Oh Those Republicans

This is a piece that I will write straight from the heart. It will also be my last write-up on last Tuesday's election

After suffering a devastating loss last Tuesday, the Republican Party is said to be doing some soul-searching as to the causes of their defeat. They are trying to figure out how to rebuild the party after two consecutive election losses that led first to the Republicans' losing their majorities in both the House of Representatives and the Senate in 2006 and second, the loss of the White House to the Democrats with the victory of President-elect Barack Obama.

Although Mr. Obama scored a landslide victory over Senator John McCain, the Republicans are consoling themselves with the thought that even though Mr. Obama garnered 53% of the popular vote as compared to Senator McCain's 46%, Senator McCain's percentage of the total vote was still higher than the 43% former President Bill Clinton got when Mr. Clinton won the Presidency in the 1992 elections.

The Republicans still think that they can win the electorate back in future election by emphasizing conservative principles such as their beliefs in smaller and more efficient government, lower taxes, a strong military, meritocracy, strong religious and family values, and the capitalist economic system.

On the surface, those conservative principles the Republicans espouse ought to be attractive to a lot of people, especially immigrants who want to start a new life in a new country. But the problem with the Republicans is that there are sectors within the Republican Party who are racist and stridently anti-immigrant. Although these bigots (let's call a spade a spade here) do not make up a majority of the Republican membership, their voices were loud enough and their numbers were big enough to prevent President George W. Bush and Senator McCain from enacting a comprehensive immigration reform law back in 2006.

President Bush, in the early part of this decade, realized the need for the Republican Party to be a more racially inclusive political party. For all his imperfections, Mr. Bush was a politically moderate man who wanted more minority groups to be welcomed and represented within the Republican Party. He knew and understood that a lot of minority groups share the same socially conservative and pro-family values that the Republican Party stands for. Thus, Mr. Bush worked hard to win the support of minority groups and promised them that he will work to pass a comprehensive immigration reform bill into law.

The bill was basically aimed at attracting illegal aliens to come out and register with the government authorities. Mr. Bush wanted the illegal aliens to pay taxes on income earned in the US but in exchange, they could gain a path towards permanent residency. His proposal enjoyed widespread support among Democrats and moderate Republicans such as Senator McCain. However, Mr. Bush ran into stiff resistance from members of his own party, specifically Republican congressmen who hid their racism under the guise of respect for the rule of law.

To make a long story short, the bill was defeated in Congress because of the hardline stance these anti-immigrant Republicans took. As a result, minority groups, especially the Hispanics, who helped Mr. Bush win reelection in 2004, switched their support to the Democrats and thus contributed significantly to Mr. McCain's defeat against Mr. Obama.

The irony from last Tuesday was that the Hispanics and other minority groups punished the Republican Party by voting against Mr. McCain, the man who helped Mr. Bush champion the ill-fated comprehensive immigration reform law. In addition, the Republicans are rapidly losing their hold in the most racially diverse areas of the nation. In the Northeastern region of the US where I live, with the lone exception of Maine, all Northeastern states (New York, New Jersey, New Hampshire, Vermont, Rhode Island, Massachusetts, Connecticutt, Pennsylvania, Delaware, Maryland, and Virginia) are now represented by Democrats in the US Senate. The same is true of the West Coast. As of last Tuesday's election, the entire West Coast region (made up of the states of Washington, Oregon, and California) are now likewise represented by Democrats in the US Senate.

If the Republicans seriously want to win back both the White House and Congress in the coming years, they need to reassess their attitudes and policies towards ethnic minorities. The demographics in the US are changing dramatically. According to the latest figures from the US Census Bureau, 44% of American children today are ethnic minorities, almost a 1-to-1 parity. The bureau projects that by 2050, non-Hispanic whites will make up 46% of the US population, down from 68% today.

But in spite of such statistics and projections, a number of Republicans still continue to ignore the immigrant community. They still pursue policies seemingly under the assumption that what worked well for them in the past in a predominantly white America will continue to work for them in the future.

What a lot of Republican politicians and their followers fail to realize is that by continuing to ignore immigrants and minorities, the Republicans run the risk of being reduced to a regional political party and worse, probably an irrelevant one in the years to come. Over the last few days, I read several reports on the web and on newspapers as to how the Republicans plan to revive their party. However, most of the Republicans' plans still fail to mention the urgent need to reach out to minorities. Some voices of reason and moderation within the party see the need to do so but for now, it seems that the Republican Party leadership is still clinging to their old ways.

I said at the beginning of this piece that I was writing it straight from the heart. I did so because of feelings of anger and sadness for the very sorry state the party now finds itself in. This Republican Party was a party that was once led by the great Abraham Lincoln. This Republican Party was the party that had once fought so hard to free the slaves and effectively ended slavery. It is highly ironic then that a hundred fifty years later, due to the narrow-mindedness and bigotry of some groups within it, this Republican Party is a party that now finds itself shunned by the very people it once fought so hard to free.

Congratulations, President Obama

This blog takes a few moments to congratulate former Senator and now President-elect Barack Obama on his historic victory. After a campaign that was remarkable for its discipline and consistency of message, his victory was indeed sweet and definitely one for the ages.

African-Americans have gone through a lot of pain, suffering and injustice since they were imported from Africa as slaves in 1619. It's been close to 400 years since they first set foot on American soil and yet, millions of them remain impoverished, unemployed, trapped in broken homes and live in tough, crime-ridden neighborhoods. The income of the average African-American family lags that of the average white American family. A disproportionately large number of inmates in American prisons are African-Americans.

I just hope that all African-Americans, especially the kids, will find inner strength and inspiration from Mr. Obama's achievement. I hope that a lot more African-American kids stay in school and do good for themselves so that someday, more of them will get to achieve what Mr. Obama did last Tuesday night.

McCain and "Palin" on SNL

In what could be their last joint appearance on Saturday Night Live, Senator McCain and Governor "Palin" were on the show last night to "raise" additional campaign funds to help counter the Obama campaign's tremendous advantage in campaign finances.

Earlier in the week, the Obama Campaign purchased a half hour of air time on three major networks. Presented as "infomercials" on Senator Obama, these were supposed to package the Senator's "closing statements" in the dying days of this historic campaign. It is known that the state of the McCain campaign's finances compare poorly to Senator Obama's. Thus, the following comedy skit from SNL shows Senator McCain's two-fold "response" by not only getting some air time but also raising some much-needed campaign cash:

I must say that Mrs. McCain did some pretty good acting in that cameo appearance, didn't she? :-)

One very positive thing about these American politicians is that, unlike their counterparts in many Third World countries, most of them don't take themselves too seriously. A lot of screaming, debating, arguing, and insulting may occur between them during the heat of the campaign. But once the campaign is over and the election results are out, the will of the voters is respected and the losing candidate promptly concedes and congratulates the victor.

