and drug lords as the kingmakers in local politics. Conrado de Quiros points out the President, next year, is due to mark the longest tenure of any post-Edsa president.  Tony Abaya says time has run out to educate a new generation of leaders. Greg Macabenta on what Filipinos learn in America and Alfredo Rosario on how the electorate will never give up its right to vote for a chief executive.

Charter change, Thai-style. Pending questions the Thais are pondering, according to Suthichai Yoon.

And relaxing holiday reading: Vanity Fair on how Archie comics have endured; an amusing American take on having a Filipina for a wife; how Inca Kola beat Coca-Cola colonization (sort of) and how Fanta is a legacy of Nazi Germany.

In the blogosphere, An OFW Living in Hong Kong says the effort to revive the Charter Change effort is a smokescreen to disguise the President truly becoming a lame duck. The view of Alternation 101 is that the President’s recent about-face suggests the real game plan: to turn Charter Change into a campaign issue in May: but the counter-issue is electoral reform, first. I have a feeling many groups will be pushing electoral reform after the New Year.

Toots Ople says the Legion’s return from the dead is like a bad film sequel.

Mountaineers conquer the Sierra Madre.

A new blog is born, by a Czech journalist who loves the Philippines: In Blumentritt’s Shoes.

Technorati Tags: CBCP, Charter Change, constitution, people’s initiative, philippines, politics, president, state of emergency, Thailand

Pichay to DPWH

The papers report the President’s about face and renewed determination to pursue amendments, while Sec. Michael Defensor plays interference and is trying to play good cop again.

Archbishop Oscar Cruz is fed up and thinks a proper rally should be planned.

Marichu Villanueva reports possible cabinet appointments:

There are very strong indications that third-termer Rep. Prospero Pichay Jr. of Surigao del Sur is up for a possible posting as new secretary of the Department of Public Works and Highways (DPWH). The incumbent DPWH secretary Hermogenes Ebdane Jr. is being groomed to become the new Defense secretary.

She also suggests Bro. Mike Velarde shafted the bishops:

Given these usual changes in key Executive posts, there is reportedly so much “sniping” taking place as some influential groups try to cash in their chips after the feared “people power” crowd did not materialize in the “prayer rally” at Luneta last Sunday. The Iglesia ni Cristo (INC) did not join it, while the El Shaddai charismatic movement of Bro. Mike Velarde merely deployed an obviously token delegation.

Newbsreak reports scuttebutt on the next Supreme Court appointment:

Two names have been floated for the post: Solicitor General Eduardo Nachura, and chief government corporate counsel Agnes Devanadera. Both are not just sympathetic to charter change; they actively campaigned for amendments at some point in their careers in public service.

My Arab News column for this week is Arroyo Should Not Misread Opposition to Charter Change.  The Inquirer editorial does a post mortem on the Sunday rally and points out how the bishops played into the administration’s hands. Dan Mariano explains why he thinks the House proposal for amendments isn’t actually dead.

Jarius Bondoc hopes Rep. Abraham Mitra’s constitutional convention bill will receive legislative support. On the surface, the bill sounds reasonable enough, but even public openness to a convention sees to be waning in view of the administration’s zigzagging attitudes to amendments. (See EC Salcedo’s online proposal for a convention).

Manuel Buencamino combines typhoons, rape stories, and winking bishops into an allegory of modern times. Mike Tan has an interesting column on baksheesh.

In Thailand, apparently there was a stock market crash, and things have been complicated by controversy surrounding the drafting of a new constitution. Tulsathit Taptim considers one proposal, to have a non-elected prime minister, sheer lunacy.

Technorati Tags: CBCP, Charter Change, constitution, people’s initiative, philippines, politics, president

Second wind

Last Sunday I asked Mon Casiple his fearless forecast before the rally started. A very circumspect man, he answered me by saying he saw three possibilities:

1. If attendance was disappointing, the administration would suddenly rediscover its courage and renew the push for constitutional amendments.
2. If attendance met expectations, then everyone could look forward to the May elections and take it from there.
3. If attendance exceeded expectations, the President would begin negotiations leading to her retirement.

The President proved Mr. Casiple right, with this statement:

There are three realities we face as a nation: one, that the people accept the need for Charter change to overhaul the system; two, that there is a need for a unified national consensus on the means and timetable; and three, that this is a platform commitment of the administration that will be pursued with urgency and fervor.

These realities will continue to shape our actions for the better future of the Philippines—working closely and inclusively with all stakeholders and institutions; observing transparency; and backing up the entire process with a strong economy, social payback and values programs.

This is a matter of paramount national interest and our leaders must all rise to the challenge.

This is a volte-face from her previous statement on December 14:

I commend the decision of the House leadership as an act of statesmanship to unify not only the two chambers of the legislature but the whole nation around the issue of Charter change.

