Some Thoughts On The Last Local Election

 

 

Though not a complete and sweeping victory for the entire team, we have to be ecstatically thankful for we have removed the dreaded head. In our earnest and honest dream, we never expected to completely dismantle in one stroke the choking system of crony politics set in place over so many years.

But in a very real and revealing way, the locals showed better discernment and choices compared to the electorate in the last US presidential elections where the top candidate judged as underperforming in most critical issues was allowed to get re-elected largely on continued promises of better governance. And for this, we ought to be extra thankful.  And I am happy to be rendered wrong in my dire prediction.

With this very significant and auspicious though incomplete victory, those who suffered temporary setbacks in this election ought to bring the good fight into the next election so that the remaining roots of misgovernance still in place and thriving can be duly removed and replaced.  

Sadly, we note that this same malignant cancer has taken firmer hold in the rest of the province, where the son and his cohorts have co-opted victories in the many provincial positions.  Let us strike a blow against those who want to set in place political dynasties, with personal aggrandizement as primary objectives.   

But in the meantime, we are hopeful that the newly-elected mayor, who also rode on the coattails of these able and deserving but losing candidates, will allow them to show their mettle and competence with various positions in his new government.  If he had firm trust and confidence in their qualifications as his candidates, they should able to mesh perfectly in his upcoming administration.  Awarding such responsibilities would allow them to be known to more people and more importantly, afford them the opportunities to show what they are capable of accomplishing beyond the campaign rhetoric.  What real governance means, as compared to empty rhetoric or rich promises of some largesse in exchange for patronage.

We also see that locally we have not attained the hoped-for majority in the council. This would have ensured that the resonating voices of change could not be stymied or short-changed by those whose naked aims would simply be to insure failure for the upcoming administration. With the very powerful head summarily removed, these allies should be rendered powerless and exposed to the people for what they truly were, as simply footstools for a despotic ruler.

In the area of tasks, it is easy for us at this stage to dream of big dreams for our city and we truly deserve them for all the efforts expended to bring about this change.

But we have to be grounded in the realities to be faced.

It was with obvious seriousness of heart and gravity of voice, that I heard OCA mention during the campaigns that if he would win, he would be faced with a very grave problem that may not have any easy solutions.  It was the problem of illegal settlers or squatters that have spilled into and infected all parts of the city.  How they can all be equitably relocated and resettled.  Their numbers would include most if not all of those sidewalk/street vendors that we see in our markets, in our parks and public places, and in most other place where they shouldn’t be because their presence have caused us many of the problems we now detest.  Like chaotic traffic in our streets.  Deteriorated and neglected parks and other public places.  Unwanted increased criminality.  Etc.

This ought to have first priority and may consume the best efforts and resources this new administration may be able to muster for its initial tasks of rebuilding this city.

 

The Evolution Of An Unscripted Search For The Ideal Home

  

After a long dry spell, I finally found both the time and urge to create a new blog entry, if only to keep alive the memory and animo of a blog that was started several years ago.

What to write about?

Something that has always been in the recesses of my mind, but never expressed nor allowed to ease into the forefront of things.

What many might suggest as the reflexive answer to the oft-repeated question of what their ideal home ought to be.

As kids and wards of our parents, the whole bit about an ideal abode surely did not occupy our consciousness.  We lived with our parents, and lived we did in the house or houses they provided for us.  It was not our anointed lot to be involved in the process of choosing places to stay.  We simply lived – with them.  And liked it or not, that sufficed for our continued existence.

As we grew and acquired our own families, again that question may have been farthest from our minds.  Why, we were too busy trying to eke out a living to worry about ideals.  There were budgets to worry about.  Work opportunities that probably took us to places we detested.  But we went anyway because work was more paramount.  A no-brainer choice compared to unemployment which could bring one’s family closer to starvation or deprivation.

And years may have rolled faster than we could have imagined before the same question may even have crossed our minds, though it obviously will at one time or other since this frenetic world of consumerism and temporal ideals will not leave anybody in peace.  Alluring advertisements in magazines and on audio-visual media, and even like-minded friends and acquaintances will not let us alone.  And there is no escaping that, unless one lived solitarily and in the mountains.

So now leaden and gray, we are left to ponder about the question again.  This time a new alignment is in our stars, giving us time and space, and maybe some extra resources, to seriously explore the question.

