Updated 6/05/16
By Marcial Bonifacio
My friends and countrymen, with Congress’ proclamation of Rodrigo Duterte as the 16th president of the Philippines (clenching 16,601,997 votes), I wish to convey some of my concerns. I have posed them based on his proposals, actions, and what he has said publicly. Such issues should be sufficiently addressed before any of our kababayans give him our full support.
First and foremost, the president must protect and defend the Constitution and respect the rule of law. According to Article III, Sect. 1 of the Constitution, “No person shall be deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process of law, nor shall any person be denied the equal protection of the laws.” Duterte’s Davao Death Squad has executed over 1,000 alleged drug lords and murderers, all of whom were denied the fundamental right to due process. Duterte expresses no remorse and is even boastful he will continue that policy under his presidency.
He was even unapologetic for his daughter (Sara Duterte), who attacked and physically assaulted Davao City Sheriff Abe Andres a few years ago. Ironically, both Dutertes were attorneys, reinforcing the idiom that "the apple doesn't fall far from the tree." Such uncivil acts are slippery slopes to more lawless behavior, are they not? How can we feel safe and certain that Duterte will not infringe on our own rights and liberty due to his thirst for criminal blood or impulsive temperament?
Second, several factors, including self-reliance and free enterprise, are essential to transforn the Philippines into a prosperous nation. Unfortunately, Duterte does not seem to promote any of those principles. On the contrary, he is a self-avowed socialist, who proposes to expand the Pantawid Pamilyang Pilipino Program. That would only perpetuate what Sen. Dick Gordon said is “the attitude of mendicancy among our people, which we have had more than enough over the last four centuries or so." I would add that such handouts (derived from hardworking taxpayers) would also prolong unemployment and encourage the systematic development of a welfare state.
Even more alarming is Duterte’s sympathy towards communists. That is apparent in his proposals to designate cabinet posts to communists, grant amnesty to NPA prisoners, and end the exile of Jose Sison, founder of the Communist Party of the Philippines. Duterte’s campaign manager, Leoncio Evasco Jr., was even a member of the NPA (New People’s Army).
Could Duterte himself be a communist? If not, then why is he negotiating with them and inviting them to join the national government? For someone known for his stringent form of justice (earning him the international reputation Time Magazine branded as "The Punisher”) even to the point of proposing the return of the death penalty by hanging, is it not inconsistent for him to be so lenient with terrorists who seek to overthrow our government?
My friends, I appreciate Duterte’s forthright oratory and maverick predisposition in opposing the oligarchy. Such can also be said of the American presidentiable Donald Trump, but I digress. Anyway, appealing rhetoric and opposition to the ruling class alone are insufficient in determining a suitable president. If they were sufficient, then it can be argued that Vladimir Lenin (Bolshevik leader of Russia), Fidel Castro (president of Cuba), and Robert Mugabe (president of Zimbabwe) should be heralded as great public servants. However, history indicates otherwise, and until my concerns are sufficiently addressed, I must deduce that Duterte will be no different.
Jocelle Rabulan Corpuz Let's just watch and wait for the outcome of his leadership as The President. Give him the benefit of the doubts and consider his achievements in Davao City. May God save our Country and people for whatever consequence we may face for his actions and laws he will implement. I know he is capable to lead but my fear is his inconsistency and the people he has chosen for the cabinet position. Remember the past history my friend ... the failures of great leaders lies on his men and the people whom they trusted. God have mercy.
Marcial Bonifacio Jocelle, my issue with Duterte is not that I don't trust him, but that he will continue with his extra-judicial executions, of which he is boastful.
Are you disappointed that he has denied Leni Robredo the National Anti-Poverty Commission post?
Jocelle Rabulan Corpuz I am disappointed of his inconsistency and giving way for BBM due to "utang na loob" now assigning him as being the president assistant. Proving that he recognize BBM as the VP.
Dodong Aberca CONCERN? NOT ME IDIOTS
Marcial Bonifacio Jocelle, are you referring to the alliance between Rodrigo Duterte's father and Pres. Marcos or the financial contributions BB Marcos made to the Duterte campaign for his presidential run?
Dodong Aberca no.......it is true....so u must dbg shares
Jocelle Rabulan Corpuz Kaibigan my apology ... I choose to just be silent but be vigilant in observing and watchful for the outcome of the leadership of our new elect President. Praying he will acknowldege God above all and put my people's welfare as well our Country first. God bless him and The Philippines.
Philip Basilio God help the Philippines
Hill de Roberts No comment--I'll wait after his first 100 days 🙂
Marcial Bonifacio Very well, my friend. Do you at least have anything to say about his insensitivity to the female missionary, who was raped and murdered, Hill?
Paul Farol My friend, I'll give him enough rope to hang himself with.
But here's the thing, on the other side of this thing are the yellowtards who have all but proven to be much, much worse than the people they replaced.
We hit Digong, the yellowtards get stronger. We are currently at an impasse.
As much as it pains me to say this, we have to make this presidency work.
If, despite our sincere efforts to help this presidency succeed and it fails, PDiggity will have no one to blame but himself.
Marcial Bonifacio Paul, I really don't know which is worse. On the one hand, we have a president surrounded by politicians, who seem either corrupt or inept in dealing with our country's age-old problems. On the other hand, we have another perfectly capable president-elect who may be able to finally resolve those issues. However, he would maintain peace and order by suppressing our people's most fundamental rights guaranteed by the Constitution. At least, Pres. Marcos did so under martial law.
Dodong Aberca r u freak this man hasn't started yet!!!
Marcial Bonifacio Dodong, I can only judge someone according to his track record. Perhaps Duterte seeks to revive the death penalty in order to deter current criminals and potential criminals, making the extra judicial killings obsolete. That would be a compromise I am willing to concede.
Biernes Atrece Very well said, kaibigan
Joseph Hinds Marcial, I share some of your concerns, but it is far too soon to tell what President-elect Duterte is going to do. He seems to be something of a chess player and a gambler when it comes to politics, so his methodology may be a bit unorthodox. At least in his case, we can see the results he achieved in Davao City. He may very well have broken some eggs, but the omelet turned out well. The extra judicial killing presents something of a conundrum because the judicial system has become so corrupt that the syndicates, oligarchs and drug lords can buy their way out of trouble even in the face of damning proof of guilt. If the system of laws no longer works for justice, then is it really an injustice when other means are used? Likewise the acceptance of the communists at the cabinet level is a novel approach. The Philippines have had a running war with the CPP for almost 50 years and have still not succeeded in getting rid of them. Perhaps by including them in the political process at the cabinet level, their position as revolutionaries can be undermined and cause them to loose some of their appeal to their followers. They may also be more willing to disavow violence in order to retain their new found political relevance. Also, I not so sure that a little socialism in the Philippines would be a bad thing. I think it would be to the benefit of the average citizens to have the power company's monopolies either opened to foreign competition or simply nationalized. It is ridiculous that electric rates in the Philippines are three times what they are in the USA and they still get hit with regular brown-outs. Let's let DU30 have his chance. It's not as if his predecessors have set the benchmark very high.
Evangeline Mejia very well said sir!!!exactly my thoughts...may I share your comment?
Joseph Hinds Yes Evangeline, feel free to share if you wish
Evangeline Mejia thank u sir...
Marcial Bonifacio Joseph, your points are well taken. However, on the issue of dealing with the communists, I think that it would be better if Duterte implement his proposals to liberalize the economy and establish a Philippine federalist system. That would serve as the basis for a long-term plan to create jobs and promote competition, which would lower prices and provide better services.
