45 thoughts on “Tar baby

  1. I was waiting for somebody to comment….As of this writing none yet

    Ok here it goes anyways..

    I read the understandable version of the tar baby and di ko malaman kung sinong mas contravida yung fox ba o yung rabbit?

    Tapos yung rabbit akala mo ang bobo dahil walang kadala dala na trap sa tar baby pero na out fox nya yung fox para makatakas.

    I was trying to realte it to the analogy of MLQ3 about who the characters relate to…..medyo ngaon ko pa lang nagegets.

  2. If the ‘Brer Rabbit is the President, Brer Fox is the Speaker’, is FVR the Big (or old) Brer Fox and what could he be up to?

    He must be up to something, it would be totally out of character if the Old Fox isn’t. He seems out of the picture now but that’s Old Fox’s ways.

    By the way,the Old Fox gifted the Brer Rabbit with the ‘baby’ when he rescued the Brer Rabbit from a pack of Hound Dogs hot on her trail.

  3. Ok here’s the challenge. Our parliamentary system seems to work fine both in our federal govt. and in provinces. I bet you,if we switch the systems of government, judiciary and all, we can make your system of governance there works as good as what we have here or even better, but can you bet than you can make our system work as fine as it did here or even outdo us?? just for fun…maybe tar baby will start talking..

  4. “but can you bet than you can make our system work as fine as it did here or even outdo us?”

    If you happen to have leaders like GMA, FVR, JdV your country would be in the same mess we’re in now.

    Admin’s Pro Chacha Advocates often cite Malaysia. The big difference is between FVR, who is practically an agent of US/WTO/WB/IMF, and Mahathir who was a maverick against the System.

    Switch system or switch leaders? Imagine any one of these ‘most distrusted leaders'(SWS)as your prime minister. Do you elect leaders because they are good liars and cheats?

  5. That’s exactly my point, jmakabayan. You can put up the best system of government, but if the attitude and the mindset of the political leaders, judicial officers and in lesser extent the whole citezenry, stay as is all is nil..

  6. Got it,

    “we can make your system of governance there work(s)” here …

    Your challenge should put a stop to all these charter change debates.

    ” maybe tar baby will start talking.. ”


    But maybe Prex Rabbit and Speaker Fox can continue ‘talking chacha’ til tar baby drops dead.

  7. Or maybe the Prex and the Fox “dance the cha-cha”, maybe just maybe the tar baby dance with both of them. If it takes three to chacha, why not?

  8. sometimes she’s the fox and sometimes she’s the rabbit but she always looks like a tar baby.

  9. JMakabayan,

    I find that our people (even many politicians themselves) have not quite understood yet what parliament is and the varying degrees in which they differ according to a particular nation.

    It is imperative to determine what type of parliamentary form of government people wish to have even before the nation votes for a shift.

    There are other issues involved besides a simple shift.

    The Philippines has a system today which is perhaps not perfect but I do believe that no system will work for as long as we have mavericks of the lowest category in our political world who refuse to make any system work for the good of the nation.

    I attempted to explain the two major parliamentary forms of government in Europe and posted it in Ellen Tordesillas’ blog following the accounts and tall tales that I have read in newspapers not only by JdV and his friends but also by people who oppose the charter change.

    There seems to be a slight confusion but really, we first must all agree that a legislature or a lesgislative body in any democratic country is a parliament. After that, we can choose the type that we feel will suit us better or best.

    Having said that, I don’t think it is effective at all to shift to some other type of system of governing until we have proper elections. Otherwise, we will be simply compounding a problem with another set of problem and really, that system is what will further drag our confused political situation down to a bottomless pit.

  10. Thank you Anna and Vic for the very detailed explanation of the parliamentary system.
    that is waht the people need to know..I admit isa ako sa mga bumabatikos dito dahil i am one of the kulang pa sa information….

    I may also be one of those ok lang but not now….

    But even after GMA, if the people are not yet informed,enlightened and educated they should not be made to participate in a plebicite until informed.

  11. MLQ3 and fellow commenters,

    Here is a European news item which might be of interest to you (I’ve sort of summarized and translated it) and it is in my blog.

