PerryScope: By Perry Diaz
In my May 27, 2009 column, “Gloria’s Gambit,” I asked: “Would De Castro kowtow to Gloria? If he does, he will be taking a great risk of losing his base of support because Gloria’s ‘anointment’ might turn out to be a ‘kiss of death’ which could put an end to his political life.” I was right. De Castro turned down Gloria’s “anointment” and his reason was that it would be a “kiss of death.” Bingo!
And then I asked: “And what would happen to Teodoro? I would not be surprised if Gloria would use him as a pawn to sacrifice in her opening gambit… unless he changes his mind and settles as De Castro’s vice presidential running mate.” Well, the question is now academic since it was predicated on De Castro accepting Gloria’s “anointment.” Secretary of Defense Gilberto “Gibo” Teodoro is now the choice of the Executive Committee of Lakas-Kampi-CMD, PaLaKa for short, as their standard bearer. They also selected Secretary of the Department of Interior and Local Government Ronaldo “Ronnie” Puno as his vice presidential running mate.
In a few days, Gibo’s former political party, the Nationalist People’s Coalition (NPC), will be selecting its presidential and vice presidential candidates. For its standard bearer, the odds-on favorite is Sen. Francis “Chiz” Escudero, who just turned 40 years old -- the minimum age for presidential candidates -- last October 10. Sen. Loren Legarda is believed to be their choice for vice presidential candidate.
Now, the question is: Who are the people who would support Chiz and bankroll his campaign? This brings us squarely on Eduardo “Danding” Cojuangco, the founder and power behind NPC. Is he going to support Chiz Escudero or his erstwhile “favorite nephew” and former political heir, Secretary of Defense Gilberto “Gibo” Teodoro?
A few days ago, Danding broke his silence and said: “I’m the founder of the party (NPC). I think I have to support my own party that I founded, I think it is but normal.” He also said, “One of my nephews left even if we did not ask him to leave. It only means that we are of no consequence to him. So why should that be a bother to me?” He was referring to Gibo who left the NPC to join PaLaKa to pursue his presidential ambitions. Danding unequivocally said that he will not support Noynoy nor Gibo.
Danding’s revelation changes the whole game. The “Cojuangco War” is no longer just between Noynoy and his cousin Gibo. It is now among three members of the Cojuangco clan: Noynoy Aquino, Gibo Teodoro, and their Uncle Danding whose choice is the NPC nominee-to-be, presumably, Chiz Escudero.
It’s interesting to note that it was Danding who prevailed upon Gibo to come back home to run for office in 1998. Gibo was at that time practicing law in New York. He came home, ran for Congress, and won. He became the leader of the large NPC bloc in the House until he was termed out in 2007. He then accepted the post of Secretary of Defense in the Arroyo administration. However, there was no evidence that he resigned his membership from NPC. This led many people to believe that he left the door wide open to go back to NPC and seek the party’s nomination for president.
It was only after he was required to join PaLaKa as a prerequisite to being considered for nomination that he formally affiliated with PaLaKa. On September 15, 2009, he was selected by the party’s Executive Committee as their standard bearer. However, his selection has yet to be ratified by the party’s membership.
But why did Gibo leave NPC? He could have stayed in NPC and still become its presidential bet. Somewhere along the way, a serious fallout might have happened between him and his Uncle Danding.
However, if Gibo had shown high poll ratings, I’m pretty sure that Danding, politically savvy as he is, would not hesitate to throw his support behind Gibo, regardless of party affiliation. Danding is a power by himself and NPC is just a vehicle to achieve political ends. But just like any other “vehicle,” it can easily be replaced. The bottom line is: If the election was held today, Gibo would lose miserably. In my opinion, that’s the primary reason why Danding would not support Gibo. Blood, after all, is not as thick as politics… particularly in the Cojuangco clan (“The Cojuangco Wars,” PerryScope September 22, 2009).
And who would Gloria support? In my August 18, 2009 column, “The Looming Battle Royale,” I said: “So, who do you think Gloria would support knowing that whoever her party’s candidate will be, would lose? There is only one person who would fit the mold of the candidate that Gloria would support… secretly. And that is Francis ‘Chiz’ Escudero.” Indeed, his “winnability” is much better than Gibo’s.
Chiz might attempt to assert his independence if he wins but that’s wishful thinking. The Arroyos and the Cojuangcos will own him and nothing will change. It will be “business as usual” with the Arroyo-Cojuangco business interests controlling the government… and, for that matter, the country. In the Philippines, politics is business and business is politics. And as someone once said, “There are no permanent friends and no permanent enemies, only permanent self-interests.” Yes, indeed.
To date, Gloria -- who had previously “anointed” Noli De Castro who turned it down -- has yet to “anoint” Gibo. She did, however, say that she was “elated” over the endorsement of Gibo by 49 governors. But “elated” does not translate to “anointed” or “endorsed.”
So, what’s Gloria really up to? In my opinion, she’s keeping her options open. She could eventually throw her support behind Chiz or Manny Villar… or even Erap Estrada. She would support anyone of the candidates who would dance to her tune. Remember, she would still be in control of the Commission on Election. She pulled a “win” in 2004 for herself. She can do it again for her “manok” in 2010.
At the end of the day, Gloria’s ultimate goal is to prevent Noynoy Aquino from winning the presidential elections next year. Follow the money and you’ll know on whose shoulders Gloria would be putting her political survival on. I said it before and I’m going to say it again: the battle for the presidency would be between Noynoy Aquino and Danding’s choice -- and, possibly, Gloria’s “secret candidate” -- Chiz Escudero.
(PerryDiaz@gmail.com)
Thursday, October 15, 2009
Friday, October 9, 2009
Typhoon Ondoy: A Tragic Disaster
PerryScope: By Perry Diaz
Last September 26, 2009, Typhoon Ondoy -- internationally known as Ketsana -- hit Metro Manila. It was the worse typhoon since 1967. After two days of torrential rain and delugial floods, the government reported that Typhoon Ondoy left 288 people dead, five injured and 42 missing. Damage to property was estimated at P8.328 billion, including P2.743 billion in infrastructure and P5.584 billion in agriculture. It also said that “at least 797,404 families or 3,899,307 people in the entire Luzon, Cordillera, Western Visayas, Regions 9 and 12, Autonomous Region in Muslim Mindanao and Metro Manila were affected.”
Could the massive floodings have been mitigated?
While it is hard to control flooding, it can be argued that it could be mitigated by effective flood control planning and timely emergency response by government agencies. In a recent article, “Not an act of God but a sin…,” written by Alcuin Papa of Philippine Daily Inquirer, urban planner Felino “Jun” Palafox was quoted as saying, “The flood disaster that struck Metro Manila over the weekend was not an act of God but a sin of omission by government and private real estate developers.”
Palafox said that “a land use plan that took floods into consideration was drawn up as far back as 1977, titled ‘Metro Manila Transport, Land Use and Development Planning Project,’ sponsored by the World Bank.” He also said, “the study had already noted the possibility of heavy flooding in at least three sites of urban growth in the Philippine capital—the Marikina Valley and its northern and southern parts.” “When I saw the damage caused by the floods recently, I realized that these were the same areas that had already been identified,” Palafox observed.
The question is: “What did the government do to mitigate flooding and other problems identified by the 1977 study?” Palafox said, “Nothing.”
In the aftermath of Ondoy, I received from a friend a forwarded email from an unidentified author -- most probably a government engineer who didn’t want to be identified for fear of reprisal -- about his analysis of the disastrous flooding. He wrote:
“It’s deemed impossible for the supposedly excessive amount of rainfall, equivalent to a month’s outpour condensed in 6 hours time, to be the main culprit.” His rationale was: (1) The rain was not that strong; (2) We’ve had worst rains before; (3) And why Marikina, Pasig and Cainta became water worlds in just an hour; and (4) Why Moriones, Tondo, just several hundred meters away from Manila Bay was barely affected if nature did cause the rivers to swell, overflow and contribute greatly to the deluge.
He further said, “The Manggahan Floodway was especially built to control flooding mostly in Marikina, Pasig and Cainta areas. Mechanical or systems failure of the water pumping station due to negligence was the more logical reason for the flash flood that swamped even high end villages.”
Recently, Sen. Aquilino Pimentel Jr. indicated that he wants to file a class action suit against those responsible for the allegedly “reckless release of water from dams” near Metro Manila. He believes that it contributed to the rapid rise of floodwater during the storm. At the moment, he is studying the facts and collecting evidence to determine who were responsible for allowing the water to flow out of the dams; thus, flooding the Marikina Valley.
By all indications, the massive floodings could have been mitigated, if not controlled. Poor government urban planning contributed to the massive floodings. You add the negligence and ineptitude of government officials and you have a disaster that not even Noah could have handled.
Could lives have been saved?
A lot of people complained that the national government, through its National Disaster Coordinating Council (NDCC), did not respond to the disaster in a timely manner. Defense Secretary Gilbert Teodoro as NDCC chairman was faulted for the NDCC’s lack of preparedness and failure to save people’s lives.
As the country’s centralized and primary disaster planning center, NDCC lacks the logistics, manpower, and an effective disaster emergency plan to cope with the massive displacement of people, many of whom had to stay on rooftops to stay alive. From what I heard, NDCC had only three rubber boats to use in evacuating the 3.9 million flood victims.
And to make the situation worse, the government didn’t have the funds for disaster assistance. A news account says that a recent Commission on Audit (COA) report said that President Arroyo “has all but spent the P800 million contingency fund allotted to the Office of the President.” Accordingly, the COA said that “nearly every peso of the fund had been used for her foreign junkets, on top of the more than P1 billion budget for her official travels.”
It’s not surprising then that on September 28, Sen. Miriam Defensor Santiago filled two legislative bills -- totaling P10 billion -- to “fund relief operations, reconstruction, and rehabilitation of areas devastated by Typhoon Ondoy.” How about the senators and congressmen’s pork barrel funds? There are more than 100 senators and congressmen representing the 25 provinces in and around Metro Manila. Or did they already spend their pork barrel funds somewhere else?
Sen. Defensor Santiago also said that mayors of areas gravely affected by Typhoon Ondoy -- including Interior and Local Government Secretary Ronaldo Puno -- should be suspended for negligently performing their duties.
Command responsibility
The Typhoon Ondoy disaster and tragedy once again manifested the government’s inefficiency in dealing with emergency situations. Although Teodoro and Puno are to be held accountable for not doing their jobs, President Arroyo should -- nay, must! -- accept full command responsibility for the Typhoon Ondoy fiasco, a disaster that could have been mitigated and a human tragedy that could have been avoided.
(PerryDiaz@gmail.com)
Last September 26, 2009, Typhoon Ondoy -- internationally known as Ketsana -- hit Metro Manila. It was the worse typhoon since 1967. After two days of torrential rain and delugial floods, the government reported that Typhoon Ondoy left 288 people dead, five injured and 42 missing. Damage to property was estimated at P8.328 billion, including P2.743 billion in infrastructure and P5.584 billion in agriculture. It also said that “at least 797,404 families or 3,899,307 people in the entire Luzon, Cordillera, Western Visayas, Regions 9 and 12, Autonomous Region in Muslim Mindanao and Metro Manila were affected.”
Could the massive floodings have been mitigated?
While it is hard to control flooding, it can be argued that it could be mitigated by effective flood control planning and timely emergency response by government agencies. In a recent article, “Not an act of God but a sin…,” written by Alcuin Papa of Philippine Daily Inquirer, urban planner Felino “Jun” Palafox was quoted as saying, “The flood disaster that struck Metro Manila over the weekend was not an act of God but a sin of omission by government and private real estate developers.”
Palafox said that “a land use plan that took floods into consideration was drawn up as far back as 1977, titled ‘Metro Manila Transport, Land Use and Development Planning Project,’ sponsored by the World Bank.” He also said, “the study had already noted the possibility of heavy flooding in at least three sites of urban growth in the Philippine capital—the Marikina Valley and its northern and southern parts.” “When I saw the damage caused by the floods recently, I realized that these were the same areas that had already been identified,” Palafox observed.
The question is: “What did the government do to mitigate flooding and other problems identified by the 1977 study?” Palafox said, “Nothing.”
In the aftermath of Ondoy, I received from a friend a forwarded email from an unidentified author -- most probably a government engineer who didn’t want to be identified for fear of reprisal -- about his analysis of the disastrous flooding. He wrote:
“It’s deemed impossible for the supposedly excessive amount of rainfall, equivalent to a month’s outpour condensed in 6 hours time, to be the main culprit.” His rationale was: (1) The rain was not that strong; (2) We’ve had worst rains before; (3) And why Marikina, Pasig and Cainta became water worlds in just an hour; and (4) Why Moriones, Tondo, just several hundred meters away from Manila Bay was barely affected if nature did cause the rivers to swell, overflow and contribute greatly to the deluge.
He further said, “The Manggahan Floodway was especially built to control flooding mostly in Marikina, Pasig and Cainta areas. Mechanical or systems failure of the water pumping station due to negligence was the more logical reason for the flash flood that swamped even high end villages.”
Recently, Sen. Aquilino Pimentel Jr. indicated that he wants to file a class action suit against those responsible for the allegedly “reckless release of water from dams” near Metro Manila. He believes that it contributed to the rapid rise of floodwater during the storm. At the moment, he is studying the facts and collecting evidence to determine who were responsible for allowing the water to flow out of the dams; thus, flooding the Marikina Valley.
By all indications, the massive floodings could have been mitigated, if not controlled. Poor government urban planning contributed to the massive floodings. You add the negligence and ineptitude of government officials and you have a disaster that not even Noah could have handled.
Could lives have been saved?
A lot of people complained that the national government, through its National Disaster Coordinating Council (NDCC), did not respond to the disaster in a timely manner. Defense Secretary Gilbert Teodoro as NDCC chairman was faulted for the NDCC’s lack of preparedness and failure to save people’s lives.
As the country’s centralized and primary disaster planning center, NDCC lacks the logistics, manpower, and an effective disaster emergency plan to cope with the massive displacement of people, many of whom had to stay on rooftops to stay alive. From what I heard, NDCC had only three rubber boats to use in evacuating the 3.9 million flood victims.
And to make the situation worse, the government didn’t have the funds for disaster assistance. A news account says that a recent Commission on Audit (COA) report said that President Arroyo “has all but spent the P800 million contingency fund allotted to the Office of the President.” Accordingly, the COA said that “nearly every peso of the fund had been used for her foreign junkets, on top of the more than P1 billion budget for her official travels.”
It’s not surprising then that on September 28, Sen. Miriam Defensor Santiago filled two legislative bills -- totaling P10 billion -- to “fund relief operations, reconstruction, and rehabilitation of areas devastated by Typhoon Ondoy.” How about the senators and congressmen’s pork barrel funds? There are more than 100 senators and congressmen representing the 25 provinces in and around Metro Manila. Or did they already spend their pork barrel funds somewhere else?
Sen. Defensor Santiago also said that mayors of areas gravely affected by Typhoon Ondoy -- including Interior and Local Government Secretary Ronaldo Puno -- should be suspended for negligently performing their duties.
Command responsibility
The Typhoon Ondoy disaster and tragedy once again manifested the government’s inefficiency in dealing with emergency situations. Although Teodoro and Puno are to be held accountable for not doing their jobs, President Arroyo should -- nay, must! -- accept full command responsibility for the Typhoon Ondoy fiasco, a disaster that could have been mitigated and a human tragedy that could have been avoided.
(PerryDiaz@gmail.com)
Monday, June 8, 2009
Survival of the Cheatest
PerryScope
By Perry Diaz
With President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo’s approval ratings plummeting like balls of fire into the Pacific Ocean, presidential wannabes are sprinting to the starting line of the 2010 presidential derby. Assuming that Gloria is not going to declare martial law -- which a lot of people say she might -- it’s going to be rough and tumble politics in a crowded field.
Election cheating has been around since the Philippines adapted the democratic system of government after gaining independence from Uncle Sam in 1946. In my column, “It’s ‘Open Season’ Again” (January 26, 2007), I said: “I remember in the 1950’s, the term ‘flying voter’ became the buzzword during elections. A ‘flying voter’ is a person who has the ability to ‘fly’ -- like a bird -- from one precinct to another to vote for the same candidate; thus, giving the candidate a numerical edge over his opponent. Mathematically, whoever has the most ‘flying voters’ would have a better chance of winning.”
In some instances, candidates provide some sort of “home service,” that is, they would send someone to your house and have you fill out the ballot in favor of their candidates. In some cases, ballot boxes were hijacked and replaced with ballot boxes containing ballots favoring certain candidates. And in other cases, particularly in remote barrios, armed goons were used to intimidate the voters to vote for their candidates. It was not uncommon for a precinct to show 100% vote for a certain candidate. Another method used was vote-buying. The poor were always fair game. The three G’s -- guns, goons and gold -- were the most effective way to win an election. As someone once said, “There were no losers in an election, only the winners and those who were cheated.”
After the People Power Revolution of 1986, a new system of election cheating evolved. Known as “dagdag-bawas” -- add and subtract -- it involves a cunning method of tallying the votes by adding a number of votes to a candidate and subtracting the exact number of votes from his or her opponent. However, this kind of cheating involves the collusion of Commission on Elections (COMELEC) officials.
During the presidential elections in 2004, the celebrated “Hello Garci” election cheating was exposed. It was alleged that the taped wiretapped conversations between President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo and COMELEC official Virgilio “Garci” Garcillano were proof that fraud was committed to rig the election results in favor of Gloria’s reelection.