I thank Speaker Joe de Venecia and his valiant allies in the House for heeding the voice of national consolidation and unity, without sacrificing their high vision of political renewal.

It is time to gather together all the energies of our people for the continuing work ahead—maintaining our economic strength, ensuring the social payback of economic reforms, and helping distressed communities back to their feet.

Philippine democracy will always find the proper time and opportunity for Charter reform at a time when the people deem it ripe and needful, and in the manner they deem proper. The nation must consolidate now and I call upon all our institutions and sectors to stand as one for the country’s future.

The “urgency and fervor” of December 19 was not there on December 14; or put another way, the need to “gather together all the energies of our people,” etc., was magnificently accomplished in all of one week (which proves nothing is ever permanent in politics).

If members of the House were stunned a week ago, it’s happy days again, as the latest show of bravura indicates, regardless of whether or not they’re taking their cue from the unsinkable Speaker, the irrepressible Senator Santiago, and a highly-pleased Alex Magno.

And so, the Inquirer says, Fresh Cha-cha push seen after Christmas; the President’s given the green light, or as GMA News puts it, she’s now “undeterred”; see also, the combined report of Malaya.

So there you have it. It reminds me of something else Mon Casiple told me: “don’t believe for a moment their Con-Ass proposal has been really archived and is dead.”

In her column, Connie Veneracion suggests broader, and harder, questions have to be tackled if a proper Charter Change debate is to take place.

In the blogosphere, Philippine Commentary continues to elaborate his thesis that a new kind of political conservatism is a-borning. Red’s Herring examines the role of People Power in a democracy and how just invoking its name can scare the wits out of leaders.

Ang Tagapaggalugad  as well as Audrin’s Site, and Sarita’s Site,  and Four Eyed Journal went to the rally and took photos. On the other hand, Pinoy X-sa KSA is fed up with rallies. A sentiment expressed by those who had to deal with yesterday’s Makati rally: see Past Midnight and onetwentyhours.

Ellen Tordesillas wrote about that rally as it was taking place, saying one message it presented was “don’t rely on the Church.” Her entry reminded me of the heated debate during Edsa Dos, between those who wanted to stay at the Edsa Shrine, and the others who wanted to march on the Palace.

Technorati Tags: CBCP, Charter Change, constitution, Philippines Free Press, politics, president

The Long View: Parameters

THE LONG VIEW
Parameters
By Manuel L. Quezon III

Published on page A15 of the December 18, 2006 issue of the Philippine Daily Inquirer

GARRY WILLS WROTE: “THE LEADER IS ONE who mobilizes others toward a goal shared by leader and followers. In that brief definition, all these elements are present, and indispensable …. Leaders, followers and goals make up the three equally necessary supports for leadership …. The goal must be shared, no matter how many other motives are present that are not shared.”

When President Macapagal-Arroyo set the Charter change ball rolling in the crisis month of July 2005, I pointed out she was doing a disservice to its cause by wrapping herself up in its mantle. Whether or not she was ever intellectually convinced of the need for constitutional amendments and of the manner she felt best to pursue it, that became beside the point: operating in an atmosphere of a political emergency, she retained one of the greatest powers of her office, the power to propose, but she lost the legitimacy required to unite the country.

It is said that pride goes before the fall. One kind of pride is intellectual pride—manifested in “the pride of authorship,” as I like to call it. It is a kind of stubborn, relentless pride to which intellectuals, political leaders—indeed, anyone involved in the realm of ideas, whether in public or private life—are particularly susceptible. Convinced that they had the solution, some proponents of constitutional change thought they could turn the President’s misery into a historic opportunity—they failed.

A leader fighting for political survival is in no position to appeal to, much less harness, the idealism of a divided country. That otherwise sincere and dedicated Cha-cha proponents failed, even refused, to see that—hoping to turn the President’s politically imperiled position into a situation that would harness her leadership and the resources at her disposal into a kind of knife to cut through the Gordian knot of constitutional change—only proves that even the well-meaning aren’t beyond political opportunism at its clumsiest.

This is why an emerging consensus for Charter change among public thinkers was broken. It wasn’t just the House of Representatives that thought it had everything worked out and, therefore, confused the tyranny of coalition majority with political will. You can list those who threw their support behind the President’s call for Cha-cha and enumerate the many different ways otherwise sterling reputations have been tarnished.

The greatest enemy of their cause was themselves. This is why those formerly inclined to work things out with them ended up pitted against them. The dividing line was on whether they were for or against the President and her ruling coalition: and rightly so. It was the fundamental “issue of the day” in July 2005 and remains the unresolved crisis that afflicts our country.

The trinity of objectives announced by the President in 2005 was: a parliamentary, unicameral and federal government. The first of these proposals to fall by the wayside was federalism. Only the unicameral-parliamentary government proposal survived—and its proponents, like demented sea captains, kept running their efforts aground on the shoals of the Constitution, common sense and public opinion.