Such a successful economy would crowd out the communists without appeasement or bloodshed. Offering them cabinet posts reminds me of Pres. Obama appointing Van Jones (member of the Communist Party) as "Green Czar."
In terms of a little socialism in RP, I think that at least on a subsistence level as food and medical services, it is reasonable for the destitute. I also appreciate Duterte's proposal to improve internet services:
http://news.abs-cbn.com/.../duterte-improve-internet...
Joseph Hinds You might be right about the communists, but Van Jones and his friends weren't killing people on a regular basis so there is a considerable distinction between the two examples. An improving economy will help without a doubt, but it will take a while for that to reach fruition, so perhaps we can look at this as a stop-gap measure to quell the violence in the short term.
Perci Lozano Piña Hindi ko po nagustuhan yung comment nya about sa Media.
Dexter Neil Ramos Because you didnt make yourself to understand what the presidenr meant. media are always dont ynderstand the point what duterte mean. We davaoneos understand him what he said. not all media is generalize. Some media to those practicing unethical.
Jose Camano its duterte who is very unethical -- unfortunately he was elected President by people who want a change in the govt. without having to change themselves. vote buying was rampant from all sides..
Paul Farol This was the quote by gma7
Jose Camano Paul Farol What's wrong with you Farol? Who says that a journalist was silenced because he was a crook, or because he was crusading? Everytime Duterte silences small time "violator" of the law, he would claim the victim was a drug pusher or snatcher. Obviously u just have to believe Duterte's word for it. Without a process, nobody knows that the victim was a real criminal or just someone whose face Duterte doesn't like.
Perci Lozano Piña Ito na naman tayo sa "We davaoneos" stop regionalism po.
Paul Farol Jose there's nothing wrong with me, i'm just citing what was said by PDiggity and what was said by another journalist who viewed the press conference.
Thing is, I've met a lot of hao shao/acdc journos and I know their MOs. I also know of at least two who were involved in shady deals that were later assassinated by people they double crossed.
We can't paint people angels and devils, it's a much more complex situation that someone, from the outside, can comprehend.
Paul Farol And yes, I am interested to know of the cases where Digong had a reporter killed based on false accusations of being a druggie or drug dealer. If there is any evidence, I would gladly confront him with it.
I never liked Duterte, btw. In fact I gave him a good bashing all through out the campaign period and even before that.
Marcial Bonifacio Perci, to be fair to Duterte, he clarified that he was referring to the corrupt journalists who accepted bribes, only to later oppose the ones who gave them money. He does not advocate the murders, but he says they are to be expected from basically double crossing the ones paying the bribes.
Marcial Bonifacio However, his catcalling to the journalist Mariz Umali was certainly inappropriate and perhaps illegal. According to Davao City Ordinance No. 5004 (which he signed), whistling can be construed as sexual harassment.
http://www.rappler.com/.../135111-duterte-catcalling...
Jeffry Dy Is catcalling again an issue jeez get real this bs had been there the whole time and in the Us i believe its legal whether this is legal or not this nonsense reporting has to move on and get on the real objectives at hand like whats in store for digong since many are still doubting him for being pro china and such and Can we be venezuela(again)on his federal form of gov as what bashers still installing in our minds???Well find out and also i may suggest to have all of transpo and public hubs free wifi to have convience of passengers and also for communication and I may say he had the guts to do so and i believe this has to end on this alleged pro commie since i voted for him and has the same accomplishments of what dick did in Subic.
Marcial Bonifacio Jeffry, I agree that the issues you raised are important, but if Duterte will not follow his own ordinance (which is fairly simple), how can we trust that he will respect and follow more serious laws? There is even talk of a potential Duterte dictatorship:
http://newsinfo.inquirer.net/.../most-powerful-ph-leader...
Marcial Bonifacio Gordon can address all of those issues within the restraints of the law. He can definitely be trusted.
Jeffry Dy I don't think so plus he's Pro left therefore as such he may not be a patientlike dick does but he's definitely a pro poor and he addresses his laws at hand since many are still criticized him again on this bs bias on media freedom and a former prosecutor(not a radical left)
Jeffry Dy also he joined edsa 1 right?if he's pro makoy then he wouln't rallied this dictatorship had it for so long it had to be arrested for having allies w npa which aquinos are also sided on and I'm just balanced on this matter so far only some unknown politicians and a card leaning leftist are in the gov so we can no longer see them rallying in the streets anymore since every presidents have a sona every year
Marcial Bonifacio Jeffry, I'm willing to give Duterte a chance. However, his leftist background and apparent coddling of communists makes me very suspicious. Also, I don't consider policies which keep our kababayans dependent on government handouts "pro-poor", unless you mean keeping them permanently poor. On the other hand, Sen. Gordon stresses job opportunities, which will raise people out of poverty. What can be more "pro-poor" than that?
Marcial Bonifacio On the issue of Duterte joining EDSA 1, perhaps he opposed the Marcos dictatorship because it did not conform to his own political ideology. After all, Pres. Marcos vehemently opposed the communists. Some even argue that he was the reason for the swelling of the NPA.
Also, many argue that the Marcos oligarchy was simply replaced with the Cory Aquino oligarchy. Therefore, Duterte's participation in the first People Power Revolution doesn't necessarily mean he opposes dictatorship; it only proves he opposed the Marcos dictatorship.
Communist/Moro arms struggles occurs when there's a Very Big gap between RICH and POOR due to corruption and exploitation by the oligarch of the common Filipino - with only the rich getting richer while the poor gets poorer.
FYI
North Korea is the only remaining communist country.
Yes he values the lessons learned from former communist and socialist countries. But it doesn't mean he will adopt a communist government.
Marcial Bonifacio On the issue of India's growing population, the country is becoming increasingly prosperous. According to Forbes:
India is the world’s 4th largest IT start-up hub with more than 3,100 tech startups in the past year alone. It ranks second in worldwide food production. Its auto industry churns outs 22 million cars a year, making it one of the world’s largest auto manufacturers. It boasts a $600 billion retail market and is one of the world’s fastest growing e-commerce markets.
http://www.forbes.com/.../india-asias-next-economic.../...
RP is abundant in natural resources and an educated, English-speaking workforce. What it lacks are job opportunities and sufficient foreign direct investment. If Gordon were in Duterte's presidential position, he would do precisely what he did in Subic Bay, which was all lawful and constitutional. He would also lift trade restrictions similar to India.
Jeffry Dy so by contrast du30 hasn't have any clue on how to regulate trade restrictions and I had an Indian friend on fb who is critical of moodi because most of India's tech he said was defective and also his Us trips as well http://www.dailyo.in/.../bjp-modi.../story/1/7763.html What i said was pro-poor because the poor themselves getting opportunities to see how he can handle things when he accomplished in Davao and many voted on him because of that even the tulfo bros the respectable tough talking journalist in media believes on his accomplishments too.Well I respect your opinion on not giving him a chance on this and thanks for having exchange of ideas in regards to du30 leadership you have yours i have my side and as such you make things balanced and constructive.
Perci Lozano Piña So yung namatay sa Maguindanao nabayaran din ba yun or kurakot din?
Cha Aguilar http://interaksyon.com/.../marie-yuvienco--first-things...