    Dateline Brussels, European Union

    EU freezes assets of Belarus president

    LEMONDE.FR 18.05.06 18h25 • Mis à jour le 18.05.06 18h49

    In an unprecedented move, the 25 member nations of the European Union decided on Thursday 18th May to freeze the assets of President Alexandre Loukachenko and 35 other officials of the government of Belarus following a who were convicted of violating international election norms and for clamping down on political opposition reports Le Monde (with reports from AFP and Reuters).

    According to the French broadsheet, the European Union had already banned some Belarus officials from obtaining entry visas to the EU and had also warned that other sanctions would be imposed.

    Brussels, the seat of the European Union, which announced the move, had been expecting the decision since early this week.

    The decision was made through a press release published by the Council of Ministers of the EU.

    The sanctions will include the freezing of assets and all other financial resources of the people who were found guilty of violating international election norms, civil society rights including and acts of illegal repression on democratic opposition during the elections of March 19, 2006.

    Alexandre Louchanco was elected to the Belarus presidency with 83% of the votes cast by the citizens of Belarus in an election contest which the European Organization for Security and Cooperation found did not duly conform to democratic election norms.

    Belarus which used to be a member of the former USSR, clamped down on legal oppositon by arresting and jailing demonstrators for “hooliganism” or “rallying without permit”.

    The report added that one of the former presidential candidates, Alexander Kozouline who was also the leader of the opposition was accused of “hooliganism”and “public disorder” and risks 7 years of imprisonment. Opposition leader, Alexander Milinkevitch was also arrested on April 27 for organizing a rally without a permit but was released a week ago.

    NOTE: This united action by an international political body against an abusive regime (like Gloria’s) should serve as reminder to repressive regimes that they cannot clamp down on legitimate dissent!!!! All it takes is for the EU’s Organization for Security and Cooperation to be requested by an NGO to come and observe the “clamp down on legitimate dissent”…So, Gloria, Gonzalez and Defensor had better watch out!!!!

  12. “But even after GMA, if the people are not yet informed,enlightened and educated they should not be made to participate in a plebicite until informed.” when kaya will this ever happen?

    karl, how many times did the Phils change its constitution? Palibhasa may amnesia ang mga tao puro for the moment ang mindset at saka yang mga nagpalit ng constitution na yan nuong panahon ni marcos at ni cory na puro maingay dapat siguro aminin nila sa sarili nila that they are not qualified to talk because they dont have the ability to think long term!THE nerve. Maybe the world should just adopt a global standard how to govern a nation and what kind of constitution will meet the standard just like ISO so all we need to do is just choose from a menu and modify…we dont need tar rabbits but the charcoal truth is that the constitution( isama nyo na dyan yung local government code ni Pimentel) is very unfriendly for commerce and it is being exploited for the benefit of those who are in control of the levers of power. we complain about corruption endlessly but if we dont correct the structure first then the snakes will always be there to offer the apples to adam and eve. As they say nagumpisa sa masama ..masama din ending

  13. Vic,

    MLQ3 asks if Dagupan Express can put good rice on Poor Tired Baby’s table. If Tar Baby starts thinking ‘maybe’ its a win-win for Speaker Fox.


    Whereas, ‘The Philippines has a system today which is perhaps not perfect but’ remains legitimate and functional.

    Whereas,”(I)We do believe that no system will work for as long as we have” incumbent officials and politicians “who refuse to make any system work for the good of the nation.”

    Be it therefore resolved that,”(Having said that, I) we don’t think it is effective at all to shift to some other type of system of governing until we have proper elections.”

  14. Emilie,
    i know you are for Charter Change Now na!

    But like the fox who kept on saying i should do this to you but since I don’t have this I might as well do this to you.

    Our lawmakers all of them do this to us tar babies like they make beautiful laws like the one recently passed what was that the juvi law….

    Where is the money to implement this,will the bicam rush this for their 2006 budget?

    One more law passed without a plan to implement them properly.

    This is where we will agree emilie.

    Our budget should not be made yearly at least they should be forward looking enough to have a budget to accompany all laws that require money to be implemented.
    Our oversight commitees should scrap all laws which are impossible to fund.