What would be an ideal place to live – for you and the rest of your reduced household, as empty-nesters really?  Not when you were young and ambitious.  Not when such an ideal abode could have provided optimal solace and comfort during your difficult years of raising a growing family or dealing with the multitudinous pressures of work.  But at this present time.

Such is the issue at hand.

Chronologically retracing the places where we had resided and spent precious time with family could help develop a keen perspective not immediately fathomed if we resorted to other methods.

The first real place that our fledgling family could call our own home was an old and tiny half of a duplex located in the periphery of Nazareth Subdivision in Cagayan de Oro, the land of my birth.  Rented for the measly sum of 65 pesos a month, it was very decrepit, sewage was leaky and thus made the place looked very filthy and unsanitary, walls were flimsy thus privacy was compromised, and it was hot and humid, dingy and too small for any comfort.  But we survived it, me, my wife, and two kids.  Overall, it was farthest from what could be considered ideal by any measure.

Thrown far into a distant place in pursuit of a better employment future, we rented another apartment.  No better or worse than the first, but maybe a little bigger space-wise.  Made worse by very unreliable electric power, though made more bearable by kindly and very hospitable landlords.  Had recurring bouts of loneliness and strong pining for a more citified environment.  Which promptly disappeared only after that short stint ended.

We were back again to the old hometown.  And the search for an abode close to work ensued.  It was back to the periphery of Nazareth Subdivision, to another duplex which was small, but painted and brand-new.  The small lot on which the building sat was bounded in the back by the city cemetery.  Ugh! Overall, nothing to crow about or a resting place devoid of any redeeming value worth a moment’s remembrance.  Space again was inadequate made worse by the arrival of twins, which doubled the total number of kids.

Finally in desperation, we decided to opt for acquiring our own house.  Not that the family was now oozing with wealth or ease.  But it was the only feasible solution to our multiplying challenges.

It was then that the idea of an ideal house for a growing family became a possibility.

We had purchased on installment two (2) lots totaling over 600 sq. m. in a brand-new and ultra-modern subdivision situated in a prime location very close to the poblacion core where I worked.  Wow!  And 2 lots to boot!

But when construction finally started after a whirlwind of preparatory moves, things had changed drastically.

One lot had been assigned to a sister so she could also construct her own house beside ours.  Though the lot where ours would stand was over 300sq. m. it would be a one-storey duplex, one half to be occupied by my dear mother with our youngest and unmarried sister.

We did live in that cramped space of a house with 4 kids and the help for the next 5 years.  Not ideal but bearable, it was after all our own house.  The first house we ever owned.

Then it was family immigration to another country in our continuing search for better opportunities.

We ended going thru the same rigmarole as when we started as a family – first bunking with relatives, then moving to a flat and then to an apartment.

To finally our own house.  Any house that we could afford – without any consideration or thought about what would be ideal for us.  So we ended in an old house with 1200 sq. feet of living space.  Its sidewalls flushed to both neighboring houses, making the entire block looking like a row of fused houses. Individual backyards provided some breathing spaces or elbow room for the occupants.  And for the next 20 years we would call this home.  Not ideal, but safe and secure comfort.

Halfway into our stay there, it was realized that relocation to another place would do the kids still in school better – better environment for both schooling and neighborhood.  Again, a duplex was the choice, though now it was called a patio home.  And it had more space and more rooms.  The development of a few acres had its own main street and open gates.  Still looking like a cookie-cutter community made more so by strict rules on the color of the houses – which was one color.

After retirement, the empty nesters had more depth and breadth to their visions of where the ideal place to live would be.

Away from the frenzied pace of urbanized living, in a newly developed community which used to be a farming town. Finally we were in a detached single-family house with some yards, and lots of elbow room within its over 2500 sq. feet of living space.  Though still part of a cookie-cutter type of development, except a lot larger in acreage.

Then we had to move back to the old homeland, whether permanently or not is still a floating issue, wafting out there in the firmament of uncertainty.  All our kids and their families are still out there.

But could we now pursue and bring fruition to our ideas about what and where the ideal abode ought to be – for us?  Well, maybe somewhat.

We now live in a nice house that we had built for ourselves – with detailed specifications essentially originating from our perceived likes and dislikes.  Though it bore many construction deficiencies, it can pass as livable and comfortable.  The lot on which it stands is smallish, as subdivision lots go.  It is not far from where the first house we ever owned now stands, though the latter had been renovated and made a lot bigger.  But overall, our place could be made better – like maybe in a better location, with better climate, with more natural amenities, etc.