Impeachment was filed in Congress against Gloria. However, Gloria survived the impeachment. But the “Hello Garci” scandal cracked COMELEC’s façade as an independent government body.
It was also during the 2004 elections that another scandal surfaced -- the P1.7 billion bidding scam of the Automated Election System (AES) awarded to Mega Pacific Consortium. It was alleged that three COMELEC officials -- then Chairman Benjamin Abalos and members Florentino Tuazon and Resurreccion Borra -- were involved in the anomaly. Corruption charges were filed against them in the Ombudsman’s Office but the Ombudsman, to date, has not made any progress in its investigation. However, the Supreme Court ruled the contract null and void due to irregularities in the bidding process.
This year, COMELEC is once again pursuing the automation project. However, with the 2010 elections just a year away, COMELEC has yet to award the whopping P11.3 billion AES contract. Recently, the bidding process hit a snag when the seven consortiums vying for the contract failed the eligibility requirements. I wonder what the “eligibility requirements” included? A “padrino” perhaps?
According to Rick Bahague, the National Coordinator of the Computer Professionals’ Union (CPU), “The initial result of CPU’s investigation in the bidding process of COMELEC revealed that the COMELEC is dealing with questionable and unreliable vendors.” He said, “The COMELEC is even more subjected to a triple degree of difficulty to win the trust of Filipino people especially on its effort to automate the national election in 2010.”
But COMELEC officials said that the situation is not hopeless and that a contract could be negotiated with a provider as a “last recourse” to install 80,000 automation machines in time for the 2010 elections.
And this is where the problems would begin. First, a “negotiated contract” implies a “sole bid process” in which only one bidder is selected. This reminds me of the controversial ZTE-NBN contract exposed by Jun Lozada. A “negotiated contract” circumvents the competitive “multiple bid process” in which two or more bidders would compete for the contract primarily based on a low-bid rule. And since there is no competition, a “negotiated contract” is vulnerable to overbidding. Oftentimes overbidding is done in order to accommodate under-the-table commissions -- or “tongpats” -- to influence peddlers and corrupt government officials. In the end, the “negotiated contract” could increase the contract amount to as much as twice its cost.
The second -- and more serious -- problem would be the integrity and accuracy of AES. In a press release issued by CPU, it says: “Cheating and fraud in the 2010 election will be swift and simple for the likes of ‘Garci’ through the automated election system (AES) the Commission on Elections (COMELEC) is striving to implement. In 2010, ‘Garci’ will return and will be more sophisticated in his cheating schemes with his expertise in computer technology. ‘Garci’ will operate far better than the fraud he performed last 2004 national election.”
Indeed, if AES is going to be hastily implemented in 2010, an electronic “dagdag-bawas” cheating scheme which might have been surreptitiously programmed in the system will virtually be impossible to detect. There would not be enough time to fully test the system and incorporate all the necessary verification and security routines in the system to ensure that data integrity is maintained. As computer professionals would say, “Garbage In, Garbage Out,” the system is only as good as the input. It is said that most computer systems work, it’s people who don’t make them work. And that is the danger of a computer system that doesn’t have all the bells and whistles installed to prevent it from being tampered.
If COMELEC pushes through with AES in 2010, the next President may not necessarily be the fittest, but the cheatest. Indeed, the 2010 elections could very well be the survival of the cheatest.
(PerryDiaz@gmail.com)
By Perry Diaz
With President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo’s approval ratings plummeting like balls of fire into the Pacific Ocean, presidential wannabes are sprinting to the starting line of the 2010 presidential derby. Assuming that Gloria is not going to declare martial law -- which a lot of people say she might -- it’s going to be rough and tumble politics in a crowded field.
Election cheating has been around since the Philippines adapted the democratic system of government after gaining independence from Uncle Sam in 1946. In my column, “It’s ‘Open Season’ Again” (January 26, 2007), I said: “I remember in the 1950’s, the term ‘flying voter’ became the buzzword during elections. A ‘flying voter’ is a person who has the ability to ‘fly’ -- like a bird -- from one precinct to another to vote for the same candidate; thus, giving the candidate a numerical edge over his opponent. Mathematically, whoever has the most ‘flying voters’ would have a better chance of winning.”
In some instances, candidates provide some sort of “home service,” that is, they would send someone to your house and have you fill out the ballot in favor of their candidates. In some cases, ballot boxes were hijacked and replaced with ballot boxes containing ballots favoring certain candidates. And in other cases, particularly in remote barrios, armed goons were used to intimidate the voters to vote for their candidates. It was not uncommon for a precinct to show 100% vote for a certain candidate. Another method used was vote-buying. The poor were always fair game. The three G’s -- guns, goons and gold -- were the most effective way to win an election. As someone once said, “There were no losers in an election, only the winners and those who were cheated.”
After the People Power Revolution of 1986, a new system of election cheating evolved. Known as “dagdag-bawas” -- add and subtract -- it involves a cunning method of tallying the votes by adding a number of votes to a candidate and subtracting the exact number of votes from his or her opponent. However, this kind of cheating involves the collusion of Commission on Elections (COMELEC) officials.
During the presidential elections in 2004, the celebrated “Hello Garci” election cheating was exposed. It was alleged that the taped wiretapped conversations between President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo and COMELEC official Virgilio “Garci” Garcillano were proof that fraud was committed to rig the election results in favor of Gloria’s reelection.
Impeachment was filed in Congress against Gloria. However, Gloria survived the impeachment. But the “Hello Garci” scandal cracked COMELEC’s façade as an independent government body.
It was also during the 2004 elections that another scandal surfaced -- the P1.7 billion bidding scam of the Automated Election System (AES) awarded to Mega Pacific Consortium. It was alleged that three COMELEC officials -- then Chairman Benjamin Abalos and members Florentino Tuazon and Resurreccion Borra -- were involved in the anomaly. Corruption charges were filed against them in the Ombudsman’s Office but the Ombudsman, to date, has not made any progress in its investigation. However, the Supreme Court ruled the contract null and void due to irregularities in the bidding process.
This year, COMELEC is once again pursuing the automation project. However, with the 2010 elections just a year away, COMELEC has yet to award the whopping P11.3 billion AES contract. Recently, the bidding process hit a snag when the seven consortiums vying for the contract failed the eligibility requirements. I wonder what the “eligibility requirements” included? A “padrino” perhaps?
According to Rick Bahague, the National Coordinator of the Computer Professionals’ Union (CPU), “The initial result of CPU’s investigation in the bidding process of COMELEC revealed that the COMELEC is dealing with questionable and unreliable vendors.” He said, “The COMELEC is even more subjected to a triple degree of difficulty to win the trust of Filipino people especially on its effort to automate the national election in 2010.”
But COMELEC officials said that the situation is not hopeless and that a contract could be negotiated with a provider as a “last recourse” to install 80,000 automation machines in time for the 2010 elections.
And this is where the problems would begin. First, a “negotiated contract” implies a “sole bid process” in which only one bidder is selected. This reminds me of the controversial ZTE-NBN contract exposed by Jun Lozada. A “negotiated contract” circumvents the competitive “multiple bid process” in which two or more bidders would compete for the contract primarily based on a low-bid rule. And since there is no competition, a “negotiated contract” is vulnerable to overbidding. Oftentimes overbidding is done in order to accommodate under-the-table commissions -- or “tongpats” -- to influence peddlers and corrupt government officials. In the end, the “negotiated contract” could increase the contract amount to as much as twice its cost.
The second -- and more serious -- problem would be the integrity and accuracy of AES. In a press release issued by CPU, it says: “Cheating and fraud in the 2010 election will be swift and simple for the likes of ‘Garci’ through the automated election system (AES) the Commission on Elections (COMELEC) is striving to implement. In 2010, ‘Garci’ will return and will be more sophisticated in his cheating schemes with his expertise in computer technology. ‘Garci’ will operate far better than the fraud he performed last 2004 national election.”
Indeed, if AES is going to be hastily implemented in 2010, an electronic “dagdag-bawas” cheating scheme which might have been surreptitiously programmed in the system will virtually be impossible to detect. There would not be enough time to fully test the system and incorporate all the necessary verification and security routines in the system to ensure that data integrity is maintained. As computer professionals would say, “Garbage In, Garbage Out,” the system is only as good as the input. It is said that most computer systems work, it’s people who don’t make them work. And that is the danger of a computer system that doesn’t have all the bells and whistles installed to prevent it from being tampered.
If COMELEC pushes through with AES in 2010, the next President may not necessarily be the fittest, but the cheatest. Indeed, the 2010 elections could very well be the survival of the cheatest.
(PerryDiaz@gmail.com)
BECCA GODINEZ TO “STIR IT UP!”
AT GOSPEL LIFE COMMUNITY CHURCH
(Los Angeles, CA. – May, 2009) - A celebration of faith and life comes to the Gospel Life Community Church as they present “Stir It Up!” a concert featuring the uplifting, life-affirming Christian music of actress, singer, composer, producer, director and recording artist Becca Godinez. The concert (title taken from a song in Godinez’s “Road to Humble” CD) hopes to bring more worshippers to the Christian church based in Walnut, California and to raise funds for their continuing missionary work in the Philippines.
Pastor John Tulio has been the lead pastor of the Gospel Life Community Church since its foundation in 1997. Gospel Life planted churches in Palawan, Nueva Ecija, Rizal, Davao and continues to plant churches throughout the Philippines. Gospel Life helped the churches it planted by providing them with the course materials, instructors, advice and financial aid. In October, 2009 the worship building in Iriwan, Palawan will be inaugurated. This building was built by the people of Iriwan with the help and aid of Gospel Life. Evangelism and discipleship are at the core of the Gospel Life's mission.
Explains Tony Luciano, Media Ministry Coordinator for Gospel Life, “the church prayed for a well known Filipino talent who is a born again Christian and God answered our prayers through Becca. We are excitedly praising the Lord for giving her to us as our featured concert performer.”
“It is an awesome and humbling experience to be able to do give back to God a small fraction of what He gives me graciously each day” exclaimed Becca Godinez. “The folks I have met at Gospel Community - - they are so deeply sincere about service to God and giving back to the community that I am honored to be a part of their vision. I already know - even before this little concert takes place that it will be a blessed ...joyful - - Spirit filled...praiseful event because its purpose is eternal. I can't wait!!!!”
“Stir It Up! with music from Becca Godinez”
Saturday, June 13, 2009 at 7:30 pm
Gospel Life Community Church at Miracle Hill
18901 East Amar Road, Walnut, CA. 91789
(Located opposite Amber Valley Road between Nogales & Creekside Drive)
Doors Open at 7:00pm
Free Parking
FOR RESERVATIONS, PLEASE CALL :
Gospel Life Church (626) 965-4300
Or email tickets@gospellifecommunity.org
Tickets are also available at:
Kusina Ni Lola Restaurant
1559 E. Amar Road, Suite C, West Covina, CA. 91792
(626) 839-9815
Borakai Bakeshop & Café
15870 Soquel Canyon Parkway, Suite G, Chino Hills, CA. 91709
(909) 597-7993
Saturday, May 2, 2009
Artist Lynda A. N. Reyes at the PSA 84th Annual Exhibit
The Pasadena Society of Artists (PSA) proudly presents 39 artists for its 84th Annual Exhibition at VIVA Gallery,13261 Moorpark Street, Sherman Oaks from April 29 to May 16, 2009. The Artist’s Reception is on Sunday, May 3 from 2:00 p.m. to 4:00 p.m.
Three oil and watercolor paintings of distinguished Filipino American artist and Art Historian Lynda A. N. Reyes titled “Out door Delight”, “Sons of the Beach” and “Fresh Produce No. 1: Onions” are featured in this juried exhibition. The award winning pen and ink entry of her son Roy Natian titled “Thine Eye” is another highlight of the show.
Lynda A. N. Reyes with her paintings for the PSA 84th Annal Exhibition at VIVA Gallery: "Outdoor Delight", watercolor on arches, "Sons of the Beach", oil on canvas and "Fresh Produce No. 1: Onions", watercolor.
Lynda A. N. Reyes is a prolific arts person. She is a visual artist, an art historian, an author, and an art educator. She is best known in the international academia for her pioneering book entitled "The Textiles of Southern Philippines” and her published studies in Philippine ethnic art. She taught at the University of the Philippines Manila, was a recipient of an International Fellowship Award from the American Association of University Women. Lynda has taught at Glendale College and in several community colleges in LA area including Santa Monica College and Pasadena City College.
As an artist, Lynda has participated in group shows at the VIVA Gallery, Eagle Rock Center for the Art, Arts and Books Gallery in LA, Glendale College Art Gallery, Brand Gallery and at the Pete and Susan Barrett Gallery in Santa Monica. In the Philippines, she had a one-person show at the University of the Philippines Manila and several group shows at the Solidaridad Galleries. As a California Arts Council grant artist, she was a resource person for the visual arts for the Glendale Unified School District as part of the Arts as Basic program of the City of Glendale Arts and Culture Commission.
"Thine Eye", an award winning entry by Roy Natian, pen and ink. The winning entry titled “Thine Eye” by Roy Natian is a pen and ink composition meticulously linear in rendering and minutely complex and personal in content. The exhibit continues until May 16 at the VIVA Gallery in 13261 Moorpark Street, Sherman Oaks.
The works in the exhibition attest to the exceptional diversity and professional standards of the current membership of PSA. Artworks for exhibit are selected by a juror or a group of senior PSA members. In this exhibition, Jay Belloli, the Director of the Armory Center for Art in Pasadena served as the juror. The 71 artworks featured in this annual show come in an array of styles ranging from the traditional to the contemporary, from the representational to the abstract. Lynda A. N. Reyes paints representational subjects that reveals mastery of both watercolor and oil mediums. The style of Roy Natian in its meticulous linear rendering of his subject in pen and ink is minutely complex and personal.
Glendale artist Roy Natian is shown receiving his award for Outstanding Artwork from the Pasadena Society of Artist President Lawrence D. Rogers during the artists’ reception held at the VIVA Gallery on May 3, 2009. .It was the 84th Annual Exhibition of PSA participated by 39 artists and juried by Jay Belloli of the Armory Center for Art in Pasadena.
Continuing its tradition of upholding high standards based on real merit, PSA recognizes the outstanding works of artists in its annual exhibitions. This year, recipients in the Award of Merit category are Rick Drobner (mixed media) Martin Mondrus (oil on canvas) and Michael Vinci (photography); and the recipients of Honorable Mention Awards are David Grigsby (Acrylic), Roy Natian (pen and ink) and Kathleen Swayden (graphite on paper).
PSA (www.pasadenasocietyofartists.org) is an organization of professional artists from Pasadena and nearby communities that has continuously exhibited its members' artworks for 84 years. Since its inception in 1925, it has evolved into a varied and vital artistic force that nourishes artistic growth in the contemporary art scene.
VIVA Gallery is a nonprofit organization run by four supporting art groups (Women Painters West, Valley Watercolor Society, Collage Artists of America, and Valley Artists Guild) that have joined together to operate a permanent Arts Center in the San Fernando Valley. VIVA provides artists with the opportunity for critical exposure and public appreciation of their creative work in a professional environment.
Three oil and watercolor paintings of distinguished Filipino American artist and Art Historian Lynda A. N. Reyes titled “Out door Delight”, “Sons of the Beach” and “Fresh Produce No. 1: Onions” are featured in this juried exhibition. The award winning pen and ink entry of her son Roy Natian titled “Thine Eye” is another highlight of the show.
Lynda A. N. Reyes with her paintings for the PSA 84th Annal Exhibition at VIVA Gallery: "Outdoor Delight", watercolor on arches, "Sons of the Beach", oil on canvas and "Fresh Produce No. 1: Onions", watercolor.
Lynda A. N. Reyes is a prolific arts person. She is a visual artist, an art historian, an author, and an art educator. She is best known in the international academia for her pioneering book entitled "The Textiles of Southern Philippines” and her published studies in Philippine ethnic art. She taught at the University of the Philippines Manila, was a recipient of an International Fellowship Award from the American Association of University Women. Lynda has taught at Glendale College and in several community colleges in LA area including Santa Monica College and Pasadena City College.
As an artist, Lynda has participated in group shows at the VIVA Gallery, Eagle Rock Center for the Art, Arts and Books Gallery in LA, Glendale College Art Gallery, Brand Gallery and at the Pete and Susan Barrett Gallery in Santa Monica. In the Philippines, she had a one-person show at the University of the Philippines Manila and several group shows at the Solidaridad Galleries. As a California Arts Council grant artist, she was a resource person for the visual arts for the Glendale Unified School District as part of the Arts as Basic program of the City of Glendale Arts and Culture Commission.
"Thine Eye", an award winning entry by Roy Natian, pen and ink. The winning entry titled “Thine Eye” by Roy Natian is a pen and ink composition meticulously linear in rendering and minutely complex and personal in content. The exhibit continues until May 16 at the VIVA Gallery in 13261 Moorpark Street, Sherman Oaks.
The works in the exhibition attest to the exceptional diversity and professional standards of the current membership of PSA. Artworks for exhibit are selected by a juror or a group of senior PSA members. In this exhibition, Jay Belloli, the Director of the Armory Center for Art in Pasadena served as the juror. The 71 artworks featured in this annual show come in an array of styles ranging from the traditional to the contemporary, from the representational to the abstract. Lynda A. N. Reyes paints representational subjects that reveals mastery of both watercolor and oil mediums. The style of Roy Natian in its meticulous linear rendering of his subject in pen and ink is minutely complex and personal.