    About the concern of pro snap elections..that too requires cleaning of our electoral process not just by revamping comelec; this requires an overhaul of our political system.
    Not talking about the constitution but the whole electoral process….then the rest will follow.

    we all know these many have blogged and many have commented already!

  15. a de brux, vic:
    I just have read your explanations on Ms. Tordesillas’ blog and it is quite refreshing to see explanations and essential details about forms of gov’t. Many thanks for that. It just needs to be pointed out that while it is true that France and Britain have bicameral parliaments, they are not CO-EQUALLY BICAMERAL. That is, both upper houses, the Senate and House of Lords are clearly much less powerful than their respective lower houses, the National Assembly and the House of Commons, respectively. For one, the both upper houses can only delay the passage or effectivity of a bill (ordinary legislation) approved by the lower house, they cannot permanently block it. Secondly, the prime minister and the gov’t is responsible only to the lower house and not to the upper house. In constitutional amendments, however, the consent of the French Senate has to be obtained. So there are checks and balances but they are clearly not of the US type. In fact, there are few parliamentary systems which have co-equal bicameralism; Italy is an example. I believe this is because, if the two houses are of equal power, which house will PM and gov’t be responsible to? Making them responsible to both increases drastically, the chances of a gov’t crisis and even the prospect of a deadlock where there will be no gov’t because the two houses couldn’t agree.

    This is in stark contrast to the US presidential system, where the two houses have basically equal powers. That is because, a political stand-off is a normal thing in a presidential system. In parliamentary system, however, there is a stronger emphasis on getting the program of gov’t passed and it is expected that important gov’t bills are passed. If the gov’t can’t do it, they should resign.

    So, yes, there are checks and balances in parliamentary systems but their extent and the spirit in which the system operates is quite different. There is an assumption of fundamental agreement between the gov’t and the parliament. If there is fundamental disagreement, either the gov’t resigns or the parliament is dissolved and new elections are called in which the people can make their views on the disagreement known.

  16. RoelM, you are right that in Parliamentary system the legislative branch is solely the responsibility of the Parliament (unicameral). In our system we also have the “senate” and its functions is mostly perfunctory and is not a co-equal of the House. And it is not elected. There is even some rumors that that it is to be abolished, because it is becoming a patronage retirement for those party candidate who could no longer win an election. The only check and balance of our system is the “loyal opposition” and our fearless civil servants, like our Auditor General who doen’t minch her words and cares none soever who is running the government. Another check is our ever vigilant Media. Since, there is no term limit for our Parliamentarians, those who are in the government or even in the opposition are all trying to do their best to get elected again and again. Add to that check and balance our justice system system who are truly color blind. Just to remind all those who have sticky fingers, those who were involved in the last government corruption scandal are now one by one going to jail. Some of those politicians, who were not directly involved but belong to governing party are now in permanent retirement from politics. And the last check and balance that a majority of our political leaders always keep in their heads all the time is “Shame”. Who wants to put his/her name and family members, friends and associates to that eternal “hall of shame”.

    It has not happened yet, but our constitution state the the Head of State is Queen Elizabeth II, so therefore if there is really a crisis beyond the capabilities of all our checks and balances, maybe the last word be that of the Queen..

  17. Roel,

    Thanks for the complementing info. My synopsis was really not complete and I am glad you raise these issues and hope others will too so that we can all complete or at least, try to have a pretty comprehensive info.

    Before I go any further, let me assure you that I am not for the adoption of parliamentary system of government in the Philippines (well, not yet). I only wish to provide a bit of info which could help address the parliamentary mode of government as they function in the UK and in France.

    True that the “upper houses” in France and Britain do not have the same vast powers as the lower houses have in matters of legislation (Commons and Natl Assembly) but in principle, they constitute the legislative “check and balance body” in those chambers.

    Everything you stated is correct but allow me to point out a relevant matter pertaining to the “check and balance” in the legislature. As a general rule in both countries is that all bills must be passed by both upper and lower chambers before they can become laws.