Their dementia was caused by the pride of authorship. That left no room for honest debate or for compromise. What compromises there were only proved the folly of their political calculations: federalism was watered down, then dropped, alienating the non-politicians from the provinces; an insistence on unicameralism or nothing left those unconvinced of the soundness of the idea with no choice but to oppose it; and in turn, the manner in which the House recently behaved demonstrated the perils of a parliamentary setup.

The problem with Charter change, as pursued over the past year, was that even its proponents lacked shared goals. The political considerations of the President turned out to be different, even contradictory, when compared to those of her allies in the House. Her supporters from the private sector differed on what motivated them: was Cha-cha’s paramount consideration the loosening of economic provisions, or was it federalism or a parliamentary government (itself an authentic urge for a century but only among intellectuals and the barons who rule provincial fiefdoms)?

But even more crucial to their lack of success was their unwillingness to respect basic parameters that public opinion outside the corridors of power had been repeating.

Filipinos have been pretty clear about their ultimate parameter: they should retain the opportunity to directly vote for their chief executive.

A citizenry that has had a hand in electing its national leadership since 1935 can’t be asked to willingly give up that right, and rightly so. No democratic people have ever given up the right to directly elect their chief executive in exchange for indirect selection by members of a legislature.

If no free people on earth have ever given up the presidential system to replace it with a parliamentary one—though parliaments have been abandoned for the presidential system—then it is unreasonable to first propose, then demand, and then attempt, to make the public abdicate that right to a bunch of politicians. Such a thing only happens when dictatorships are established and all elections of whatever kind become meaningless rituals.

Most of all, they ignored a fundamental reality in politics: you cannot have everything. Absolute victory and total surrender are the goals of warfare, not politics. Only when the present proponents of constitutional change shall have realized this, will the time be ripe for the setting aside of past differences. Only then can a frank, but mutually respectful and productive, debate resume. But not before.

Monday morning quarterbacking

The Manila Standard-Today crows about the thin crowd and gives the lowest estimate at 15,000 (also echoed by the Philippine Star and the Inquirer and Newsbreak). Other reports suggest the Palace has regained its confidence because of the poor attendance (it had barricaded itself behind container vans on Sunday). Another Newsbreak report indicates the President may have been done a favor by the Speaker self-destructing; the initial advice of her advisors -for a Constitutional Convention to be elected, which they can pack- may be winning out.

The Manila Times estimate was 30,000. The Daily Tribune and the Business Mirror also put it at between 30 to 50,000 (30-40,000 was the police estimate, 50,000 the Church estimate). Malaya reports, but does not claim as true, still another claim that the crowd reached 100,000.

My personal view is that the crowd, during the Mass, numbered about 40,000 based on my circling around and asking people who should know (organizers of mobilizations). The crowd, first of all, was divided into two groups, because of a fence erected where the lawn ends and the concrete road facing the Quirino Grandstand begins. One organizer told me the student contingent numbered about 3,000. The crowd in front of the Grandstand compressed but was mainly huddled in the center. When I went beyond the fence, the lawn up to the Macapagal (Diosdado, that is) era carabaos that frame the entrance to this section of the park, was filled near the front but sparsely populated towards Rizal Monument. The El Shaddai contingent was closest to the railing in the lawn area, civil society groups were behind them sprawled on the grass, and isolated families that didn’t belong to any groups hung around the sides.

Last Friday, 20,000 Negrenses rallied: 10,000 in Bacolod City, 3,000 in Kabankalan City, 1,000 in San Carlos City, 2,000 in Cadiz City, 1,500 in Escalante City, 2,000 in Guihulngan town.

Now 40,000 is a highly respectable number for any kind of gathering; and even the lowest estimate equals the first flexing of renewed People Power in December 2000. Yesterday’s gathering, I think, is best understood in those terms: having been absent from the public arena, the Church is as much on probation as any other group, but still mustered a decent turnout without arm-twisting or other inducements. It’s muscles have atrophied and need some exercise.  Had it been held on Friday, attendance would surely have been larger. But despite the imminent threat dissipating, and the threats from the Palace sinking in (I encountered quite a few people, when I talked to various people who attended, who said they came despite warnings from friends and family about their safety), people still went. A veteran journalist I encountered said what he found remarkable was that the people hanging out in the periphery were obviously people who’d turned up on their own: he described a surgeon, some businessmen, and some families he personally knew, who had never taken any kind of stand at all in the past. Those people, giving up a holiday season Sunday to make a personal statement, he said, are an encouraging sign.