Glendale artist Roy Natian is shown receiving his award for Outstanding Artwork from the Pasadena Society of Artist President Lawrence D. Rogers during the artists’ reception held at the VIVA Gallery on May 3, 2009. .It was the 84th Annual Exhibition of PSA participated by 39 artists and juried by Jay Belloli of the Armory Center for Art in Pasadena.
Continuing its tradition of upholding high standards based on real merit, PSA recognizes the outstanding works of artists in its annual exhibitions. This year, recipients in the Award of Merit category are Rick Drobner (mixed media) Martin Mondrus (oil on canvas) and Michael Vinci (photography); and the recipients of Honorable Mention Awards are David Grigsby (Acrylic), Roy Natian (pen and ink) and Kathleen Swayden (graphite on paper).
PSA (www.pasadenasocietyofartists.org) is an organization of professional artists from Pasadena and nearby communities that has continuously exhibited its members' artworks for 84 years. Since its inception in 1925, it has evolved into a varied and vital artistic force that nourishes artistic growth in the contemporary art scene.
VIVA Gallery is a nonprofit organization run by four supporting art groups (Women Painters West, Valley Watercolor Society, Collage Artists of America, and Valley Artists Guild) that have joined together to operate a permanent Arts Center in the San Fernando Valley. VIVA provides artists with the opportunity for critical exposure and public appreciation of their creative work in a professional environment.
Friday, May 1, 2009
Telltale Signs/ NICOLE'S RAPE
Nicole (not her real name) is now among us, somewhere in the US on a visa generously provided by the US Embassy. She is reportedly awaiting the arrival of her US serviceman fiancé who will marry her and petition her for a green card. But before she received her US visa, Nicole had to sign a sworn affidavit on March 12, 2009 prepared by Jose Justiniano, the lawyer of the man who raped her, Lance Corporal Daniel Smith. The affidavit exonerated Smith for the rape which occurred on November 1, 2005 in Olongapo City.
Justiniano had appealed the December 2006 guilty verdict against Smith and the Court of Appeals was set to rule on the appeal this month and a recantation by the rape victim would virtually ensure his client's victory. Towards that end, the US Embassy was willing to offer anything to Nicole to sign the recantation as the fate of the Visiting Forces Agreement between the US and the Philippines somewhat depended on the outcome of the case. Offering a visa to Nicole and her sister was a small price to pay to seal the deal.
The 3-page affidavit prepared by lawyer Justiniano followed the logic of Justiniano's own closing argument at the conclusion of the trial of Smith and the basis of his appeal. Here is an excerpt of the affidavit prepared by Justiniano:
“Looking back, I would not have agreed to talk with Daniel Smith and dance with him no less than three times if I did not enjoy his company or was at least attracted to him since I met him for the very first time on the dance floor of Neptune Club. With the events at the Neptune club in mind, I keep asking myself, if Daniel Smith wanted to rape me, why would he carry me out of the Neptune Club using the main entrance in full view of the security guard and the other customers? Why would the van park right in front of Neptune Club? Why would Daniel Smith and his companions bring me to the sea wall of Alaba Pier and casually leave this area that was well lighted and with many people roaming around? If they believed that I was raped, would they have not dumped me instead in a dimly lit area along the highway going to Alaba Pier to avoid detection?”
After securing Nicole's signature on the affidavit, Justiniano then included it in the supplementary “manifestation” which he submitted to the Philippine Court of Appeals panel that was reviewing Smith’s 2006 conviction by the Makati Regional Court.
As Justiniano expected, on April 23, 2009, a 3-judge panel of the Court of Appeals reversed Smith’s conviction, finding that no evidence was presented in court to show that Smith had employed force, threat and intimidation on Nicole. The panel of three women judges found the sexual tryst to be nothing but "a spontaneous, unplanned romantic episode…(with Smith and Nicole) carried aw ay by their passions."
"Suddenly the moment of parting came and the marines had to rush to the ship,” they wrote. “In that situation, reality dawned on Nicole – what her audacity and reckless abandon, flirting with Smith and leading him on, brought upon her”.
The regional trial court had earlier found that Nicole was too drunk to give consent to sex. But the appellate panel rejected that claim. “From the narration, after draining all those drinks of Sprite Vodka, B-52s, Singaporean sling, B-53 and half a pitcher of Bullfrog, although feeling dizzy, she danced with Smith through all four songs for about 15 minutes. She did not drop on the floor nor did she vomit,” they wrote. They also rejected the trial court’s finding of “forcible entry” to explain the contusions in Nicole’s genitals. “Even in consensual sex,” they explained, “contusions could be inflicted by finger grabs, as in Nicole’s case.”
Philippine Daily Inquirer columnist Rina Jimenez-David criticized the decision of the women judges which “seemed more like the admonitions of scandalized maiden aunts to a wayward niece than a reasoned, objective and compassionate appreciation of evidence. They needed only to settle one question: Was Nicole raped? Was she in possession of her faculties such that she could decide freely whether she wanted to have sex with Smith or not? Or was she so drunk that the Marine, taking advantage of her conditio n, had his way with her? But instead of answering these queries, what the justices wrote instead was a complicated scenario justifying the rape and gross abandonment of Nicole at the pier of Subic.”
In his 2006 column “Cry Rape”, Inquirer columnist Conrado De Quiros described the viciousness of the rape. “The girl was plied with drink and God knows what else in a bar, shoved into a van, and raped inside by an American serviceman while his four buddies egged him on with cries of "F__k! F__k! F__k!" Later, she was lifted out of the van by her hands and feet by two men like a pig ("parang baboy") and deposited on the pavement. She had on only a shirt and a panty, a condom still sticking to her panty. Someone from the van threw a pair of pants in her direction, and the van drove off.”
Nicole’s case might have been just another of the thousands of other cases of rape that involved US military personnel in or around US military bases in the Philippines since 1946. But no American soldier had ever been convicted of raping a Filipino woman until December of 2006 when Makati Trial Judge Benjamin Pozon pronounced Smith guilty of raping Nicole.
Judge Pozon ordered Smith remanded into the custody in a Philippine jail. But a provision of the VFA required US military personnel convicted of a crime in the Philippines to remain in US custody pending the outcome of the appeal. While this provision was disputed (and ultimately found unconstituti onal), Philippine government authorities removed Smith from a Makati jail cell and transferred him to the US Embassy where he was billeted while awaiting the eventual reversal of his conviction which occurred last week.
As Daniel Smith hurriedly departed the Philippines a few days ago, columnist Rina Jimenez-David wrote “Goodbye Danny Boy”: “Filipino women, fighting gender bias and social dictates in court, and finding themselves judged against hoary social standards, will have reason to remember you, Danny Boy. They will remember you and how you, abetted by your and our governments, manipulated the justice system and the unequal relationship between our nations, and managed to get away with a most heinous crime.”
Welcome to America, Nicole. I hope you find some measure of peace here.
(Send comments to Rodel50@aol.com or mail them to the Law Offices of Rodel Rodis, 2429 Ocean Avenue, San Francisco, CA 94127. For past columns, log on to: Rodel50.blogspot.com.)
Justiniano had appealed the December 2006 guilty verdict against Smith and the Court of Appeals was set to rule on the appeal this month and a recantation by the rape victim would virtually ensure his client's victory. Towards that end, the US Embassy was willing to offer anything to Nicole to sign the recantation as the fate of the Visiting Forces Agreement between the US and the Philippines somewhat depended on the outcome of the case. Offering a visa to Nicole and her sister was a small price to pay to seal the deal.
The 3-page affidavit prepared by lawyer Justiniano followed the logic of Justiniano's own closing argument at the conclusion of the trial of Smith and the basis of his appeal. Here is an excerpt of the affidavit prepared by Justiniano:
“Looking back, I would not have agreed to talk with Daniel Smith and dance with him no less than three times if I did not enjoy his company or was at least attracted to him since I met him for the very first time on the dance floor of Neptune Club. With the events at the Neptune club in mind, I keep asking myself, if Daniel Smith wanted to rape me, why would he carry me out of the Neptune Club using the main entrance in full view of the security guard and the other customers? Why would the van park right in front of Neptune Club? Why would Daniel Smith and his companions bring me to the sea wall of Alaba Pier and casually leave this area that was well lighted and with many people roaming around? If they believed that I was raped, would they have not dumped me instead in a dimly lit area along the highway going to Alaba Pier to avoid detection?”
After securing Nicole's signature on the affidavit, Justiniano then included it in the supplementary “manifestation” which he submitted to the Philippine Court of Appeals panel that was reviewing Smith’s 2006 conviction by the Makati Regional Court.
As Justiniano expected, on April 23, 2009, a 3-judge panel of the Court of Appeals reversed Smith’s conviction, finding that no evidence was presented in court to show that Smith had employed force, threat and intimidation on Nicole. The panel of three women judges found the sexual tryst to be nothing but "a spontaneous, unplanned romantic episode…(with Smith and Nicole) carried aw ay by their passions."
"Suddenly the moment of parting came and the marines had to rush to the ship,” they wrote. “In that situation, reality dawned on Nicole – what her audacity and reckless abandon, flirting with Smith and leading him on, brought upon her”.
The regional trial court had earlier found that Nicole was too drunk to give consent to sex. But the appellate panel rejected that claim. “From the narration, after draining all those drinks of Sprite Vodka, B-52s, Singaporean sling, B-53 and half a pitcher of Bullfrog, although feeling dizzy, she danced with Smith through all four songs for about 15 minutes. She did not drop on the floor nor did she vomit,” they wrote. They also rejected the trial court’s finding of “forcible entry” to explain the contusions in Nicole’s genitals. “Even in consensual sex,” they explained, “contusions could be inflicted by finger grabs, as in Nicole’s case.”
Philippine Daily Inquirer columnist Rina Jimenez-David criticized the decision of the women judges which “seemed more like the admonitions of scandalized maiden aunts to a wayward niece than a reasoned, objective and compassionate appreciation of evidence. They needed only to settle one question: Was Nicole raped? Was she in possession of her faculties such that she could decide freely whether she wanted to have sex with Smith or not? Or was she so drunk that the Marine, taking advantage of her conditio n, had his way with her? But instead of answering these queries, what the justices wrote instead was a complicated scenario justifying the rape and gross abandonment of Nicole at the pier of Subic.”
In his 2006 column “Cry Rape”, Inquirer columnist Conrado De Quiros described the viciousness of the rape. “The girl was plied with drink and God knows what else in a bar, shoved into a van, and raped inside by an American serviceman while his four buddies egged him on with cries of "F__k! F__k! F__k!" Later, she was lifted out of the van by her hands and feet by two men like a pig ("parang baboy") and deposited on the pavement. She had on only a shirt and a panty, a condom still sticking to her panty. Someone from the van threw a pair of pants in her direction, and the van drove off.”
Nicole’s case might have been just another of the thousands of other cases of rape that involved US military personnel in or around US military bases in the Philippines since 1946. But no American soldier had ever been convicted of raping a Filipino woman until December of 2006 when Makati Trial Judge Benjamin Pozon pronounced Smith guilty of raping Nicole.
Judge Pozon ordered Smith remanded into the custody in a Philippine jail. But a provision of the VFA required US military personnel convicted of a crime in the Philippines to remain in US custody pending the outcome of the appeal. While this provision was disputed (and ultimately found unconstituti onal), Philippine government authorities removed Smith from a Makati jail cell and transferred him to the US Embassy where he was billeted while awaiting the eventual reversal of his conviction which occurred last week.
As Daniel Smith hurriedly departed the Philippines a few days ago, columnist Rina Jimenez-David wrote “Goodbye Danny Boy”: “Filipino women, fighting gender bias and social dictates in court, and finding themselves judged against hoary social standards, will have reason to remember you, Danny Boy. They will remember you and how you, abetted by your and our governments, manipulated the justice system and the unequal relationship between our nations, and managed to get away with a most heinous crime.”
Welcome to America, Nicole. I hope you find some measure of peace here.
(Send comments to Rodel50@aol.com or mail them to the Law Offices of Rodel Rodis, 2429 Ocean Avenue, San Francisco, CA 94127. For past columns, log on to: Rodel50.blogspot.com.)
Monday, April 6, 2009
Chip Tsao’s Cheap Shot: A Wake-up Call
PerryScope By Perry Diaz
Chip Tsao, a Hong Kong-based author and columnist, stirred a hornet’s nest in his recent article, “The War at Home.” Tsao said, “Manila has just claimed sovereignty over the scattered rocks in the South China Sea called the Spratly Islands, complete with a blatant threat from its congress to send gunboats to the South China Sea to defend the islands from China if necessary. This is beyond reproach. The reason: there are more than 130,000 Filipina maids working as $3,580-a-month cheap labor in Hong Kong. As a nation of servants, you don’t flex your muscles at your master, from whom you earn most of your bread and butter.”
Tsao further said, “I summoned Louisa, my domestic assistant who holds a degree in international politics from the University of Manila, hung a map on the wall, and gave her a harsh lecture. I sternly warned her that if she wants her wages increased next year, she had better tell every one of her compatriots in Statue Square on Sunday that the entirety of the Spratly Islands belongs to China.”
Adding insult to an injury, Tsao said, “Grimly, I told her that if war breaks out between the Philippines and China, I would have to end her employment and send her straight home, because I would not risk the crime of treason for sponsoring an enemy of the state by paying her to wash my toilet and clean my windows 16 hours a day. With that money, she would pay taxes to her government, and they would fund a navy to invade our motherland and deeply hurt my feelings.”
And rubbing salt to the injury, Tsao said, “Oh yes. The government of the Philippines would certainly be wrong if they think we Chinese are prepared to swallow their insult and sit back and lose a Falkland Islands War in the Far East. They may have Barack Obama and the hawkish American military behind them, but we have a hostage in each of our homes in the Mid-Levels or higher. Some of my friends told me they have already declared a state of emergency at home. Their maids have been made to shout ‘China, Madam/Sir’ loudly whenever they hear the word ‘Spratly.’ They say the indoctrination is working as wonderfully as when we used to shout, ‘Long live Chairman Mao!’ at the sight of a portrait of our Great Leader during the Cultural Revolution. I’m not sure if that’s going a bit too far, at least for the time being.”
Tsao’s acerbic commentary spread like a virus in cyberspace. Bloggers hit him back with unprintable insults. After a couple of days of incessant attacks against Tsao, Tsao went to the Philippine Consulate General in Hong Kong and met face to face with representatives from the Filipino community. He conveyed his “most sincere” apologies to the Filipino people. He said that he realized that he had “crossed the line” and was “terribly sorry.” After making his statement, he stood up and bowed deferentially before the audience.
As we say, “all’s well that ends well,” but is it really the end? For Tsao, it was. But as I see it, it’s just the beginning. It’s a wake-up call for Filipinos. Although Tsao’s act was a cheap shot at Filipinos, he didn’t realize that he had unwittingly raised an issue which Filipinos have conveniently ignored in the past; that is, there is an increasing number of Filipinos who are going abroad to work as domestic workers or as Tsao said, “servants.”
In August 2006, President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo proclaimed, “We will be sending ‘super maids’,” when she announced the launching of a new training program for Filipino domestic workers. Today, out of approximately 3,500 Filipinos leaving each day for overseas jobs, about 70% are domestic workers. A few years ago, there were only 40,000 Filipino domestic workers in Hong Kong. Today, there are 130,000. And it’s probably in this context that Tsao used the pejorative term, “nation of servants.”
In Europe, particularly England, a servant is called “Filipina.” Is it more acceptable for an Englishman to call his maid, a “Filipina,” than a Chinese man to call his maid, a “servant”?
But let’s not even deal with that because the real issue here is that the Philippine government is in the business of exporting domestic workers. Today, out of the 8.7 million Overseas Filipino Workers (OFWs), a large number is employed as domestic workers.
With the government’s main thrust of exporting OFWs, the need to create jobs at home has diminished in the overall scheme of things. The more OFWs were to be deployed overseas, the better the economy would be for the simple reason that OFW remittances -- $16 billion in 2008 -- has been fueling the economy. With 75% of the Gross Domestic Product (GDP) generated from personal consumption spending, the economy is virtually dependent on OFW remittances.
As long as OFW deployment remains on an upward trajectory, consumer spending would continue to increase, thus keeping the economy on the “growth path.” However, if OFW deployment declined, the remittances would decrease and the economy would revulse.
According to a “worse case” scenario analysis by Citibank, OFW remittances could drop to $11.4 billion this year which would cause the GDP to drop to 2.5% from last year’s 4.5%. However, the International Monetary Fund was more pessimistic in its GDP prediction: 2.25% in 2009. Either way, the economic outlook for 2009 looks bad.
The question is: How will the Arroyo administration cope with a potentially disastrous economic forecast? Chip Tsao’s cheap shot may have insulted Filipinos but it also sent a warning to President Arroyo that her approach to economic growth is not only risky, it is dehumanizing to the Filipino people who are systematically being trafficked to foreign land as commodities.
The Philippines has a good educational system -- one of the best in Asia -- which produces professionals in the fields of medicine, health care, engineering, education, business, science and technology. But due to lack of job opportunities at home, a lot of the country’s new college graduates are forced to leave -- out of necessity -- to seek a better life abroad. And the sad part is that they’re taking jobs which are not what they were educated or trained for.