Playing Things Safe at San Miguel

I was reading the Business Section of yesterday's issue (October 29) of the Inquirer when I was struck by an event that was reported in this article. The article reported on the UK-based investment firm Ashmore Group's move to increase its control over Petron. I have no problem with foreigners increasing their level of investment in Filipino companies as long as the investment would lead to the creation of more jobs and better incomes for our countrymen.

However, I was not too happy to find in the same article that San Miguel Corporation, that long-time food and beverage conglomerate, has plans to buy into Petron too. In fact, reading further, I found that San Miguel was seeking more than 50% control of Petron, this planned move was announced right after acquiring a 27% stake in Meralco last Monday.

I am no strategic genius or business whiz but San Miguel's foray into power distribution and its planned entry into the oil refining business should not impress any serious student of Philippine business. This company has been able to lord it over the Philippines for many decades due to its sheer size and lack of true competition. Given its reputation and the resources at its disposal, I expect a lot more from a multi-billion dollar corporation who has been around since 1890. But aside from the Philippines, its premier product, San Miguel Beer, still does not have a significant presence in any foreign market save for Hongkong.

I love San Miguel's beer and I strongly believe that the product has the potential to compete with the world's best. But San Miguel's management hasn't done a very good job of introducing and marketing its premier product into different foreign markets. It seems content playing a conservative game of marketing San Miguel Beer only in places marked by a large Filipino presence. Instead of trying to compete in the global market against foreign brands, San Miguel's management seems content to just play it safe within its home grounds.

In my humble opinion, this is the problem when a company the size of San Miguel has never operated in an environment where it had to seriously compete to either maintain or expand its share of the market. Although the security afforded by a protected business environment may seem reassuring to a company's investors, the lack or absence of challenges or fights from a serious competitor never truly forced San Miguel to seek greater efficiency in resource allocation to lower its costs and boost its market share. It never had to mount a serious counterthrust to any competitor's moves. In short, it has a management that by international standards has never been truly battle-tested.

Instead of growing the company's revenues organically by expanding the market share of its products locally or by expanding into foreign markets either through strategic acquisitions or strategic alliances, San Miguel's management decided to pursue the path of least resistance by growing the company through investments into other industries WITHIN the Philippines even if these companies are in businesses outside of San Miguel's core competency. Even its selection of industries to invest in (power distribution and oil refining) are "safe" industries in the Philippine context. Both are practically cash cows and both are environments with limited or no competition.

In a previous job many years ago, I had the chance to be part of teams that analyzed parts of San Miguel's operations in a couple of its divisions. Typical of problems in a virtual monopoly, we found bloated bureaucracies, operational inefficiencies, waste, and even corruption. Due to the absence of competitive market pressures, we sensed no urgency on the part of both management and employees to fix their problems. I don't mean to paint a broad brush but a culture of complacency certainly prevailed. The place ran like a government office. I have no reason to believe that such mediocrities and problems have gone away because the environment San Miguel operates in remains virtually unchanged.

San Miguel is a company that can do more and achieve more. A lot of foreigners I know who have tasted its beer love it. Aside from beer, it has a wide array of products that are of high quality that competing in foreign markets and gaining the acceptance of foreign customers should not be deemed an insurmountable challenge. Instead of pouring its resources into businesses it knows next to nothing about, the company ought to focus its energies on its core competency. Instead of focusing on protecting its local market share and stifling local competition, San Miguel's management owes it to the country, the Filipino people, and themselves to prove that the people behind San Miguel are made of sterner stuff. The only way to do so is to unleash the competitive spirit within them and do competitive battles on foreign shores.

Mr. McCain Failed To Connect

In the debate Tuesday night in Nashville, Tennessee, one that he desperately needed to win in order to turn back the Barack Obama tide, Senator John McCain utterly failed.

In a debate that was set in a townhall type of meeting where the presidential candidates fielded questions from an audience of undecided voters, Mr. McCain failed to deliver. The knockout blow he needed to assure Americans that he would be the right President to deal with the nation's economic problems eluded him. It was ironic because the debate's townhall format was supposed to play to Mr. McCain's strength.

But unlike Senator Obama who was able to articulate the economic issues down to the level of how such issues affect family's budgets, their access to credit, their retirement funds and everyday lives of millions of Americans, Mr. McCain pretty much stayed within his comfort zone. He stuck to his favorite talking point that freezing government spending would lead to lower deficits and therefore, lower taxes.

However, McCain's line did not and still does not resonate well with the average American. In a time when people are gravely concerned about the impact of the financial crisis on their family budgets, their access to credit, their purchasing power, and their ability to save for retirement, education, and health care, Mr. McCain failed to directly address such concerns. The impact of reduced government spending on the lives of taxpayers are not immediately felt when compared to reduced witholding (or payroll) taxes that people will immediately see on their paychecks.

There's a lot of anxiety and worry over the financial crisis. People are cutting back on spending. I take the train to work and I noticed recently that there are a lot more cars on my train station's parking lot these days, a sign that more people now commute than drive themselves to work. Last week, a report came out that car sales in the US which normally average about 1.3 million units a month registered September sales of 965,000, roughly a 26% drop. All carmakers, even the Japanese, reported double-digit drops in sales figures. ABC News recently reported that more than 500 car dealerships have closed since the start of the year. The lower sales was attributed to customers cutting back on spending and tighter access to car loans. Restaurants, department stores, airlines, jewelry stores have all reported drops in revenues.

Mr. McCain was correct when he stated that there was too much anger out there at Wall Street and at Washington because by failing to prevent the financial crisis, both institutions failed the country. However, as in the first debate, Mr. McCain failed to strongly explain to the people how his proposals to reduce taxes and government spending would benefit them. He failed to raise people's doubts on how Mr. Obama's proposals, specifically on how his (Obama's) plans to increase government spending on social programs while simultaneously reducing taxes would not further increase a trillion-dollar budget deficit.

Mr. Obama's plan to reduce taxes on 95% of the population, specifically the ones who make less than $250,000 a year, hopes to stimulate spending among the middle and lower classes. The plan is also aimed at helping small businesses expand and create jobs. It's true but only up to a certain point.

The problem with the Obama tax proposal, as Mr. McCain has correctly and repeatedly pointed out, is that to make up for the tax cuts on the middle class, Mr. obama will increase taxes on the 5% of the population, that segment of society we used to call "rich" but are now known as the "investor class".

It is correct that small businesses generate many jobs. However, it is outdated and folly to think that a nation's economy will significantly progress if one sector is awarded at the expense of another. That, for me, is divisive politics. One also needs to see the big picture here. It is the large corporations that create the better-paying jobs and consequently, higher quality and quantity-type of demand that help make a lot of small businesses thrive and grow. It is the large corporations, with their big-ticket capital expenditures in facilities, people and equipment, that contribute to a significant portion of a nation's wealth. In addition, that 5% of the population Mr. Obama plans to raise taxes on are already shouldering, according to some estimates, roughly 80% of the nation's tax burden. The plan to further increase their share of the country's tax burden could prove to be a disincentive to infusing more capital into the economy at a time when such investments are badly needed.

