The Long View
A tandem for democracy
By Manuel L. Quezon III
Philippine Daily Inquirer
First Posted 01:06:00 09/21/2009
Manuel Roxas II’s expected acceptance of Benigno Aquino III’s invitation to be his vice presidential candidate makes him the immediate front runner in two races: for veep in 2010 and president in 2016. And it makes the Aquino-Roxas tandem the team to beat. The first test of a potential president’s judgment is the running mate he selects. There is a grim responsibility attached to the vice presidency, given the fact that three of our presidents died in office.
A candidate who selects a running mate with the end-view of enhancing job security because of unease over the thought the latter might end up as his/her constitutional successor or who thinks only of the latter’s vote-getting power – while disregarding how, in every other respect, the choice of running mate will be an administrative and political liability – does not deserve to be president.
For the vice presidency is more than morbidly waiting for the president to die. The vice president helps set the tone of an administration and fosters an approach to governance that thinks not merely of the next election but also of a continuity of policy from one administration to the next. Will the next administration be a collaboration, a partnership for progress, one that builds and nurtures institutions, or one that wrecks them?
Gary Wills, in his book, “The Kennedy Imprisonment: A Meditation on Power,” points to the sociologist Max Weber who “distinguished three kinds of authority – traditional, relying on the inertia of sacred custom; legal, based on contractual ties; and charismatic, based on the special gifts of a single ruler. Charismatic leadership is transitory – the ‘grace’ is attached to one person, who must constantly revalidate it in action.’; It serves, amid the collapse of order or old ways, to bind together a new effort – the embodiment of a cause in George Washington or Mao Zedong. The founders of states, or of religious orders (a favorite Weber illustration) have to exert personal authority, since they have no preexisting majesty or office or sanction of law to draw upon.”
With our institutions so weakened, so damaged, it will require a team of leaders to reanimate them with the ideals and idealism of the citizenry.
Wills favored the example (from among modern chief executives) of Franklin D. Roosevelt, who used his charisma to establish institutions and then lent his authority to them, so that generations after his administration, the American institutional landscape is still marked by the presence of the positive institutions he set up. He held this up in contrast to the Kennedys, who Wills felt approached every institution as something to be bent to their will; the constant urge to dominate created a brittle legend because instead of investing institutions with their charismatic authority, the Kennedys spent too much time warring with institutions in an effort to defeat them.
What Aquino and Roxas are setting out to do is to channel the goodwill and trust of the public toward a coalition that will revitalize our battered institutions. Roxas is the point man in translating the values he and Aquino and their constituency for change share, on the basis of clearly defined limits to executive and official power, both in terms of law and political principle. And this is where their shared martial law experience is crucial.
Martial law did not begin on Sept. 21, 1972, which was an otherwise normal day in a clearly abnormal time. It was imposed in the early morning hours of Sept. 23, when the military fanned out to shut down the mass media and arrest Marcos’ enemies based on a faked ambush on Juan Ponce Enrile. Marcos, leaving nothing to chance, backdated the legal camouflage for his coup to Sept. 21, for numerological purposes (a multiple of his lucky number, seven) and as a kind of back-handed tribute to Jose P. Laurel’s imposition of martial law on the same date in 1944.
The only connection Sept. 21 has to martial law was in Marcos’ mind. To perpetuate it as the anniversary is to perpetuate his crafty legal arguments for a naked power grab. But it is an anniversary of an altogether different kind: it was the last day when the country could still claim the protection of the Bill of Rights, the “most precious legacy of the founding fathers,” as Ninoy Aquino wrote.
To do away with the Bill of Rights, Marcos had to threaten the Supreme Court with the possible proclamation of a revolutionary government; he had to padlock Congress, in particular, the Senate; he had to muzzle the media, imprison journalists, educators, Constitutional Convention delegates, politicians, Maoists and reformers. He maintained his power by bribery and corruption. The elder Gerry Roxas and Ninoy Aquino would not collaborate, would never surrender; and while neither lived to see the Bill of Rights restored, Cory presided over the restoration of those rights and it is to deepen those rights – ”to make freedom tangible – that Noynoy and Mar have dedicated themselves.
The Great Recollection inspired the Great Awakening in August and now the task before the electorate is the formation of a Great Constituency: one that is prepared to contest not just the presidency and the vice presidency, but the Senate and more.
