when cardinal rosales took over as archbishop of manila, the country and most specially civil society gave a collective ho-hum. some mourned. for good reason – rosales replaced the hugely popular and well-loved cardinal jaime sin.
cardinal sin is known for his wit and intelligence and above all, his activism in philippine political and national life. he is largely credited for the beginnings of the People Power Revolution that removed ferdinand marcos in 1986.
nobody will forget that day. people were just starting to gather in EDSA, then over the radio cardinal sin asked catholics to get out of their homes and proceed to isetan in cubao, the starting point for a march towards camp crame edsa for the people to protect camp crame and camp aguinaldo. the rest is history.
that kind of involvement is something everyone knew rosales will not give. and true enough, upon his installation in the highest position in the philippine catholic church, he simply disappeared into nowhere saying nothing about what was happening to the country. all of a sudden the archdiocese of manila turned silent, the exact opposite of what it was before. not only that, he instructed priests and bishops not to meddle in political affairs.
that was rosales then, but the rosales that we hear now is very, very different.
the bishops and now being led by rosales have been very vocal about the cha-cha and con-ass, the move by arroyo supporters to change the constitution to enable a term extension that can mean arroyo will install herself as president for life of the philippines.
cardinal rosales has transformed himself. and his latest statement to describe allowing the congressmen to form themselves into a con-ass to amend the constitution : “It’s like entrusting your teenage daughter in the care of a rapist.”
that statement is just one of many signs, words said, rallies organized and movements led that is pointing to a more active involvement of catholic bishops in national issues.
welcome, cardinal rosales. i am sure cardinal sin is smiling in heaven.
Cardinal: Con-ass backers like rapists
MANILA, Philippines—Manila Archbishop Gaudencio Cardinal Rosales has expressed what may yet be his sharpest rebuke of administration lawmakers pushing a constituent assembly (Con-ass) to amend the 1987 Constitution.
“It’s like entrusting your teenage daughter in the care of a rapist,” Rosales told reporters. “I’m sorry for the analogy, but you get the idea.”
The cardinal said it would not be prudent to allow certain members of the House of Representatives to perform the task of Charter change because of their vested interests including “political dynasties.”
He added: “[There] is a danger of extending [the term of] the present administration and those who are occupying positions [in it] down to the last office.”
But Rosales, who now holds the prelature from which the late Jaime Cardinal Sin called on the people to overthrow two presidents, indicated the Catholic hierarchy’s support for “improving the Constitution.”
SWS survey : filipinos united in support for the RH Bill 5043 – across the board, even among catholics
filipinos united in their support of RH Bill 5043
posted here at 2010 Presidentiables are the results of the october 2008 SWS survey on the RH Bill 5043 and key charts. read in full here: http://2010presidentiables.wordpress.com/sws-survey-overwhelming-support-for-rh-bill-5043/
there is overwhelming support for the RH Bill across all demographics, all areas and even among catholics. the numbers are staggering – dominant support for the RH Bill across all groups.
the support is so overwhelming that the “undecided” across all groupings are even higher than those “not in favor”. more importantly, the “in favor” scores are signigicantly higher even if you add the “undecided” and “not in favor” scores.
in marketing terms, the RH Bill is a clear winner, no question about it. this country is hugely and deeply divided on many national and political issues but not on the RH Bill. it is probably one of the very few issues in the country where the filipino people are very much united on.
nobody can’t do it better than david letterman. a couple of gems from letterman!
the monologue, the first here is just brilliant!
Roxas won’t apologize for Friday’s expletive
abs-cbnNEWS.com | 12/15/2008 11:06 AMThey shouldn’t wait for an apology because it will never come, Sen. Manuel “Mar” Roxas said Monday.Roxas made the statement as a reaction to reports that the Palace was saddened with his swearing during his speech at the anti-charter change (cha-cha) rally in Makati City last Friday.
In a phone interview, deputy presidential spokesperson Anthony Golez said the Palace respects Roxas’ actions, saying that it is up to him if he wants to apologize or not.