So maybe, this could be the answer.

 

 

Out there in the mountains with its very cool climate, with a babbling brook in the back and within earshot.  Away from the chaotic hustle and bustle of city life and annoying people.

So who knows what after all this is done and ready for occupancy.  The future holds many answers.

Because as ever, life is a continuing journey.  A work in progress.

 

 

 

 

Channeling US Elections for Cagayan de Oro Politics

 

 

I admit in my frustration with the results of the last US election I sadly lamented that the election process itself was becoming more like 3^rd-world politics.  Or was it the other way around?

 

But I believe it had its grains of truth – massive negative ads, massive campaign fund generation to politicize any and all issues, voter fraud, every political device, whether fair, unfair, legal or illegal appeared to have been on the table, etc.

 

In a real way, elections are not anymore contests premised and debated on logic, good deeds, better political programs, etc.

 

And in our old homeland, elections, especially local ones, are decided more or less in the same ways.

 

Thus, while being optimistic is always the best path to pursue, it has to be tempered by realities on the ground.  And that is what I feel should be addressed in Cagayan de Oro politics, which in many ways mirrors the last US elections.

 

If we go by the many issues of governance, corruption, or everything else for that matter, the current mayor does not have a chance in hell of winning.  And he himself does not even appear inclined to address the many issues against him. He simply either skirts them completely or allows his many surrogates to do the talking for him.  He even laughs publicly when new charges against him are brought to his attention. He may even entertain the idea that in his milieu he is invincible, being so well-entrenched and powerful.

 

And in many respects he appears to be.  And recently gifted with massive funds, many sourced from abroad, to help alleviate the dire conditions, both human and otherwise, brought upon by the last flood, Sendong, he is again well positioned (in the local sense) to gain his electoral foothold .  Since this recent capital infusion will be added to his already formidable political arsenal – the immense power and influence of incumbency, he owns the council neatly wrapped around his daughter and son-in-law, his other relatives surround him in the provincial areas, etc.

 

So if Cagayanons are again lulled into thinking that they have the upper hand because with their wise use of words and arguments, through print or orally, they have satisfactorily and logically laid out the case against the incumbent, they better think again.

 

A better than likely scenario.

 

In the local area, one well-ensconced political warrior will engage in any and all political devices to ensure his victory.  He will definitely outspend his opponents – whether for campaign expenditures or outright vote buying.  And this will be very crucial for this election because this early on his principal opponent has declared that he does not have sufficient personal funds to run any campaign. But this challenger, the current highest official of the province, has done a very good job in his position and he has unvarnished records to prove it.  And countless impartial people will attest to his credibility.

 

Sounds eerily familiar? 

 

BTW, this provincial executive presided over the financial mess among other mismanagement issues left behind by the former occupant.  Who was? The same person he is running against for Hizzoner.

 

My parting words?  If the Republicans and conservatives in the last US elections truly did their darned best and presented their issues in the best possible logical way, the local opposition will have to do a lot more – and often.  If they want the results to be any different.

 

 

 

 

 

 

The Ubiquity of Cell Phones

Indeed, especially in the Philippines the most democratic user appliance/tool is the cell phone because rich and poor, young and old, urban and rural folks almost all have cell phones.  Of course, some more classy and more expensive than others.  But most have them to use as communication tool, music player, and even some game-playing.

 

But is this the default tool to access the Internet for those unable to acquire a PC, tablet, laptop, netbook, etc.?  Save for a number of select groups of tech-savvy citizens the Internet is still unreachable for many families, unless they go to an Internet café site and pay the reasonable fee of 15-20 pesos per hour.

 

Still this shortcoming does not preclude certain parties from being able to communicate with large numbers of those still in the dark with regard to the Web.

 

And this was displayed sterlingly during the aftermath of Sendong.

 

One family in Balulang literally lost everything including their house during Sendong and a son-in-law was and is an employee of mine.  Fortunately, he decided to keep his family in our building where he stayed rather than make a late-night visit to his in-laws in Balulang. 