As a result, families are breaking apart with their young children left behind so the parents could take jobs abroad in order to feed them. And if President Arroyo doesn’t take action to reverse this trend, the Philippines will indeed become a “nation of servants.”
(PerryDiaz@gmail.com)
Chip Tsao, a Hong Kong-based author and columnist, stirred a hornet’s nest in his recent article, “The War at Home.” Tsao said, “Manila has just claimed sovereignty over the scattered rocks in the South China Sea called the Spratly Islands, complete with a blatant threat from its congress to send gunboats to the South China Sea to defend the islands from China if necessary. This is beyond reproach. The reason: there are more than 130,000 Filipina maids working as $3,580-a-month cheap labor in Hong Kong. As a nation of servants, you don’t flex your muscles at your master, from whom you earn most of your bread and butter.”
Tsao further said, “I summoned Louisa, my domestic assistant who holds a degree in international politics from the University of Manila, hung a map on the wall, and gave her a harsh lecture. I sternly warned her that if she wants her wages increased next year, she had better tell every one of her compatriots in Statue Square on Sunday that the entirety of the Spratly Islands belongs to China.”
Adding insult to an injury, Tsao said, “Grimly, I told her that if war breaks out between the Philippines and China, I would have to end her employment and send her straight home, because I would not risk the crime of treason for sponsoring an enemy of the state by paying her to wash my toilet and clean my windows 16 hours a day. With that money, she would pay taxes to her government, and they would fund a navy to invade our motherland and deeply hurt my feelings.”
And rubbing salt to the injury, Tsao said, “Oh yes. The government of the Philippines would certainly be wrong if they think we Chinese are prepared to swallow their insult and sit back and lose a Falkland Islands War in the Far East. They may have Barack Obama and the hawkish American military behind them, but we have a hostage in each of our homes in the Mid-Levels or higher. Some of my friends told me they have already declared a state of emergency at home. Their maids have been made to shout ‘China, Madam/Sir’ loudly whenever they hear the word ‘Spratly.’ They say the indoctrination is working as wonderfully as when we used to shout, ‘Long live Chairman Mao!’ at the sight of a portrait of our Great Leader during the Cultural Revolution. I’m not sure if that’s going a bit too far, at least for the time being.”
Tsao’s acerbic commentary spread like a virus in cyberspace. Bloggers hit him back with unprintable insults. After a couple of days of incessant attacks against Tsao, Tsao went to the Philippine Consulate General in Hong Kong and met face to face with representatives from the Filipino community. He conveyed his “most sincere” apologies to the Filipino people. He said that he realized that he had “crossed the line” and was “terribly sorry.” After making his statement, he stood up and bowed deferentially before the audience.
As we say, “all’s well that ends well,” but is it really the end? For Tsao, it was. But as I see it, it’s just the beginning. It’s a wake-up call for Filipinos. Although Tsao’s act was a cheap shot at Filipinos, he didn’t realize that he had unwittingly raised an issue which Filipinos have conveniently ignored in the past; that is, there is an increasing number of Filipinos who are going abroad to work as domestic workers or as Tsao said, “servants.”
In August 2006, President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo proclaimed, “We will be sending ‘super maids’,” when she announced the launching of a new training program for Filipino domestic workers. Today, out of approximately 3,500 Filipinos leaving each day for overseas jobs, about 70% are domestic workers. A few years ago, there were only 40,000 Filipino domestic workers in Hong Kong. Today, there are 130,000. And it’s probably in this context that Tsao used the pejorative term, “nation of servants.”
In Europe, particularly England, a servant is called “Filipina.” Is it more acceptable for an Englishman to call his maid, a “Filipina,” than a Chinese man to call his maid, a “servant”?
But let’s not even deal with that because the real issue here is that the Philippine government is in the business of exporting domestic workers. Today, out of the 8.7 million Overseas Filipino Workers (OFWs), a large number is employed as domestic workers.
With the government’s main thrust of exporting OFWs, the need to create jobs at home has diminished in the overall scheme of things. The more OFWs were to be deployed overseas, the better the economy would be for the simple reason that OFW remittances -- $16 billion in 2008 -- has been fueling the economy. With 75% of the Gross Domestic Product (GDP) generated from personal consumption spending, the economy is virtually dependent on OFW remittances.
As long as OFW deployment remains on an upward trajectory, consumer spending would continue to increase, thus keeping the economy on the “growth path.” However, if OFW deployment declined, the remittances would decrease and the economy would revulse.
According to a “worse case” scenario analysis by Citibank, OFW remittances could drop to $11.4 billion this year which would cause the GDP to drop to 2.5% from last year’s 4.5%. However, the International Monetary Fund was more pessimistic in its GDP prediction: 2.25% in 2009. Either way, the economic outlook for 2009 looks bad.
The question is: How will the Arroyo administration cope with a potentially disastrous economic forecast? Chip Tsao’s cheap shot may have insulted Filipinos but it also sent a warning to President Arroyo that her approach to economic growth is not only risky, it is dehumanizing to the Filipino people who are systematically being trafficked to foreign land as commodities.
The Philippines has a good educational system -- one of the best in Asia -- which produces professionals in the fields of medicine, health care, engineering, education, business, science and technology. But due to lack of job opportunities at home, a lot of the country’s new college graduates are forced to leave -- out of necessity -- to seek a better life abroad. And the sad part is that they’re taking jobs which are not what they were educated or trained for.
As a result, families are breaking apart with their young children left behind so the parents could take jobs abroad in order to feed them. And if President Arroyo doesn’t take action to reverse this trend, the Philippines will indeed become a “nation of servants.”
(PerryDiaz@gmail.com)
Tuesday, March 24, 2009
‘4 Divas’ embark on U.S. and Canada Tour
Photos by Jay Fermin & Albert Vargas (FMG)
Article by Jay Fermin
It is early in the year but everybody can feel that the biggest show for 2009 is indeed here. The four Divas Kuh Ledesma, Zsa Zsa Padilla, Pops Fernandez, and Regine Velasquez arrived in Los Angeles last March 17th for the biggest and most ambitious concert tour of all entitled “Divas 4 Divas”.
Meeting members of the media the next day in Hollywood, Kuh Ledesma confided that it took almost 4 years of planning the project. “I’ve performed with each one of them before, here and in US concert tours, but this is the first time that we are doing a concert together”, she exclaimed.
Following a very successful December 6 show at the Araneta Coliseum in Manila, the 4 Divas were all praises for each other, and especially for Kuh who is the creative brains behind ‘Divas’. Pops described Kuh as ‘persistent’ in making the dream project of having all four of them on one stage become reality.
However, this did not come without challenges. Concert Director Rowell Santiago resigned only 9 days before the December 6 concert because, as insiders reported, he was having problems getting the four divas to rehearse together due to their very tight schedule.
And if schedule was not the main thing, it would indeed be interesting to see the collaboration of the four divas under the same spotlight, playing their best musical style and bringing on their larger than life stage presence without out-staging each other. Kuh emphasized however that this ‘is not a competition.’
‘Divas 4 Divas’ opened in Houston, New Jersey, and Vancouver, and is scheduled for 16 venues in the U.S. and Canada. However, all eyes are looking forward to the concert at Pasadena Civic Center near Los Angeles on March 28, 2009. Produced by Starmedia’s Anna Co-Puno, it is expected that the 3,029 seats will be sold out!
The show continues on to San Jose, Washington D.C., Chicago, Florida, Dallas, and other cities.
With fabulous fashion of 12 costume changes, impressive production numbers, musical direction by famed composer-arranger Louie Ocampo, and the legendary voice of Pop Diva Kuh Ledesma, Divine Diva Zsa Zsa Padilla, Concert Queen Pops Fernandez, and Asia’s Songbird Regine Velasquez, ‘Divas 4 Divas’ promises a totally different concert experience.
Be there when music history happens in your city.
DIVAS4DIVAS 2009 TOUR
MARCH 20 HOUSTON TEXAS HOUSTON ARENA THEATER
MARCH 21 ATLANTIC CITY,NEW JERSEY SEASIDE ENTERTAINMENT CENTER
MARCH 27 VANCOUVER CANADA QUEEN ELIZABETH THEATER
MARCH 28 LOS ANGELES CALIFORNIA PASADENA CIVIC CENTER
APRIL 3 SAN JOSE CALIFORNIA San Jose State University Event Center
APRIL 5 WASHINGTON D.C. GEORGE MASON PATRIOT CENTER
MAY 14 HIGLAND CALIFORNIA SAN MANUEL CASINO
MAY 15 To Be Announced
MAY 16 CHICAGO ARIE CROWN CENTER
MAY 17 ORLANDO FLORIDA SILVER SPURS ARENA
MAY 22 CHUMASH CASINO
MAY 23 MAY 24 To Be Announced
MAY 29 DALLAS TEXAS TBAAL (The Black Academy of Arts & Letters) Dallas Convention Center Theatre Complex
MAY 30 SAN DIEGO SAN DIEGO CIVIC THEATER
MAY 31 To Be Announced
visit Divas 4 Divas website
Sunday, March 22, 2009
Bankers Have Gone Bonkers
PerryScope By Perry Diaz
In the past several months, amidst the financial meltdown, a lot of people have wondered, “are bankers going bonkers?” With the passage of the $700-billion Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP) and President Obama’s signing of the $787-billion economic stimulus package, the bankers have gone bonkers, not for lack of money but for having too much money in their pockets. Indeed, the government bailout has created a “windfall” for the banks that they can use any which way they want.
Basically, TARP is a program of the US government to purchase “toxic” assets from financial institutions that were acquired through unregulated subprime mortgage programs. Passed during the waning days of the Bush presidency, TARP was intended to prevent the country’s financial sector from collapsing. However, in its ardent desire to keep the financial institutions from going belly up, Congress haphazardly enacted TARP with no specific conditions on how the recipients should use the bailout money. In essence, it’s a giveaway money with no strings attached. They were given carte blanche on how to use the money.
Of the $700 billion in TARP funds, $185 billion went to four of the largest banks: AIG ($70 billion), Bank of America ($45 billion), Citigroup ($45 billion), and Wells Fargo ($25 billion). The rest of the TARP funds were distributed to smaller banks. While the government had acted in good faith, a lot of the banks -- particularly the big ones -- did not respond in a manner that would be consistent with the legislative intent of TARP.
At a congressional hearing last February, lawmakers grilled Wall Street CEOs over their use of TARP funds. The CEOs’ responses were identical. When asked what they’re going to do with the bailout money, they responded that “the shareholders -- not increased lending -- are their utmost concern.” As a matter of fact, many of the banks have tightened their lending standards after TARP was signed to law.
According to a recent report by The Wall Street Journal, it was revealed that 10 of the 13 largest TARP beneficiaries’ lending fell even after they received $148 billion in TARP funds. The report said that these banks’ outstanding loan balances declined by a total of about $46 billion, or 1.4%, between the third and fourth quarters of 2008. The question is: where did their TARP money go?
It is interesting to note that some banks were using TARP funds to buy out banks who were in trouble and who didn’t qualify to receive TARP bailout. There were also some banks who applied for TARP bailout but did not have any use for it. They claimed that they applied out of “civic duty.” If that is the case, shouldn’t it be their “civic duty” to return them to the government?
But some banks have used the bailout money not for “civic duty” but for greed. Take the case of AIG. After reporting a $61.7 billion quarterly loss, they asked the government for an additional $30 billion on top of the $40 billion already received. When AIG got the extra bailout money, they gave bonuses to some of their employees!
A few days ago, Attorney General Richard Blumenthal of Connecticut revealed that documents he subpoenaed from AIG showed that it paid a total of $218 million in bonuses, $53 million more than what it previously disclosed. He said that “bonuses were showered like confetti” on AIG employees.
It is sad that while Congress took the unusual step to bail out the distressed financial institutions, the banks’ modus operandi remains “business as usual”; that is, to maximize profits for their investors and stockholders. In other words, they continue to be driven by “greed” even in these uncertain times.
Wells Fargo CEO John Stumpf said it bluntly: “We make money when we make loans. That’s our business. Not every borrower that needs money can get it today. We have to be prudent.” But Stumpf wasn’t prudent enough to underwrite “toxic loans” when things were looking good and business was profitable. And now that things are looking bad, he suddenly has the temerity to say, “We have to be prudent.” It is interesting to note that Wells Fargo received the lion’s share of TARP’s $27.6 billion bailout for California’s 67 banks -- a whopping $25 billion!
At the end of the day, the taxpayers are being screwed by the banks. Indeed, the banks are frying the homeowners with their own fat. And at the rate that homes are being foreclosed, it is estimated that one million children will be homeless by the end of 2009. And come to think about it, it will be these one million children who will be paying back the bailout money that they never benefited from. Meanwhile, the banks would be raking in profits from the $700 billion “windfall” they received -- with no repayment plan required -- from their parents.
With the economy in the brink of deflation, the magnitude of which has never been seen before, the bankers couldn’t fathom the depth in which they brought America -- and by extension, the world -- to its worse economic recession since the Great Depression.
There is only one rational explanation to the bankers’ irrational behavior: they have gone bonkers. It’s time for President Obama to rein in the bankers and bring sanity to the banking industry. It’s also time for President Obama to redirect government resources from bailing out banks to helping homeowners avoid foreclosures.
Yesterday, March 23, President Obama did just that. In his boldest move in his 60-day old presidency, he unveiled a new three-part plan -- the Public-Private Investment Program -- that could buy up to $2 trillion in “toxic” real estate assets from troubled banks. As part of this plan, up to $100 billion from TARP funds would be used as equity. But a big part of this plan is for the US Treasury -- through a joint venture with the Federal Reserve -- to pump approximately $1 trillion more into purchasing “toxic” assets from banks. This program is called the Term Asset-Backed Securities Lending Facility (TALF).
Finally, Obama is back on track to doing exactly what he promised the voters last year; that is, to create a foreclosure prevention fund for homeowners.
(PerryDiaz@gmail.com)
In the past several months, amidst the financial meltdown, a lot of people have wondered, “are bankers going bonkers?” With the passage of the $700-billion Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP) and President Obama’s signing of the $787-billion economic stimulus package, the bankers have gone bonkers, not for lack of money but for having too much money in their pockets. Indeed, the government bailout has created a “windfall” for the banks that they can use any which way they want.
Basically, TARP is a program of the US government to purchase “toxic” assets from financial institutions that were acquired through unregulated subprime mortgage programs. Passed during the waning days of the Bush presidency, TARP was intended to prevent the country’s financial sector from collapsing. However, in its ardent desire to keep the financial institutions from going belly up, Congress haphazardly enacted TARP with no specific conditions on how the recipients should use the bailout money. In essence, it’s a giveaway money with no strings attached. They were given carte blanche on how to use the money.
Of the $700 billion in TARP funds, $185 billion went to four of the largest banks: AIG ($70 billion), Bank of America ($45 billion), Citigroup ($45 billion), and Wells Fargo ($25 billion). The rest of the TARP funds were distributed to smaller banks. While the government had acted in good faith, a lot of the banks -- particularly the big ones -- did not respond in a manner that would be consistent with the legislative intent of TARP.
At a congressional hearing last February, lawmakers grilled Wall Street CEOs over their use of TARP funds. The CEOs’ responses were identical. When asked what they’re going to do with the bailout money, they responded that “the shareholders -- not increased lending -- are their utmost concern.” As a matter of fact, many of the banks have tightened their lending standards after TARP was signed to law.
According to a recent report by The Wall Street Journal, it was revealed that 10 of the 13 largest TARP beneficiaries’ lending fell even after they received $148 billion in TARP funds. The report said that these banks’ outstanding loan balances declined by a total of about $46 billion, or 1.4%, between the third and fourth quarters of 2008. The question is: where did their TARP money go?
It is interesting to note that some banks were using TARP funds to buy out banks who were in trouble and who didn’t qualify to receive TARP bailout. There were also some banks who applied for TARP bailout but did not have any use for it. They claimed that they applied out of “civic duty.” If that is the case, shouldn’t it be their “civic duty” to return them to the government?
But some banks have used the bailout money not for “civic duty” but for greed. Take the case of AIG. After reporting a $61.7 billion quarterly loss, they asked the government for an additional $30 billion on top of the $40 billion already received. When AIG got the extra bailout money, they gave bonuses to some of their employees!
A few days ago, Attorney General Richard Blumenthal of Connecticut revealed that documents he subpoenaed from AIG showed that it paid a total of $218 million in bonuses, $53 million more than what it previously disclosed. He said that “bonuses were showered like confetti” on AIG employees.
It is sad that while Congress took the unusual step to bail out the distressed financial institutions, the banks’ modus operandi remains “business as usual”; that is, to maximize profits for their investors and stockholders. In other words, they continue to be driven by “greed” even in these uncertain times.
Wells Fargo CEO John Stumpf said it bluntly: “We make money when we make loans. That’s our business. Not every borrower that needs money can get it today. We have to be prudent.” But Stumpf wasn’t prudent enough to underwrite “toxic loans” when things were looking good and business was profitable. And now that things are looking bad, he suddenly has the temerity to say, “We have to be prudent.” It is interesting to note that Wells Fargo received the lion’s share of TARP’s $27.6 billion bailout for California’s 67 banks -- a whopping $25 billion!
At the end of the day, the taxpayers are being screwed by the banks. Indeed, the banks are frying the homeowners with their own fat. And at the rate that homes are being foreclosed, it is estimated that one million children will be homeless by the end of 2009. And come to think about it, it will be these one million children who will be paying back the bailout money that they never benefited from. Meanwhile, the banks would be raking in profits from the $700 billion “windfall” they received -- with no repayment plan required -- from their parents.