Marcial Bonifacio That is an interesting article related to Gordon and Estrada, Cha. However, I disagree with the writer's last point. I hope Duterte does implement some of his proposals, just not all of them. 🙂
Philip Basilio Sana unahin bitayin ang mga lumapastangan Sa bansa Sa malawakan pagnanakaw panloloko at pandaraya Sa halalan 2016
Jeffry Dy Sana nga at etong si daldallima ay umeeksena naman hayy naku naman oh!
Oscar Saddul TRUTH & CONSEQUENCE !!! .......... INKLING IN 6 MONTHS !!!
5/19/2016
Ni Marcial Bonifacio
Mga kaibigan at mga kababayan ko, ang muling pagkahalal ni Richard Gordon sa Senado noong Mayo 9, 2016 proves the impact a proactive citizenry can have sa halalan. Sa katotohanan, panglima siya sa pagkapanalo at nagkaroon ng 16,719,322 boto (as of COMELEC’s proclamation on May 19, 2016). Sa kanyang unang pagtakbo sa Senado noong 2004, panglima rin siya sa puwesto at nagkaroon ng 12,707,151 boto.
Kahit isa siyang mabisang lingkod bayan, Gordon ran for the presidency and lost in 2010; pang-anim siya sa bilangan noon at nagkaroon ng 989,250 boto. In 2013, he ran for the Senate again and lost. Panglabingtatlo siya sa puwesto at nagkaroon ng 10,159,561 boto, just a few hundred thousand votes short of reaching the "Magic 12."
Given Gordon’s long-awaited victory, let us examine some lessons which can be learned mula sa napakahalagang tagumpay na ito. Unang-una, utilizing all the resources of a proactive and perseverant citizenry and netizenry can win an election, sa kabila nang mahabang pagkaliban o pagkawala ng kandidato sa paglilingkod bayan at ang sunud-sunod na pagkatalo sa mga naunang dalawang laban nito . All of Gordon’s individual campaigners, bloggers, and Bagumbayan volunteers have done precisely that.
Pangalawa, maging ang pagliban ng mga boto galing sa apathetic pessimists (discouraged from voting and affecting social change) did not prevent Gordon from reaching the “Magic 12.” Nor did the numerous votes of the “Wowowee Crowd” (a term I use when referring to the intellectually and morally lazy, gullible, celebrity-worshipping electorate) hinder Gordon’s ascent to 5th place. Sa katotohanan, kung mayroong informed intellectuals (as few as they may be) who will participate in the electoral process, hindi dapat akalain na ang Wowowee Crowd will automatically win.
Pangatlo, hindi pa lubhang nababahiran ng mali at hindi pa lubusang pumapanig sa piling iilan ang sistema ng halalan . If that were the case, then such an anti-trapo maverick as Gordon would not have been re-elected to the Senate, much less with eight higher ranks than in 2013.
Pang-apat, napakabuti nang sapat na traditional media coverage, nguni’t hindi ito mahalaga para sa ikapagtatagumpay sa halalan. Rep. Manny Pacquiao received far more mainstream media coverage than Gordon, nguni’t ang bantog na kampiyong boksingero ay pampito lamang na may 16,050,546 boto (as of COMELEC’s proclamation on May 19, 2016) at pumapailalim sa kanya.
Sa wakas, mga kaibigan ko, let us use Gordon’s campaign and victory bilang isang huwaran para sa magiging kasunod na pagkilos ng ibang mga kandidato. That means continuing to utilize the social media, such as Facebook and Twitter, blogging, forming a research team in order to answer the questions of potential voters or to debate political opponents and their surrogates, organizing and participating in rallies and fundraising events, and encouraging people to register and to vote. For those who live abroad, they can launch an online campaign and vote as overseas absentee voters as a friend whom I wrote about in “Ang People Power at ang Ating Tungkulin.” The key is to keep our kababayans informed and engaged. Ngayon, let’s celebrate a well-deserved victory para kay Sen. Gordon at sa ating bayan.
Aim High Pilipinas!
Updated: 3/28/16
By Marcial Bonifacio
My friends, “if it looks like a duck, swims like a duck, and quacks like a duck, it’s probably a duck.” Not only has Donald Trump absolved himself from attending two important events, he said he would not participate in the next FNC debate as well. All three events are significant, since they allow his potential voters and supporters to scrutinize his record, policies, and vision for America more closely. Therefore, Trump’s pattern of absence from these events looks precisely like a “duck”---a hypocritical position since he has criticized Sen. Marco Rubio for his excessive absences in the Senate.
In my commentary titled “Why Evangelicals and Conservatives Should Cruz with the Best and Trump the Rest…including the Donald,” I criticized Trump for evading the Iowa debate just before its caucuses. He claimed that debate moderator Megyn Kelly was unfair to him in the previous FNC debate, and that he committed to a veteran fundraising event instead (which he said was more important). As a result, presidential candidate Sen. Ted Cruz challenged Trump to a 90-minute, one on one debate for which the former’s team would donate $1.5 million to veterans. As an alternative to Kelly, Cruz stated, “We can arrange for Mark Levin to moderate, or Sean Hannity to moderate or Rush Limbaugh to moderate or Glen Beck to moderate.” That would seem to be a win-win situation for Cruz, Trump, Iowa voters, and the veterans. However, Trump declined Cruz’s challenge. (I hear a duck quacking.)
In my commentary titled “Are Trump Conservatives Irrational?,” I mentioned that Trump did not attend the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC) in spite of being one of the first to accept the invitation. According to its organizer, Matt Schlapp, Trump disliked the new question and answer format of the event, which was formerly a speech format. As a result of CPAC’s refusal to capitulate to Trump’s terms, he campaigned in Kansas and Florida instead. (I heard a duck quacking again.)
Again Trump has decided to forgo the FNC debate scheduled March 21 in order to speak at the pro-Jewish American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC). “I thought the last debate on CNN was the last debate, that was going to be it. Nobody told me there were going to be more debates,” stated Trump, “I think we’ve had enough debates.” Apparently Trump does not want to debate Cruz due to his poor performance in the last two debates. Ironically, Trump did declare on March 6, “I would love to take on Ted one-on-one.” (That is the third quack I heard. Perhaps it is more accurate to say that a “quack” has “ducked” three times.)
On March 22, 2016 Cruz appeared on the O' Reilly Factor, challenging Trump again to a one on one debate. However, he has chosen the feisty but fair Bill O' Reilly to moderate this time. Trump may have a big penis, as he boasted in a GOP debate, but does he have big proverbial testicles to meet Cruz's challenge? Perhaps it was his scheme all along to attack Cruz's wife on Twitter in order to distract his potential voters from the debate challenge. After all, they both occurred on the same day.
Aside from another potential debate, why would Trump skip all three of the aforementioned important events? Is it purely coincidental? Could that have been his strategic plan in order to evade the informed conservatives---the ones who are well read and actually view and scrutinize the debates down to their minutia? Cruz spokesman Ron Nehring concludes:
Perhaps Mr. Trump is unable to speak for more than one minute about any given topic because of his shallow understanding of basic policies, or perhaps he is scared of voters learning the truth---that he has spent his entire adult life promoting liberal positions completely opposite of the conservative platform that he has campaigned on.
If Nehring is correct, that puts into question Trump’s capacity to lead the country and confront America’s enemies. Trump himself has admitted that he has never encountered so much pressure as he has in campaigning. How much worse will it be once he starts governing as president? Would this not be a grave risk for the American people as well as the world just as the election of Pres. Barack Obama was?