I do agree with Mr. Obama that in order for a capitalist economy like the United States to continue to thrive and maintain its standing as the world's most trusted financial system, that a certain degree of industry regulation should be put in place. I strongly agree that the trend towards deregulation that began roughly in the early 1980s under the Reagan administration has led to spectacular abuses of power among corporate executives and to a decline in certain industries such as the US airline industry. The current financial crisis ought to change a lot of people's views about deregulation. Every game needs a referee.

But going back to the debate, I was quite disappointed in Mr. McCain's performance because his proposal to cut taxes for all Americans to create more jobs and generate investment and his plan to curb government spending to address the growing budget deficit stand on solid ground. In addition, Mr. McCain has long been an advocate of regulation, much to the chagrin of his colleagues in the Republican Party who believe otherwise. He has also gone against his party numerous times on critical issues such as the waste of government money on pork-barrel spending. The campaign finance reform law that carry his name and that of Democratic Senator Russ Feingold aims to reduce the corrupting influence of lobbyists in Washington DC. He successfully fought for the passage of this law in spite of opposition from the Republicans, including President George W. Bush.

In contrast, Mr. Obama's track record in the US Senate in his four years there does not show a man who has gone against his party to address issues of corruption and excess. He has not authored or even co-authored a single law of national significance. In addition, in his four years as Senator, he spent the last two years running for President. As a result, among all the men who have run for US President, he has the thinnest resume. But thanks to Mr. McCain's failure on Tuesday night to strongly argue the merits of his (McCain's) economic proposals, it seems a certainty now that Mr. Obama will become the 44th President of the United States.

That's not to say that Mr. Obama does not have the intelligence to hold the most powerful office in the country and in the world. His Harvard law degree and his cool and poised demeanor during the debates showed unassailable evidence of it. Like all the Presidents that have come before him, he will certainly tap the best minds within the Democratic Party to advice him on domestic and foreign policy. He will certainly make history once he gets elected as the first African-American President. However, due to the absence of a defining professional track record that reveals his thought and decisionmaking processes, he is leaving millions of voters no choice but to simply rely on his promise of change not only in the US but also in the world. That would truly be the Audacity of Hope.

Fall of the High and Mighty

The New York Times (NYT), in its Sunday issue (September 21), came up with a piece that showed the effects the recent bloodbath in Wall Street has had on the shareholdings of a number of Wall Street CEOs, both former and current. To illustrate such effect, the NYT article showed the values of the CEOs' shareholdings at the beginning of January 2007 and compared it to the value of their shareholdings after the financial markets closed last Friday, September 19.

In the interest of full disclosure, the figures represent the stocks owned by the individuals listed and does not include the value of their stock options. Anyway, here are some of the names that were listed: (Each line shows the CEO Name, the Firm he either heads or used to head, the Value of his Shareholdings as of 1/1/2007, and the Value of his Shareholdings after the markets closed on 9/19/08.)

Maurice R. Greenberg, Former CEO (AIG), $1.25 billion, $49.6 million
James E. Cayne, Former CEO (Bear Stearns), $1.06 billion, $61.2 million
Sanford I. Weill, Former CEO (Citigroup), $914.9 million, $342 million
Richard S. Fuld Jr., CEO (Lehman Brothers), $827.1 million, $2.3 million
E. Stanley O' Neal, Former CEO (Merrill Lynch), $127.7 million, $40.2 million
John Mack, CEO (Morgan Stanley), $224.6 million, $80.4 million
Martin J. Sullivan, Former CEO (AIG), $3.2 million, $173,000
Daniel H. Mudd, Former CEO (Fannie Mae), $26.5 million, $476,000
Richard F. Syron, Former CEO (Freddie Mac), $10.6 million, $130,000

The above individuals I chose to list here are the ones whose shareholdings took the biggest hits as the crisis in Wall Street worsened. For a complete list of the CEOs, you can find the New York Times chart here.

According to some government estimates, US taxpayers will be on the hook for $1.5 trillion to bail these financial institutions out. The bill that US Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson and Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke submitted to the Congress seeks $700 billion to be made available to help financial institutions rid themselves of failed or illiquid securities. Those illiquid securities were based on subprime mortgages whose debtors failed to pay.

Thus, millions of American taxpayers will now end up footing the bill for these guys' avarice and greed. I don't mean to sound insensitive or mean but I do not feel sorry for any of the guys above. A majority of them still have millions of dollars of wealth available. Except for a black mark on their reputations and maybe some social ostracism that they will suffer, these guys won't have any problems finding money for their next meal.

I don't even feel sorry for their direct reports and the senior managers of their firms. Those groups of officers earned millions of dollars in bonuses ANNUALLY. Living in the New York metro area, I always read about how the bonuses these guys make every year average about two to three times their annual salary.

But what's more worrisome for me are the ripple effects from the crisis in Wall Street.

First, a lot of establishments and businesses, small and medium-sized, depend on Wall Street firms and employees for a good portion of their business. Revenues of tailors, barbershops, hair salons, spas, restaurants, laundromats, and theaters, to name a few, will certainly suffer as a result of the job losses. In fact, some of these smaller businesses may even end up letting go of some of their employees too.

Second, the crisis will definitely lead to tighter credit. A humbled and tightly regulated Wall Street means a more conservative Wall Street. Tighter credit will definitely lead to higher quality loans extended to higher quality debtors. However, tighter credit could lead to reduced economic activity. People and businesses could buy and invest less. And once the American consumer tightens his/her belt, the whole world will certainly feel it. As of this writing, a number of US banks have started reducing the credit limits of thousands of those credit cardholders with less than stellar credit histories.

Some economic experts say that the worst isn't over yet. To a person, all of the economists are worried about the ripple effects through the rest of the economy. So far, we've only read about the big players in the banking industry. Apart from those, there are also big regional banks that have not yet revealed the extent of their losses on subprime mortgages.

To be honest though, people also share part of the blame here. And by "people", I'm referring to those who bought homes at prices that were clearly way beyond their means. Banks can be blamed for tempting these people with "exotic" types of mortgages such as "interest only" mortgages and "adjustable rate" mortgages. However, at the end of the day, the transaction would not have pushed through if upon due assessment of his/her financial position, the buyer had wisely decided not to proceed with the purchase.

Both banks and the buyers can delude themselves all they want through such creative schemes but the bottomline remains the same: there is still a debt that needs to be paid and that a buyer still doesn't acquire full title to a property until such time he/she has paid both principal and interest on a debt. Financing has always operated on this principle for centuries and will always do.

As I end this post, word just came out that the last two large investment banks. Goldman Sachs and Morgan Stanley, in an effort to gain Federal protection from the crisis, have obtained the approval of the Federal Reserve to change their status from investment banks to bank holding companies. As such, both institutions can now operate commercial banks and take deposits. The change in status subjects both institutions to tighter government regulation. However, tighter regulation is a rather small price to pay when in exchange, they can avail themselves of the government's bailout program.