    Although in theory, UK House of Lords and the French Sénat “can only delay the passage” of a projected law – essentially, they can effectively “block” a law that is sent to them or return it to the lower houses for further scrutiny.

    How? Both UK and France upper chambers function almost in similar mode – if the upper chambers do not ratify a proposed bill, it’s true that it can be tackled by the lower houses in next parliamentary session or a year later and may be adopted by the lower houses without upper chambers’ consent but within that 1 year time frame, a lot of things can happen, the debate on the floor will take on a new dimension and therefore it is safe to assume that a bill initially rejected by the upper chambers will either be modified or abandoned.

    The upper chambers act as or are expected to be independent, non-partisan chambers (unlike in the US) which they almost always are, and when they adopt a position, i.e., reject, re-scrutinize a bill, throw the bill back to the lower chambers, their position is almost, always given a lot of weight not only by the members of the lower chambers but by the public at large.

  18. Vic,

    Quite true what you said that in the end, it is the people, the citizens and the legitimate opposition who can serve as the ULTIMATE check and balance in any type or form of government.

    Truly, no ammount of legislating for or against a certain bill can replace public vigilance in matters that concern the nation.

    In France, the judiciary is very, very independent too and as you say, absolutely “color blind” – the son of former French President Mitterand spent years in prison for influence peddling and his own presidential adviser was jailed for insider trading (while Mitterand was still in power).

    Recently, the juge d’instruccion in charge of investigating l’affaire Clearstream raided the office of Defence Minister Michélle Alliot-Marie and seized her diary, computers and other documents which the investigating magister believed could shed light into the affair. Not a squeak of protest was heard from the party in power – not even President Chirac (he wouldn’t have dared in the first place!) could do anything to stop the raid!

    Canada’s attitude towards these things is very much like France and the UK. These two countries obviously left their imprints on the country which not only adopted the good things from their erstwhile “founders” but also improved them! I’m really quite impressed with Canada and the Canadians!

  19. A. de Brux:

    Thanks for the interesting info on the practical workings of the British and French legislative systems. So, the upper chambers seem to act as chambers for revision or reflection with regards to legislation…

    I actually am for the implementation of a parliamentary system in this country with the right adjustments and modifications that take into account our local experiences and political culture. I actually incline more to a parliamentary model with positive votes of no-confidence and a constraining supreme or constitutional court. I am open to a bicameral legislature as long as it is not co-equally bicameral. I can accept a directly-elected president but with basically neutral, non-partisan functions unlike the actual practice in the French system. Perhaps,I shall have more to say on this later. I am definitely against the type of transitory provisions being proposed by GMA and her allies.


    A monarchy definitely has advantages for a parliamentary system when it comes to the crunch, as demonstrated recently in Thailand. It is hard to import that authority and mystique but a functional equivalent could perhaps be devised, even in a republic.

  20. Sorry, just a correction. Make that “… constructive votes of no-confidence …” instead of “… positive votes of no-confidence …”.

  21. sorry karl but this talk and debate is the same same debate during the time of marcos when he ordered the shift to parliamentary system…sus french system…british system bla bla bla bla so sick of it..I already know that its not the form of govt that counts and I dont care about what our countrymen living in other countries say for Christ’s sake even the US government is so defective. All i care about is the economic provisions of the constitution which are so backward that need to be changed immediately and we behave as if we can afford to wait. I dont think GMA will dare to extend her term beyond 2010( ano sya sineswerte? baka akala nya may queen gayenendra )..you can insult her to death and call her names but she is still President (inspite of the perception of the senators that she was rebuffed by the Supreme Court 3x-as if it means anything) because the people allow her to be so (that Karl is the truth inspite of all the surveys that are full of contradictions). I have no excuse for thinking that way and i am no member of any brigade

  22. If granting for the sake of argument, it is the economic provisions of the Constitution that need to be changed, then these should be proposed as ammendments, not part of wholesale Charter Change.

  23. cvj,

    My view, GMA and allies are decided to escape accountability. In that case, setting up a unicameral parliamentary system is a forced move for them. Economic and other issues,at this point, are secondary, and are cited only for propaganda,and worse, used as bribe to gather support from local and foreign power players.