Fortunately, there is an alternative candidate who is a constitutional conservative and already has a proven record of defending life, religious liberty, gun rights, state sovereignty, and the free market system. His iron political will has made him impervious to the pressures of standing up to his own party in defense of fulfilling his campaign promises before the Senate and defending the Constitution before the Supreme Court. In conclusion, my friends, Trump the Donald and Cruz with Ted.
Victory to Sen. Ted Cruz for God and Country!
Updated: 4/27/16
By Marcial Bonifacio
My friends and American countrymen, today I write in disappointment and dismay at so-called conservatives and evangelicals who supported Donald Trump in the states which logically and rightfully should have supported Ted Cruz. First and foremost, the term "Trump conservative" is an oxymoron, comparable to a Catholic Protestant, a Marxist businessman, a vegetarian carnivore, or a leftist Republican, although the latter seems increasingly accurate, considering the prevalence of those whom conservatives are unapologetic to call a "RINO" (Republican In Name Only). Such is Trump. Aside from that as the primary reason that conservatives should not support him, I have listed a few others below.
1. Trump is not a conservative.
He has recently been styling himself as a "common sense conservative." Could that be his flexible version of a constitutional conservative? Semantics aside, conservatives support the principles of religious liberty, limited government, and a free market system. Based on that conventional definition, here are some of Trump’s unconservative positions:
Such government intervention in the private sector is scarcely conservative. By the way, Trump skipped out on a very important conference of conservatives (CPAC) in which all Republican presidential candidates speak. He did so on a short notice in spite of accepting CPAC’s invitation several months ago. Instead, he took it for granted that he did not have to answer questions by the attendees, and according to CPAC organizer Matt Schlapp, that was “disrespectful.”
2. Trump lacks basic understanding of the Constitution and the rule of law.
When asked by CNN host Anderson Cooper what the top three functions of the U.S. government are, he responded that "the greatest function of all by far is security for our nation. I would also say health care, I would also say education." Every conservative knows that the last two are unenumerated powers reserved to the states.
Trump's disregard for the rule of law can be illustrated in his support for restricting free speech by loosening libel laws, whereby suing newspapers would be easier. He also indicated that as commander-in-chief, he would coerce soldiers into waterboarding terrorists, even though the Obama administration has banned it.
3. Trump lacks good character.
On several occasions, he made a public display of his arrogance. For example, on the issue of Sen. John McCain’s POW status, Trump objected to his heroism, since his plane was shot down in North Vietnam. "He's not a war hero," Trump said. "He's a war hero because he was captured. I like people that weren't captured." One could easily envision such arrogance displayed in other scenarios. The picture below (displayed on a billboard sign by a church) illustrates a similar point.
When Trump refused to participate in one of the FNC debates, essentially because he could not dictate the terms, his arrogance became apparent again. He mistakenly took it for granted that he did not have to present himself, his policy positions, or his American vision before Iowans in order to get their vote. On another occasion, he was boastful of how loyal his supporters are, stating, “I could stand in the middle of 5th Avenue and shoot people and I wouldn’t lose voters.” Do any of you sense Trump's fear of the Lord or humility?
Aside from Trump's arrogance, he has also made some inappropriate remarks, as well as exhibited ill-mannered behavior. In response to one of the questions (apparently unfavorable to Trump) of Fox News debate moderator Megyn Kelly, Trump disparagingly said that she had "blood coming out of her eyes and blood coming out of her...wherever." Where could wherever possibly be?
In one of his rallies, Trump mocked New York Times reporter Serge Kovaleski (a unique creature of God with a congenital disability), emulating his body’s irregular posture and movements---behavior that even properly reared children are taught never to mimick. On another occasion, Trump publicly called Pres. George W. Bush a liar and called for his impeachment for allegedly misleading Americans to believe WMD were present in Iraq; Trump later stated he was uncertain whether or not Bush lied (putting his judgment into question as with other foreign policy positions). Clearly, a man of his temperament, making such an outrageous and unfounded accusation and acting inappropriately, is not fit to be America’s chief diplomat or statesman.
4. Trump is not an anti-Establishment candidate.
Contrary to popular (or rather populist) belief, he is the ultimate Establishment politician. He may never have held the official title of politician, but by virtue of contributing large sums of money to Establishment politicians (Democrats and Republicans) in order to affect public policies, he displays the term in action. That gives him the advantage for his business operations while trumping (pardon the pun) over conservative principles, perpetuating a large part of the Washington Establishment---namely, crony capitalism. His loyalty or, rather, disloyalty to both parties indicates he has no entrenched principles or political platform on which he can stand or predictably govern. Gov. Bobby Jindal summed up Trump’s position well when he said, “He is not a conservative. He is not a liberal. He is not a Democrat. He is not a Republican. He is not an Independent. He believes in Donald Trump.”
Even on the campaign trail, Trump emulates the cunning methods of typical politicians. For example, in order to galvanize evangelicals, he claimed that his favorite book (next to his Art of the Deal) is the Bible. If that were the case, it seems logical that he would know how to pronounce II Corinthians 3:17 or be able to state his favorite biblical verse when requested to do so, which was not the case. Another example of political expedience was raising the issue of presidential candidate Ted Cruz’s eligibility to be president prior to the Iowa caucuses. For several months, Trump was silent on the issue, as if he were finally satisfied that Cruz was eligible. However, when GOP debate moderator Neil Cavuto asked why Trump continued to pursue it, he frankly admitted, “Because now he’s doing a little bit better [in the polls].” Such is the myth of Trump not being a politician.
My friends, when there is a clear alternative candidate, who is a consistent conservative and has a successful record of defending Christian liberty (all of which I have documented), why don’t many conservatives and evangelicals in the southern states support him instead of Trump? Could they be confusing his sophomoric, vulgar, and arrogant demeanor (scarcely Christian, much less presidential) for being forthright or politically incorrect? Could it be that they are ill informed, gullible, or even irrational? Could it be that they are confusing a populist candidate for a conservative one?
Could the Trump evangelicals be of the same mindset as the evangelicals who temporarily subdued their intellectual judgement and Christian principles in order to satisfy a more superficial impulse via membership in Ashley Madison (the controversial, extra-marital affair dating site)? The renowned pastor Robert Jeffress of Dallas First Baptist Church sympathizes with the Trump evangelicals and reasons thus:
Christians overwhelmingly chose Ronald Reagan not because he was the most religious candidate but because he had the quality people thought was most necessary at the time, and that is leadership...I think many evangelicals have come to the conclusion we can no longer depend upon government to uphold traditional biblical values...We need a strong leader and a problem solver, hence many Christians are open to a secular candidate like Donald Trump.
Indeed, Reagan served in the Army Air Forces as Personnel Officer, Post Adjutant, and Executive Officer, assisting in the production of training films for the military. He assisted the FBI in purging Hollywood of suspected Communists, and he served two terms as California governor (1967-1975) before he became president. Therefore, Jeffress was correct to point to Reagan's leadership, and I would add patriotism.
What of Trump's leadership? Could Jeffress be referring to being a leader in insulting American heroes, in mocking disabled people, or in his sexual performance of which he boasted at one of the presidential debates? Perhaps he is referring to Trump's leadership in raising the issue of border security and immigration and making it the focal point of public discussion. In that case, I must mention that Ted Cruz has led the opposition against amnesty, which is precisely why the Gang of Eight amnesty bill was quashed in the House. Cruz also proposed several border security measures, including a wall in 2011---several years before Trump made his well-known pitch.