Since 2005, I’ve been arguing that national redemption is required, both from leaders and the led; if a restored civic sense is what’s required of the citizenry, then a rededication to the principle that there are limits no one in power ought to cross is necessary, too. Redemption is and should be available to everyone, but on the basis of the secular principles of self-control on the part of officials, a universal adherence to peaceful change (which requires an accompanying dedication to improving matters, sometimes by small steps but also by daring to do so by leaps and bounds), and a fundamental respect for the intelligence and sound values of the public.
87 thoughts on “The Long View: A tandem for democracy”
oh dear, this is getting pretty heated …let’s take it down a notch. i think we are getting to the crux of why it is soooo very difficult to have a rules-based governance system in our country.
even a saint like cory had to relent when it came to her relatives (although, Carl, i think we can concede that she herself didn’t steal, because things like that have a way of getting out in the public domain). even a technocrat such as GMA had to approve ill conceived policies due to lobby groups. no one can maintain a 100% clean record while in office under present conditions.
we had our lee kwan yew in the form of marcos and our lula da silva in the form of erap, but they both disappointed us in the end.
we shouldn’t vote for a candidate solely on the basis of his ancestry, but by the same token, we should not reject him either on account that we expect his leadership to be an exact replica of his parents’. we keep saying noy should be his own man. well we should at least let him have a go at it. he’s got 6 months to convince the voters. i personally would have preferred a mar-noy ticket, but that is just my preference.
in the end each of us should compare and assess platforms, records in office, associates, lifestyles, past business interests and dealings, visions and plans for the country and vote on that basis. this is why i said previously it’s not about good v evil, light or darkness, just shades of grey i’m afraid.
Again, the question was, and you do not answer this but dodge it, did Cory steal? Your comments on everything else points top innuendo that cannot be answered because nothing can be proven; yet the scrutiny was quite intense in those days and at a time when the corruption during the Marcos years was being unearthed and scrutinized. The absence of cases does not prove innocence in the face of the rumor-mongering but neither can it prove guilt: a good example, based on your logic, is how do you know the extent of imelda’s jewelry collection? she took presumably the best pieces with her; much else was left and it’s in the central bank’s vaults; the circumstances surrounding the evacuation of the palace by the marcoses were such that so many could have run away with so many things -and just as easily blamed it on those who were the first from the other side to arrive.
and you seem to be willfully ignorant of the cases that hobbled danding until they started being dispensed with and the same goes for the increasing momentum of cases going the marcos’ way in recent years.
my point about the bataan nuclear power plant is the same as with the communists. the notoriety of the bataan power plant was such that it could not be used, when the entire energy policy of the government had been oriented towards its use; and if you point to the alternatives you have to consider whether these were proposed, and considered, and within the resources of the government to implement at a time the coups were taking place and hammered the economy. the communists too, in particular, sison, had individuals imprisoned without regard to legality or due process. the country had just been brought back from the brink of economic collapse and a terminal spiral into communist rebellion fueled in part by corruption and brutality in the military. the military could not accept limits to its power after ruling the roost during martial law; it couldn’t accept that even enemies of the state deserve the protection of due process. what you are saying is that it was legitimate for the putchsists -themselves playing footsie with the marcoses- to rebel against the reassertion of civilian authority and in pursuit of national reconciliation. that the communists used the democratic space to provoke their enemies in the military and thus use it as a pretext to condemn the democracy that was restored despite their best efforts not to help it get restored in 1986, does not invalidate the peace efforts.
and your repeated cheap shots only betray the inflexibility of your point of view, your relentless partisanship and your inquisitorial attitude. you have been absolutely unyielding in your certainty and your biases. you have never made room for “objectivity,” and i’ve noticed appeals for “objectivity” are the first resort of those with a dogmatic disposition.in other words you accuse me of the very things you’re fundamentally guilty of and it’s getting rather old.
“…symbols do matter in this day and age, sometimes even more than substance.”
we’re seeing that now. Noynoy as presidentiable. haaay naku
“And, it is not just a promise not to steal, but the will and ability to institute a rules based system, that we need to argue over here (is the tandem up to it?)”
at present, any presidentiable can only pay lip service to it
“It is much easier to change formal institutions, i.e. introduce democratic forms of govt, than replace age old informal institutions, i.e. tenancy farming, patrimonial dealings based on kinship.”
which explains why many want Noynoy the president – to preserve the status quo
“The question is have we matured enough and do we have the capacity to adapt, given the experience of the last 25 years”
no we haven’t
you touched a nerve
Carl on, “Tingting Cojuangco and company cannot account for what happened to Imeldaâ€™s precious jewelry collection, which disappeared when the yellow forces raided Malacanang. Various witnesses have attested to Tingting as the principal culprit.”