On the other hand, baratillo@cubao says the public’s voted with its feet: and rejected everyone and everything. My only problem with this is it ignores similar things said about similar efforts as far back as I can remember. After every rally in the 70s and 80s and so forth, I’d hear exactly the same conclusions. I even heard it in 1997, after the anti Cha-Cha rally at the Grandstand; I heard it after the Edsa shrine rally; and over the past year. Identical assumptions were wrong, then. But only time will tell. Amando Doronila says it’s much simpler: the government eliminated what had been the motivation for the rally, and if the public remains divided up to now on the legitimacy issue, then it wouldn’t excite anyone beyond the usual suspects (like yours truly, but definitely not others); most of all, the rally lacked a definable objective. People lose the incentive to rally if the target of their ire curls up and dies, like the Constituent Assembly plan.

Anyway, you would think that by now, estimating crowds would have reached some level of scientific certainty, never mind what organizers or participants claim. In this case the police estimates seem to match the more sober estimates of the crowds from experienced organizers, so maybe the police are more objective than we normally assume.

The problem to my mind, is that a crowd is dynamic, it’s constantly changing; and that your estimate of the crowd depends not only on your method for counting people, but what time you do the counting. For example, had you counted the crowd at any time between 2 to 3 pm, the low estimate would have been valid; had you estimated the crowd during the Mass itself, you would most likely have gotten the 30,000 to 40,000 figure. If you counted the crowd, again, after the Mass but before El Shaddai got its momentum going, you might have been down to 20,000 but in about half an hour (as the sun set) the crowed suddenly mushroomed and definitely you could have counted 50,000 or more (the crowd thickened so that it reached the Macapagal carabaos and there was precious little standing room left).

MindanNews reports a Mindanao congressman’s views that his colleagues received no inducements for supporting amendments, but apologizes to his constituency for supporting the amendments effort. Newsbreak takes a look at the Commission on Elections, which will be the focus of attention after the New Year. My impression was that the most-applauded portion of Cardinal Rosales’ homily was his call for a revamp of the Comelec.

The President issues a national appeal for moral transformation.

My column for today is Parameters. Why are groups that formerly adopted a consensus for charter change, now bitterly divided? The reason is the President.

Bong Austero presents a useful analysis (and this serves as a reminder, I think, that one shouldn’t assume he’s an Arroyo loyalist; I’m all the more convinced that he is the voice of the undecided):

A line has been crossed in the last three weeks. And, unless more concrete steps are taken to assuage people’s fears and doubts, unless very definitive assurance is made that similar sinister conspiracies will never ever be resorted to again, I am afraid that the resentment will continue to snowball.

It is very easy to dismiss the prayer rally spearheaded by the Catholic Church yesterday simply as a warning salvo to the powers-that-be. I don’t share that belief. The organizers may have tried to downplay the political overtones of the event by insisting that it was simply a religious affair. But the truth of the matter is that most of the people who went to Luneta yesterday did not go there to pray. Everyone knows we can pray anywhere. People went because of political reasons. People went because they felt violated. People went because, quite frankly, their patience was wearing thin….

…Serves the administration right, I think. It has been given more than enough opportunities to redeem itself but it has only squandered these. If there is something that can be said of this administration, it is that it has done a great job at self-destruction. Instead of focusing on building a great legacy that will counterbalance the series of scandals that have rocked it from its inception, it has wasted its energy on counterproductive actions that have only alienated more and more people, including those who have been initially supportive—whether sincerely or grudgingly.

Is everything lost, then? I don’t know. Right now, I can’t see through my personal resentment at the way my intelligence has been insulted by this administration over that stupid move to ram that constituent assembly. Proposal down my throat. It is just sheer luck that all this mess is happening during the Christmas season when people are in a more forgiving and hopeful mood. But this self-destruction has got to stop. It simply has got to stop. Enough. Please.

Ellen Tordesillas was there and points out what was significant about it. I think we can get a good sense of where things are by approaching things from Ellen’s and Bong’s different points of view.

Jarius Bondoc is skeptical about calls for electoral reform, and mentions the Davide report, which is interesting. That report was prepared ages ago but never released to the public by the President.

Pictures (actually, Ellen Tordesillas has better ones):

Inq7.net photo. If you look at the center of the picture, you can see me!

Ecumenical invocation.

Archbishop Lagdameo speaks.

A happy, jiggly choir at the Grandstand (behind the scaffolding)

Students from La Salle.

Civil Society matrons: Vicky Garchitorena, Winnie Monsod. Serge Osmeña’s head.

Beginning of the Mass.

Periphery of Grandstand. Where the people are sitting on the sidewalk was the location of the fence separating lawn from asphalt. El Shaddai and Civil Society groups were behind the fence, in the lawn area.

Parish delegations going home after Mass.

Manila Bay sunset.

Students going home after Mass.

In the blogosphere,

Check out Tastes@Blogcritics.org for food and other reviews.

Technorati Tags: Blogging, CBCP, Charter Change, constitution, One Voice, people power, philippines, politics, president

Next Page »