Street Justice

The following video shows the scenes that need to be immediately played out at the offices of Don Sulpicio Lines (and in its backyard) against the people responsible for the latest ferry accident that claimed the lives of at least 700 of my countrymen.

Unfortunately, this tragic incident is not a first for this company. This is due to the fact that Don Sulpicio Lines was also the exact same company whose vessels figured in the following sinkings that had claimed the lives of thousands of passengers:

1) Dona Paz - 4,300 plus people dead (December 1987)
2) Dona Marilyn - 300 people dead (October 1988)
3) Princess of the Orient - 200 people dead (1998)

Thanks to an inept and hopelessly corrupt government, this company has managed to remain in operation in spite of its past transgressions. Thus, barring its permanent closure or any significant changes in the way it does its business, we should expect this company to kill more Filipinos in the coming years due to a profit-above-everything-else style of management.

Enough said.

Missing From YouTube

There is a certain sadness I feel whenever I go through YouTube's music video files. Regular readers of this blog will notice that quite often, I feature and write about a certain band or solo artist whose music I am a fan of or whose song was of some personal significance at a certain point in my life. But a review of all my posts classified under the Music category will show that the music artists I have so far written about have either been American or British artists.

This does not mean that I am not a fan of any Filipino band, singer, or songwriter. Far from being so. In fact, Original Pilipino Music, or OPM, blossomed during the 1970s, the decade of my childhood. This was the time when the phrase "We believe in the Filipino Talent" was heard often from the mouths of DJs whenever they introduced or played a song by a Filipino artist on the air.

As a result, I became a big fan of bands like Hotdog led by the brothers Rene and Dennis Garcia, VST & Co. whose best songs were written by Vic Sotto and Joey De Leon, and the folk songs of Heber Bartolome and Banyuhay and ASIN that opened my eyes to social and environmental issues. I was also a fan of rock musicians Mike Hanopol and Maria Cafra. I enjoyed listening to Sampaguita whenever she belted out her signature rock song "Bonggahan".

On the pop and ballad side, I was a fan of Rico J. Puno and Hajji Alejandro. Although I was not a big fan of Rey Valera, I respected him due to the fact that like a number of his peers at the time such as Tito and Vic Sotto, he penned a number of his songs and also wrote hit songs for fellow artists such as Sharon Cuneta ("Mr. DJ") and Rico Puno ("Sorry Na, Puwede Ba?"). To those of us who were present back in late 1978, we all know that it was the song "Mr. DJ" that catapulted Ms. Cuneta to nationwide fame.

But going back to the subject of this blog entry, I find it lamentable that unlike their American, British and other foreign counterparts, I have not been able to find classic television performances of any of the above named Filipino artists on YouTube. What I've seen so far are video clips of some of the artists' performances on recently-held reunion concerts. Aside from such clips, the only other YouTube entries available are Karaoke-type videos that only show their songs' lyrics but not the artists themselves.

Video clips of the artists' recent performances are fine except that they fail to show, especially to younger generations, the artists in their prime. It sure is nice to see Mike Hanopol belt "Jeprox" out in those reunion concerts but for a young Filipino, all he/she may see is a middle-aged guy performing a rock tune that his/her parents loved during their time. At best, although the youngster may appreciate the musicianship, he/she could only imagine how the artist performed back in the day when his popularity was at its height.

Growing up in the 70s, the artists I mentioned were regularly featured on shows like Discorama, which was shown on GMA-7 on Saturday evenings, or on daily noontime shows such as Student Canteen (GMA-7) and Eat Bulaga, which was then shown on RPN-9.

Discorama, hosted by the late Bobby Ledesma, was one of the rather cool shows to watch for this hour-long show was dedicated to the latest dances and songs. The show was fun to watch for they regularly featured and/or introduced Filipino artists along with their latest hits or releases. It was on this show where I first saw Pinoy rock artists Sampaguita ("Bonggahan"), Maria Cafra ("Kumusta Mga Kaibigan"), and Mike Hanopol ("Jeprox") perform the songs that would later become part of Filipino rock music history.

It was on Student Canteen where I first saw the likes of folk musicians such as Heber Bartolome ("Tayo'y Mga Pinoy")and ASIN ("Masdan Mo Ang Kapaligiran"); pop groups such as Hotdog ("Manila", "Panaginip"), Cinderella ("TL Ako sa Iyo") and VST & Company ("Awitin Mo, Isasayaw Ko", "Ipagpatawad Mo"); and balladeers such as Rey Valera ("Ako si Superman"), Hajji Alejandro ("Nakapagtataka"), and Anthony Castelo ("Balatkayo") who was also a cousin to Tito and Vic Sotto.

It was also on these shows where the country first saw a then twelve-year old Sharon Cuneta perform her first hit song "Mr. DJ".

It would be a great learning experience to everyone, especially the youth, if past television performances of these artists and those of their peers whose names I failed to mention were made available and shown to younger generations of Filipinos either through a documentary or a retrospective on Philippine music history. The performances will show clear and moving evidence on how these artists performed during their heyday and what made them great and/or popular to Filipino audiences at the time. Who knows? A budding musician from today's youth may even learn a thing or two from watching these artists.

But their absence from YouTube and from television documentaries is a reflection of of our society's obsession with trends. We tend to be obsessed with the latest and greatest ("uso") in areas like fashion and music. We tend to cast a huge spotlight on an artist while he/she is popular and then simply let him/her fade away from our collective memory once a newer artist comes along. We love to use the phrase "Laos na iyan!" ("That's old!" or "That's outdated!") to contemptuously label anything or even worse, anyone, we no longer consider as representative of the latest trends. We discard the old in favor of the new. We fail to realize that by doing so, we all lose.

Other countries, such as the US, Britain, and Japan, continue to honor the contributions of past artists in various forms such as tv documentaries, film preservation, and by simply showing video clips of artists' past performances on tv. In doing so, not only do they make sure that such artists' contributions are not forgotten but they also make sure that these artists are introduced to younger generations.

I hope that the tapes that contain the television performances of the artists I mentioned on this piece still survive within the video vaults or video tape archives of both GMA-7 and RPN-9. And if the tapes are still around, I certainly hope that both stations are doing a damn good of job of maintaining the tapes in very good and viewable condition so that someday, they can be viewed again by an appreciative audience. It would be an extreme disservice to our people if we find out later that both television stations had failed to preserve an important part of our cultural heritage.

A Lifestyle Change

One truly learns something new everyday.

I got back to New York City last Saturday night from my one-week visit to Manila. Since I was at an airport that I don't normally use on business trips because it was located more than 60 miles (about 96 kilometers) from my place, I took a car service home. As I often did on such rides, especially long ones, I struck up a conversation with the driver.

I found out that the driver had been a bar owner prior to working for the car service company. He was in his mid-forties, 44 years old to be exact. He was a Portuguese-American whose family migrated to the States when he was about four years old. He told me that he had owned and operated a bar in the town of Harrison in New Jersey for 20 years before closing it down a month or so ago.