If this is correct, Imelda could have filed a lawsuit considering various witnesses as you claimed. The justice system at that time is not one sided unlike in Marcos years.
Carl on, “When Cory was accused of nepotism by allowing Kamag-anak, Inc. corner sweetheart deals, it is on record that she responded that they had â€œa right to make a livingâ€.
Business can be subject to prosecution if there was violation of law. It is on the record that several cases had been filed during Cory’s time and after, with Danding Cojuangco, a very well known Marcos crony but latter smeared against Cory (as if Cory controlled Danding and other relatives). Even Danding won legal battles when Supreme Court dismissed some cases against him and the SC was independent from the president.
Carl on, “Danding wasnâ€™t prosecuted, inspite of his links to the sinister Rolex 12 under Marcos, suspicion (aired by no less than Cory herself, at one point) that he masterminded Ninoyâ€™s murder and his plunder of the coconut industry.”
There you go where your information is wrong. You should check the cases of PCGG with Sandiganbayan and protracted battles that ended up in the Supreme Court.
Carl on, “Was it not because Cory was playing footsie with the Communists? Didnâ€™t Cory pardon Joma Sison? ”
It reveals your strong military ties, Carl. You are blind to the fact that military unceremoniously killed communist suspects, disregard basic human rights and save the leaders in jail for bargaining. Cory’s pardon cannot correct the human rights abuses in the past. But it was a timely action that put both extremes to a common ground. Now you see both communist and military as legislators. And that is how it is suppose to work.
Prrrt! TIME OUT. It’s Dean de la Paz. And he’s crying WOLF! WOLF! http://filipinovoices.com/quezons-php-1-billion-biomass-bid
I suppose it could explain why Congressman Suarez was so willing to foot that La Cirque bill.
I’m putting it on as a test for Super Ninoy. Or for any other presidential wannabe. What are they going to do about it?
Noynoy, for more of Cory. Erap, for more of himself. Gibo, for more of Gloria. Villar, for more of congressional insertions.
All of them is for more of Danding. That makes the tandem of Chiz and Loren an expensive redundancy.
What would Carl rather have more of?
I’m getting a sense of Carl’s political disposition. The relentless attacks on Cory, which is not applied to Marcos (he even an apologises for, sometimes elevates, the dictator), could Carl be an old-time Marcos loyalista?
MLQ3, I strongly suggest you revisit the economic crisis from the years 1983-1990. From the point of view of the economic fundamentals. The peso crashed during the 83 BOP blowout. The banks were all but bust. Even the local branch of Citi could not service their dollar accountholders.
When a country is on a dollar reserve system and no dollar reserve no credit generation. Hence the government took over the Binondo Central Bank they allocated dollars for strategic imports. What little exports and remittances then gave a bonus to those who were earning in these currencies. The Philippines was in a debt default till 1989.
Jobo then issued his infamous 40% a year bonds. Volker had already raised overnite rates in the U.S. to over 14%. We were placed on life support by the IMF. To allow more foreign participation in our local bond market we allowed for the capital account liberalization of our financial markets.
Cuisia, Estanislao and Paderanga were the prime movers of this policy change. They are doctrinaire equilibrium scientists.
By 1989 the effects of this massive infusion of funds had caused inflationary pressures to build up. From a partial collapse in which prices collapse due to the collapse of demand due to the massive forex crisis you need inflation to jump start the economy.
Those who had monies stashed away during the early part of the crisis started buying debt at heavily discounted prices and using these to buy land at bargain basement prices.
The massive devaluation gave a windfall to those who had the means.
I strongly suggest you interview Estanislao who had already mentioned in the past that the economy itself was starting to tank by the time the 89 coup came about.
Someone should write a book about the vulture and scavenger investing after the 83 crash. The persons who are in the know about this nefarious activities were Gabriel Singson, Tetangco and some others.
The net effect of this was the debt of the country ballooned and this was the start of the end of complete monetary independence of the country.
We gave up out sovereignty for a few pieces of silver.
Scalia on, “effectively keeping Hacienda Luisita out of CARP”.
Scalia on, “Carl articulated well what is on the minds of most Filipinos but are afraid to say: Cory was more symbolic than solid achievement.”
You just acknowledged that Filipinos are about image or beemers, they could not separate accusations from substance to justify CARP is Cory and Cory is CARP. Since CARP has failed and so was Cory.
