LATEST SWS SURVEY - BAYANI FERNANDO: 1%

Bayani Fernando's political machinery is on cruise control for now. Nowadays, one can easily spot tricycles carrying his stickers which says, 'Bayani 2010 For President Movement,' or his 'new and improved' posters which has a confusing new name for our country - Metro Philippines. What that exactly means is still a puzzle to me to this day. I'm sure he's also clueless as to what it means. Is he trying to put the whole country under his jurisdiction, for obvious reason? In the latest survey conducted by the Social Weather Stations (SWS) from the dates September 24-27, 2008, the following results show Noli de Castro 19% from 28%, Joseph Estrada 17% (not included last March), Manny Villar 17% from 10%, Chiz Escudero 13% from 16%, Loren Legarda 8% from 20%, Ping Lacson 8% from 10%, Mar Roxas 6% from 12%, Gloria Arroyo 3%, Dick Gordon 1%, Jojo Binay 1%, and Bayani Fernando 1%. It's obvious that legions of Filipinos believe that Bayani Fernando (contrary to what many people think), just doesn't have even the faintest qualities to make president, and one outstanding reason among several is that they simply don't trust him at all, not forgetting how he has and continues to abuse his position as MMDA chairman. It is also my personal opinion that Mr. Fernando's foot simply doesn't fit the presidential shoe, even if that shoe is hand-made especially for him by a reputable shoe maker from Marikina. The presidential shoe will always be too big for his parochial foot.

(Image from http://img5.imageshack.us/)

GMA'S NATIONWIDE PROGRAMS

The Social Weather Stations (SWS) and Pulse Asia recently conducted a survey on GMA. It was discovered that Pinoys are generally happy and satisfied with GMA's nationwide programs. When asked what program they like and approve the most, majority of respondents replied: 'DYESEBEL.'

(Image from http://cdn4.wn.com/)

SONA - SAME OLD NOTHING AGAIN

Gloria's State Of The Nation Address (SONA) is a ritual that coincides with the opening of Congress. A lot of preparation has gone to the speech (thanks to AIM Professor Gary B. Olivar), not to mention the collateral fuss that the whole government structure underwent for the occasion - overspending taxpayer's money for the Batasan and its surroundings (thanks to Speaker Boy Nograles), securing the place and the roads that lead there, printing invitations and programs, installing a new set of microphones, tapes, CDs, flags, lights, plants, drinks, finger food, light dinner at the lounge, haute couture for the lady (and the not so lady) representatives, signature suits for the men (and the not so men) representatives, and a host of other details and expenses for a one-hour, lie-filled speech. Only those with invitations are allowed entrance to the hall and galleries. The rest of the nation for whom the address is being made are expected to watch the televised broadcast in their homes or offices, or wherever they may be at the time of delivery and are advised to take two (2) tablets of antacid before listening to Gloria's Sonatas de Kasinungalingan, or they may watch the replay before retiring to bed at night. Last year, the SWS gave GMA a negative rating in the urban centers, but a slightly higher average rating in the provinces although still in the negative too. Why is this so? Has she not worked hard enough to make the citizenry feel that her super-projects are already part of the legacy she has spoken of? A bankrupt legacy perhaps. Are not these super- projects for the super- regions super enough to have the people feel superiorly taken care of? There are lessons in history one reads about regarding the leader who does not encourage the people to be part of whatever the government is doing with them. Participation, initiative (not inis sa thief) and responsibility - these are the key elements if one is to spur the people to development. Everything the president has talked about lies (lies!) in the balance between the forward motion of her projects and the participation, initiative and responsibility coming from the mass base. If these are not elicited from the people, the recited list of infrastructure would remain simply as cold as steel, iron and cement, while the individual citizen remains equally as cold and detached. If such a relationship between the leader and the people has not been established, or has been falsified, all these super-projects would self-extinguish in the consciousness of the masses. If she is not able to "awaken the imagination of her audience," hence the oratorical delivery of the SONA would be for naught. And I expect it to be just that on Monday's SONA.

(Image from http://www.abante.com.ph/)

CHARITY FOR THE DOWNTRODDEN

It seems altruism is not something we Filipinos are big on. While billionaires Bill Gates and Warren Buffet are giving away virtually all their wealth to ease poverty in the Third World, we can't even spare a peso to a street urchin begging for alms. In a recent survey, the Ateneo-based Social Weather Stations (SWS), a normally accurate and correct surveyor of the public pulse, found out that when it comes to charity, we seem to be paying nothing more than lip service. The survey - covering 1,200 respondents aged 17 to 69 across four economic classes - revealed that the average Filipino gives to charity only 12 times a year, at most.
In Metro Manila, where awareness of charitable organizations are supposed to be the highest, only 3 out of 5 are aware that there are organizations advocating care for orphans and street children. Are we really stone-cold tightwads when it comes to charity? Not really. Our hearts still bleed when we see a rain-soaked three-year old girl barely able to carry her eight-month old brother begging at a corner of a busy intersection. We do, however, often ask ourselves if by giving alms, are we really helping them or making their situation worse? We are bothered sometimes because we know that the same girl and the same baby are going to be at that same corner when we pass by it again tomorrow. We wonder whether the boy with the amputated leg would use the loose change we give him to a cara y cruz match or buy a vial of mind-altering adhesive - rugby. We also cannot shake away the thought that all those loose change we dole out may end up in the hands of a syndicate running all those begging children, amputees and beaten-down senior citizens. But we give, anyway, thinking that it's not our problem how they use the money. The important thing is that we give away something, anything to help them get through the day. But sometimes, even that is not the wise thing to do. For we often wish though that we can do more for them, and remember that mantra that we think is a much better recourse: "Do not give them fish, but teach them to fish." The problem as the SWS has correctly diagnosed, is that we often don't have a clue how to help them help themselves. The closest and the most immediate thing we can think of at that very moment is to drop a few coins in those cans sitting beside the cash register of a shopping mall or a restaurant advocating a noble cause: caring for orphans, getting street-children off the streets, helping battered women and protecting the environment. Sometimes, we come across charitable causes in our own workplaces that ask us to donate a portion of our salaries, or just our own time to an unselfish undertaking, like building homes for the homeless, visiting an orphanage or a medical mission, but these are few and are often seasonal. The SWS is correct in advising charitable organizations to get their act together so they can make the public more aware of their existence and the causes they espouse. Otherwise, they simply seem to us as nothing but vaporware, and we just do the best we can, in our own small way to help out. We do have a bleeding heart for the downtrodden. The problem is: How can we really stop the bleeding?

(Image from http://daylife.com/)