With the economy in the brink of deflation, the magnitude of which has never been seen before, the bankers couldn’t fathom the depth in which they brought America -- and by extension, the world -- to its worse economic recession since the Great Depression.
There is only one rational explanation to the bankers’ irrational behavior: they have gone bonkers. It’s time for President Obama to rein in the bankers and bring sanity to the banking industry. It’s also time for President Obama to redirect government resources from bailing out banks to helping homeowners avoid foreclosures.
Yesterday, March 23, President Obama did just that. In his boldest move in his 60-day old presidency, he unveiled a new three-part plan -- the Public-Private Investment Program -- that could buy up to $2 trillion in “toxic” real estate assets from troubled banks. As part of this plan, up to $100 billion from TARP funds would be used as equity. But a big part of this plan is for the US Treasury -- through a joint venture with the Federal Reserve -- to pump approximately $1 trillion more into purchasing “toxic” assets from banks. This program is called the Term Asset-Backed Securities Lending Facility (TALF).
Finally, Obama is back on track to doing exactly what he promised the voters last year; that is, to create a foreclosure prevention fund for homeowners.
(PerryDiaz@gmail.com)
Tuesday, March 17, 2009
Quo Vadis, Republican Party?
PerryScope By Perry Diaz
With the Republicans routed last November and the Democrats now controlling the Executive and Legislative branches of government, there is a lot of talk about the future of the Republican Party. The Republicans have been looking for a leader to pick up the pieces and restore the Grand Old Party to its glorious past.
Leaderless and rudderless, where is the party of Abraham Lincoln going? Quo vadis, Republican Party?
In an apparent attempt to draw support from African-Americans, Latinos, and other minorities -- who delivered a solid block of votes for President Barack Obama last November -- the Republican National Committee (RNC) elected Michael Steele as its chairman. Steele, who is of African-American descent, immediately went to work in trying to sell the Republican Party and its “conservative philosophy” to minorities. Projecting the GOP’s image as a “big tent” that welcomes all Americans, Steele’s message is not resonating well with minorities. Instead, he’s making the right wingers of his party fuming mad.
With his political head getting squeezed -- like in a vise -- between the right wingers and the mainstream moderates and conservatives of his party, Steele is frantically trying to please both sides. But it is like walking a tightrope with no safety net to fall into if he slips. And he knows that all it takes is one slip to end his political life.
Recently, there have been speculations that Steele was on his way out. During a GQ magazine interview, Steele was asked, “Does a woman have a right to choose abortion?” He replied, “Yeah, absolutely!” If there was one issue that the Republican Party would fight to death, it would be in defense of its anti-abortion stand. And for Steele to utter “right to choose” makes him an anathema to the powerful “right to life” forces within the Republican Party.
There were talks that Katon Dawson -- the former chairman of the South Carolina Republican Party and the person whom Steele defeated for the RNC chairmanship -- has been quietly soliciting support for a “no confidence” vote on Steele. However, if Dawson were to succeed in ousting Steele, it would be unlikely that he will get the coveted chairmanship for himself. Interestingly, one of the reasons why he lost to Steele was his 12-year membership in a racist “whites-only” country club -- the last bastion of Southern segregation. Although he claimed that he had resigned his membership, it would be hard to dispel the perception that he has racist tendencies.
The question is: Are the Republicans searching for the “great white hope” to unify their seemingly divided party? Or would they stick it out with Steele and make the most out of him? If the Republican leaders were to use their heads instead of their ideological beliefs, they could prevent their party from disintegrating and start the task of rebuilding it. Otherwise, the 2010 mid-term elections could further solidify the Democrats’ grip on Congress, particularly in the Senate where the Democrats are just a few votes shy of reaching a filibuster-free supermajority.
The next two years would be crucial to the Republicans’ goal of defeating Obama in 2012. There is a guardedly optimistic mood among Republicans that Obama could become -- like Jimmy Carter -- another one-term Democratic president. However, it would take another Republican with a Reaganesque charisma to match up with Obama whose charismatic personality has enthralled millions of Americans. Today, that Republican “presidential timber” has yet to emerge. But who knows? Politics is the ultimate game of the “possible.” Didn’t Obama prove that last November?
Obama also proved that he is a skillful master of the “art of war.” When he saw a power vacuum within the Republican Party, he adroitly moved to fill that vacuum with the person of his choice. At a White House meeting with Republican leaders last January 23, he told them: “You can't just listen to Rush Limbaugh and get things done.” In one short sentence, Obama catapulted Limbaugh to the top of the Republican Party, filling the void created by the departure of George W. Bush and John McCain. As expected, many Republicans fell for Obama’s cleverly executed bait. They turned to Limbaugh to lead them in their fight against Obama. And with Limbaugh emerging as the Republicans’ undisputed de facto leader, he could now use his radio talk show as his “official” Republican pulpit to attack Obama and the Democrats.
But wait a minute. Is Limbaugh going to be effective in leading the Republican Party? Some Republicans are worried that Limbaugh might just be the opposite -- he could be the “kryptonite” that could weaken the party just like what it did to Superman.
Limbaugh’s famous line, “I hope Obama fails,” has been widely circulated and criticized by Democrats and some Republicans as well. If Obama fails, then America will fail too -- a notion that scares the hell out of millions of Americans who are tiptoeing on the edge of losing their jobs, homes, and life savings.
Indeed, Limbaugh’s blistering assaults against Obama have unleashed a backlash against him. Bloggers had a heyday lambasting “El Rushbo” as Limbaugh calls himself. They labeled him “Tokyo Rose.” One blogger said, “Rush Limbaugh is the Tokyo Rose of our time. At least, Rose did her subversive, anti-American broadcasts from Tokyo, not from the USA.” Another cyberspace habitué blogged, “Tokyo Rose was as unconcerned about giving accurate, undistorted views of the world situation back in her day like the failed top 40's radio disk jockey turned ideological know-it-all Limbaugh is today.”
In a recent survey conducted by McClatchy-Ipsos, it showed President Obama to be twice as popular as Limbaugh -- 65% to 30%. The survey also showed that a solid 33% of all Americans have "very unfavorable" opinions of Limbaugh.
A few days ago, former Vice President Dick Cheney, during an appearance on CNN’s “State of the Union,” was asked, “Is Rush Limbaugh kryptonite?” Cheney replied, “No, Rush is a good friend. I love him.”
It is interesting to note that a few days before the November 4, 2008 elections, Cheney came out to endorse John McCain. With Cheney’s 15% favorability rating at that time, his endorsement was viewed by many as a “kiss of death.” Does Cheney’s endorsement of Limbaugh have the same morbid effect?
The Republican Party has a monumental task in changing its image from a destructive obfuscator to a constructive opposition. Nothing is gained by bringing down the president of the United States of America. He is the people’s president. If he fails, so will the people. All Americans are all in this together.
(PerryDiaz@gmail.com)
With the Republicans routed last November and the Democrats now controlling the Executive and Legislative branches of government, there is a lot of talk about the future of the Republican Party. The Republicans have been looking for a leader to pick up the pieces and restore the Grand Old Party to its glorious past.
Leaderless and rudderless, where is the party of Abraham Lincoln going? Quo vadis, Republican Party?
In an apparent attempt to draw support from African-Americans, Latinos, and other minorities -- who delivered a solid block of votes for President Barack Obama last November -- the Republican National Committee (RNC) elected Michael Steele as its chairman. Steele, who is of African-American descent, immediately went to work in trying to sell the Republican Party and its “conservative philosophy” to minorities. Projecting the GOP’s image as a “big tent” that welcomes all Americans, Steele’s message is not resonating well with minorities. Instead, he’s making the right wingers of his party fuming mad.
With his political head getting squeezed -- like in a vise -- between the right wingers and the mainstream moderates and conservatives of his party, Steele is frantically trying to please both sides. But it is like walking a tightrope with no safety net to fall into if he slips. And he knows that all it takes is one slip to end his political life.
Recently, there have been speculations that Steele was on his way out. During a GQ magazine interview, Steele was asked, “Does a woman have a right to choose abortion?” He replied, “Yeah, absolutely!” If there was one issue that the Republican Party would fight to death, it would be in defense of its anti-abortion stand. And for Steele to utter “right to choose” makes him an anathema to the powerful “right to life” forces within the Republican Party.
There were talks that Katon Dawson -- the former chairman of the South Carolina Republican Party and the person whom Steele defeated for the RNC chairmanship -- has been quietly soliciting support for a “no confidence” vote on Steele. However, if Dawson were to succeed in ousting Steele, it would be unlikely that he will get the coveted chairmanship for himself. Interestingly, one of the reasons why he lost to Steele was his 12-year membership in a racist “whites-only” country club -- the last bastion of Southern segregation. Although he claimed that he had resigned his membership, it would be hard to dispel the perception that he has racist tendencies.
The question is: Are the Republicans searching for the “great white hope” to unify their seemingly divided party? Or would they stick it out with Steele and make the most out of him? If the Republican leaders were to use their heads instead of their ideological beliefs, they could prevent their party from disintegrating and start the task of rebuilding it. Otherwise, the 2010 mid-term elections could further solidify the Democrats’ grip on Congress, particularly in the Senate where the Democrats are just a few votes shy of reaching a filibuster-free supermajority.
The next two years would be crucial to the Republicans’ goal of defeating Obama in 2012. There is a guardedly optimistic mood among Republicans that Obama could become -- like Jimmy Carter -- another one-term Democratic president. However, it would take another Republican with a Reaganesque charisma to match up with Obama whose charismatic personality has enthralled millions of Americans. Today, that Republican “presidential timber” has yet to emerge. But who knows? Politics is the ultimate game of the “possible.” Didn’t Obama prove that last November?
Obama also proved that he is a skillful master of the “art of war.” When he saw a power vacuum within the Republican Party, he adroitly moved to fill that vacuum with the person of his choice. At a White House meeting with Republican leaders last January 23, he told them: “You can't just listen to Rush Limbaugh and get things done.” In one short sentence, Obama catapulted Limbaugh to the top of the Republican Party, filling the void created by the departure of George W. Bush and John McCain. As expected, many Republicans fell for Obama’s cleverly executed bait. They turned to Limbaugh to lead them in their fight against Obama. And with Limbaugh emerging as the Republicans’ undisputed de facto leader, he could now use his radio talk show as his “official” Republican pulpit to attack Obama and the Democrats.
But wait a minute. Is Limbaugh going to be effective in leading the Republican Party? Some Republicans are worried that Limbaugh might just be the opposite -- he could be the “kryptonite” that could weaken the party just like what it did to Superman.
Limbaugh’s famous line, “I hope Obama fails,” has been widely circulated and criticized by Democrats and some Republicans as well. If Obama fails, then America will fail too -- a notion that scares the hell out of millions of Americans who are tiptoeing on the edge of losing their jobs, homes, and life savings.
Indeed, Limbaugh’s blistering assaults against Obama have unleashed a backlash against him. Bloggers had a heyday lambasting “El Rushbo” as Limbaugh calls himself. They labeled him “Tokyo Rose.” One blogger said, “Rush Limbaugh is the Tokyo Rose of our time. At least, Rose did her subversive, anti-American broadcasts from Tokyo, not from the USA.” Another cyberspace habitué blogged, “Tokyo Rose was as unconcerned about giving accurate, undistorted views of the world situation back in her day like the failed top 40's radio disk jockey turned ideological know-it-all Limbaugh is today.”
In a recent survey conducted by McClatchy-Ipsos, it showed President Obama to be twice as popular as Limbaugh -- 65% to 30%. The survey also showed that a solid 33% of all Americans have "very unfavorable" opinions of Limbaugh.
A few days ago, former Vice President Dick Cheney, during an appearance on CNN’s “State of the Union,” was asked, “Is Rush Limbaugh kryptonite?” Cheney replied, “No, Rush is a good friend. I love him.”
It is interesting to note that a few days before the November 4, 2008 elections, Cheney came out to endorse John McCain. With Cheney’s 15% favorability rating at that time, his endorsement was viewed by many as a “kiss of death.” Does Cheney’s endorsement of Limbaugh have the same morbid effect?
The Republican Party has a monumental task in changing its image from a destructive obfuscator to a constructive opposition. Nothing is gained by bringing down the president of the United States of America. He is the people’s president. If he fails, so will the people. All Americans are all in this together.
(PerryDiaz@gmail.com)
Thursday, March 12, 2009
Mercy or No Mercy ?
PerryScope By Perry Diaz
In an act of defiance, Ombudsman Maria Merceditas “Mercy” Gutierrez arrogantly declared, “I have my mandate, I have my term and I believe this is my duty, my service to our countrymen.” With “my” repeated four times in one sentence, one would wonder if she really cared much about what her “mandate” was all about.
What prompted her outburst was the filing of an impeachment complaint against her. Last March 2, 2009, 31 civil society leaders led by former Senate President Jovito Salonga filed a complaint before the House of Representatives. The group -- called “Kilosbayan” (people action) -- said that the Office of the Ombudsman “has become synonymous to inaction, mishandling or downright dismissal of clear cases of graft and corruption, some leading to the President herself or her closest associates.”
What makes the impeachment complaint extraordinarily unusual is that Gutierrez, as the Ombudsman, is the “Tanodbayan” -- literally, the “Protector of the People” -- who is duty-bound to prosecute corrupt public officials who use their positions to enrich themselves. That’s her mandate. If she fails to perform her mandate, then she will be derelict of her constitutional duty to “protect the people.”
Appointed to a seven-year term of office by President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo on December 1, 2005, the constitution stipulates that the Ombudsman can only be removed from office “on impeachment for, and conviction of, culpable violation of the Constitution, treason, bribery, graft and corruption, other high crimes, or betrayal of public trust.”
It is interesting to note that Gutierrez is believed to be a close friend of the First Gentleman, Jose Miguel “Mike” Arroyo. They were classmates at the Ateneo College of Law. Their “friendship” has fueled speculations that Gutierrez is a protégé of the First Gentleman. Prior to her appointment as Ombudsman, Gutierrez was appointed by President Arroyo as Chief Presidential Legal Counsel and Chairman of the Presidential Anti-Graft Commission -- the Anti-Corruption Czar -- in December 2004. Her two concurrent appointments made her one of the most powerful officials in the Arroyo government.
Coincidentally, it was during Gutierrez’s “czarist” days that corruption dramatically increased. In 2004, before she became the Anti-Corruption Czar, the Philippines was the fifth most corrupt country in Asia. In 2005, during her first “czarist” year, the Philippines became the third most corrupt country in Asia. In 2006, during her first year as Ombudsman, the country moved up to second place. In 2007 and 2008, the country became the most corrupt country in Asia. And more than likely, the country would retain that ignominious distinction in 2009.
The basis for the impeachment complaint against Gutierrez involved at least five cases of corruption in high places which Gutierrez allegedly failed to investigate or prosecute. They are the P1.3-billion Mega Pacific poll computerization case against former Comelec Chairman Benjamin Abalos, the $2-million extortion case against former Justice Secretary Hernando Perez, the P728-million fertilizer scam scandal involving Joc-joc Bolante, the P6.9-million case involving the “euro generals,” and the rigged bidding of multi-billion World Bank-funded projects in which the First Gentleman was implicated.
When Gutierrez took office, she declared, “I will be merciless to the grafters… no one can bribe me!” But within eight months, “Mercy,” as she is affectionately called by her friends and associates, was accused of being too merciful to influential people suspected of graft and corruption. On July 31, 2006, the Malaya editorial said: “The Office of the Ombudsman has become a joke after Merceditas Gutierrez, a classmate of Mike Arroyo, succeeded Simeon Marcelo. How many big-time corruption cases have been sleeping the sleep of the dead on the desk of Gutierrez?”
The Malaya editorial enumerated several “sleeping” cases, to wit:
(1) The case against former Justice Secretary Hernani Perez who allegedly received millions as payoff for awarding a sovereign guarantee to an Argentine company. It was reported that the Swiss government provided information to the Philippine government on deposits made to bank accounts of Perez and his wife.
(2) The case against Comelec officials over the election modernization scam was completed by Gutierrez’ office. However, the findings of investigators were overturned by Gutierrez, leaving only Resurreccion Borra among the commissioners to face the music.
(3) On the fertilizer fund scam, Gutierrez failed to take action despite the massive volume of testimonial and documentary evidence transmitted by the Senate committee on agriculture and the Blue Ribbon committee.
Indeed, the impeachment complaint filed by Kilosbayan mirrors the three “sleeping” cases exposed by Malaya two and a half years ago and the two recent scandals involving the “euro generals” and the rigged bidding of World Bank-funded projects.
Although President Arroyo had publicly distanced herself from the impeachment complaint against her three-time appointee and friend of her husband, it remains to be seen if she would covertly exert pressure on her House allies to reject the impeachment complaint against Gutierrez.
However, as a lame duck president, House members might be emboldened to resist pressure from Arroyo to quash the impeachment complaint. With the likelihood that Arroyo would not be able to stay in power beyond 2010, her House allies might soon be looking around for a new “master” to lead them to battle in the 2010 elections.