Far from how you think, Cory is not a failure. In fact, the apparent victims of CARP which are the peasants farmers think otherwise. KMP Secretary General Danilo Ramos lambasted the Senate when it ratified the CARP and dedicate it to Cory as a gift. To them it was an insult upon her death when Cory truly envisioned lands for farmers. For them, CARP failed but not Cory.
When Cory came to power in 1986, she promised land reform. CARP would have not been passed without loophole provisions required by majority legislators who are landowners. And yet 2 yrs after the signing of RA6657, Cory conceded that the implementation was an uphill climb due to continued resistance by landowners both in Congress and private sectors.
After Cory’s term, CARP had been diluted in favor of the landowners (that is expected if farmers are not legislators) by support pricing (allows overvaluation of lands), deletion of accountability of funds over 20 yr period, targeted size changed, insertion of vulnerabilities proviso to allow cancellation of CLOAS and land use conversions.
It is easy for the landowners to blame CARP on Cory when actually they have benefitted from it. I am sure Anthony Scalia and Carl among here were not farmers.
We have to remember that Kamaganak, Inc. is an old, old outfit. Itâ€™s been installed during the era of American tutelage and also as part of the â€œpacificationâ€ strategy. Thus the stockholding really belongs to many generations. If it has taken on a new brand that got stuck with Cory, itâ€™s really just first-rate agitprop.
If we remember moreover that Cory was a reluctant saint, how could we have demanded for her wickedness? Isnâ€™t it good enough that she stayed a saint?
Now, if Villar is best qualified because heâ€™s wicked, why not just go cha-cha then (that is, to keep things rules-based) and let the little one but with full-size Marcosian instinct (and a decent prospect to be as wicked a Darwinian capitalist) have more fun?
Cusp on, “With regard to Villar or any other candidate, can he/she institute a system of governance effectively based on rules, not favours better than the other guy/gal.”
Forget Villar. His work experience in SGV made him a crook cooking his own books.
Consider this, he owned a real estate company Adelfa Properties and bought lands. He used these lands as collateral to get money as loan 10 times their original values. He was able to do it because he also owned the Capitol Development Bank. 2 years after, the bank declared bankcruptcy.
Villar may cook the Banko Sentral if he became the President. Another SGVean Jaime Laya the Central Bank governor during Marcos time cooked the dollar reserves and allowed disappearance of gold bullions into the Swiss accounts for Marcos.
J_AG on, “Someone should write a book about the vulture and scavenger investing after the 83 crash. The persons who are in the know about this nefarious activities were Gabriel Singson, Tetangco and some others. The net effect of this was the debt of the country ballooned and this was the start of the end of complete monetary independence of the country. We gave up out sovereignty for a few pieces of silver.”
This is a very serious proposal inviting death contract if not litigated. Bobby Dacer got his untimely death and so was Edgar Bentain. The only safe place for disclosure is privilege speech in Congress or Senate, like when the younger De Venecia turned against the China commission, or Lacson’s expose on his former boss.
Corruption has been redefined and narrowed in terminology from Erap (as long as not directly from treasury, eg: commissions on facilitated sale, proceeds from illegal gambling), to exclusions under Arroyo (related private transactions to government deals are separate while original contract originated from executive privilege).
Precisely why I doubt if Noynoy can hack it. Being the president does not mean you can get things done by sheer will power alone, he has to get the support of congress, senate, local government, big business, etc., unless his word is the law, he will have to do it the usual way, wheeling and dealing, rewards and censure…Could it be that this age old system we have can change a man/woman overnight? Can it turn a saint into a sinner, or a stone cold killer? If he/she stays the course the perceived inaction (overplayed by some) will be bandied about as incompetence in other words “walang nagawa?”
I also believe Cory’s decision to release all political prisoners was a monumental move for democracy, if we really want “due process” we must also be prepared to give it to our enemies – justice for all. If Cory chose to remain a saint that was her decision, it seems it wasn’t all together popular but it was still a decisive move. Everybody has an agenda, everybody wants to benefit, for someone placed in the position of deciding who’s aganda to prosper, even not deciding means deciding in itself.
I’m beginning to believe that our brand of democracy is even limiting our leaders’ capability to effect change, so many critics, so many hecklers, and only a handful actually roll up their sleeves and get down to work. To top that off, there are more influential individuals who can influence policies and the implementation thereof…too many cooks…
Can Noynoy stand up against all this and steer the country to whatever he envisions our direction should be under his watch?