I was a bit surprised by what he said. What? Closed a bar down? Why? Bars, especially one that lasted as long as this person's bar did, must have done pretty well. So I asked him, "What happened to your bar? Aren't bars pretty much recession-proof? Don't people drink in both good times and bad times?"

"Yes, they are recession-proof," he replied. "But a lifestyle change occurred in the last 10 years that has adversely affected the bar business."

"And what was that?" I asked.

"The internet and the gaming consoles," he said.

"What?" I asked again for I wasn't so sure if I heard him right the first time.

"The bar business got impacted by the internet and the gaming consoles," he repeated. He then went further to explain that up until the mid to late 1990s, a lot of people, especially college students and young professionals who were in their late teens through their early 30s, used to hang out in bars for hours after work or school to socialize or to watch ball games.

However, he said that that's no longer the case with young people today. He said that young people these days often stay home or hang out at another friend's house to either go online and chat with their buddies or play games on their PS3s, XBOX 360s, and Nintendos. He cited Shaquille O'Neal and a few other NBA athletes as examples because those guys had said in tv interviews that their favorite past time was to stay home and play on their gaming consoles.

The conversation was an eye-opener for me because I myself used to hang out in bars with co-workers and friends after work to relax and unwind. There was even a point when the stress at work was a bit much that we hung out in bars on a nightly basis just to de-stress. Our favorite bars in Makati City at the time were Larry's Bar (Greenbelt), Jazz Rhythms (Jupiter Street), and Rhythm and Booze on Makati Avenue.

Although I kind of felt bad for the driver because he lost his old business, I don't see the young people's switch from bars to the internet and gaming consoles as necessarily a bad thing. In fact, in my opinion, the internet and the gaming consoles could help drive home the message that one does not need to be drunk to have a lot of fun. I don't even think a lot of parents would mind seeing their child at home having fun with his/her friends rather than he/she be out in some bar somewhere getting drunk. I just think it's also much better from a safety standpoint whenever one thinks of the thousands of people that lose their lives in the United States to drunk drivers and drunk driving every year.

According to the latest statistics compiled by the organization called Mothers Against Drunk Driving (MADD), 17,602 people died in the US on alcohol-related traffic crashes in 2006. This figure translates to one death every 30 minutes. One life lost is too many. Thousands is an outrage.

Some parents and members of the older generation have expressed concern that spending too much time on the internet and on the XBOX or Playstation could negatively impact a child's social and emotional development. Their concerns are valid. However, there are other alternative activities that young people could participate in and enjoy such as team sports, theater, music, civic groups, and other activities that would help kids develop their social skills.

Man is a resilient being and gifted with strong survival instincts. He's been on the planet for millions of years and has survived a host of wars, diseases, pestilence, and disasters both natural and man-made. He has learned to tame his environment and make it work for his benefit. Given all that Man had accomplished in the past, he should still end up fine with this latest lifestyle shift. By moving his social activities away from the neighborhood bar to cyberspace while in the comfort of his (or his parents') home, he is simply replacing one form of socializing with another.

Cohesion

Cohesion is said to be the act of uniting or sticking together. In the context of a team, work unit, in relationships or even a family, cohesion refers to a couple or a group that's united in working towards a common goal or purpose.

Cohesion takes time to form because it requires that the development of a certain degree of trust and support among a group's members. It requires that such trust and support be elevated to a certain degree of sophistication that it becomes second nature for all the individuals involved.

Various factors influence the degree of cohesion a team has or would have. Shared experiences, the quality and amount of time a team has been together, and the dynamics within a team are some of those factors.

A team starts losing its cohesiveness once distractions surface. A sports team that finds itself embroiled in controversy or scandal often loses its will and focus to win. Morale among the players eventually break down and before everyone realizes it, the desire to win is no longer there.

Same is true in a work environment. Once a scandal flares up or once an individual pursues an agenda separate and counter to the team's, the spirit of camaraderie within a department or group soon deteriorates and unravels.

In relationships or in a family, cohesion is impacted when a member becomes withdrawn from the normal activities, begins to spend less time with a significant other or from the spouse and kids. Withdrawal leads to indifference and eventually leads to an unraveling of a relationship.

Cohesion is a delicate quality that needs a lot of work to sustain. Teams, couples, families, and even nations that have successfully attained it have reaped many rewards from it. Those who have failed to achieve it or those who simply don't have it are destined to wallow in mediocrity or are doomed to failure.

A Shortage of Engineers (and Nurses too)

This article ("High-tech Japanese, Running Out of Engineers") was from Saturday's (May 17) issue of the New York Times. It seems that after decades of sustained economic success that has catapulted it to the position of the world's second largest economy, Japan now finds itself facing the same problems that a lot of industrialized nations are facing: a lack of engineering and technology graduates.

At first glance, such shortage may present a much needed opportunity for engineering and technology graduates from poor nations. One of the world's largest economies, one that boasts of the highest standards of living in the world is experiencing a rather severe skill shortage. Thus, graduates from poorer nations ought to be flocking to it in droves, right?

Unfortunately, that has not been the case. Japan, unlike other industrialized nations, will probably have a harder time attracting foreign talent to its shores. This is due to the fact that unlike its first world peers, Japan unfortunately has gained a reputation for being a closed society where language and culture have proven to be strong barriers to any outsider.

English is not widely spoken and there are still a considerable number of companies that are against the idea of bringing in foreign workers into their fold. There are glass ceilings in a lot of companies and discrimination against foreign workers is still quite common. There may be some bright spots here and there but as a whole, the country presents quite a number of barriers that a foreigner could find difficult to deal with.

Such attitudes against foreigners is also reflected on its immigration policies for Japan has one of the lowest, if not the lowest immigration rate among industrialized nations. Aside from engineers, Japan is also experiencing a shortage of nurses. However, unlike the US and a number of European countries, it has steadfastly refused to increase its recruitment of foreign workers.

Japan's population is slowly but surely aging due to a negative population growth rate. Unlike China and India with their huge talent pools, Japan does not have that benefit. As per the article, Japanese companies can either increase their hiring of foreign workers or put up factories outside of Japan just to stay relevant and competitive in the global economy.

If it fails to hire the engineering and technology graduates it desperately needs, Japan's competitiveness could slide into irrelevance within the next 100 years. If it fails to bring in more nurses, the quality of health care in that country would also deteriorate. The country urgently needs to step out of its comfort zone to stay a step or two ahead of its rivals. If it fails to do so, then it might as well consider ceding its title as Asia's richest economy to China soon.

Some Awful Truths

Just wanted to share with you a couple of articles that were published on this Sunday's (May 18) issue of the New York Times. Both articles are rather long reads and thus, I will keep my commentary brief. In light of the food crisis that's going on all over the world, both articles serve to remind us of the challenges ahead and what steps we as global citizens can do to alleviate the problem.

This first article ("One Country's Table Scraps, Another Country's Meal") discusses the amount of food an average American family throws away each month. It says that Americans, on the average, throw away 27% of the amount of food available for consumption. The report cited figures from way back in 1997 where statistics showed that a staggering 96.4 billion pounds out of 356 billion pounds of edible food was never eaten.

