Let me introduce to you another field I would call ‘Electioneering’—an operation in the political system that includes black and white, the worse and better, wrong and right during election time.
May 2004 is very crucial for me since I believe it’s the “transition government” that will be selected by our electorate. For one, my Christmas and New Year’s wish is for the Filipino people to think the country more than them and to put the common good above selfish desires. As for the presidency, allow me to present a thesis and analysis of which I bank on.
Why and why not FPJ? He never had corruption record; he can unite the divided nation and he is sincere and dedicated. On the other hand, he never had experience in governance and worse he never had the know-how in any political games, he may just be another ‘puppet’ of the ambitious political ‘trapos’ waiting. Another scenario is that he may just be another or worse Estrada in the making. Though he has the popularity, he just cannot help much in remaking this divided nation.
Why and why not Raul Roco? He is very idealistic—a value that magnetizes that youth and why he has lots of volunteers. He has experience and legislation and execution of laws and most of all, he is very good that unfortunately he becomes too good for other sectors not to trust and support him. He is hot-headed that no one of his undersecretaries stayed with him. Every one resigned during his DepEd term. If he really loves his country, he should not have left his post wherein during that time; the department badly needed his leadership. And that Roco can’t win for he doesn’t have machinery to win and can never lead ‘multi-sectoral’ Republic like ours.
Why and why not Lacson? Yes, he has the political will and had proven his ability as former PNP Chief. He has the track record of being reform-oriented but unfortunately, he has dismantled his credibility. What makes him multi-millionaire during his term may be peoples’ money and besides, I don’t want to tag this country the ‘salvage capital of the world’.
Why not and why PGMA? In a patriarchal country as ours, many don’t trust a lady President or leader of the country and this folklore meant big in our history. She’s too ‘little’ to govern but she’s the only one who has the experience being a President. Continuity of policies, consistency of national and international political network, trusts of the investors and business communities and eradication of finger-pointing Filipino culture may themselves justify the ‘incumbent’ to be re-elected. It’s so happened that it’s the time of GMA. Why don’t we give the incumbent a second chance to continue and lead the transition that our nation is dreaming and praying for? Why not let this country, our nation-state, our very own Republic, rest to this “always changing” politics?
But at the end of the day, I believe its personal prerogative of every Filipino that would make this thesis a thought to ponder. Let us not think just for ourselves, but for the generations to come, too.
« return.