Abe Margaullo: “We have to remember that Kamaganak, Inc. is an old, old outfit. Itâ€™s been installed during the era of American tutelage and also as part of the â€œpacificationâ€ strategy.”
Actually, it is as old as the Roman system, where the saying “what are we in power for?” comes from.
It was only in England, approximately in the 17C that the basic institutions for modern governance and capitalism were forged. Over the last 300 years, they have been slowly spreading across the globe, albeit slowly in the developing world (DeSoto’s, Why Capitalism Triumphs in the West and Fails Everywhere Else tells us why).
Anthony, we shouldn’t underestimate our countrymen’s capacity for reform. after all we moved from dictatorship to democracy without violent means (the first in the world). i continue to hold out hope that they can surprise us again (this time through a constitutional process).
Lip service to good governance you say is all candidates can present us with at this point, but what about their current business dealings, associates, lifestyle as public officials. Don’t these provide an inkling of what their intentions are when they assume higher office?
but what about their current business dealings, associates, lifestyle as public officials. Donâ€™t these provide an inkling of what their intentions are when they assume higher office?
A very good point worth considering when choosing the man for the job…
As though we have a choice. As though our choice matters. Hehehe.
I’ve felt the same way eversince…
From NYTimes 1991 article
“The Highly Indebted” Countries with the most outstanding debt in ’89, in billions. Brazil $111.3 Mexico 95.6 Argentina 64.7 Egypt 48.8 Poland 43.3 Venezuela 33.1 Nigeria 32.8 The Philippines 28.9 Morocco 20.9 Hungary 20.6
Egypt’s debt was cut in half because it joined the Persian Gulf War. Cory Aquino turned down Kuwait’s request for troops. HU HU HU!
this is a bit off topic but if you google Nonoy Aquino, followed by any issue, you will get the Ninoy Aquino position.
even just google Nonoy Aquino and most of the results are for Ninoy.
Egyptâ€™s debt was cut in half because it joined the Persian Gulf War. Cory Aquino turned down Kuwaitâ€™s request for troops. HU HU HU!
Sending troops, risking Filipino lives to pay for debts…definitely not the Cory I know…what will the soldiers’ families say then?
you touched a nerve”
Because the truth hurts.
By the way, I have nothing personal against Cory. But to hold her up as if she were the best thing that happened to us is inane. C’mon guys, we can keep the bar much higher than that!
As for upholding some of what Marcos did, let’s face it, the guy had some things down right. Right up to this day, Marcos is still the elephant in the room. The OFW program he initiated is still the backbone of our economy. The infrastructures he put up, like roads and irrigation systems are still being used. And, sadly, especially with regard to irrigation, slowly deteriorating, with no improvement in sight. We have never been self-sufficient in rice production since Marcos’ time.
OK, so Marcos was evil personified. That is why, in the same way that I say that idolizing Cory keeps our standards at mediocre, if not very low, levels, we need to do much more than to continue relying on the institutions and practices that Marcos left us.
“…we shouldnâ€™t underestimate our countrymenâ€™s capacity for reform. after all we moved from dictatorship to democracy without violent means (the first in the world). i continue to hold out hope that they can surprise us again (this time through a constitutional process).”
oh no problem with the ‘capacity for reform.’ Pinoys have that. if i may use early grade school science terms, Pinoys have not progressed from potential energy (capacity for reform) to kinetic energy (reform realized)
“Lip service to good governance you say is all candidates can present us with at this point, but what about their current business dealings, associates, lifestyle as public officials. Donâ€™t these provide an inkling of what their intentions are when they assume higher office?”
i don’t know. we are not aware of Noynoy’s and Gibo’s “business dealings, associates, lifestyle as public officials.”
there’s something wrong with a candidate if he still has to toot that he won’t steal! not stealing is already assumed! if “not stealing” is the best foot forward of a candidate he does not deserve to be president!
to add to some of Maccoy’s legacy:
the Oil Price Stabilization Fund
Phil Heart Center for Asia (started its deterioration when Cory assumed power)
Bataan Nuclear Power Plant (its over 25 years, yet where are the supposed risks that are supposed to occur within its area? where’s the earthquake?)
Tree Planting – there was a presidential decree in the 1970s that required all grade school and high school students to plant one tree a month for 5 years; it was a requirement for graduation. this was during a time when di pa kalbong kalbo ang forests natin.
