In a previous post (Why Filipinos must not. . . , Feb. 16, 2016), I suggested that Philippine presidential candidate Rodrigo Duterte was “an egomaniac who believes himself to be above the law” and whose “delusions of personal greatness will eventually bloat” causing him to “become a dictator.” President-elect Duterte has proven otherwise.
Immediately after having won the Philippine presidential election on May 9, 2016, Rodrigo Duterte toned down his rhetoric and admitted that all his tough talk was campaign ploy, saying that he was going to serve according to law even when he acts “tough on crime, drugs, cigarettes, corruption – and everything else wrong with the country.”
Bravo, president-elect Duterte!
Duterte ran a controversial campaign in which he cursed detractors, bad-mouthed Pope Francis, and promised to personally execute wrong-doers, but he bent down to become humble in victory and sober in his approach to his inauguration.
Rodrigo Duterte won the hearts and minds of folk all across the country’s social and economic strata.
While the out-going Aquino administration associated the country’s problems with graft and corruption and focused on the prosecution and conviction of corrupt officials, Duterte aimed his sights not only at government corruption but largely at the economic problems of the people. Candidate Duterte focused on the plight of the large percentage of Filipinos living in extreme poverty all across the country (While the Philippine economy grows. . ., Sept. 27, 2015), while simultaneously appealing to the economically well-to-do and the wealthy by credibly talking tough against crime, drugs, and tobacco.
The people saw in Duterte’s tough talk and stance a person who could truly deliver on his promises. On the other hand, candidate Mar Roxas – poorly short in personality and charisma – delivered his message of helping the poor with little to no credibility. The rest of the aspirants to the presidency – Grace Poe, Jejomar Binay, and Mirriam Santiago – were non-factors. Poe was handicapped by questions on her citizenship, Binay was plagued by plunder and corruption cases filed against him, and Santiago was simply out of touch.
Duterte has promised results in three to six months of his administration. He may very well achieve his goal if he pursues it with what is expected: extra-judicial efficiency.
Emmanuel “Manny” Dapidran Pacquiao, currently an elected member of the Philippine House of Representatives, is running to be a Senator of the Republic. Is he qualified? Is he mentally and emotionally fit for such high public office?
Manny Pacquiao – who is also an Evangelical Protestant minister – is a homophobic demagogue who appears to seek recognition to compensate for his shortcomings and poor beginnings in life. He wants to be a senator because he feels inadequate as a congressman, because his ego needs a bigger lift. He joined a religious group as a minister because he feels the urge to wow it over his people and win their utter reverence, knowing that they already admire and respect him for his boxing skills.
Saudi Arabia – once the United States’ most fervent and dependable ally in the Middle East – has become the United States’ biggest diplomatic liability.
Much of the hatred in the world is born of religious, ethnic, cultural, or political intolerance. Those that preach hate should be punished for inciting crime and criminal activity, and for effectively being principals in such crimes.
Free speech and the right to peaceably assemble come with the responsibility to be respectful of others’ dignity, rights, and privileges.
They are the religious extremists, the Islamic Wahhabists and radical evangelical Christians (among them, leaders of the Westboro Baptist Church) that condemn people not of their faith or who do not heed their teachings. They are the ‘white’ supremacist ‘societies’ – including the Ku Klux Klan – that believe in the superiority of the ‘white race’ over the rest of humanity and that demand exclusivity and the ‘elimination’ of people not of their color. And they are the political demagogues who spew hateful discourse against those whose ethnicity, culture, and religious and/or political views they dislike and oppose.
Now that is some moxie!
Every nation on earth has the potential to produce its own brand of terrorists and criminals. But only a few nations provide the media and conditions that produce and nurture terrorists and criminals. There are nations notorious for organized crime syndicates, and there are countries where corruption is the way of life. And there are countries that allow institutions – in consideration of the rights to free speech and peaceful assembly – to promote and foster hate and ill-will toward others. The latter becomes the breeding ground for all sorts of terrorists.
Saudi Arabia’s Wahhabists (a Sunni Muslim sect) is responsible for the propagation of organizations like al Qaeda, the Taliban, and ISIS. The American government’s inability to outlaw or reign in the activities of organizations that incite hatred and violence encourages many members of fundamentalist or evangelical Christian, White Supremacist, and anti-abortion or pro-Life groups to take the law into their own hands. And then, of course, there are the mentally unstable people who “hear voices” that tell them to do certain evil things.
America’s fundamentalist and evangelical Christians unwittingly induce people to commit crime and terrorist acts in the name of their causes and beliefs. An example is the very recent killing spree at a Colorado Springs Planned Parenthood building by Robert Lewis Dear. Colorado Springs is a hotbed of racists. Colorado state has an “open carry” weapons law. In an another instance, the brothers Dzokhar and Tamerlan Tsarnaev planted home-made bombs at a Boston Marathon site in 2013, killing 3 and wounding 264; they later engaged police in a shootout.
The United States of America – a nation of immigrants – appears to be turning away from and shunning its history. More and more voices are condemning the US government’s plans to provide asylum to thousands of desperate Syrian war refugees.
There is no one in America – outside of the country’s Indian natives – who is not an immigrant or the descendant of an immigrant.
America’s record as a haven for the oppressed and misplaced is well-established. The US welcomed 1.2 million Cubans after their country turned communist; tens of thousands of Koreans after the Korean War; 65,000 Vietnamese following the end of the Vietnam War; 300,000 Soviet Jews in the late 1980s; thousands of Afghans in the aftermath of the Soviet invasion of their country; and 100,000 Iraqis following the Gulf War. All of these refugees have become part of the American social milieu.
Refugees do not easily qualify for admission to the US – they have to undergo a vetting process that could last a year or two. The process weeds out possible criminals, jihadists, or other religious zealots and makes sure only qualified people are admitted.
The inscription on the base of the Statue of Liberty is America’s national credo – and is the foundation of America’s national philosophy.
Many Americans appear to be confused about, or unsure of, their political identities. Some Americans align with a party because they have friends or associates within it, while some drift towards a party because of one or two platform issues they like, and still others join a party because they are attracted by its charismatic leader.
In 1912, the Democratic Party started taking stands “to the left of” the Republican Party position, especially on economic and social matters. The socialist philosophy of Franklin D. Roosevelt formed the Democratic Party’s agenda beginning in 1932, controlling much of the government’s programs. Meanwhile, Lincoln’s Republican Party was being scorched by internal factions and scandals, resulting in changes in its membership and thinking. Starting at about 1910, the party became pro-business and started embracing the viewpoints of the “religious right.”
A Democrat is against growing the military while a Republican wants a militarily powerful nation. A Democrat will oppose military intervention in foreign disputes while a Republican will seek it.
Demographically, more minorities (Blacks, Asians, Latinos, etc.), including immigrants, are Democrats while more Whites are Republican.
There should be a law making it a misdemeanor for one to have achieved nothing – or next to nothing – for the benefit of a constituency while enjoying the title, benefits, and honor of a public office.
Bernie Sanders had served as a Vermont congressman for sixteen years when he was elected to the US senate in 2006. He was reelected to the senate in 2012. In all his 25 years as a legislator, Sanders could not point to or name anything that he could claim as an “achievement.” All he has been known for are his “criticisms” of US foreign policy and his “status” as a self-described “democratic socialist.” An Independent for almost his entire political career, Sanders joined the Democratic Party early this year – only because he’s running for president.
The fact that some politicians make a hobby of holding public office does not seem to bother their conscience or concern their constituents.
JULIUS C. WILLIS JR: Our World, Today! 