Hence, the leadership premise Jeffress raises is fallacious. Perhaps these so-called conservatives have consumed the Holy Communion wine, which is spiked with a bit of the Shirley Temple beverage the blogger Conservative Cyborg has written about.
Just think rationally for a moment and consider your two viable choices for the Republican nominee. One is a New York crony capitalist, who has changed his party affiliation at least six times (since 1987), and has done virtually nothing for Christian liberty, promoting constitutional principles or conservatism in general. On the contrary, Trump has supported liberal and unconstitutional policies, which largely benefitted himself (hardly patriotic), and boasts that he will compromise conservative principles in order to “get along” and “get things done” with the Washington Establishment.
However, the alternative candidate (Ted Cruz) is a proven conservative, whose record of defending the Constitution (namely religious liberty, rights of the unborn, gun rights, and state sovereignty) remains unmatched by any of the current presidential candidates, and is tenaciously unwilling to compromise on core conservative principles merely for the sake of getting along and getting things done, even in the midst of political gridlock (a situation for which the founders devised an electoral process as a remedy, not a hindrance to be bypassed by executive orders). By the way, should President Trump's deals or compromises fail in Congress, would he resort to executive orders as Obama currently does?
My friends, conservatives are completely justified in channeling their infuriation and distrust of the Republican Party (whose members have constantly reneged on their promises in capitulation to Democrats) into a candidate who shares the same sentiments. However, shared sentiment alone does not qualify one to be president of the U.S. As conservatives, we must not be blinded by our anger and vote strictly out of emotion, a trait which is generally attributable to liberals, especially those who voted for Pres. Barack Obama. Instead, let us use our full reasoning capacity to see past Trump’s flimsy, populist rhetoric and elect a seasoned constitutional maverick, who seeks not to make deals with the devils in the Washington Establishment, but to defy them in defense of the conservative principles of religious liberty, limited government, and free enterprise.
As Cruz pointed out at a Texas rally:
It’s easy to talk about making America great again. You can even print that on a baseball cap. But the critical question is, do you understand the principles and values that made America great in the first place?
If you all do not understand, then please refrain from referring to yourselves as “conservatives.”
Victory to Sen. Ted Cruz for God and Country!
Comments
Anyway, Cruz was not responsible for the misinformation that CNN publicized. Even then, he has terminated his communications associate for his negligence.
Basically, such a high tariff could cause China to impose retaliatory costs on the U.S., which would simply be passed on to American consumers. Think of buying things for double or triple the price from retailers like Walmart or Target. Besides, most of the job losses in manufacturing are due to automation, not outsourcing as Trump would have you believe. His idea is one of those which sounds great on paper (like communism), but is scarcely practical. Most jobs are in the service sector and in the knowledge or information sphere.
https://marcialslaw.wordpress.com/.../why-conservatives.../
http://www.fox-nation.com/?Dkt_nbr=11550-1...
By the way, there's nothing wrong with that as long as Trump fulfills the mandate of his supporters. My point is that accepting money from whomever is the donor is less important than for the candidate to honor his word to the American people. So far, Cruz has not deviated.
Updated 5/7/16
Ni Marcial Bonifacio
Mga kaibigan at mga kababayan ko, ang layunin po ng lathalang ito ay hindi upang hikayatin kayo na iboto si Sen. Richard Gordon against or over another senatoriable, kahit marahil, that debate can be made. Sa kabilang banda, I wish to persuade you all to add an indispensable man ng talino at makasaysayang mga tagumpay sa inyong talaan ng hinihirang na mga senatoriables. Please allow me to present my case.
1. Siya ang tagapagtaguyod ng laban sa mga tradisyonal na pulitiko at katiwalian.
Unang-una, si Gordon ay isang taong may paninidigan at matibay na paniniwala. Bilang chairman ng Senate Committee on Accountability of Public Officers and Investigations (Blue Ribbon), Gordon exercised his power to oppose corruption, as in the P728 million fertilizer fund scam. (He did so by wrapping up the probe and pushing for the filing ng charges ng kasalanang mabigat laban kay former Agriculture Undersecretary Jocelyn Bolante para sa misappropriation ng mga laang-gugulin ng pamahalaan.)
Sa alingasngas ng $329 milyong dolyar ZTE National Broadband, he took measures para sa pag-uusig ng mga pinuno ng pamahalaan sa paglabag ng Anti-Graft at Corrupt Practices Act. At the time when Pres. Gloria Arroyo imposed martial law sa Maguindanao, Gordon opposed it challenging its constitutional validity; such a maverick tendency indicates na hindi siya trapo sapagkat siya ay itinalaga ni Arroyo sa gabinete. Furthermore, a man, such as Gordon, who will impartially uphold justice and follow the rule of law bilang senador ay mahalaga para sa ating bayan which was ranked as one of the most corrupt countries sa Asia noong 2014 sang-ayon sa Corruption Perceptions Index of Transparency International.
In his most recent crusade against corruption, Gordon filed a Petition for Mandamus in the Supreme Court in order to curb voter fraud for the 2016 elections. As a result, the Comelec was ordered by the high court to enable the printing function of the PCOS machines, which would clearly reveal the chosen candidates of voters on their receipts.
2. Siya ang taong matuwid at maginoo.
Pangalawa, maaring mas may kapakinabangang pampulitiko si Gordon, kung nagsampa siya ng kaso laban kay Sen. Grace Poe upang madiskwalipika ito sa pagtakbo sa senado dahilan sa mga usaping pagkamamamayan at paninirahan, na naging paksa ng agam-agam at pag-aalinlangan sa mga mapanuring mata ng lipunan. That was precisely what his UP college mates (also members of UNA and LP) urged him to do. Subalit, sa halip na pagnasaan ni Gordon ang senatorial seat na mababakante ni Grace Poe kung sakaling mapawawalang saysay ang pagkamamamayan nito at matanggal siya sa pwesto, minabuti niyang bigyang linaw ang usapin.
I believe that the matter of Sen. Poe's qualifications for national office has already been referred to the proper legal venues, and I deem it counter-productive to say anything more about this issue, aside from the statements I have already made.
Karagdagan dito, lubhang pinahahalagahan ni Gordon kagalingang panlahat at katiwasayan ng nakararami, higit sa kanyang pamilya. Sa halip na ipagdiwang ang kapaskuhan sa piling ng kanyang pamilya, pinili niyang ibahagi ang diwa ng Pasko sa buhay ng mga taong higit na nangangailangan, ang mga biktima ng Hurricane Mayon. Isang pagmumulat matang may kaakibat na tanong. Nasaan at ano ang pinagkakaabalahan ng ibang senador sa panahon ng kapaskuhan?
3. Siya ang taong may pananaw.
Pangatlo, Gordon's transformational vision of a prosperous Pilipinas is not one of mere wishful thinking or political rhetoric. Sa kabilang banda, iyon ay pangarap, which has already been partially implemented sa Subic Bay with outstanding success. (I will elaborate later in this blog.) Gordon supports measures which would create domestic jobs and render the Philippine economy less dependent sa mga remittances ng overseas Filipino workers (OFWs). He favors the promotion of the free market system, so that competition would lower energy costs; this would lower production costs and prices for consumer goods. In turn, living standards of all our kababayans would be raised and the destitute would be lifted out of poverty, rendering the culture of government handout dependency obsolete. Sa wakas, Gordon envisions a Third World Philippines ascending into First World status.