To impeach Gutierrez, a one-third vote -- 80 -- of the 238 members of the House is needed. The question is: would there be enough House members who will show no mercy for Gutierrez and thus impeach her? In the event that Gutierrez was impeached by the House, she would then be brought to trial before the Senate. Conviction in the Senate requires a two-thirds vote -- 16 -- of the 23 senators. In my opinion, the Senate will show no mercy for Gutierrez -- they will convict her. Therefore, Gutierrez’s fate hinges on how the House members will vote on impeachment: mercy or no mercy?
(PerryDiaz@gmail.com)
In an act of defiance, Ombudsman Maria Merceditas “Mercy” Gutierrez arrogantly declared, “I have my mandate, I have my term and I believe this is my duty, my service to our countrymen.” With “my” repeated four times in one sentence, one would wonder if she really cared much about what her “mandate” was all about.
What prompted her outburst was the filing of an impeachment complaint against her. Last March 2, 2009, 31 civil society leaders led by former Senate President Jovito Salonga filed a complaint before the House of Representatives. The group -- called “Kilosbayan” (people action) -- said that the Office of the Ombudsman “has become synonymous to inaction, mishandling or downright dismissal of clear cases of graft and corruption, some leading to the President herself or her closest associates.”
What makes the impeachment complaint extraordinarily unusual is that Gutierrez, as the Ombudsman, is the “Tanodbayan” -- literally, the “Protector of the People” -- who is duty-bound to prosecute corrupt public officials who use their positions to enrich themselves. That’s her mandate. If she fails to perform her mandate, then she will be derelict of her constitutional duty to “protect the people.”
Appointed to a seven-year term of office by President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo on December 1, 2005, the constitution stipulates that the Ombudsman can only be removed from office “on impeachment for, and conviction of, culpable violation of the Constitution, treason, bribery, graft and corruption, other high crimes, or betrayal of public trust.”
It is interesting to note that Gutierrez is believed to be a close friend of the First Gentleman, Jose Miguel “Mike” Arroyo. They were classmates at the Ateneo College of Law. Their “friendship” has fueled speculations that Gutierrez is a protégé of the First Gentleman. Prior to her appointment as Ombudsman, Gutierrez was appointed by President Arroyo as Chief Presidential Legal Counsel and Chairman of the Presidential Anti-Graft Commission -- the Anti-Corruption Czar -- in December 2004. Her two concurrent appointments made her one of the most powerful officials in the Arroyo government.
Coincidentally, it was during Gutierrez’s “czarist” days that corruption dramatically increased. In 2004, before she became the Anti-Corruption Czar, the Philippines was the fifth most corrupt country in Asia. In 2005, during her first “czarist” year, the Philippines became the third most corrupt country in Asia. In 2006, during her first year as Ombudsman, the country moved up to second place. In 2007 and 2008, the country became the most corrupt country in Asia. And more than likely, the country would retain that ignominious distinction in 2009.
The basis for the impeachment complaint against Gutierrez involved at least five cases of corruption in high places which Gutierrez allegedly failed to investigate or prosecute. They are the P1.3-billion Mega Pacific poll computerization case against former Comelec Chairman Benjamin Abalos, the $2-million extortion case against former Justice Secretary Hernando Perez, the P728-million fertilizer scam scandal involving Joc-joc Bolante, the P6.9-million case involving the “euro generals,” and the rigged bidding of multi-billion World Bank-funded projects in which the First Gentleman was implicated.
When Gutierrez took office, she declared, “I will be merciless to the grafters… no one can bribe me!” But within eight months, “Mercy,” as she is affectionately called by her friends and associates, was accused of being too merciful to influential people suspected of graft and corruption. On July 31, 2006, the Malaya editorial said: “The Office of the Ombudsman has become a joke after Merceditas Gutierrez, a classmate of Mike Arroyo, succeeded Simeon Marcelo. How many big-time corruption cases have been sleeping the sleep of the dead on the desk of Gutierrez?”
The Malaya editorial enumerated several “sleeping” cases, to wit:
(1) The case against former Justice Secretary Hernani Perez who allegedly received millions as payoff for awarding a sovereign guarantee to an Argentine company. It was reported that the Swiss government provided information to the Philippine government on deposits made to bank accounts of Perez and his wife.
(2) The case against Comelec officials over the election modernization scam was completed by Gutierrez’ office. However, the findings of investigators were overturned by Gutierrez, leaving only Resurreccion Borra among the commissioners to face the music.
(3) On the fertilizer fund scam, Gutierrez failed to take action despite the massive volume of testimonial and documentary evidence transmitted by the Senate committee on agriculture and the Blue Ribbon committee.
Indeed, the impeachment complaint filed by Kilosbayan mirrors the three “sleeping” cases exposed by Malaya two and a half years ago and the two recent scandals involving the “euro generals” and the rigged bidding of World Bank-funded projects.
Although President Arroyo had publicly distanced herself from the impeachment complaint against her three-time appointee and friend of her husband, it remains to be seen if she would covertly exert pressure on her House allies to reject the impeachment complaint against Gutierrez.
However, as a lame duck president, House members might be emboldened to resist pressure from Arroyo to quash the impeachment complaint. With the likelihood that Arroyo would not be able to stay in power beyond 2010, her House allies might soon be looking around for a new “master” to lead them to battle in the 2010 elections.
To impeach Gutierrez, a one-third vote -- 80 -- of the 238 members of the House is needed. The question is: would there be enough House members who will show no mercy for Gutierrez and thus impeach her? In the event that Gutierrez was impeached by the House, she would then be brought to trial before the Senate. Conviction in the Senate requires a two-thirds vote -- 16 -- of the 23 senators. In my opinion, the Senate will show no mercy for Gutierrez -- they will convict her. Therefore, Gutierrez’s fate hinges on how the House members will vote on impeachment: mercy or no mercy?
(PerryDiaz@gmail.com)
Tuesday, March 3, 2009
GOP’s ‘Colorful’ Poster Boys
PerryScope By Perry Diaz
In an attempt to add “color” and re-energize its ranks, the Republican National Committee (RNC) elected Michael Steele, an African-American, as the new Chairman. They also asked Gov. Bobby Jindal of Louisiana, who is of Asian Indian descent, to respond to President Barack Obama’s address to a special joint session of Congress last February 24, 2009.
Obviously, the motivation behind the election of Steele as the first African-American RNC Chairman was to counter the election of Barack Obama as the nation’s first African-American president. But Obama was elected by 52.92% of approximately 131 million voters while Steele was elected by 168 RNC members.
As soon as Steele was installed, he immediately laid out plans to reach out to African-American and Latino voters in all 50 states. He vowed that his outreach program will be “permanent” and not just election-time activity as what had happened in past campaigns.
In a recent interview with a national news magazine, Steele said that he wanted to “better explain the GOP's conservative philosophy of optimism, opportunity, and economic growth to minority voters and make folks understand that ‘we'll walk that walk with them’.” However, he conceded that “it may be tough sledding, but we're going to get on the sled.”
Well, it seems to me that he isn’t bold enough to do the task and doesn’t have the “optimism” that he claims is part of the “conservative philosophy” that he’s trying hard to sell to minority voters. But no matter how Steele retools “conservative philosophy,” minority voters aren’t going to buy that because they perceive it as pro-business. And how could he peddle Republicanism to Latinos who perceive Republicans as anti-immigrant; therefore, anti-Latino.
The battle for Obama’s stimulus package last month proved once again that the Republican Party is out of touch with the American people’s problems -- particularly the poor and the middle-class. Obama’s populist stimulus package, among other things, centered on creating jobs and providing tax cuts for those who needed it most, which is 95% of those earning less than $250,000 a year.
The Republicans in Congress insisted that Obama’s stimulus package should provide tax breaks to businesses and the wealthy, a philosophy -- known as Trickle Down Economics or Reaganomics -- launched by Ronald Reagan in 1980. But Reaganomics hardly trickled down to the people. Instead, it became the tool of big businesses and their greedy CEOs who plundered the economy for corporate and personal gain. The result was the financial meltdown that occurred in the waning days of George W. Bush’s administration.
After losing the White House to Obama, the Republicans retrenched in Congress hoping that they could hold some bargaining chips. Obama tried to work with the Republicans in a bipartisan fashion. But even after getting some concessions, the House Republicans voted unanimously against Obama’s stimulus package. But the number of Republicans in the House had dwindled so much that it made them completely irrelevant and inutile.
The Republicans’ last redoubt was in the U.S. Senate where the Democrats hold a majority but short of the 60 required to stop a filibuster. But the Republicans’ only chance of defeating the stimulus package was shattered when three Republican senators broke ranks with their party and voted with the Democrats; thus, preventing a filibuster and ensuring its passage.
After signing the bill into law, Obama addressed a joint session of Congress to explain how the stimulus package would work. As soon as his speech was over, Jindal went on national television to deliver the Republican Party’s blistering attack against Obama’s stimulus package.
Jindal called the congressional Democrats “irresponsible” for passing the $787 billion stimulus package which the Republicans had criticized as excessive and wasteful. He claimed that giving tax breaks and assistance to businesses -- an allusion to Reaganomics -- would work best for the nation’s economic recovery. In my opinion, that’s like selling a dead horse to pull the wagon. He should know that Reaganomics died when George W. Bush’s presidency came to an end.
But the question that popped in my mind was: Why did the Republicans select Jindal as their spokesman in attacking Obama’s stimulus package? Why not the Senate or House Republican leader? Or was it because Jindal was presumed to be “teflonized” from attacks by minorities -- particularly African-Americans -- who might be alienated if the Republican spokesman was white? With Jindal as the spokesman -- or “hatchet man” -- the Republican congressional leaders could conveniently wash their hands in the event of a backlash from the community.
But whether it projected the 37 year-old Jindal as a bad guy or not, his “15 minutes” on TV prime time gave him priceless exposure that he could use to promote his ambition to run for president in 2012. But will he have the gumption to wage war against a sitting president? Well, he’s probably praying day and night that Obama will fail and thus become another one-term president like Jimmy Carter and George H.W. Bush.
And kicking by his side for the next four years is Steele whom he could unleash as his “attack dog” just like what Sarah Palin did for John McCain during the 2008 elections. With Steele doing the attacks, nobody could accuse him of racism since he and Obama are both African-Americans.
With Jindal and Steele as poster boys for the “new” Republican Party, it would certainly add color to an otherwise anemic party that had bled to near-death after the Obama electoral landslide last November. And where would Sarah Palin fit in the picture? She would probably be making her next move pretty soon.
(PerryDiaz@gmail.com)
In an attempt to add “color” and re-energize its ranks, the Republican National Committee (RNC) elected Michael Steele, an African-American, as the new Chairman. They also asked Gov. Bobby Jindal of Louisiana, who is of Asian Indian descent, to respond to President Barack Obama’s address to a special joint session of Congress last February 24, 2009.
Obviously, the motivation behind the election of Steele as the first African-American RNC Chairman was to counter the election of Barack Obama as the nation’s first African-American president. But Obama was elected by 52.92% of approximately 131 million voters while Steele was elected by 168 RNC members.
As soon as Steele was installed, he immediately laid out plans to reach out to African-American and Latino voters in all 50 states. He vowed that his outreach program will be “permanent” and not just election-time activity as what had happened in past campaigns.
In a recent interview with a national news magazine, Steele said that he wanted to “better explain the GOP's conservative philosophy of optimism, opportunity, and economic growth to minority voters and make folks understand that ‘we'll walk that walk with them’.” However, he conceded that “it may be tough sledding, but we're going to get on the sled.”
Well, it seems to me that he isn’t bold enough to do the task and doesn’t have the “optimism” that he claims is part of the “conservative philosophy” that he’s trying hard to sell to minority voters. But no matter how Steele retools “conservative philosophy,” minority voters aren’t going to buy that because they perceive it as pro-business. And how could he peddle Republicanism to Latinos who perceive Republicans as anti-immigrant; therefore, anti-Latino.
The battle for Obama’s stimulus package last month proved once again that the Republican Party is out of touch with the American people’s problems -- particularly the poor and the middle-class. Obama’s populist stimulus package, among other things, centered on creating jobs and providing tax cuts for those who needed it most, which is 95% of those earning less than $250,000 a year.
The Republicans in Congress insisted that Obama’s stimulus package should provide tax breaks to businesses and the wealthy, a philosophy -- known as Trickle Down Economics or Reaganomics -- launched by Ronald Reagan in 1980. But Reaganomics hardly trickled down to the people. Instead, it became the tool of big businesses and their greedy CEOs who plundered the economy for corporate and personal gain. The result was the financial meltdown that occurred in the waning days of George W. Bush’s administration.
After losing the White House to Obama, the Republicans retrenched in Congress hoping that they could hold some bargaining chips. Obama tried to work with the Republicans in a bipartisan fashion. But even after getting some concessions, the House Republicans voted unanimously against Obama’s stimulus package. But the number of Republicans in the House had dwindled so much that it made them completely irrelevant and inutile.
The Republicans’ last redoubt was in the U.S. Senate where the Democrats hold a majority but short of the 60 required to stop a filibuster. But the Republicans’ only chance of defeating the stimulus package was shattered when three Republican senators broke ranks with their party and voted with the Democrats; thus, preventing a filibuster and ensuring its passage.
After signing the bill into law, Obama addressed a joint session of Congress to explain how the stimulus package would work. As soon as his speech was over, Jindal went on national television to deliver the Republican Party’s blistering attack against Obama’s stimulus package.
Jindal called the congressional Democrats “irresponsible” for passing the $787 billion stimulus package which the Republicans had criticized as excessive and wasteful. He claimed that giving tax breaks and assistance to businesses -- an allusion to Reaganomics -- would work best for the nation’s economic recovery. In my opinion, that’s like selling a dead horse to pull the wagon. He should know that Reaganomics died when George W. Bush’s presidency came to an end.
But the question that popped in my mind was: Why did the Republicans select Jindal as their spokesman in attacking Obama’s stimulus package? Why not the Senate or House Republican leader? Or was it because Jindal was presumed to be “teflonized” from attacks by minorities -- particularly African-Americans -- who might be alienated if the Republican spokesman was white? With Jindal as the spokesman -- or “hatchet man” -- the Republican congressional leaders could conveniently wash their hands in the event of a backlash from the community.
But whether it projected the 37 year-old Jindal as a bad guy or not, his “15 minutes” on TV prime time gave him priceless exposure that he could use to promote his ambition to run for president in 2012. But will he have the gumption to wage war against a sitting president? Well, he’s probably praying day and night that Obama will fail and thus become another one-term president like Jimmy Carter and George H.W. Bush.
And kicking by his side for the next four years is Steele whom he could unleash as his “attack dog” just like what Sarah Palin did for John McCain during the 2008 elections. With Steele doing the attacks, nobody could accuse him of racism since he and Obama are both African-Americans.
With Jindal and Steele as poster boys for the “new” Republican Party, it would certainly add color to an otherwise anemic party that had bled to near-death after the Obama electoral landslide last November. And where would Sarah Palin fit in the picture? She would probably be making her next move pretty soon.
(PerryDiaz@gmail.com)
Saturday, February 28, 2009
A MEMORY, A MONOLOGUE, A RANT and A PRAYER : THE VAGINA MONOLOGUES
TAMLYN TOMITA, DANTE BASCO AND NIA PEEPLES HEADLINE
“V-DAY 2009:FILIPINAS” PERFORMANCES
TO STOP VIOLENCE AGAINST WOMEN AND GIRLS;
PRODUCTIONS BRING MANY “FIRSTS” FROM ALL FILIPINO CASTS
tdrz productions, inc. presents
V-Day 2009: “FILIPINAS” 2009 Benefit Productions of
A MEMORY, A MONOLOGUE, A RANT and A PRAYER
Writings To Stop Violence Against Women and Girls
And
THE VAGINA MONOLOGUES
Until the Violence Stops
( Los Angeles , CA .) – February, 2009 – CHANGE THE STORY OF WOMEN! The international movement to end violence against women and girls comes to Los Angeles with benefit readings of Eve Ensler’s award winning play “The Vagina Monologues” and the groundbreaking collection of monologues by world-renowned authors and playwrights, “A Memory, A Monologue, A Rant and a Prayer”. For the first time in Los Angeles, all-Filipino casts have been assembled for both productions, headlined by Dante Basco, Nia Peeples, Janelle So, Giselle Tongi, Tamlyn Tomita and just added, performer/singer/actress/publisher Antoinette Taus.
Each year, 1 in 3 women in the U.S. will be victims of sexual assault, domestic violence and/or rape, a staggering statistic that only counts reported cases. For women in college, 1 in 4 will be raped or sexually assaulted in their freshmen year. The current economic crisis is dramatically impacting women even more so. “There has been a noticed increase in women who are seeking assistance from women’s shelters,” explained Holly Mattson, Development Associate at the Center for the Pacific Asian Family, one of the beneficiaries of V-Day 2009:Filipinas. “A lot of women, mostly new immigrants, are being kicked out from their homes by their spouses or partners because they have lost their jobs and can no longer support a family. Most of the women are stay-at-home mothers, with little or no work experience or skills. All the shelters have been impacted and the situation gets worse daily” continues Mattson.
“The recent headline grabbing incident with Chris Brown and Rihanna is reason enough for all of us to see how violence, particularly towards women, should not be tolerated in our society,” explained Ted Benito, Executive Producer of the V-Day 2009: Filipinas productions. “It was so disheartening to hear some people say ‘well, maybe she deserved it’ or ‘she put herself in that situation herself’ or ‘he’s like that because of his childhood experiences’. Whatever the case, and we may never no what actually happened, I believe there is no excuse to result to such brutality.”