 

In the aftermath we all pitched in to assist the victimized family members.  But our meager assistance paled in comparison with the assorted assistance received from government and other institutions – from City Hall, to Red Cross, to the government social welfare departments. This family now has recovered quite modestly, thanks to a private endowment and the Red Cross.

 

All these good things  in spite of practically an entire city in gaping need of assistance with basic necessities – from water to light, to food and blankets, etc.

 

But what brought wonder to me was how these huge masses of people could be gathered together with great ease and convenience.  So I had to ask the surviving mother of that stricken family how it was done.  And the reply was:

 

“It was easy, Sir.  All our phone numbers were collected by SWS, City Hall, etc.  And we were told that when our time and schedule came, we would each receive a text message with the time and the location where to receive our aid.  So we wasted no unnecessary time going to the designated place and everybody received their share promptly without extra hassle.”

 

Now project to the future, say during the next election cycle in 2013.  Would these same parties you think be receiving text messages on what to do during Election Day and where maybe they can get their “provisions”?  Who knows?

 

Indeed, the wonders of even simple technology like a cell phone in communicating with large masses of people are staggering and limitless.

 

You think maybe this access would be used as a potent political tool, come next election in 2013?

 

 

 

 

My Own Thoughts on the Last US Elections

When I clicked on the Opinion tab of the Goldstar Daily webpage, my heart started to skip a bit when I read the title of a column, Thoughts on the US Elections (2). Because all this time I noticed that whatever little interest on the subject the locals have shown, has always been quite perfunctory and relied mostly on talking points and opinion columns emanating from the US mainstream media.  I yet have to encounter a more in-depth analysis of US politics that went beyond the comfort zones defined by such mainstream media practitioners as the NYT, CNN, Washington Post, even the ascendant Huffington Post, etc.  And without a doubt, most of MSM in the US espouse the liberal/progressive orientation on issues, and this they do so ardently and with great passion to the point that their journalism has in most crucial issues been colored by their deeply-held ideologies.  This is an accepted fact in the US supported by all sorts of data.  Therefore, unaware readers tend to get only one side of most stories. And I had been chomping at the bits looking for opportunities where I could present the other side for a more balanced understanding of issues.

 

I was doubly excited to read that the item was written by Fr. Leo, who is not only a distant relative but a friend since childhood his having been gang mates with several elder brothers of mine.  I knew then that I could be open and frank with issues I may have regarding statements in his column.  Understanding that the (2) in the column headline meant there was an earlier article of the same title; I searched for the original article and decided to download both and collate them as one treatise.

 

So why should I address statements he made in his two articles?

 

Having lived in the US these past three decades and more, I do feel I have developed insights and understanding that may not be that readily visible to other interested parties relying only on printed reports and other second-hand sources.  And my having spent a good part of that time being avidly interested and also involved in US politics I believe would also accord  me some inherent advantages.

 

Being a registered Independent was an added boon since all other political parties vied for my patronage by providing and trying to sell me their candidates and platforms of government.  And in California where I reside, there is the added perspective of being able to participate in open primaries of both major parties, again giving one freer and more access to party issues and initiatives.

 

Since I encounter on all levels of local communications be they print, conversation, etc. a lot of misperceptions and maybe even “myths” of US politics, the job of exposition becomes even more imperative.

 

Allow me to proceed then.  But first I would like it known this early that Fr. Leo in his articles made many perceptive statements about US politics and society which I find very much as hitting the mark.  Thus I shall deal mostly with the exceptions that I perceive.

 

Fr. Leo rightfully extols the initial election of Barack Obama as history-setting, the first time that an American of mixed parentage, one parent being Caucasian and the other a Kenyan from Africa, was elected to the highest office of the land.  The US electorate then was at the cusp of making a change from a Republican administration that was being demolished by its critics, many coming from the mainstream media. And as an aside, many of the charges then leveled against the Bush administration would be the same actions Obama would take and pursue, but the then vocal MSM would suddenly lose their voices. Anyway, this and the stupendous Chicago-style political machinery that employed innovative and precedent-setting methods of campaigning carried Obama to victory.  But the alignment of the stars was just right anyway so that any Democratic candidate, say a Hillary Clinton, could have overhauled any Republican candidate.  The GOP side never had a chance from the get-go, though the VP nominee, Sarah Palin, did initially energize this distressed and demoralized side.  This was a given and Obama was the number called. So the US did make a historic selection – Obama the first US president of mixed parentage.  And whites were a very big part of the mixture in the electorate that gave him the vote,  many of them Independents, readily dismissing any lurking thoughts about racism or discrimination.