4. Siya ay may malawak na karanasan sa serbisyong pampubliko.
Pang-apat, ang limampung taon na makabayang paglilingkod ni Gordon ay patunay ng kanyang wagas na pagsisilbi sa ating bayan. Sa katunayan, he has assumed various positions as Olongapo City mayor, Subic Bay Metropolitan Authority (SBMA) chairman, Department of Tourism secretary, at senador ng RP (Republika ng Pilipinas). He has even been a Red Cross volunteer, since he was seventeen years old (48 years ago) and is currently its chairman.
5. Siya ay may kapita-pitagang ulat na natupad.
Panglima, si Gordon ay may pambihirang galing na naitala sa Senado para sa kanyang masigasig na pagsusulong ng mga panukalang batas at pagtatanggol sa Saligang-Batas. Bilang senador, he authored several important laws (e.g., New Automated Elections System Law, University of the Philippines Charter of 2007, Filipino World War II Veterans Pensions and Benefits Act of 2008) and was a member of more than twenty committees (most notably the Blue Ribbon, Economic Affairs, Trade and Commerce, Education, Energy, Foreign Relations, National Defense and Security, and Ways and Means). He also served as chairman of the Constitutional Amendments and Revision of Laws Committee and was the youngest delegate to the 1971 Constitutional Convention. That makes him an exceptional lawyer and senator, sapagkat he has not only participated sa paghahanda at pagsususog ng mga panukalang batas at resolusyon, lalo’t higit sa pagbalangkas ng kataas-taasang batas ng ating bayan, ang Saligang-Batas. Samakatuwid, si Gordon lamang ang nagtataglay nang labis na kahusayan at kasanayan sa pagpapaliwanag at pagpapatupad ng mga batas sa buong kapuluan.
Kaugnay sa mga paliwanag ko sa aking naunang blog “Of Scooters, Buses, Jeepneys, and Airplanes: A Simple Case Against Gibo, Noynoy, and Manny Villar for President in 2010," I argue that more than forty years of Gordon’s diverse executive experience sa local at pambansang level ng pamahalaan was his unique advantage over the other presidentiables for being the national executive (the president) ng bayan. I compared him to a skilled driver of a scooter, jeepney, and bus, all of which require different types of perception (namely, distance and depth), maneuvering, and coordination. Halimbawa, a bus driver could not possibly drive in the same manner as he would drive a scooter in which, when turning a bus around, would necessitate wide turns and a keener sense of distance and depth.
Gayunpaman, sa paliwanag na iyan, I argue that such a diversity sa executive experience is also Gordon’s unique advantage for the national legislative branch (Congress) as well as for the national executive branch (the presidency). Using the same metaphor, consider a driver’s perspective as opposed to that of an engineer or blue print maker, who designs motorized vehicles or builds roads. Sa katotohanan, a vehicle transports the driver insofar as its apparatus (mobile design, engine capacity, etc.) and road surface allow. Samakatuwid, a driver’s experience is generally confined exclusively to the mechanics and mobility of the vehicle he drives. Hence, though an engineer may have the ingenuity and creativity to design a vehicle, without actually test-driving and utilizing it fully, the engineer can only speculate on its operation and effectiveness, thereby rendering the driver’s experience and perspective more accurate (for purposes of designing vehicles).
With this in mind, may isang tanong ako na gusto kong unawain ninyong mabuti. Which would you prefer to have as an infrastructural or mechanical engineer para sa inyong bahay o commuting route? The man who only draws blue prints for buses or a skilled driver of a scooter, jeepney, and bus, who also draws blue prints for buses? Sa katotohanan, iyang proverbial multi-vehicle driver at blue print maker ay si Gordon.
In plain language, here is why I also argue that Gordon’s diverse executive experience gives him a unique advantage of being a senator. His experience of private and public policy implementation gives him the hindsight of working with other policy makers as chief executive himself, which subjected him to conflicts of interest, compromise, resolutions, and collaboration with them. Halimbawa, bilang mayor (an executive position) ng Olongapo City, he worked with the sangguniang panglungsod (local legislature) in ratifying or vetoing bills as a local public executive. This gave Gordon the perspective and savvy to craft good laws and pass them effectively through the often long drawn out legislative process and conflicts of interest between the national executive (the president) and the national legislature (Congress). Being mayor has also given him a stricter sense of public accountability, since the small bureaucratic structure of local officials tends to be more transparent (as opposed to the national level), thus making it more difficult for them to conceal their potential violation of the law.
6. Siya ay tagapamahala ng krisis.
Bilang CEO (an executive position) ng Philippine Red Cross, Gordon traveled all over RP, undertaking numerous drastic measures. Bilang crisis manager, he directed many disaster/rescue operations involving aid sa man-made and natural catastrophe victims. Sa kanyang limampung taong mapagkawanggawang paglilingkod, his intervention has saved millions of lives and restored over 133,000 homes ng mga biktima ng Yolanda at ng iba pang malaking mga kapahamakan at kalamidad. (View this video for firsthand accounts, including a successful hostage rescue operation from Abu Sayyaf without ransom.) He has also directed operations that involve prevention and safety in order to better prepare our kababayans for any disaster. Only a crisis manager or executive (not just a legislator) would know precisely what resources and in what quantity need to be allocated to each disaster area, knowledge which is indispensable for a country prone to such disasters.
7. Siya ay tagapaglikha ng hanapbuhay.
Bilang Subic Bay Metropolitan Authority (SBMA) chairman, Gordon directed a successful effort to convert a desolate, abandoned American naval base (Subic Bay) into a prosperous economic trade zone. Bago pa man ang conversion, Subic Bay was reduced to a heap of ash caused by the eruption of Mt. Pinatubo. After Gordon inspired thousands of volunteers to clean and renovate the area, hundreds of companies (including Acer and FedEx Express) created approximately 40,000 jobs with their US $1billion of foreign investments. The success was such that several world leaders (including Pres. Clinton) hailed it bilang halimbawa para sa pagsulong ng ekonomiya.
Another executive position Gordon assumed was that of secretary of the Department of Tourism. At a time of declining tourism, he managed to increase the number of tourists from one million to two million within a single year, thereby creating numerous jobs. Against overwhelming odds, all this occurred in the midst of terrorist threats, civil war in Mindanao, coup attempts, and SARS.
Furthermore, mga kaibigan at mga kababayan ko, sana naiintindihan ninyo ang kahalagahan at kapakinabangan ng executive experience as opposed to legislative experience lamang. Maliwanag iyan, knowledge for crafting laws can most accurately be derived from those who constantly manage the daily operation of producing and allocating various resources (e.g., food, manpower, money, capital, rescue supplies). Short of such first hand experience, knowledge remains partial and inaccurate sapagkat iyon ay based sa pangalawang mga pinagkukunan o kaisipan lamang. It would be analogous to an engineer claiming the car he designed will be easy to operate, ride smoothly, and be comfortable to drive without ever having driven it himself.
8. Siya ay dalubhasa sa pakikipagtalastasan.
Pang-anim, bilang radio show host sa Radyo5 92.3 News FM on a program called “Aksyon Solusyon”, Gordon is exposed to people of diverse economic, provincial backgrounds. Such a constant daily inflow of various feedback directly from the people keeps Gordon informed on the state of the nation and provides him with fresh ideas on what can and must be done. Bilang senador, he will be in a better position to accommodate such ideas sa pamamagitan ng pagsasabatas.