In 2008, over 4000 “V-Day” benefit events took place produced by volunteer activists in the U.S. and around the world (and for the first time, in the Philippines ), educating millions of people about the reality of violence against women and girls. To date, the V-Day movement has raised over $60 million for local beneficiaries working to end violence against women and children. “I’m very excited about our V-Day:Filipinas productions” explains Associate Producer Maria Gardoce “not only because of the message of V-Day but also because they will have special highlights. Jannelle So (from “Kababayan L.A.”) and Prosy de la Cruz (civil service commissioner) will be making their theatrical debuts in The Vagina Monologues. Camile Velasco will be debuting a song off her new, upcoming CD. Eleanor Academia – The Black Swan will be playing music throughout both shows and theater veterans Bernardo Bernardo and Becca Godinez will be sharing the stage in “A Memory, A Monologue, A Rant and A Prayer” for the first time in years!”
This year, net proceeds from the benefit performances Bantay Bata (Child Watch), a project of the ABS-CBN Foundation, Inc.- USA (www.abscbnfoundation.org), and The Center for the Pacific Asian Family. CPAF’s toll free 24-hour crisis hotline is 1-800-339-3940 and they are on the internet at www.cpaf.info.
The cast of A Memory, A Monologue, A Rant and A Prayer includes (in alphabetical order) actors Dante Basco (“The Debut”, “Take the Lead”, upcoming Ixnay at East West Players), Dion Basco (“City Guys”, “Biker Boyz”) Bernardo Bernardo (The Romance of Magno Rubio) and actor/dancer/producer Sonny Sison (“General Hospital”). They are joined by actresses Esperanza Catubig (“Without a Trace”, “The Sensei”), Fran de Leon (“Becker”, “Faces of America”, Associate Artistic Director of Will & Company), Liza del Mundo (“ER”, Imelda: A New Musical, “Punk’d”), Becca Godinez (singer/songwriter, director, producer, recording artist; “West Side Story”, “The King and I”); Golda Inquito (“The Shield”, Chess-The Musical) and Minerva Vier (Stateside Girls, Barefoot Boy with Shoes).
The cast of The Vagina Monologues features (in alphabetical order) actresses Edelyn Aubrey (“Kapalaran”, Dough Boys), Melody Butiu (Dogeaters, Shipwrecked, “Samantha Who”); poet, playwright and performance artists Alison de la Cruz; community leader Prosy de la Cruz (former L.A. Civil Service Commissioner appointed by Mayor Villaraigosa); actress, singer and television personality Nia Peeples (“North Shore”, “Fame”, “The Young and the Restless”); television host and producer Jannelle So (“Kababayan L.A.” – KSCI Channel 18); and actresses Leslie Lewis Sword (Miracle in Rwanda, Yesterday Came Too Soon), Antoinette Taus (actress/singer/dancer/magazine publisher); Tamlyn Tomita (“The Joy Luck Club”, “Day After Tomorrow”, “Heroes”) and Giselle Tongi (television host, singer, Anna in the Tropics).
American Idol Season 3 finalist Camile Velasco will make a featured appearance at The Vagina Monologues and singer/songwriter and musician Eleanor Academia – The Black Swan will be the featured musical guest artist at both shows. Directing both productions is Jon Lawrence Rivera, award-winning Artistic Director of Playwrights’ Arena (“Dogeaters”). All performers have volunteered their time and talent to make both productions a success.
Both performances will be presented on Saturday, March 7, 2009 at the Aratani Theater, part of the Japan American Cultural & Community Center, at 244 South San Pedro Street , Los Angeles , California 90012 .
*********************
tdrz productions, inc. presents
“A Memory, A Monologue, A Rant and A Prayer”
and “The Vagina Monologues”
SATURDAY, MARCH 7, 2009
The Aratani Theater of the Japan American Cultural & Community Center
244 South San Pedro Street
Los Angeles, California 90012
A Memory, A Monologue, A Rant and A Prayer - 4:00pm
Tickets: $10.00 - $15.00
The Vagina Monologues - 7:30pm
Tickets: $10.00 - $35.00
Parental Advisory: Adult Language and Themes
Silent Auction
Limited* $100.00 VIP tickets which include premiere seating at both “A Memory, A Monologue, A Rant and A Prayer” and “The Vagina Monologues” performances and access to post-performance reception (after “The Vagina Monologues”). Please email info@vday2009.org and include a daytime contact phone number and/or valid email address.
*While available and on first-come, first-serve basis.
Tuesday, February 24, 2009
The Czarina and the Priest
PerryScope By Perry Diaz
A battle royal is looming in the land of Cong Dadong Macapagal between his daughter, President -- and anti-drug “Czarina” -- Gloria Macapagal Arroyo and Gov. Fr. Ed Panlilio of Pampanga. With all the government and political resources at her disposal, the Czarina has come down furiously at the priest-turned-governor through a series of Machiavellian strategies. But the priest is fighting back like David did to the mighty Goliath.
It all started when Panlilio and other governors were invited to a breakfast meeting at the Malacanang Palace in October 2007. During the meeting, a presidential aide handed brown envelopes to the guests without any explanation. The brown envelope that Panlilio received contained P500,000. After a few days -- not knowing what the money was for -- Panlilio went public and disclosed the money which he believed was a bribe. At about the same time, it was revealed in the news that brown bags were also distributed to about 190 congressmen who attended a separate meeting with Gloria in Malacanang. At that time, an impeachment resolution against Arroyo was pending in the House of Representatives. Soon after the meetings, the impeachment resolution was overwhelmingly rejected by the House of Representatives.
Panlilio’s expose’ of the bribery was tantamount to a declaration of war against the Arroyo regime. Pretty soon, Pampanga’s vice governor, provincial board members, and all the municipal mayors ganged up on Panlilio and openly opposed him on everything he did or wanted to do including eradicating jueteng and corruption.
Pampanga is known as the “Vatican of Jueteng” because the reputed Jueteng King of Central Luzon is believed to be a town mate and “kumpadre” of Gloria. With the influence of “jueteng power” over the people and political establishment in Pampanga, any attempt by Panlilio to stop the jueteng operations would likely fail. However, something good in a grand scale could be achieved in the process.
Unfazed by the resistance, Panlilio persisted and held his political enemies at bay. Last year, people believed to be associated with Lilia Pineda -- one of two candidates that Panlilio defeated in the gubernatorial election in 2007 -- launched a recall petition against Panlilio. Some people questioned if Gloria’s son, Congressman Mikey Arroyo, had a hand in initiating the recall move.
The recall was stalled momentarily when the Commission on Elections (COMELEC) didn’t have the funds to spend for the recall election. But in an unusual move, the Arroyo-controlled House of Representatives hastily approved a budget of P50 million specifically for the Panlilio recall election. Clearly, the Arroyo administration was hell-bent in removing Panlilio from office. However, there is a small window of opportunity for Panlilio to escape the recall. If the COMELEC fails to conduct the recall election by April this year, then Panlilio could complete his three-year term of office.
The Arroyo-Panlilio war came out in the open when Panlilio accused Gloria and Mikey of “coddling” the jueteng protectors in Pampanga. But Gloria challenged Panlilio to “show proof that the President allows jueteng lords to operate freely in his province.” This “show proof” counter-offense has always worked for Gloria.
Panlilio wanted to replace Senior Superintendent Keith Ernald Singian as Pampanga Provincial Director. He accused Singian as one of the protectors of jueteng operations in Pampanga. He also claimed that Mikey together with San Fernando Police Chief Superintendent Benjamin Medina and a certain Fr. Jun Mercado had been protecting Singian from being removed from his position.
At one time, Singian declared that jueteng did not exist in Pampanga. He could be technically correct because jueteng, which is illegal, has morphed into “Small Town Lottery” (STL), which is legal. Jueteng and STL are basically the same. It’s interesting to note that the STL operators are the same people who operated the illegal jueteng operations.
Panlilio had repeatedly complained -- he said 18 times -- to National Police Chief Director General Jesus Verzosa that jueteng was still rampant in Pampanga and that Singian had been protecting the jueteng (aka STL) operators. Under constant pressure from Panlilio, Verzosa finally acceded and directed the regional police director to replace Singian. Senior Superintendent Gil Lebin, Jr. was appointed to replace Singian.
After Lebin took over, he was interviewed by the press and was asked how he would deal with jueteng? His response was: “Does it exist here?” Whoa! Is Lebin a clone of Singian? Panlilio commented that “Lebin was recommended by the Pampanga Mayors’ League, who is chaired by the son of the alleged jueteng lord in Pampanga.”
The high-profile tug-o-war between Panlilio and Gloria -- and her surrogates -- has attracted a lot of attention in the country as well as abroad. Sad to say, it is contributing to Gloria’s bad image abroad. It’s no wonder that US President Barack Obama had avoided Gloria three times when she chased him around in the US.
Recently, Panlilio stated that he would run for President if God willed it. His base of support is growing fast in the country as well as in the Filipino global community. But should he decide not to run in 2010, he could become a strong catalyst for “change” and would be effective in helping to bring down the corrupt ruling party.
Almost a century ago, the powerful Romanovs of the Russian empire were deposed in a bloody revolution. The weakling Czar Nicolas II and his strong-willed wife Czarina Alexandra were oblivious of the suffering of the Russian people. Protected by the military led by corrupt generals, the royal family lived in pompous splendor while the people lived in abject poverty and hunger. And behind the Czarina was a mad monk. His name was Gregory Rasputin. He ill-advised the Czarina who virtually held power in running the corrupt czarist regime. In the end, the evil Rasputin was one of the causes -- perhaps the catalyst -- of the Romanovs’ downfall in 1917.
In the case of Czarina Gloria Macapagal Arroyo, another holy man -- the good priest Among Ed Panlilio -- could play a pivotal role in the 2010 election, an election that could eventually bring “change” to the country. Indeed, it could be a “change” that will bring forth -- albeit belatedly -- the true spirit and meaning of the unfinished “People Power” revolution of 1986.
(PerryDiaz@gmail.com)
A battle royal is looming in the land of Cong Dadong Macapagal between his daughter, President -- and anti-drug “Czarina” -- Gloria Macapagal Arroyo and Gov. Fr. Ed Panlilio of Pampanga. With all the government and political resources at her disposal, the Czarina has come down furiously at the priest-turned-governor through a series of Machiavellian strategies. But the priest is fighting back like David did to the mighty Goliath.
It all started when Panlilio and other governors were invited to a breakfast meeting at the Malacanang Palace in October 2007. During the meeting, a presidential aide handed brown envelopes to the guests without any explanation. The brown envelope that Panlilio received contained P500,000. After a few days -- not knowing what the money was for -- Panlilio went public and disclosed the money which he believed was a bribe. At about the same time, it was revealed in the news that brown bags were also distributed to about 190 congressmen who attended a separate meeting with Gloria in Malacanang. At that time, an impeachment resolution against Arroyo was pending in the House of Representatives. Soon after the meetings, the impeachment resolution was overwhelmingly rejected by the House of Representatives.
Panlilio’s expose’ of the bribery was tantamount to a declaration of war against the Arroyo regime. Pretty soon, Pampanga’s vice governor, provincial board members, and all the municipal mayors ganged up on Panlilio and openly opposed him on everything he did or wanted to do including eradicating jueteng and corruption.
Pampanga is known as the “Vatican of Jueteng” because the reputed Jueteng King of Central Luzon is believed to be a town mate and “kumpadre” of Gloria. With the influence of “jueteng power” over the people and political establishment in Pampanga, any attempt by Panlilio to stop the jueteng operations would likely fail. However, something good in a grand scale could be achieved in the process.
Unfazed by the resistance, Panlilio persisted and held his political enemies at bay. Last year, people believed to be associated with Lilia Pineda -- one of two candidates that Panlilio defeated in the gubernatorial election in 2007 -- launched a recall petition against Panlilio. Some people questioned if Gloria’s son, Congressman Mikey Arroyo, had a hand in initiating the recall move.
The recall was stalled momentarily when the Commission on Elections (COMELEC) didn’t have the funds to spend for the recall election. But in an unusual move, the Arroyo-controlled House of Representatives hastily approved a budget of P50 million specifically for the Panlilio recall election. Clearly, the Arroyo administration was hell-bent in removing Panlilio from office. However, there is a small window of opportunity for Panlilio to escape the recall. If the COMELEC fails to conduct the recall election by April this year, then Panlilio could complete his three-year term of office.
The Arroyo-Panlilio war came out in the open when Panlilio accused Gloria and Mikey of “coddling” the jueteng protectors in Pampanga. But Gloria challenged Panlilio to “show proof that the President allows jueteng lords to operate freely in his province.” This “show proof” counter-offense has always worked for Gloria.
Panlilio wanted to replace Senior Superintendent Keith Ernald Singian as Pampanga Provincial Director. He accused Singian as one of the protectors of jueteng operations in Pampanga. He also claimed that Mikey together with San Fernando Police Chief Superintendent Benjamin Medina and a certain Fr. Jun Mercado had been protecting Singian from being removed from his position.
At one time, Singian declared that jueteng did not exist in Pampanga. He could be technically correct because jueteng, which is illegal, has morphed into “Small Town Lottery” (STL), which is legal. Jueteng and STL are basically the same. It’s interesting to note that the STL operators are the same people who operated the illegal jueteng operations.
Panlilio had repeatedly complained -- he said 18 times -- to National Police Chief Director General Jesus Verzosa that jueteng was still rampant in Pampanga and that Singian had been protecting the jueteng (aka STL) operators. Under constant pressure from Panlilio, Verzosa finally acceded and directed the regional police director to replace Singian. Senior Superintendent Gil Lebin, Jr. was appointed to replace Singian.
After Lebin took over, he was interviewed by the press and was asked how he would deal with jueteng? His response was: “Does it exist here?” Whoa! Is Lebin a clone of Singian? Panlilio commented that “Lebin was recommended by the Pampanga Mayors’ League, who is chaired by the son of the alleged jueteng lord in Pampanga.”
The high-profile tug-o-war between Panlilio and Gloria -- and her surrogates -- has attracted a lot of attention in the country as well as abroad. Sad to say, it is contributing to Gloria’s bad image abroad. It’s no wonder that US President Barack Obama had avoided Gloria three times when she chased him around in the US.
Recently, Panlilio stated that he would run for President if God willed it. His base of support is growing fast in the country as well as in the Filipino global community. But should he decide not to run in 2010, he could become a strong catalyst for “change” and would be effective in helping to bring down the corrupt ruling party.
Almost a century ago, the powerful Romanovs of the Russian empire were deposed in a bloody revolution. The weakling Czar Nicolas II and his strong-willed wife Czarina Alexandra were oblivious of the suffering of the Russian people. Protected by the military led by corrupt generals, the royal family lived in pompous splendor while the people lived in abject poverty and hunger. And behind the Czarina was a mad monk. His name was Gregory Rasputin. He ill-advised the Czarina who virtually held power in running the corrupt czarist regime. In the end, the evil Rasputin was one of the causes -- perhaps the catalyst -- of the Romanovs’ downfall in 1917.
In the case of Czarina Gloria Macapagal Arroyo, another holy man -- the good priest Among Ed Panlilio -- could play a pivotal role in the 2010 election, an election that could eventually bring “change” to the country. Indeed, it could be a “change” that will bring forth -- albeit belatedly -- the true spirit and meaning of the unfinished “People Power” revolution of 1986.
(PerryDiaz@gmail.com)
Sunday, February 8, 2009
Arnel Pineda joins Lani Misalucha U.S. Tour for a Cause
By Jay Fermin (FMG)
Anaheim, California: It was the Nightingale teaming up with the Journeyman! Lani Misalucha was joined onstage by Journey’s Arnel Pineda. And the house was packed for the Friday Concert at Heritage Forum last January 30, 2009. Excitement was in the air as close to a full house SRO crowd filled the theatre-in-the round as it is popularly referred too – the stage being in the middle of the venue.
Close to near capacity crowd of 2500 slowly took their seat as Season 3 American Idol Finalist Jasmine Trias opened the evening with intimate rendition of pop and R&B favorites at a little past 8 pm.
However, the excitement of the evening was Journeyman Arnel Pineda himself who for the first time joined the multi-awarded nightingale Lani Misalucha on this her 2009 multi-city U.S. Concert Tour.
Arriving at Burbank Airport shortly before noon, just the day after the U.S. tour opening night in San Jose Auditorium, Arnel Pineda took a quick rest at the hotel and proceeded to Heritage Forum for soundcheck. Tonight will be different from the rest of the U.S.Tour. Arnel will be performing in the first part of the concert and catch a flight to Tampa, Florida, where he will join his band Journey to perform on Superbowl Sunday Pre-Game show February 1, 2009.
Lani Misalucha, lovely as ever, opened the show with a couple of fast paced songs, circling the round stage in her white mini skirt to the delight of the packed crowd. However, what brought the house down was when Journeyman Arnel Pineda joined her onstage; the energy of the crowd, especially the ladies, was overpowering, testing the limits of stage security!
Arnel thanked the crowd’s overwhelming response by saying “Salamat po sa pag tangap ninyo sa akin !” (Thank you for accepting me!). He opened his set of seven songs with Journey’s own ‘Faithfully.’ The crowd pushed forward as he belted the opening lines “Highway run / into the midnight sun / wheels go round and round / you’re on my mind…” echoing with the guitar lead of the popular Journey anthem song.