The food numbers mentioned represent figures from just a single year. It is probably safe to assume that given that the US population has increased by millions more since 1997 that the numbers of food wasted today are billions of pounds higher.

The article does not surprise me one bit. Having lived in the United States for more than a decade, I've always been struck by the amount of food that gets tossed away on a daily basis. It's a common sight in restaurants to see busboys pick plates up with significant amounts of food left and see such food tossed. And yet, the insanity in the restaurant business is that in spite of the amount of food that gets wasted, restaurant executives still keep pushing for bigger serving sizes.

There's a lot of blame to go around. Not only are the industrialized nations guilty of this but poor countries are as well. In a lot of third world countries, our beloved Philippines included, food get wasted even before they get distributed to the consumers due to lack of technology and inefficient distribution methods. When will we in the Philippines ever start developing and constructing an efficient railway system to distribute food products and other goods all across our country's biggest islands such as Luzon and Mindanao?

Although, the article talked about food wastage, it also discussed some steps being taken by responsible restaurant owners and some organizations to put the leftover food to better use.

This second article ("World's Poor Pay Price as Crop Research Is Cut") was reported from the International Rice Research Institute (IRRI) in the Philippines. The article talks about the challenges of battling the global food crisis in the face of reduced funding from the US and other foreign governments.

The IRRI, and other similar food research institutes, became victims of their own success. IRRI successfully introduced varieties of rice that were both high-yielding and pest-resistant that by the late 1980s and early 1990s, the world enjoyed a food surplus. Except in some countries in Africa where drought and corrupt governments conspired to starve millions of people, the rest of the world enjoyed relative stability and security in its food supply.

The problem was that such success bred complacency in a lot of governments. Since the threat of global hunger faded from the front pages of newspapers around the world, the need and urgency to fund the food research institutes faded too.

The good news is that IRRI's researches are still confident that they still have the technical capability to develop rice varieties that could resist future plant diseases and pests. The challenge, however, is to make foreign governments realize about the urgency of the problem and that if no action is taken soon, the threat of world hunger may come back to the front pages of our dailies, if it hasn't done so already.

Hometown Hero

My apologies that both my blogging and bloghopping had been quite erratic these past few days due to a rather busy work schedule. I had just completed a one-week assignment in Greenville, Texas and I'm scheduled to fly home first thing Friday morning.

Greenville, Texas is a rather sleepy rural town about 50 miles east of Dallas. Except for a few businesses, the town is made up mostly of homes that sit on huge tracts of land and numerous cow farms. The town has a small airfield, Majors Field, that is owned and run by one of the companies operating in the area.

Aside from being in a major cotton producing area in the United States, Greenville's other claim to fame would be the fact that it was in this town where Audie Murphy (1924-1971) signed up to join the US Army in 1942. To those who are into military history, Audie Murphy is known as America's most decorated soldier in World War II. He was born near Greenville but his actual birthplace is in dispute. Some historians say that he was born in the town of Celeste but a couple of people at the office I visited, both long-time residents of the area, said that he was actually born in the neighboring town of Kingston.

The son of poor sharecroppers, Audie had a very rough childhood. He was the sixth of 12 children. His father abandoned their family when he was 12 while his mother died when he was about 16 years old. Prior to signing up for the Army, he had to send some younger siblings to foster homes to ensure their proper care and survival.

Contrary to some biographical acocunts, he never really lied about his age when he signed up for the Army at 18 in 1942. In the battlefield, he showed exemplary courage in his three years of active service and as a result, ended up garnering 33 awards and decorations, among them the Medal of Honor. He joined the army in 1942 as a private and ended his military career in 1945 as a second lieutenant.

To Filipinos, he became known and popular when he starred in his autobiographical film To Hell and Back which was released in 1955. The movie was based on the book of the same title and my father, like many teenage boys of his generation, saw the movie when it came out in Manila. In fact, I learned of Audie Murphy through my father when as a kid, I had entertained thoughts and ambitions of joining the Philippine Military Academy after high school.

Although he eventually became a Hollywood star and had quite a number of War and Western movies to his credit, Audie Murphy's story was not all bright and happy. Like a lot of young men who got exposed to violent and brutal combat situations then and since, he had also suffered from post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), a mental problem that was also known at the time as "battle fatigue". For the rest of his life, he suffered from recurring nightmares, insomnia and depression. He even reportedly kept a gun under his pillow to possibly ward off enemies that came to him in his dreams.

His life came to an abrupt and sad end in 1971 when he died in a plane crash in Virginia while on a business trip. Although Hollywood glorified his exploits as a war hero, his lifelong mental problems also showed that he also counted as one of war's many victims.

As for yours truly, although my dream of becoming a soldier faded long before I entered college, my interest in military history and in its related areas remain. I have always maintained the highest respect for the common soldier for his/her willingness to put his/her life on the line to defend our way of life. It needs to be said that a lot of these people often come from poor families. It's quite ironic then that the people who have been willing to pay the highest price to defend our freedoms and democratic ideals come from families who hardly benefit from those materially.

Thus, in spite of the scandals we often hear about in the upper echelons of the Philippine military establishment, let us set aside our cynicism for a while and pay homage to the lowly enlisted man who continues to serve and be loyal to his country in spite of all its problems, broken promises and imperfections.

What if Martial Law Did Not Take Place?

Just thinking of events (positive ones at least) that could have happened to our country had Marcos not declared Martial Law on September 21, 1972 (the actual date was September 23 but since the Great Apo was superstitious and thought that the number 7 and multiples thereof brought him luck, he decided to ante-date the declaration by a couple of days) and had he stepped down as President upon the completion of his second term in January 1973:

1. Senator Benigno Aquino, Jr. (Liberal Party) would have assumed office as the 7th President of the Philippine Republic in January 1973.
2. The two-party system would probably still be in place today and both the Nationalista and Liberal Parties would probably still be around as the dominant political parties.
3. The 1935 Constitution, along with its imperfections, would still be in place.
4. As a result of #4, the number of justices in the Philippine Supreme Court would have remained at 9 instead of the current 15.
5. The country would have incurred a lot less foreign debt and thus, a bigger portion of the government's budget would have been available for projects that would have benefited the people.
6. Metro Manila, as a political entity, would not exist. Thus, we would not have an MMDA and would have no need for a Bayani Fernando to lord it over Metro Manila.
7. The country would have been a lot more progressive because private industry would have grown without a lot of intervention from the government.
8. The Philippine Military would have remained as the professional and well-trained force that it was. It would have probably remained better armed too.
9. The Muslim and NPA rebellions would not have grown to become the huge problems they became under Marcos. A democratic and pluralistic society would have kept a lot of those guys legally engaged in the political arena.
10. The Philippine National Police in its current form would not exist. Police control would still have remained under the city and town mayors. The Philippine Constabulary would have remained in existence as well.
11. Cory Aquino would not have become President.
12. Juan Ponce Enrile would not have become a Senator and would not have been in a position to encourage military adventurism among misguided elements in the Philippine military. His long stint as Secretary of Defense under the Marcos Dictatorship enabled him to establish his own band of loyal followers within the military.
13. The Department of Tourism would not exist as a cabinet-level department.
14. The country would have been a lot wealthier than it is now and probably a lot more peaceful.
15. The Catholic Church would not have become as powerful and influential a player in politics as it is today. The two-party system would have prevented such rise to power.
16. A lot less Filipinos would have seen the need to leave their families to work overseas for the economy would have been more vibrant and market-oriented.
17. The likes of Edgar Jopson, Evelio Javier, and thousands of other Martial Law victims would still be around today.