9. Siya ay taong pangmasa.
Sa aking pang wakas, apart from Gordon’s apparent devotion and service sa ating bayan, on the lighter side, he is a man of the masses, which maSiya des him a likable politician with a human face. Halimbawa, ito ang clip upang he performs a song and dance routine with the renowned entertainers ng Moymoy Palaboy.
Sa ibang video, he dances the Harlem Shake with his grandchildren. If that is not enough to persuade you all of his ordinary humanity common to the masses, here he is cooking barbeque. Hindi totoong isang pangkaraniwang faceless, “out of touch” at professional politician si Gordon. Sa katotohanan, isa siyang payak at masayahing tao na may kababaang loob, magandang pag-uugali at mapagpatawa.
Sa aking pagbubuod, ito ang mabait na senatoriable who has served sa Senado, held various executive positions, and has expressed his love para sa ating bayan by serving it for more than fifty years. He was responsible for saving millions of lives and building thousands of homes for the homeless. He has opposed corruption openly and challenged the president (who appointed him sa gabinete) and others, sa batayan ng kanyang pagtatanggol ng Saligang-Batas. He also knows how to do the Harlem Shake. Who would not want all those qualities in a senator?
Gayunpaman, gaya ng sinabi ko kanina, ilan lamang ito sa pamantayan nang matalinong pagpili ng isang kandidato over another. Batid kong, isa itong pagpapasya kung gugustuhin mong magdagdag ng isa pa sa iyong talaan ng mga hinihirang na senatoriables. Subalit iminumungkahi ko, mga kaibigan at mga kababayan ko, if you don’t want the best to be missed, then add Sen. Gordon to your list.
Mabuhay si Sen. Dick Gordon! Mabuhay ang Pilipinas!
Acknowledgements
Related Reading
Refoj Lap Tan Dahil nakapag alyansa sya sa partido ni peping at binay.sayang dahil hinagaan ko noong 2010, akala ko matinay ang prinsipyo nya.
Ronaldo Tuason go go go go
Condesa De Espana WOW!....IT'S GORDON!
Paolo Dela Cruz Lim 1 good reason not to bring him back dahil ibabaon nya sa utang ang mga tao. Kahit gawin pa nya zero interest yung ipapautang ay di parin tama. LOAN Education = Corruption
Chino Fernandez It's just a proposal, don't you want to consider him for other things? Then who will you vote?
Paolo Dela Cruz Lim They can't even answer a simple question why despite the growing economy the country's debt is also growing? Back on January each Filipino share to the national debt is only 55,000 pesos after a moth it became 59,000 pesos. Some of them knows why but they too scared to tell the truth.
Philip Basilio He is a good and fair person po, sa mga boboto Kay gordon Hindi po sayang Ang vote nyo. Naglilingkod po sya nang tapat para sa Bayan ...go go. Gordon.
Ferdie J Maglalang One just wonders whatever happens to his Bagumbayan vision? And his historical account of the 9th ray of the sun in the Philippine flag? If they are genuine, they could stand the test of time.
Marcial Bonifacio Paolo Dela Cruz Lim, I'll answer your question here as well as in the blog itself. Unang-una, Gordon does not have the silver bullet which will address all of our country's ills. Gayunman, one of his solutions, to address your point of objection to add him to your list, is economic liberalization. As a consequence, more jobs would be created, and more tax revenue would flow to the government and reduce dependence on social welfare programs, thereby reducing the national debt. He already did it sa Subic Bay. Samakatuwid, he can do it for the entire country.
Nga pala, you did not answer Chino Fernandez's question. If you will not add Gordon to your list, whom do you have?
Chino Fernandez ^ Methinks Paolo is thinking of a boycott, because everything we're doing "legally" is a joke for him.
Chino Fernandez Common with believer of the New World Order conspiracy junk.
Marcial Bonifacio Marahil tama ka, kaibigan ko. Gayunman, I'm willing to give him a chance to respond logically.
Germi Cruz SisonAlthough I hate his hobnobbing with the Estradas and the Enriles I still will vote for him as the most competemnt among the senatoriables.
Marcial BonifacioRefoj Lap Tan, unang-una, the instability of RP's multi-party system is such that political expedience demands such measures be taken paminsan-minsan. Even Sun Tzu in the Art of War has stated that forming alliances with opponents against a greater enemy can lead to a successful victory para sa short-term. Then, the long-term can be dealt with afterwards. Talaga, a warrior must think in terms of practical strategy, hindi prinsipyo lamang. Gayunpaman, what principle has he violated? He has not done anything illegal or unconstitutional.
Buksan po sana ng ating mga kababayan ang kanilang mga mata sa pagkakaiba ng mga pulitkong sumasakay lamamg o nanggagamit ng pagkakataon at pananamantala. Sa palagay ko naman po ay VERY CONSISTENT PO OVER THE YEARS ang mga serbisyo at gawain ni Chairman Dick Gordon. Wala po akong nakikitang dahilan upang siya ay pagdudahan. Sana po ay nakatulong po itong paliwanag ko sa inyo at sa mga may katanungan o duda sa kanilang pagiisip.
See TranslationHer accusation is very subjective and speculative. Election of 2013 happened in May. Typhoon Yolanda wreaked havoc in November. I do not see any reason for Senator Gordon to campaign amidst the destruction because it is way past the election and way too early for the next. Granted that she indeed saw a Red Cross vehicle with Sen. Gordon's face on it, definitely, that was not intentional nor promotional. Who, in a right mental framework, would even thought of such selfish act at the very center of misery and tragedy? That was an urgent response for help, Sen. Gordon would not even bother to choose what vehicle to use. Hill Roberts should think in a broader perspective and objectively. She had focused and dwelt on the minutest detail yet overlooked the most significant ones. Sen. Gordon's great act of heroism and stewardship. He was among the earliest to respond to the disaster and brought relief. No one can contest to that.
As to the present , Sen Gordon has the most comprehensive and extensive recovery, restoration and rebuilding programs for Yolanda victims.
Here, we deal with issues and not with heresays. Not even emotions. We aim to promote the truth and equip the people with sustainable knowledge and awareness based on facts We don't attack individuals, we simply align their acts and concepts to conform with veracity and accuracy, if we deem necessary.
Sen. Gordon is our leader and our only hope. Whoever disrespects and dishonors him will be on the same hotseat that you're currently in. We aim to impact change in our land, influence the people's voting behaviors by empowering them with the truth. This is for our children and yours too...we just cannot afford that HOPE be dampened with lies, indifference and selfish intentions.
Kuya Sonnie pm me your number.
1. Why is the Net devoid of such a controversial news story or photograph?
2. How can the inconsistency in the time of Yolanda (November) and the 2013 election (May) be reconciled as Jonatas and Mundo have pointed out?
3. Kung tama ka, is it possible that such an alleged emblazoning was done without Gordon's order, which many may have mistakenly viewed as self-promotion?
"We are here tonight to pay tribute to the Philippines. To you volunteers, to you staff of the Philippines Red Cross who make us so proud. You cannot imagine how many times I go to meetings and get congratulated for the work that was done in Haiyan. I had not joined the Red Cross at that time. But I am still reaping the benefit of being congratulated. You cannot imagine how many times, when the next Typhoon season came, and because of preparedness we did not have the same catastrophic situation that we had before, I was still the one being congratulated for the wonderful work the Red Cross is doing, without ever having been in the Philippines myself.
Tonight let me tell to you, to you who deserve all the thanks and congratulations for which so many of us are being thanked and congratulated for: to say thank you, and to say congratulations for the wonderful work you are doing.