“We respect everyone’s feelings. What is important is what is inside each person, and as for Roxas, he should just do whatever he thinks is right,” he said in an interview on ABS-CBN’s “Umagang Kay Ganda.”
At the same program, Roxas said that he has nothing to apologize for, saying that what he did was merely a reflection of the people’s frustrations towards the Arroyo administration.
“This is the real thing. I’m not plastic. This is the sentiment of the Filipino people, and the [administration] should act properly,” Roxas said in an interview at ABS-CBN’s “Umagang Kay Ganda.”
“We are hungry, we have no jobs, our only hope lies in other countries, not in our own. Despite these, the administration is preoccupied with cha-cha. I didn’t say anything beyond what the people feel. I just said the truth,” he added.
In spite of the sudden outburst of emotions during the rally, Roxas made it clear that the expletive-laced speech was addressed to the situation, and not to President Arroyo.
“My swearing was because of the awful situation we are in. That is what I am referring to,” he said.
senator putang ina has taken a tough stand on the words he uttered. we will not dwell into examining his reasons for saying those words and his rationalization on why he does not want to apologize for it. what we will do is post a few questions for roxas to answer before he goes to sleep at night.
first, what he has done is he gave himself a brand negative. whether that brand negative is big, important, detrimental or not, the point is he gave himself one. right now it may be small to medium but who knows what the future will be. of course, it can both ways, that negative might not grow and in fact it might disappear. or if he is unlucky, it might not. only time will tell.
you usually do not want a brand to have a negative. the ideal you aim for is a perfect brand where all key components are not just favorable but also preferred. but that is normally not enough. you also look if it has some negatives.
launching a brand with some negatives is a high risk situation. once it is discovered by consumers, it can grow and it can spread when it does, then there is no stopping it.
and that leads us to the questions roxas need to answer. these are the questions he needs to answer to answer the question, “Should I apologize or not?”
- media will not easily forget it. once done, it is forever there. filed and ready for use anytime.
- his presidentiable opponents will also not forget it. it does not matter if it’s small or big, they will always make everything big. they will certainly make it matter.
- is his hard line stance now of not apologizing worth all that much versus the potential flack he can get?
- this is a needless and unnecessary distraction. he will now forever find himself answering the same question over and over again – why did he say “putang ina”? he will now forever need to defend himself. rather than spend time discussing his plans and ideas for the country, he will have to take valuable time explaining this.
- let’s be brutal here — what is it that he gained when he said those words? and what is it in reality did he gain from saying he will not apologize? did those things add to his popularity? or did they remove something from it?
- if roxas apologizes, what will be removed from him? and what will be given? which is bigger? what is more important?
- and this is probably the most important question of all – is the kind of man he was when he said those expletives the real person that he is?
we have made a point about the shoe throwing incident president bush experienced recently as perhaps the defining moment for his presidency. it’s eloquent – bush in iraq delivering his valedictory address, then an iraqi throwing shoes at the president of the most powerful nation. it speaks volumes, some of which a measure of popularity or lack of it, for the president and how the iraq war has evolved to become not only in iraq but also in america itself and the rest of the world.
did mar roxas, an undeclared but sure thing presidentiable, have his own defining moment of his candidacy last friday?
mar roxas in front of thousands and on live tv cursed, said “putang ina” (SOB) referring to the issue of con-ass and term extension.
we are guilty of the same thing, well granted that some more than others, but we all have our share of cursing. often by ourselves and some in public.
but not all of us are senators. and fewer still, not in front of a crowd of thousands and on live tv. and that is where the key difference lie.
there are clear expectations in becoming a senator. they are always held to a higher standard. and cursing, saying those words exactly is the wrong thing to do.
senator miriam defensor is my favorite for these sorts of things. i make it a point to watch miriam do her thing when she gets mad or when she intends to be insulting. but i have not heard her cuss. and yet the way she does it is even more hysterical, much more biting. that’s because even though the thoughts are not, she uses acceptable words and even more elegant logic in delivering them.