    June and July are/will be marked months in every power player’s calendar.

    We’re ‘all in’ in, unfortunately, a zero sum game – nobody wins, everybody looses

  24. jmakabayan, it looks like that’s the case, but it also looks like her place in the history books is becoming clearer. GMA is on the way to becoming our version of Mexico’s Carlos Salinas de Gortari.

  25. It was good of you to flesh out with details the use of the term, tar baby, because sometime in the past, the term did have another context, one that referred pejoratively to very dark-skinned African-Americans.

    So even here in the States where the term forms part of early American folklore, context has to be explained or provided. And even if provided, some sectors will still take one to task for even using the term.

    The newest press secretary of the administration the other day used that term in his first presscom twice and had an opportunity to explain the context.

    Still, the US blogosphere is awash with negative criticism about its use – claims of insensitivity.

  26. “Carlos Salinas de Gortari (born 3 April 1948 in Mexico City) was President of Mexico from 1988 to 1994. He is by far the most hated president of all time in Mexico, and he is constantly associated with frauds, lies, and robberies. Some of his nicknames are “Chachalaca Innombrable”, “Orejon”, “Raton”, “Salinillas”, all are remarkably offensive or disrespective. He is considered a shame by so many because of the so called Fraude Electoral and all the money he stole from the National Treasury when he left power.” – from Wikipedia

    According to Felipe Miranda of PulseAsia, GMA has the lowest approval rating for a head of state in the history of polling.

  27. As CVJ asked, what is then GMA’s briar patch? How could she clean herself? I personally think she will get away from punishment, but as mentioned at #26 her place in history is already sealed, what will come next will just be footnotes.

  28. Amadeo,

    I guess the moral of the story could be that John Snow would have spared his first press conference from unnecessary controversy had he simply used a sticky chewing gum analogy in lieu of tar baby and our Manolo’s own baby would make PDI’s most read column if he were more indigenous with a si pagong at si matsing (at ang saging) folklore instead. What you think? (And “briar patch”? Why not kugon grass? Abe glancing at mlq3 with a wink).

  29. Jmakabayan, perhaps, it’s too simplistic that GMA & her allies are escaping accountability.
    I think even before the scandals broke out. We have been facing a system that has not been working for the development of the country.
    The gridlocks legislation faces are real problems.
    The real friction between the executive & congress are real problems that only provide us w/ lots of “entertainment” but at the end of the day We are lawys the biggest losers because we don’t get what is due to us.
    We can only be losers all together not until we learn to focus on issues that will make this contry move on.
    I like the parlamentary system because we will get out of the drama & emotion of electing leaders.
    Although, pinoys have the penchant for wanting to elect National leaders.
    Not because something is wanted & demand is it nesseserely the proper thing to do. Unless we want to continue w/ “being popular” although an action will not help to solve the problems treated by doing things in a “personal” level.
    It will allow us to concentrate on issues & not have to be just an audience of “song & dance” numbers by candidates.
    We have always been complaining about the weakness of the party system in our present set-up, well, now is the time that party platforms can be better defined.
    I think if we really care about being winners. We have to work for it by changing our mind-sets & attitudes & focusing on issues.

  30. #6,29

    ‘GMA’s briar patch’

    Another take could be:

    July 8,2005,FVR (Old Briar Fox?)rescued GMA and set the (briar patch?)FVR formula which is charter change plus cutting short her term equals graceful exit and federal-parliamentary system. That was a set-up that exploited GMA’s exposed and,at that time, almost indefensible position and presented a golden opportunity for Briar Fox Bros JdV’s and FVR’s legacy agenda, who were delirious at the GMA’s “let’s start the great debate” SONA.

    But ‘graceful exit’ and ‘good riddance’ mean the same thing to foxy trapos. When the situation stabilized, Malacanang’s wary operators, took full control of the Cha-cha express with ConCom’s transitory provisions that junked FVR’s shortened term formula and opened an unlimted term option.

    Foxy GMA and her foxy “tuta’s” simply out-foxed the old foxes. A pack bloodhounds might still catch up with these voracious foxes specially the ones feasting in Malacanang.