And we are here also to pay tribute to leadership. To your leadership, Chairman Gordon, I would say, Governor Gordon because to me you are a member of our board, you are known to be the Chairman of the Philippines Red Cross, and I have nothing to tell you about that you know that much better than I do. But I can tell you something about Governor Gordon on the Board of the IFRC.
The same voice of reason, the voice of compassion, the voice of commitment that reminds us that we should not be complacent, we have to be angry when we have to be, we have to be sad when we have to be, we have to shout when we have to, but also, you have to share love, solidarity, hope, and remind ourselves that we are not helpless in the face of the many challenges that we have.
So, sir you are a son of the Philippines but you no longer belong to the Philippines alone, because of the message you carry which is a universal message, a universal message, the message of the Red Cross. So let me salute you and thank you for your leadership. Thank you, Sir.
IFRC SECRETARY GENERAL, ELHADJ AS SY
Remarks at the welcoming dinner
Manila Conference on Migration
12 May 2015
Good evening.
Colleagues, friends, distinguished guests, our young volunteers, volunteers of the Red Cross.
We are here tonight again as a beautiful rainbow community, united by our shared humanity. Because that is what we are about. We as the Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement: always there, on the side of the communities in need, to accompany them to respond to their needs, wherever those needs are.
And that is exactly what is taking us in the homes of the elderly. That is what is taking us on the streets among young people. That is what is taking us in the most dangerous places where we confront armed conflict. That is what is taking us when we witness an outbreak of an epidemic.
At times when everybody runs away, we run in, because we are the Red Cross and the Red Crescent.
We are almost there and almost everywhere, in 189 countries all over the world. We are always there and in almost every community, where we live, where we work, and where we belong to. We are 17 million volunteers. And it is such a privilege to be a part of this Movement.
And every time we witness such a hardship, it is always the young volunteers who come forward and make a very simple but profound statement: “If we don’t do it, who is going to do it?”
Now when we met young volunteers in Liberia, Sierra Leone and Guinea, when people died of Ebola and then they had been abandoned in mortuaries, they came forward and asked: “If we don’t bury them, who will?”
When Homs became ruins, and we already lost more than 42 volunteers of the Syrian Arab Red Crescent, it was again a young volunteer who came forward: “We have to be here because if we don’t do it, who will?”
When we witnessed the Typhoon of Haiyan in this country of the Philippines, it was you here who came forward with a simple plain statement: “If we don’t do it, who will?”
When Nepal is, today, affected by an earthquake is not over, because there was another shock registered today, who was there first: that was again our volunteers.
I was so thrilled to meet just outside to meet the Filipino team who was there. Motivated and moved by the same slogan: “If it is not us, who will?”
And for the same reason today, when people ask us “Why are you working on migration?” I can give the same, simple answer: “If we don’t do it who will?” We do it because it is not about migration. We do it simply because it is about people. It is about people that remind us our shared humanity. It is about people like you and me: about fathers and mothers and daughters and sons, who put themselves on the move in the search of a better life to care for their families, care for their children.
Where they are coming from, the many countries they travel through, until their point of destination, in each of those places there is a Red Cross, there is a Red Crescent society. So we are better placed than everybody, then, to prepare them, to accompany them, and to welcome them to where they are.
So if we don’t do it, then who will?
I think that is what is uniting us here today, to show that humanity, to show that universality. Again: it is no matter where it is happening. Whatever touches on one part of our fellow human being touches us all, no matter where. And we are here to show that unity, to show that commitment, to show that we care, to show that compassion. And then to show that we have the knowledge, we have the expertise, we have the resources, we have the means to do that, because we are this formidable Movement that is anchored in the values of our Principles, but also in the values of the community, the societies where we live and where we work.
But we are here today to pay tribute to partnership. This conference is not the first one, it will not be the last. It started already in many other places like in Doha. The issues have been discussed in many other forums like in our Governing Board, in many other meetings where our technical people never stop drawing attention to this issue, never stop also searching for solutions to respond to the needs of the people.
But we are also here tonight to pay tribute to the Philippines. To you volunteers, to you staff of the Philippines Red Cross who make us so proud. You cannot imagine how many times I go to meetings and get congratulated for the work that was done in Haiyan. I had not joined the Red Cross at that time. But I am still reaping the benefit of being congratulated. You cannot imagine how many times, when the next Typhoon season came, and because of preparedness we did not have the same catastrophic situation that we had before, I was still the one being congratulated for the wonderful work the Red Cross is doing, without ever having been in the Philippines myself.
Tonight let me tell to you, to you who deserve all the thanks and congratulations for which so many of us are being thanked and congratulated for: to say thank you, and to say congratulations for the wonderful work you are doing.
And we are here also to pay tribute to leadership. To your leadership, Chairman Gordon, I would say, Governor Gordon because to me you are a member of our board, you are known to be the Chairman of the Philippines Red Cross, and I have nothing to tell you about that you know that much better than I do. But I can tell you something about Governor Gordon on the Board of the IFRC. The same voice of reason, the voice of compassion, the voice of commitment that reminds us that we should not be complacent, we have to be angry when we have to be, we have to be sad when we have to be, we have to shout when we have to, but also, you have to share love, solidarity, hope, and remind ourselves that we are not helpless in the face of the many challenges that we have.
So, sir you are a son of the Philippines but you no longer belong to the Philippines alone, because of the message you carry which is a universal message, a universal message, the message of the Red Cross. So let me salute you and thank you for your leadership. Thank you, Sir.
Indeed many of us come here today to say: let’s for one moment try to give back a little bit to you who give so much, travelling across oceans on the other side of the world. So then if you call, and maybe if the small just return that we travel the way back to be together with you.
When we talk about this issue of course, we can see the best in human beings as we can see the worst in human beings. We see stigma, we see discrimination, we see xenophobia, we see abuse, we see racism, and we cannot deny that, because so many of our fellow human beings suffer from that. On the other hand, we can also see the best in human beings. Care, compassion, respect, trust. What is more trustful than taking your own family and entrusting them to a so-called domestic worker to care for your children, to care for your sick mother, and then to take care of your full house when no one is around. What is also more about care and compassion than to have a domestic worker to love a child more than her own child who she left behind in her home country. To care for an elderly woman like she would care for her own mother. And if we do not see there a lesson for humanity, if we do not see there a message of the best in us, then we are missing something.
We are the Red Cross and Red Crescent. We are here to fight the worst and we are here to support the best. And we are so glad and privileged to be part of the solution rather than part of the problem. And that is what commitment and leadership is about at the end of the day, leadership is nothing if it is not leading to the solution. And to you, many of the leaders coming here joining Chairman Gordon on that same journey, and to you the young people who are taking us through a leadership journey into the future, for leaders, and let me assure you that as an IFRC; we will always be on your side to accompany you to that journey of humanity.
Thank you.
Here, we deal with issues and not with heresays. Not even emotions. We aim to promote the truth and equip the people with sustainable knowledge and awareness based on facts. We don't attack individuals, we simply align their acts and concepts to conform with veracity and accuracy, if we deem necessary.
Sen. Gordon is our leader and our only hope. Whoever disrespects and dishonors him will be on the same hotseat that you're currently in. We aim to impact change in our land, influence the people's voting behaviors by empowering them with the truth. This is for our children and yours too...we just cannot afford that HOPE be dampened with lies, indifference and selfish intentions.