not the same thing with mar roxas. he used gutter language. “salitang imburnal” in the vernacular. defensor uses gutter thoughts elegantly delivered in acceptable words. there was no elegance nor intelligence in what mar roxas said.
will those words define mar roxas’ candidacy? for now it is doing that. and we don’t know if down the line, as we get closer to 2010, if it will stick till then. the filipino electorate easily forgets and this one might have the same fate. he could be lucky.
the people might forget, but will media and specially his presidentiable opponents let us forget about it? unlikely.
what is not right about this is not so much the exact words said in that rally by mar roxas, it’s his reaction afterwards that is. he is unrepentant. he is adamant. and he will not apologize for it.
the cuss words will not do him in, it is the words he said after the cussing incident or those he will not say that might.
i think its a strategic blunder not to apologize. not apologizing and not repenting will not make it go away. it will continue to be there. eating his pride and apologizing on the other hand will make it go away.
in that sense, president bush is luckier and much smarter than mar roxas in managing their defining moments. president bush successfully ducked to avoid the twin shoe missiles and then made a joke of it later - they are a size 10. he came out agile, smart and self-effacing.
mar roxas’s day after action simply makes him a turd. an ass hole. brash and disrespectful. henceforth, he will be known as senator putang ina. will filipinos vote president putang ina?
a memo to senator mar roxas.
first posted in WAWAM! (http://the-wawam-file.blogspot.com/), we are now on the strategy #2 in john mccain;s losing marketing strategies.
i found the choice of sarah palin as uncharacteristically john mccain’s. it looks like someone else made this decision for him.
this image could very well be what will define george w bush’s presidency – an iraqi man throwing his shows at bush.
for the iraqi culture, using the sole of your shoes is the ultimate condemnation and insult one can give another person. we saw similar images when the US forces tore down sadam’s statue in baghdad during the invasion. iraqi men rushed to sadam’s huge statue face and kept hitting it with their shoes.
americans themselves no longer favor the iraq war that the US started. many americans now think the US went into war in iraq without any legitimate reason.
the US’ iraq war for many arab countries and other countries in many other continents have used it as the key reason for their dislike on america and americans. it is possible that history will conclude it was the start of the loss for the US as a glabal power.
an iraqi man in iraq throwing his shoes at bush may be the eloquent statement on what this iraqi war means for george bush and for the iraqi people.
in consumer marketing, when you do something new to your brand like a new ad, a new flavor or a new perfume you worry about two things, almost of equal importance – consumer preference or rejection and absence of negatives.
these things you find out through consumer research. doing research is very important as you don’t want to launch something that consumers will not like or something that will not build more business for you. launching it, then failing is a waste of investment and a blackeye to the brand.
the first one, consumer preference or rejection is very straight forward. the research will tell you if whatever new thing you plan to launch is liked or not liked by consumers.
the last one, though a risky thing to do, you lanuch the new thing when there is an absence of negatives. for sure if you have a high negatives, it will eventually bite you. it might not make itself known at the start but it might eventually build up and accumulate to something larger than the positive that it will over-power it.
that is the risk that the pro cha-cha groups are taking. while the protest rally was not as large, it’s reckless to read just the numbers. most of consumer sentiments on political issues, unlike in consumer marketing, are latent. the vaunted “silent majority” is very real.
there is no such thing as silent majority in consumer marketing. consumer research in consumer marketing if done well pull these types of consumers out. they are never silent, they are always vocal.
these latent or hidden sentiments can be called to surface fairly quickly. and once called, it cannot be stopped. this is a country who has done two people power revolutuons, doing a third one will be easy.
the administration congressmen have declared cha-cha thtough con-ass has been abandoned. given the obsession and persistence of arroyo in extending her term of office, con-ass as a way to do cha-cha may for now be shelved, but there are other ways to do it. and it’s almost sure, just like in the past, they will try again but in anther form.
consumers or the electorate has spoken many times before on cha-cha. and the voice says the same thing – they don’t want it. when will the administration finally listen to it?
