Since June 2005, the Philippines was plunged into a quagmire of political bickering and debacle. I have written in a previous blog that in the end it is the common Pinoy that will suffer while politicians would just shrug it off and go abroad if the situation gets bad or worst if revolution erupts. Such situation would not have much effect to politicians who can still buy the basic necessities even if the prices would have doubled because of the political tension. When there is a change in leadership, it would be easy for politicians to just throw their support to the new leader if ever the president resigns and there will be status quo of the benefits they enjoy at the expense of the people. But the poor....God help us, our politicians are feeding us to the dogs!
Almost a year from thence, the bickering continues. After the failed impeachment and a hodgepodge of expose' and hearings-in-aid-of-legislation and rallies that failed to attract multitudes, the opposition remained divided and unable to gather much footing from the masses and the decisive middle class. More so, they seemed to be busy only with criticism and fault-finding. Military adventurists tried but failed to “withdraw” their support. GMA seems to have an answer to everything thrown at her. I see the hands of a master political operator in everything that GMA used: the NO-EL scenario which appeared attractive to self-serving politicians, the EO 464, the CPR, the Proclamation 1017 and the much ballyhooed People’s Initiative for charter change. These schemes were designed to divert attention from the real issue of whether or not GMA cheated in the 2004 elections. There is a tell-tale sign on all of these schemes- there are gray areas on their constitutionality. But GMA’s political operator’s motto seemed to be that “these schemes are constitutional unless proven otherwise”. They put the burden on those who challenge the constitutionality of such schemes. GMA has succeeded in using such diversionary schemes pending the resolution of their constitutionality. The Supreme Court have so far decided against EO 464 and CPR and upheld Proclamation 1017 with certain caution on abuses. But by then, they have already served their purpose- to intimidate and to temporarily divert attention. The question is: How far can she sustain? I do not think such schemes have totally removed the cloud of doubt about her victory. Her defiant stance will only further plunge our beloved country into uncertainty as impeachment season begins come July. The semblance of economic recovery highlighted by the stronger peso which they have projected is superficial for it is based from the peak months of remittances from OFWs.
I must admit that in the past 10 months I have been against GMA stepping down because I dreaded the return of ERAP (as advocated by his sons and blind supporters). Nevertheless, after observing the ill-effects of GMA's obscure mandate, I am now one with those who clamor for SNAP ELECTION. To those who think that there are no visible alternative from among the opposition I say: Does the next president need to be an oppositionist? Have they ever considered the admirable meekness of a Magsaysay or the economics savvy of a Roxas? Does it have to be a Ping, an Erap or even a Susan? Besides, GMA can still run and if she really have the support of the majority then she can have a fresh mandate.
G. C. UANAN
3 May 2006
5 comments:
You are a priest pala. Why does the Church- priests and bishops in particular have to speak on political issues? Bakit hinde na lang kayo magsermon?
RE: DAMASO'S COMMENT
The church speaks on political issues because they are moral issues. The Church has to uphold moral principles even in the temporal order.
A Snap election would just be a waste of time, effort and resources.
Will it guarantee anything? NO.
The problem lies in the voting population of this country.
What makes up the majority of voters?
Unfortunately its the MASSES.
We all know how the masses select their leaders.
They have turned the presidency and the senate into a showbiz galore.
In short, the masses have a very different criteria in choosing whom to vote for. Unfortunately, plan of government and qualifications are in the bottom of their list.
They are easily persuaded by popular showbiz personalities, add unbelievable and irresistible promises to that popularity and you own them.
Make them believe that when you assume office, their problems of poverty would be instantly wiped out, you're a winner.
The masses greatly outnumber sensible voters.
Until something is done about that, an election would be nothing more than an expensive exercise of futility.
I think what GCU wants to drive out is that because of uncertainty under a GMA leadership, snap election is now a viable option. But of course the COMELEC should undergo a major overhaul so that the snap election would be credible.I agree that GMA is now pulling our country down the drain for she only has band-aid solutions or tapal solutions to the present problems in our country.
Tama!!! Dapat nang magkaroon ng halalan. Hindi na nakakatulong sa bansa at sa mga maralita ang iringan at away ng ating mga politiko na ang habol lamang ay ang pansariling kapakanan at simutin ang kaban ng bayan. Si GMA ay kapit-tuko at ang mga oposisyon ay puro akusasyon laang... wala silang mabuting ginawa para sa bansa... sa bangayan lamang sila magaling. Pero kailangan ng maiiahon ang ating bansa at hindi na talaga nakakabuti na si GMA ay manatili sa poder.
Post a Comment