“Iâ€™m beginning to believe that our brand of democracy is even limiting our leadersâ€™ capability to effect change, so many critics, so many hecklers, and only a handful actually roll up their sleeves and get down to work. To top that off, there are more influential individuals who can influence policies and the implementation thereofâ€¦too many cooksâ€¦”
No less than the grand old man of Philippine business, Washington SyCip, said that the problem of the Philippines is too much democracy.
not stealing is an irrelevant platform only for those who believe the present administration has done no wrong, and surveys are only irrelevant for those who do not believe public opinion in and of itself is something important and worth studying as a part of democracy -precisely those who believe democracy is a danger.
and the point also is that it is persistent appeals for fairness while being relentless with a lack of it that is irksome.
Carl on Thu, 24th Sep 2009 2:18 pm
There you go again. How ’bout a little balance by pointing out the damage Marcos has wrought our society: the genesis of big budget deficits, the beginnings of the crippling debt that ballooned during his 20 years (people conveniently blame Cory for not repudiating the debts while conveniently forgetting that Marcos borrowed and stole most of it, a politicized military (has the military even been power hungry before Marcos?). Read your comment again and you’ll see the Loyalista talking.
. . . and don’t forget, the SC has yet to recover its independence theretofore vaunted until Marcos virtually set it at naught.
Cory sought to strengthen the SC (with the now misused â€œexpanded certiorari jurisdictionâ€) but GMA has prolonged the irreverence by filling it with political justices. Now, what are we heading about Giboâ€™s agenda to effectively clip some judicial powers when it comes to big business?
I mean “what are we HEARING . . .”
‘Sending troops, risking Filipino lives to pay for debtsâ€¦definitely not the Cory I knowâ€¦what will the soldiersâ€™ families say then?’
I don’t think Egypt knows it will happen (repudiation of debt) but their gesture generated enough goodwill to make it happen.
SoP on, “… your comment again and youâ€™ll see the Loyalista talking”
Just to say that Carl is one of the Marcosian babies. Marcos would have been the Lee Kuan Yew and Philippines would have the status of Singapore today if not for that very small detail – corruption. That small detail which is repeatedly ignored today always make a country become a basket case.
“people conveniently blame Cory for not repudiating the debts while conveniently forgetting that Marcos borrowed and stole most of it”
no, people do not forget that! precisely why Tita Cory should have repudiated the foreign debts entered into by Marcos!
when people say Tito Cory should have repudiated the foreign debt, they were referring to the debt taken during Marcos’ time.
before the 1987 Constitution came into effect, Tita Cory had dictatorial powers. she could have easily told the creditors ‘sorry but we won’t recognize it’
By the way, I have nothing personal against Cory. But to hold her up as if she were the best thing that happened to us is inane. Câ€™mon guys, we can keep the bar much higher than that!
It seems that Carl’s bar is admirably higher than most, as Cory enjoys the admiration of event the international community. I’ve never heard foreigners say something negative about her, in fact during her burial I received text messages from colleagues all over, Singapore, France, Indonesia, Denmark, all expressing condolences for “Corazon” yes, she is called Corazon Aquino abroad, while we just call her “Cory” the naive housewife…we get a lot of flak from fellow Filipinos…but having a very high standard is a good thing, I guess…
Emotions have a tendency to cloud judgment…Carl is like the voice behind our minds that says “are you sure you want to do this?” everytime we get into a traffic altercation and we are tempted to take out the baseball bat from the trunk of the car and whop the taxi driver, or when the dancer is about to open your fly during a lap dance and you hold on to your pants getting a big “KJ” comment from your friends…
Scalia on, “people do not forget that! precisely why Tita Cory should have repudiated the foreign debts entered into by Marcos!”
Scalia on, “Tita Cory had dictatorial powers. she could have easily told the creditors â€™sorry but we wonâ€™t recognize it”
Scalia totally misread the character of President Corazon Aquino. The lady did not have that arrogance granted emergency powers were available to her. Such arrogance drove Marcos, Erap and Gloria to corruption in the 1st place.
Arrogance is very common among politicians always looking for money here, money there. That is something you never saw in Corazon Aquino.
no i didn’t misread her character. debt repudiation was well within her power. she owes it to the Filipino people
what arrogance? how did arrogance get into the picture?
what “looking for money” are you talking about? what’s the connection of “looking for money” with debt repudiation?
debt repudiation was for the nation, not for self-aggrandizement.
Tita Cory stopped the Bataan Nuclear Power Plant from operating, yet allowed the continuation of payments to the BNPP’s creditors!
and lest you forget, Tita Cory is Tita Cory. Noynoy is not Tita Cory. let the son shine on his own.
unfortunately, Noynoy is like the moon…..