Those are just some of my thoughts. What are yours?

Unintended Consequences

I went to Costco early yesterday to do some food shopping. I was out of eggs, milk, and rice and my supply was a bit low on a few other food items. Thus, I had to make quick trip to this store, of which I am a member, so I can replenish my dwindling supply.

Since rice was high on my list of items, I immediately went to the aisle where they usually have it and the following picture shows the stock they had available on display:


I normally buy only one sack of rice at a time. However, I was a bit saddened, although not surprised, to see the following notice posted above the sacks of rice.

The rice and grain shortage that is being felt in parts of Asia and Africa has finally hit the United States too. Although news reports here are assuring the American public that no shortage currently exists within the United States, the government and the private sector have begun to take steps to manage the current rice and grain supply to prevent hoarding, undue price increases, and artificial shortages from occurring.

The above picture shows the brand and type of rice I buy from that store. The brand is called "Super Lucky Elephant" and Jasmine is the rice variety. The rice was imported from Thailand and comes in sacks that have a net weight of 25 pounds or 11.34 kilograms. For the longest time, this particular sack of rice sold for a little less than $9.00 at this store. However, the last year or so saw its price increase gradually. Yesterday, I bought it at $12.69, a 41% increase from what it was just a couple of years ago.

In and of itself, the increase may not be that much. However, once one adds up all the price increases in other food products such as eggs, milk, meats, fruits, vegetables, and other food items, the cumulative impact on one's food budget can be quite significant.

It would be easy and simplistic to lay all the blame on our oil-producing friends at OPEC (Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries) for indeed, the price of oil has skyrocketed throughout the first decade of this new century. From around $25 a barrel in 1999, Oil is now hovering at $119 per barrel, a staggering 376% increase. (Sources: WTRG Economics and Bloomberg.com) The soaring price of oil has indeed contributed significantly to the jump in food prices worldwide.

However, unbeknownst to many, there is also another culprit that is contributing to the increase in food prices. This culprit threatens to make global warming a lot worse and a lot more disastrous for all of us. And it's called Biofuels.

When the US Congress passed legislation to increase the use of biofuels, the intention was to lower the country's dependence on oil imports and to protect the environment. Ethyl alcohol, or Ethanol, a fuel distilled from plant matter was considered to be the answer to the world's uncontrollable thirst for crude oil.

However, the unintended consequences of such legislation are that it is now driving up food prices, it is actually making the global warming problem worse and it is inadvertently aiding the destruction of huge swaths of forests worldwide.

It was not only the US Congress who passed such legislation that mandated the use of biofuels. The same type of legislation was also passed all across Europe. It's created a ripple effect. As a result of such legislated mandates, global demand for ethanol experienced a huge spike which in turn has made the prices of grain and corn shoot up in the world market. In the US alone, it is estimated that biofuel production will increase from 7.5 billion gallons in 2012 to 36 billion gallons in 2022.

Due to such very favorable market conditions, a lot of grain and corn farmers worldwide have reallocated part of their grain and corn harvest to the production of fuel rather than just food. In short, a lot of hungry people the world over are now competing against cars for a very limited corn and grain supply. Instead of fueling us, a large part of such harvests are now being used to fuel our cars.

What is a big eye opener according to a recent Time magazine article("The Clean Energy Myth") is that the amount of grain needed to fill an SUV's gas tank with ethanol was enough to feed a person for an entire year.

Since corn and grain farming have now become highly attractive economically, a number of governments and businesses around the world have resorted to converting huge areas of farmland and forests to the planting of such crops. This is getting to be a problem in Brazil where huge areas of the Amazon forest are now being cut down to make way for farms devoted to address the high demand for ethanol. The same is true in both Indonesia and Malaysia where rain forests are being depleted at a rapid rate. If such activities continue, then the amount of greenhouse gases will continue to rise at an even faster rate.

There are other worries too. If more and more of the world's farmers shift their farming to corn and grain, such move would have the effect of reducing the supply of other agricultural products and thus driving their prices up too. In addition, dedicating large amounts of land to fuel production would certainly rob the world of one of its most important sources of food.

With everything that's happening in the world today, it is clear that this whole push for ethanol should be reevaluated and, if necessary, pushed back or stopped. Time is of the essence here. At this point, we've already heard of food riots in certain parts of Africa and that high food prices have fomented instability in other poor countries.

Some experts have said that what we're experiencing is just the beginning, that things are going to get a lot worse before they get better. But at this point and as a first step towards reversing this growing global problem, we all need to accept the cold hard fact that biofuels aren't really the answer to our global warming problems. They're simply making it worse.

Horrible Tuesday

Woke up this morning to the sound of a large explosion coming from the back of my house. I jumped right out of the bed to find out what was going on. What I saw shocked me for never in my life have I witnessed such a scene of utter devastation:

It was such a horrible sight. Bodies were strewn all over the wreckage. Emergency crews were rushing in from our town and from neighboring areas. My neighbors and I rushed out to try to see if we could pull anybody from the burning wreckage. However, the heat was too much for us.

At this point, it has not yet been determined as to how many people perished from this crash. The news this morning was that investigators from the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) were still going through flight records and passenger manifestos to identify both the plane and the flight number. As you can see from the above photo, the heat burned the plane's metal to the point that it made it impossible for investigators to immediately identify the airline involved.

Will keep you all posted.

Original Photos by: Panaderos

A Boss Unworthy of the Title

Joe T runs a small but successful insurance agency in a tony suburb of San Francisco in California. Prior to that, he had worked for a big insurance company where he honed his insurance knowledge and marketing skills. Joe T is a very smart guy who knows the insurance business very well. So well that in the few years of his agency's existence, he has managed to attract some very big and wealthy clients.

However, in spite of Joe T's successes, he is not the type of boss I would like to work for. He demands loyalty, hard work, intelligence, and dedication from his employees. Those I have no problem with for any boss is entitled to set a certain level or standard of performance for his employees.

But as a boss, Joe T is seriously flawed in one area. In exchange for the high level of performance he requires of his employees, he tends to promise them with vacation trips around the US and to sign them up for company-paid training courses that would help boost their professional skills. Those are all still fine. However, it was observed that whenever the time came for him to fulfill his end of the bargain, he always reneged. He reneged time and time again without fail. It is for that reason that no employee had lasted more than two years in his employ.