  31. Hi MLQ3, CVJ, JMakabayan,

    I think we all agree that the country is facing so many problems that we are quite at a loss as to where to start.

    Since we can’t just burn all the problems in an incinerator, I suggest is that we eliminate one problem at a time – make a list – if we really can’t tackle them all in one sitting.

    Let’s get rid of the single biggest, most obnoxious problem in the country first – Gloria Mandaraya Arroyo. After all didn’t she admit that she was the single most divisive reason for the division in the country (her own words) and because of that, she promised she wouldn’t stand in the elections of 2004?

    Let’s help her realize her vow, her promise, her whatever! Perhaps, Gloria needs a bit of help to finally stand down; perhaps, she’s simply procrastinating coz, you know, procrastinators usually need a bit of kick in the butt to help them do what they promised to do. If Pinoys do that, it will serve as a gauge of their generosity and Christianity towards Arroyo, don’t you think?

    Gloria’s brigades of die hards and sympathizers will hopefully recognize this as a charitable act by anti-Gloria forces.

    When that’s done, we can all stop procrastinating, buckle down to work and start getting rid of the next problem and .

  32. I Agree with Joselu that a strong party systems, where political parties with a clearly defined programs and principles and ideologies are presented to the people to choose from.
    Site you an example where such system works, granting that voters are free to select and vote on their own free will.
    We have four major Political Parties here;

    The Conservative Party – where the name implies is a party where its program is more conservative in nature. Less government, lower taxes and pro-business. It is comparable to the U.S. republican party. Now the party is running the govt. as minority (less than 50 % of party candidates elected). ,but have the agreed support of the other party to form a majority votes in parliamnet.

    The Liberal Party – ideologies more liberal in nature. Pro-choice, support same sex marriages, more social benefits for more taxes, but the last liberal govt. has managed the treasury very well, that the got rid of deficit into surplus. These are the two major parties competing for the govt.

    The New Democrat Party – this one is a socialist party. Its program and ideologies tend toward social justice above all. The are the proponents of free medical care for all, generous welfare assistance and just about what socialism is all about.

    The Parti Quebecois – this is the one issue party which was established and founded by the Separatists of Quebec. Its program and goal is to facilitate the eventual Separation of Quebec province out of confederation and become an independent country within Canada. It only runs candidate in the province of Quebec for Federal parliament. And during its heyday, was able to win more than 50 % of that province seats. Now it is becoming less popular option for the People of Quebec.

    How the electorate choose which party:

    In western region the conservative party dominate the landscape. It reflects the attitude and mindset of the western folks as to their preference and ideologies.

    In the eastern part the Liberal Party do the same.

    The New Democrats, being a socialist party has its die hards and it always managed to maintain its share of votes, albeit always a minority of insignificant numbers.

    The Parti Quebecois as I noted only in quebec and last election it garnered less than 50% of popular in Quebec and it’s a party in its deathbed.

    Only the Province of Ontario which is the swing voters can a party really fight it out for a majority government.

    Why it works: In reality the Party who governs the country will just have to usually implement the programs and platforms which was laid to the voters during the election campaign. It is always the public servants who do the “nitty gritty”, and put these programs into realities.

    What if if doesn’t work: Well if it is a minority govt. as it is at present, the parliament can be desolved by the house vote of “no confidence” and the new election is called, where the voters could make ammend for their mistake.
    If it’s a majority and it’s really bad, then we just have to wait for its mandate to expire then we punished them mercilessly at the ballot boxes. It happened last time with the Conservative Govt. who won just two seats after a very bad tenure. Just two out of possible 352.

    Will a strong party system, which is stronger than any personalities the country political landscape can offer, may have a chance to work in the Philippines? It all boils down to how mature and ready the whole country is..

  33. Joselu,
    “friction between the executive & congress are real problems”

    I hear even Senators Arroyo, Gordon and Biazon cite the Senate-Executive conflict as debilitating. But, in my view, the “real problem” is GMA’s predicament(intent?) vis a vis accountabilty. There is a continuing cover-up that puts her administration in conflict not only with the Senate but also with the Supreme Court, media, academe, students, CBCP and much of the public at large.

