Isang Tanong

Watched some parts of GMA 7's 2nd episode of Isang Tanong. Whoever conceptualized the show deserves praise and gratitude.

Watching the show reminded me of my English III (Public Speaking/Oral Com). It's quite interesting to see our leaders acting like a classmate in an ENGLTRI exercise (They’re humans, too. Some buckled probably because they were nervous). Such activity enabled the viewers to know the stance of candidates in various issues. Aside from that, it's also a test of how well these candidates know different issues as well as how well they know comprehend their own platform. Aside from that, it also measures their ability to understand and think fast. It’s also good to note that the activity somehow helped in reflecting a candidate’s commitment and character through their answers (and even the manner that questions were addressed).

Lacson’s proposal to review the "Act Repealing the Death Penalty Law" reflected hiss view of implementing strictly harsh policies (kamay na bakal) to maintain Peace and Order. He never had my vote and such stand proves that he doesn't deserve my vote. There's no need to review the act. Sufficient and acceptable arguments for repealing the Death Penalty lAw have been presented already – (1) Death Penalty has not been proven deterrent, (2) The Country has a bad criminal justice system and inefficient police system, and (3) Being a poor country, not all is capable of hiring competent lawyers, (4) Majority of the countries (developed and developing) in the world don't utilize Death Penalty anymore. The more crucial thing that legislators should look at is improving our police and criminal justice system. Rather, they should oversee means to improve our police and criminal justice system. As a former PNP chief, he should know the rot in the PNP.

While Lacson was too transparent of his authoritarian-leaning perspectives, others were quite apprehensive in answering questions directly. Two possible reasons for this include: (1) They aren’t aware of the issue and would rather go tautological of their answers, and (2) They didn’t want to be associated with any stance that might affect their relationship with the coalition they belong. Just a simple yes or no and explanation were expected from them. But there are still those who failed to confront the challenge. Like any other English III class, it’s unavoidable to have a classmate who’s too nervous. Perfect example would be Mike Defensor who was not in the condition during the show (as evidenced by his answers,I think, he’s too ‘sabog’ or he’s probably nervous; and didn’t understand the question). He was asked what he wants the young leaders to become; and what laws would he support or author to fulfill this vision. He was able to answer the first question however it seems that he didn’t get the follow-up question. Instead of stating his legislative plans for young leaders, he mentioned his general legislative plans (yes, those in his advertisements). If he wasn’t confused during that time, it is also possible hat he wasn’t able to answer the second question (or opt to deviate his answers), as he doesn’t have specific legislative plans for the youth and aspiring leaders after all.

Being in the public service isn't about doling out. It's not as simple as donating money to make another person’s life better. It's not as simple as distributing your wealth to the poor to make this country a better place to live. That's one thing most candidates (esp. those coming from the showbiz industry) don’t understand. Like for example, Cesar Montano thinks that instead of spending much money for the elections, they could've given the money to the people. He doesn't understand that it's not just the money that matters but good leadership and sustainable projects.

Now, it's my turn. Isang tanong para sa akin: Sino-sino ang mga iboboto mo sa darating na halalan?

For Senators:

1. Sonia Roco
2. Manny Villar
3. Francis Pangilinan
4. Adrian Sison
5. Martin Bautista
6. Zosimo Paredes
7. Joker Arroyo? (After reading one of mlq3's column this week, I'm in a dilemma.)

Party List:

I'm currently torn between Kabataan and Akbayan. The former is the only party list that represents the Youth Sector. However, should Kabataan win, there'd be too many Bayan Muna Affiliated groups in the congress (RA). Meanwhile, I've somehow observed the performance of Akabayan in the past congress. They've always advocated for progressive bill vis-a-vis resisted bills that violate Human Rights. But given that both groups (Kabataan and Akbayan) are progressive, it's highly possible that they'd have similar stance on issues. The advantage of going for Kabataan is that they are (of course) more focused on the needs of they youth. Aside from that they've good nominees, Mong Palatino in particular.