Con-ass bid in House derailed
MANILA, Philippines—The Charter change (Cha-cha) express train was derailed on Friday after running head-on against the most broadly based civil society mass protest in Makati City since the declaration of a national emergency by President Macapagal-Arroyo in 2006.
The 10,000 crowd that packed the intersection of Ayala Avenue and Paseo de Roxas did not come up to the mammoth scale of the people power demonstrations at Edsa that deposed President Ferdinand Marcos in 1986 and President Joseph Estrada in 2001.
But the explosion of rage against Cha-cha expressed in the Makati multisectoral rally was sufficiently powerful to force the Arroyo administration to abandon the constitutional revision drive.
The rally was spearheaded by a coalition of forces associated with the Roman Catholic Church, which also provided the mass backbone of the two people power movements.
House Majority Leader Arthur Defensor declared on Saturday that the House of Representatives had abandoned its plan to unilaterally convene a constituent assembly (Con-ass) to consider amendments to the 1987 Constitution without the participation of the Senate.
Strongest message yet
The Senate resolution was initiated by Sen. Francis Pangilinan, who said it sent “the strongest message yet that the Senate stands united against the allies of the president in the Lower House to subvert the Constitution for dubious ends,” i.e., extend the term of the President beyond 2010.
Sign of intense outrage
Despite their perceptions dismissing the rally turnout as not as threatening as the mass protests during Edsa I and II, there were ample signs on the ground that the level of outrage against constitutional change has escalated and the groups now coalesced in the protest movement have increased.
They now embrace not only the Church-associated groups, but also leftist organizations, the major religious organizations, El Shaddai charismatic movement, big business leaders, leaders of opposition parties, senators aspiring for the presidency—all of whom joined the rally. These were the main components of Edsa I and II.
The Catholic hierarchy has been so outraged by the stepped-up drive by the administration to revise the Constitution to open the way for the extension of the President’s hold on power beyond 2010.
The opinion surveys show widespread revulsion at the thought of an extended Arroyo presidency.
Even the moderate archbishop of Manila, Gaudencio Cardinal Rosales, raised his voice in protest. “Let’s stop all this foolishness,” he said on the eve of the rally, voicing the sentiments of the Catholic Bishops’ Conference of the Philippines condemning the Con-ass congressional fast-track.
At no time since 2004 have public opinion surveys shown a decisive shift toward opposition to Cha-cha. A recent Social Weather Stations survey shows that 64 percent of voters rejected Cha-cha at this time.
While the numbers at the rally were not of the scale that would intimidate the administration from pushing its constitutional revision project, there are warnings that the demonstrations represent the head winds of a storm that is ready to break out if the forces behind Cha-cha ignore them.
Defensor may be listening to these warnings when he announced the abandonment of the overdrive for Con-ass without Senate participation.
Senate institutional opposition to Con-ass is the less important reason for the abandonment.
More important is the fury of an outraged public opinion building up behind the growing momentum of protests against Cha-cha being used as a weapon to smuggle Ms Arroyo into an extended term without electoral mandate.
december 14, 2004 – death of would have been president fernando poe jr and the philippine daily inquirer
fernando poe jr., FPJ or to his fanss “Da King” died four years ago. he was the considered as the King Of Philippine movies. an FPJ movie was a sure hit and would be remembered for years after and even across generations. but when he died, he was know for much more than that.
but when Da King died on december 14, 2004 at 12:15 am, he was know for something much more than his movies. he died as the man who challenged president gloria macapagal arroyo in the 2004 presidential election.
not only did he run for president, he thought he won the election and so did not only his fans but the masa as well. he filed an election protest but his life was cut short before a final decision was made on his election protest.
like all other media, the philippine daily inquirer was on a hospital watch for Da King. PDI printed their december 14, 2004 edition like all other days. but something happened. and this is what PDI did that is next in WAWAM!
posted here, continuation of obama’s winning marketing strategies: http://2010presidentiables.wordpress.com/obamas-winning-marketing-strategies/
first posted here: http://the-wawam-file.blogspot.com/
in consumer marketing, this is called down-scale distribution and presence.