    GMA is in conflict with the Truth, the Law and good conscience. It wouldn’t help any if we keep a blind eye on things that are simply wrong, like lying, cheating and stealing.

    How about asking Bunye about his famous CD’s to mark its anniversary come June 6? Where is Gary now?

    He keeps saying GMA won ‘fairly and squarely’ but what does it mean? ‘As fairly and squarely’ as a pair of two perfectly round CD’s?

  34. Re: “He keeps saying GMA won ‘fairly and squarely’ but what does it mean? ‘As fairly and squarely’ as a pair of two perfectly round CD’s?”


    Knowing Gloria’s government is a governmet of the crooks, by the crooks and for the crooks, JMakabayan, I won’t be surprised at all if they adopt your line and use it to promote Gloria’s win as fair and square like Bunye’s round Hello Garci CDs.

  35. a de brux, i agree with your priorities. By repudiating GMA, we can also begin to deal with the popular memes that help sustain her administration and suppress our underlying potential as a nation:

    1. Democracy is reserved for those with Diplomas or Taxpayer Identification Numbers.
    2. Civil liberties can be traded off for economic progress or smoother traffic flow.
    3. Killing leftists is less appalling than calling the middle class names.
    4. It’s ok for a ‘hardworking’ President to promote a culture that rewards loyalty over integrity.

    The above list is by no means exhaustive.

  36. Jmakabayan,it’s almost a year now since the scandal.Groups have desperatly tried all the tricks in the book & all possible gimmicks.From the start so many things have been done & nothing seems to have caught fire or inspired the people to make a move.
    So what’s wrong? Is it the issue? Is it the personality? Is it about the mysterious characters orchestrating the scandal? Is it because the cowards behind the tapes have chosen to remain in the shadows leaveing all those sold to their gimmick holding an empty bag.
    I think lots of people have moved on.
    Media is always in conflict w/ administrations, so what else is new. Acadeeme always knows everything until they deal w/ theories & don’t have to be responsible for so many lives.It’s forever true that until it’s not your neck sticking out.You always have all the right answers.I think the SC rulings have been very objective. The issue on 464 is not over yet.
    The symbol of those cd’s is a waste of time.
    Anyone for the strangest & most selfish & selfgratifying reasons can burn anything on a cd & it will be far from it being a symbol of truth.
    If one cd can be doctored. Who is to say how many infinite ways there are to doctor anything?
    Perhaps the lesson behind all this madness is anything but the truth but how technology can be used to manipulate peoples thoughs & emotions.

  37. It’s been a year but I’m still waiting for the truth to come out regarding the Garci tapes. Come to think of it, Gloria has to say sorry for talking to a Comelec commissioner, but still nothing came out of it. She’s really good, but she hasn’t found her briar patch yet.

    How many years has Erap been in custody? I’m also waiting for his case to be resolved. Since it has been that long, should we just forget it?

    How many years has the PCGG gone after the Marcos millions? I’m also waiting for closure on this. Since it has been too long, should we also just forget it?

  38. Jon, erap is a one of a kind.His the only innocent person whoes lawyers have filled the record number of petition for one reason or another that has taken more time then defending him.As if they have been waiting for something to happen that never happens.Seems like it’s the homestretch already.
    I’m for the present deal because after around 20 years of evidence & people dissapearing & an endless court battle where only lawyers will make the most money.It’s time to be practical cause the amounts that can be taken will go a long way for social projects.It was all about the money from the start.So let’s just get the money & move on w/ our lives.
    I too ask myself if we will ever get to the bottom of the garci tapes.If nobody will ever admit to having done it then it’s a lost cause to persue.Who in the world will ever admit to a piece of evidence that is questionable?

  39. Joselu, I believe that people have moved on regarding all three points I raised. But moving on means going on with our daily lives but not forgetting that these issues are not yet closed. When new pieces of information/fact come out, or new developments come to show (or promises to show) the truth, these issues are coming to life again.

  40. do you think its important to change the system of the philippine gov. w/c among diff.ideologies best suit in our country?

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.