Lani and Arnel however reminded the crowd before their duet that the greater purpose of their U.S. Tour is ABS-CBN’s Bantay Bata 163, a social welfare program which protects children in the Philippines from abuse. Part of the proceeds of the tour will go to the Children’s Crisis Center and the Children’s Village.
Going back to business, Journeyman Arnel completed his set with classic rock selections and capped his performance with another Journey favorite – “Open Arms.” The crowd now are pushing forward to touch Arnel’s hand as he rounds the stage singing “Lying beside you / here in the dark/ Feeling your heart beat with mine / Softly you whisper, you’re so sincere / How could our love be so blind….” The crowd rendered Arnel a standing ovation as he belted out the last line “So here I am with open arms / Hoping you’ll see / What your love means to me / Open arms.” He was rushed by security down the circular stage thru the pushing crowd into the safety of backstage. Tonight’s reverse format with Arnel singing earlier than their other concert venue of the U.S. Tour, took Lani a few minutes to bring the crowd back to her sweet rendition of heartwarming blend of pop, rock, jazz, soul, R&B, and opera!
The Nightingale again has caught the heart of America with Journeyman himself, with shows in Chicago, New Jersey, San Diego (February 8) and capping the tour in Guam (February 12). As promised, they have delivered something different, a fusion of the Diva and the Rock Star! Just in time before the Rock Star rejoins the band Journey for their 2009 World Tour.
Friday, January 30, 2009
‘NAMETS’, a film of Life, Love and Food comes to L.A.
Angel Jacob and Christian Vazquez
By Jay Fermin (FMG)
Everyone with a heartbeat has experienced the depth and passion of a good movie. You are not only sitting and watching – but you are intertwined in the story, smiling, with a flood of memories of the place, the culture, the love, and of course the food.
‘Namets’ (an Ilonggo term which means delicious) is a film by celebrated Director Jay Abello that was shot entirely in Bacolod City in Central Philippines and was one of the finalists at Cinemalaya 2008. He has worked with other directors including Erik Matti, Yam Laranas, Laurice Guillen, and Peque Gallaga (Oro,Plata, Mata) who hails from Bacolod himself. Jay’s cinematographic and photography background gave the film the mood and framing needed to seam together the playful snippets of the script into a heartwarming and sometimes bittersweet love story.
Making a movie about a place and its culinary culture is indeed a challenge. The key, Director Jay Abello confides, is in the casting. ‘Namets’ stars Christian Vazquez and Angel Jacob, two dueling chefs in the heartwarming romantic comedy. The story revolves around the character of Jacko Teves (Christian Vazquez) who tries to save his Italian restaurant from being garnished by Big Boss Dolpo (Peque Gallaga) due to a gambling debt.
The plot thickens when Cassie Labayen (Angel Jacob), another chef, is hired as a consultant to transform Jacko’s Italian restaurant into a place where traditional Negrense food is served with a unique twist. The script (written by multi-awarded Ilonggo Vicente Garcia Groyon) follows the adversarial flirting of the two chefs as they try to grasp the vast scope of the Ilonggo culinary sphere and rekindling along the way the love they had lost during their high school years.
The film is amazingly appealing inspite of the challenges of being an independent production. Shot in its entirety in Bacolod, home to all of the characters of the movie, except for Angel Jacob who is from Manila, it showcased the amazing talent that the province has contributed to Philippine Cinema including actor Joel Torre (who plays a small part in the opening scene), Director Peque Gallaga who for a change, has an acting role as Boss Dolpo in the film.
With the dialogue set in ‘Hiligaynon’, the dialect of Ilonggos, Angel Jacob had to download her lines into her Ipod and listen in; and although at times her punctuations and punch-lines were not true to form, she delivers a believable rendition of the script by her superb acting, creating a building up of love chemistry between her and ‘Jacko’ (Christian Vasquez).
Through their search for the best culinary delights, and interspaced with snippets of the Ilonggo way of dining, from the simple but world famous ‘Inasal’ (chicken barbeque) to the complex recipes handed down from generations past, ‘Namets’ lets you peak into the unique cultural mix that is Bacolod, not only thru its food but also thru its people. The movie is a must see light-hearted but heart warmed love comedy which is quite different from most movies. You will not only be watching after all. The movie will swoon you and you will be craving for more…. More love. More laughter. And most of all, you will be craving for Ilonggo food !!
The only U.S. screening will on February 7, 2009 at the historic Rialto Theatre, 1023 Fair Oaks Avenue in South Pasadena, California at 6 p.m.. Advance tickets can be purchased by calling the Babes of Bacolod at 818-636-3939 or email at babesofbacolod@aol.com.
(Namets is subtitled in English)
Bon Appetit. See you at the movie.
Monday, January 26, 2009
Pacman Meets Rocky
PerryScope: By Perry Diaz
Wow! I can't believe it when I was invited to attend Manny "Pacman" Pacquiao's meeting with Sylvester "Rocky" Stallone at the latter's office in Los Angeles. Pacman greeted me, "Kumusta bro, I'm glad to see you again," and he gave me a high-five which almost knocked me down. "Okey lang, Manny," I replied. I was impressed by Pacman's expensive-looking pin-striped suit. He looked like a big-time Pinoy politician.
The amenities between Pacman and Rocky went well except for a few funny moments when Pacman greeted his host, "Hello, Rocky, you look shorter than what people were saying about you -- a movie giant." Rocky laughed and said, "Well, Manny, you seem bigger than what I thought. You're in the flyweight division, is that correct?" Pacman was taken aback. He regained his composure, shrugged his shoulders, and said. "I may be small but I can knock out a heavyweight with my bolo punch. You want me to try that on you?" "Ha ha ha… Manny, relax," Rocky laughed and said, "Just kidding, ok? Care for a drink? How about a Johnny Walker Blue?" Pacman replied, "Do you have Chavez?" Rocky said, "Chavez? Or do you mean Chivas Regal?" "Same thing, make it double and no rocks, please," Pacman asked. Rocky said, "No rocks? You mean 'no ice,' right?" "Same thing," Pacman said.
After a few sips, Rocky asked, "Okay, now, to what do I owe your visit, Manny?" Pacman quickly responded, "Excuse me but I didn't come here to collect a debt. You owe me nothing, Rocky. This is just a curiosity call." Rocky looked confused and looked at me with raised brows. I explained, "He meant 'courtesy call,' Mr. Stallone." Pacman gave me a dirty look. Whew! I told myself, "I'm not going to open my mouth again and let these two bozos handle their own communication problems."
"Well, let's get down to business then. I just had an idea, Manny," Rocky said, "Why don't we do a movie together? We'll call it 'Rocky Thrills Manila.' You'll be my trainer, okay?"
Pacman turned red and started sweating, his eyes squinting. "No way, man! You're too old to fight. Besides, you're not a real boxer. I am a real boxer so I can be a better actor than you! I bet you can't even throw a punch in real life." Rocky was flabbergasted but kept his cool and said, "Okay, okay, let's not do a boxing movie then. How about a 'Rambo' movie. Say, you're the President of the Philippines and you want to wipe out that terrorist group…" "Abu Sayyaf!" Pacman blurted out. "Yeah, yeah, that's it," Rocky said, "Let's say that you are President Pacquio and you hired me to go after these terrorists…" "Hold it!" Pacman interrupted him and said, "My name is Pacquiao. It's pronounced PAKYAW, not PAKYU. Get that straight!" Rocky was apologetic and said, "I'm so sorry. You know I have a little bit of a speech problem since I was a kid. I have a hard time pronouncing your name. Can I just call you Manny like in Money?" "I like that. I got plenty of that too, he he he…" Pacman replied with a wide grin, "Can I just call you Baloney, Mr. Stalloney? Just kidding. He he he…" Rocky was not amused and replied, "That's not funny, Mr. Pac... Forget it. Let's move on, okay?"
"Let's be serious here," Rocky said, "Now, back to our movie. How about calling it 'Rambo Rumbles in Mindanao.' Do you like that?" Pacman thought for a while and then said, "It should be 'Pacman and Rambo' since I will be the President and you'll just be my sidekick." Rocky was irked and said, "Me? Your sidekick? No way, pal! Either I get top billing or no movie."
"Well, Rocky… or Rambo, I wanna tell you something nobody knows about yet," said Pacman with his trademark grin. "Oh? Let's hear it," Rocky said, seemingly amused. "I'm going to run for President of the Philippines," Pacman deadpanned. Rocky asked, "For real or just in the movie?" "Of course it's for real," Pacman answered, "I already talked to Ate Glo -- you know, President Gloria Arroyo -- and she thought I'll win with no hands." Rocky was confused again and looked at me. I explained, "Manny meant 'with hands down,' Mr. Stallone." This time Pacman pointed his finger at me and warned me, "One more time and I'll knock you out!" I quickly said, "I'm sorry, I won't do it again… never again." Whew!
Rocky then asked, "I didn't know you're a politician, Manny?" "As I said before…" Pacman answered, "I'm not really a politician but my people love me. Actually, I ran for Congress two years ago." "Did you win?" Rocky asked. "Well, I lost," Pacman replied, "But you see, that was just a sample balloon." Rocky corrected him, "You mean 'trial balloon,' right?" "No, it was not a trial. I never committed a crime in my life. I'm a very religious person, see…" and he lifted his 4-inch wide tie to reveal a large diamond-studded gold crucifix dangling from his neck. "This is a St. Benedict medallion crucifix," he said, "It protects me from Satan and evil spirits."
"Well, do you think that you're going to win this time with the help of St. Benedict?" Rocky asked. Pacman was getting agitated. "As I said before…" Pacman said, "Ate Glo told me that I will win…" "Hands down," Rocky said. "No!" Pacman blurted, "It's 'hands up' like what I do every time I beat my opponent in the ring," raising both arms with clenched fists in a victory sign.
Rocky started laughing and then asked, "Well, tell me then -- what's kind of a platform would you sell to the people?" "Platform, huh? Ahhh…" Pacman pondered the question for a moment and then said, "As I said before… I'm not a salesman and I don't sell platforms. Actually, I'm a buyer… I buy the people's votes. He he he…" "What?" Rocky said shouting at the top of his voice, "You're going to buy votes? Look pal, that's cheating! You should be ashamed of yourself." "Hey, hey, hey!" Pacman shouted back, "Let me tell you this, Mr. Baloney: if I don't buy votes, my opponent will buy them. Politics is like boxing, if I don't punch, my opponent will punch me. I'll be the number one pound-for-pound politician in the Philippines. Get that?"
Rocky was fuming mad. He stood up and told me, "You'd better get this shorty out of my office right now or I'll throw both of you out!" Pacman stood up and said, "You want me to show you what a shorty can do to an overweight old man like you, Mr. Baloney?"
Suddenly, I realized that I was standing between Pacman and Rocky. I told myself, "Oh, no! I'd better get out of here." I was just about to run when I heard my jawbone crack. I was falling and suddenly the room was dark. I saw thousands of twinkling little stars. And before I hit the floor, the bell rang. I was saved by the bell. I sat up on the floor. Pacman and Rocky were gone. And my alarm clock was still ringing. I must have had another Pacman nightmare.
(PerryDiaz@gmail.com)
Wow! I can't believe it when I was invited to attend Manny "Pacman" Pacquiao's meeting with Sylvester "Rocky" Stallone at the latter's office in Los Angeles. Pacman greeted me, "Kumusta bro, I'm glad to see you again," and he gave me a high-five which almost knocked me down. "Okey lang, Manny," I replied. I was impressed by Pacman's expensive-looking pin-striped suit. He looked like a big-time Pinoy politician.
The amenities between Pacman and Rocky went well except for a few funny moments when Pacman greeted his host, "Hello, Rocky, you look shorter than what people were saying about you -- a movie giant." Rocky laughed and said, "Well, Manny, you seem bigger than what I thought. You're in the flyweight division, is that correct?" Pacman was taken aback. He regained his composure, shrugged his shoulders, and said. "I may be small but I can knock out a heavyweight with my bolo punch. You want me to try that on you?" "Ha ha ha… Manny, relax," Rocky laughed and said, "Just kidding, ok? Care for a drink? How about a Johnny Walker Blue?" Pacman replied, "Do you have Chavez?" Rocky said, "Chavez? Or do you mean Chivas Regal?" "Same thing, make it double and no rocks, please," Pacman asked. Rocky said, "No rocks? You mean 'no ice,' right?" "Same thing," Pacman said.
After a few sips, Rocky asked, "Okay, now, to what do I owe your visit, Manny?" Pacman quickly responded, "Excuse me but I didn't come here to collect a debt. You owe me nothing, Rocky. This is just a curiosity call." Rocky looked confused and looked at me with raised brows. I explained, "He meant 'courtesy call,' Mr. Stallone." Pacman gave me a dirty look. Whew! I told myself, "I'm not going to open my mouth again and let these two bozos handle their own communication problems."
"Well, let's get down to business then. I just had an idea, Manny," Rocky said, "Why don't we do a movie together? We'll call it 'Rocky Thrills Manila.' You'll be my trainer, okay?"
Pacman turned red and started sweating, his eyes squinting. "No way, man! You're too old to fight. Besides, you're not a real boxer. I am a real boxer so I can be a better actor than you! I bet you can't even throw a punch in real life." Rocky was flabbergasted but kept his cool and said, "Okay, okay, let's not do a boxing movie then. How about a 'Rambo' movie. Say, you're the President of the Philippines and you want to wipe out that terrorist group…" "Abu Sayyaf!" Pacman blurted out. "Yeah, yeah, that's it," Rocky said, "Let's say that you are President Pacquio and you hired me to go after these terrorists…" "Hold it!" Pacman interrupted him and said, "My name is Pacquiao. It's pronounced PAKYAW, not PAKYU. Get that straight!" Rocky was apologetic and said, "I'm so sorry. You know I have a little bit of a speech problem since I was a kid. I have a hard time pronouncing your name. Can I just call you Manny like in Money?" "I like that. I got plenty of that too, he he he…" Pacman replied with a wide grin, "Can I just call you Baloney, Mr. Stalloney? Just kidding. He he he…" Rocky was not amused and replied, "That's not funny, Mr. Pac... Forget it. Let's move on, okay?"
"Let's be serious here," Rocky said, "Now, back to our movie. How about calling it 'Rambo Rumbles in Mindanao.' Do you like that?" Pacman thought for a while and then said, "It should be 'Pacman and Rambo' since I will be the President and you'll just be my sidekick." Rocky was irked and said, "Me? Your sidekick? No way, pal! Either I get top billing or no movie."
"Well, Rocky… or Rambo, I wanna tell you something nobody knows about yet," said Pacman with his trademark grin. "Oh? Let's hear it," Rocky said, seemingly amused. "I'm going to run for President of the Philippines," Pacman deadpanned. Rocky asked, "For real or just in the movie?" "Of course it's for real," Pacman answered, "I already talked to Ate Glo -- you know, President Gloria Arroyo -- and she thought I'll win with no hands." Rocky was confused again and looked at me. I explained, "Manny meant 'with hands down,' Mr. Stallone." This time Pacman pointed his finger at me and warned me, "One more time and I'll knock you out!" I quickly said, "I'm sorry, I won't do it again… never again." Whew!
Rocky then asked, "I didn't know you're a politician, Manny?" "As I said before…" Pacman answered, "I'm not really a politician but my people love me. Actually, I ran for Congress two years ago." "Did you win?" Rocky asked. "Well, I lost," Pacman replied, "But you see, that was just a sample balloon." Rocky corrected him, "You mean 'trial balloon,' right?" "No, it was not a trial. I never committed a crime in my life. I'm a very religious person, see…" and he lifted his 4-inch wide tie to reveal a large diamond-studded gold crucifix dangling from his neck. "This is a St. Benedict medallion crucifix," he said, "It protects me from Satan and evil spirits."
"Well, do you think that you're going to win this time with the help of St. Benedict?" Rocky asked. Pacman was getting agitated. "As I said before…" Pacman said, "Ate Glo told me that I will win…" "Hands down," Rocky said. "No!" Pacman blurted, "It's 'hands up' like what I do every time I beat my opponent in the ring," raising both arms with clenched fists in a victory sign.
Rocky started laughing and then asked, "Well, tell me then -- what's kind of a platform would you sell to the people?" "Platform, huh? Ahhh…" Pacman pondered the question for a moment and then said, "As I said before… I'm not a salesman and I don't sell platforms. Actually, I'm a buyer… I buy the people's votes. He he he…" "What?" Rocky said shouting at the top of his voice, "You're going to buy votes? Look pal, that's cheating! You should be ashamed of yourself." "Hey, hey, hey!" Pacman shouted back, "Let me tell you this, Mr. Baloney: if I don't buy votes, my opponent will buy them. Politics is like boxing, if I don't punch, my opponent will punch me. I'll be the number one pound-for-pound politician in the Philippines. Get that?"
Rocky was fuming mad. He stood up and told me, "You'd better get this shorty out of my office right now or I'll throw both of you out!" Pacman stood up and said, "You want me to show you what a shorty can do to an overweight old man like you, Mr. Baloney?"
Suddenly, I realized that I was standing between Pacman and Rocky. I told myself, "Oh, no! I'd better get out of here." I was just about to run when I heard my jawbone crack. I was falling and suddenly the room was dark. I saw thousands of twinkling little stars. And before I hit the floor, the bell rang. I was saved by the bell. I sat up on the floor. Pacman and Rocky were gone. And my alarm clock was still ringing. I must have had another Pacman nightmare.
(PerryDiaz@gmail.com)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)