 

On the issue of racism in Obama’s re-election bid, I take exception with Fr. Leo’s observation that again prejudice against a black man reared its ugly head.  The race card was almost always dealt by the Democrats during that last election, hoping to incite and instill division in the electorate’s ethnic ranks.  The other party had always tip-toed around this issue knowing current sensibilities.  But the President and his surrogates, which most everybody believe have presided over very divisive politics, found and pursued with relish the politics of division to their advantage.  Again as before, whites crossed ethnic lines, the second time around 39% of whites voted for Obama. So this “straw man” argument was used to advantage by a now unscrupulous administration.  But is there still prejudice?  Of course, there still is – on all sides.

 

Fr. Leo assumes because the Republican Party is the party of rich people that it spent more.  Well, when Obama first won, he definitely spent a lot more than the other candidate.  He waived his right to receive government money so he could raise unlimited funds which he did, including from foreign sources.  For his re-election, early on he promised in public to raise one billion dollars, yes that is with a B.  Did he?  Including from all sources like super-PACs, I am confident he did raise that much.  Plus, he utilized with resolve and gusto all the resources and perks of his office for his protracted campaign which started from day one of his first election.  So let us disabuse ourselves from the mythical thinking that Republicans have all the rich people.  Obama surrounds himself with rich people from Hollywood bigwigs to business leaders like gigantic GE’s President J. Immelt, from top Wall Street honchos to Main Street players.  And of course, the MSM players who carried water for Obama are no small-time operators themselves.

 

With regard to the issue of Abortion, I can only say the following.  It is one of the sturdy and steadfast pillars of the Democratic Party, representing a large constituency of hard-core adherents. Unfortunately or not, many prominent Catholics count among the members in their ranks, most prominent are the sitting VP, Senator Kerry, Cong. Pelosi, etc.  Mind you, these are Catholics that will not only respect the Abortion law in the US, but will support and/or initiate legislation/initiatives/bills/ that promote legal abortion.  Sadder still to note, that Catholics making up 20% of the population, translating to about 60 million people, surely did not give the majority to the other party which had a Catholic (VP candidate Ryan) who abides with the Church doctrine on abortion.  Instead it gave the nod to Obama.

 

Fr. Leo theorizes that the issue abortion should trump all other issues in that election.  He probably got his wish because while many earnest people thought that the flailing economy was the greatest and most important issue, it appeared to have not been.  Thus, the abortion issue probably gained more importance, and the vote went to those who favored almost unlimited freedoms to practice it.  The Democratic Party.

 

Again, I take exception when Fr. Leo puts abortion, the killing of a human fetus, in the same category as torture, a charge thrust repeatedly against the Bush Administration.  This torture was done to 3 notorious terrorists in the form of waterboarding which is classified as enhanced interrogation and none of the 3 died.  Also very different from escalated drone attacks used by the current administration to “assassinate” terrorists, including US-citizen terrorists, and which typically include collateral damages.  So  where are the howls of protest?

 

Regarding Fr. Leo’s comparison of the two candidates, traditionally reelection-bids are referenda of the incumbent’s performance in office.  Thus, his campaign typically is tailored to highlight his successful programs. This was completely abandoned during this last election for one good plausible reason.  He couldn’t name one to highlight and exalt.  Even his historic Obamacare to this day has very high unfavorable ratings with the electorate.  So the incumbent’s campaigns focused on demolishing and demoralizing the opposition, churning out negative ads after negative ads touching on mostly petty issues not pivotal or consequential to the office being sought after.  And this he got concerted and almost unanimous support from MSM.  The only thorn among the TV roses, graced by CNN, MSNBC, and the 3 broadcast networks, was upstart Fox News, which may lean conservative but definitely not a lapdog for the Republican Party

 

Fr. Leo touched on Obama’s slogan, Moving Forward, which by the way has long ties with Marxism, Socialism, and yes, Communism.  It did resonate with many impressionable young in the US electorate.  Sad but true.

 

Lastly, Fr. Leo postulates on the moral decay of the US, as exhibited in its entertainment and recreation industries.  Now pause for a moment to ponder which party Hollywood has latched on as its champion? Definitely not the party where conservatives have staked their future.