Whenever it came time for him to fulfill his end of the deal, Joe T always brought up issues or concerns such as the high cost of the plane fare, the high cost of hotel and lodging, and the cost of the training as reasons for his inability to follow through on his promises. If so, why make a promise then if there's really no intention to fulfill it?

Without a reasonable excuse, a broken promise amounts to nothing less than a betrayal, an act of bad faith. A person who constantly breaks his/her promises to another can never be considered as a person of integrity. A broken promise especially hurts when it imposes a condition that requires a significant amount of work/effort on the other party to fulfill.

This has happened to all of us at some point in our lives. As human beings, our memories tend to be long on people who had wronged us and had been unfair to us. In an employer-employee relationship such as the one above, I view the broken promise to an employee as tantamount to taking much needed food away from the employee's dining table. It is very demoralizing and heartbreaking to an employee who relied on the employer's word in good faith. It is an act that is worthy of all condemnation.

For such dishonesty and unprofessionalism, a boss like Joe T clearly deserves no loyalty and respect. When such negative traits are present in a boss/employer, other factors that may exist such as good pay and good career opportunities no longer matter. A person would be better off moving on to another employer who would give his/her contributions the respect and appreciation they truly deserve.

The Face That Brought Down A Moral Crusader

The photo at left shows Ashley Dupree, the 22 year-old high class prostitute that brought down New York Governor Elliot Spitzer. Mr. Spitzer, who shot to fame in the early part of this decade as a moral crusader of sorts against corporate abuses and white collar crime, was brought down earlier this week as a result of a federal wire-tapping probe against an illegal prostitution ring. He announced his resignation to the media yesterday and his resignation will take effect on Monday, March 17.

Ashley went by the name of "Kristen" on the Emperor's Club VIP catalogue. As a high-class prostitute (quite an oxymoron), the "fantasy" that was sold to Mr. Spitzer by Emperors Club VIP was that Kristen was a successful swimsuit model who had travelled the world.

With the resignation of Mr. Spitzer, Ms. Dupree joins a rather infamous list of women such as Monica Lewinsky (Bill Clinton), Christine Keeler (Profumo scandal in the UK), Donna Rice (Sen. Gary Hart), Jessica Hahn (Rev. Jim Bakker), and Debra Murphree (Rev. Jimmy Swaggart). These were women who, through sex, had brought down men of wealth, influence and power. Except for Bill Clinton, the men they had affairs with had unsullied public reputations at the time.

Whether she likes it or not, the Spitzer episode changes Ms. Dupree's life forever. At 22, she still has many years ahead of her. It is pretty certain that a federal indictment will be levelled against Mr. Spitzer in the coming months. Should that happen, Ms. Dupree will most certainly be asked to testify before a federal grand jury.

In the foreseeable future, she will be finding her name in the headlines. Vultures, in the form of agents, will be circling her for opportunities to make a quick buck about the whole affair. She'll probably be offered book deals, a movie on her life, and maybe, even a recording contract. Exploitation is the name of the game, my friends.

It is up to her. She can use the lessons learned from this whole Spitzer affair to make right a lot of things that went wrong in her life. The other option would be to remain unwise and simply replace one form of exploitation with another.

Photo credit: New York Times and MySpace

How Do You Solve A Problem Like Obama?

This is probably the question hounding the minds of both the Clinton and McCain campaigns at this very moment. Since Super Tuesday (February 5), Senator Barack Obama has been on a winning streak. He has won primaries and caucuses in 10 states. In each of the 10 states, he had significant margins of victory over Senator Hillary Clinton.

He has become the darling of the US media and the press and his recent victories showed that he has been winning votes from groups that used to be firmly in the Clinton camp, specifically white men, white women, blue collar workers, and Latino voters.

Both Mrs. Clinton and Mr. McCain have been attacking Mr. Obama for his lack of experience in political, economic, and international affairs. There is some truth to the criticism because listening to Mr. Obama's speeches, one clearly notes that the speeches lack specifics on how he plans to deal with the nation's many problems. Mrs. Clinton's campaign staff has even accused Mr. Obama lately of plagiarizing the speech of a friend, Gov. Deval Patrick of Massachusetts.

Battling Mr. Obama won't be easy. It is undeniable that he has the charisma and can connect to voters on the stump. In my humble opinion, I think he is much better than Mrs. Clinton when speaking to crowds. In that environment, he appears more relaxed and thus comes across as more genuine.

His opponents could force him to get into specifics on how he plans to fulfill his campaign promises. Voters do need to hear specifics from Mr. Obama. He needs to give the voters specific ideas on how he would address the projected shortfall in social security funds for retirees. He needs to tell voters how he plans to fund his proposed health care program for every American. He needs to tell voters on how he plans to deal with the domestic and foreign consequences of a total US pullout from Iraq.

His opponents could also attack his lack of notable accomplishments and experience in the US Senate and challenge him to a series of debates where they could force him to field tough questions.

Though it may seem that things are currently going Mr. Obama's way, it's still too early to tell if such luck would hold. We still have eight months until the Presidential elections in November and in politics, that is an eternity. It must also be noted that all of the votes Mr. Obama has won have come from Democratic primaries and caucuses. We still don't know how he would fare in a general election. Anything could still happen and voters could be quite a fickle lot. A promise to vote for a candidate today could all change once the voter is by his/her lonesome in the voting booth.

It also remains to be seen how he will perform in debates against tough and experienced opponents like Mrs. Clinton and Mr. McCain especially when hard domestic and international issues are presented before him. Difficult days still lie ahead.

Photo credit: Sen. Barack Obama, Illinois Senator Official Website

Worn Out

I want to write about the latest scandal rocking my country. This Lozada matter is a corruption scandal that could potentially topple the hugely unpopular and politically inept Arroyo administration. I want to read the dailies to analyze the statements from the opposing parties. Like millions of my countrymen, I have a very strong desire to learn the truth.

But for some reason, I could not muster the energy to do so.

I don't want to say that I've become apathetic for my country remains very dear to me. I remain very interested in any news that discuss the latest Philippine developments or lack thereof. I remain very proud whenever I hear of my countrymen's accomplishments in both the local and international scenes.

However, call me a pessimist if you'd like but I believe, as with the other scandals that went before it, that the whole truth will still manage to elude us here. I can no longer be excited by charades held under the guise of Senate hearings.

I sincerely apologize for the attitude but I'm tired of a government that asks so much of its citizens but gives too little. I'm resentful of a political leadership that protects the interests of a wealthy few at the expense of the long-term interests of the struggling many. I'm so sick of seeing a Congress that is supported by billions in taxpayer money but with too little to show in terms of meaningful legislation.

Thus, this whole Lozada affair should be viewed as nothing more than entertainment. It is a show that's being staged for us at our expense. Like the others that came before it, we will end up not getting our money's worth for it is another poorly scripted play. We, the viewers, will again walk away from it with no real lesson learned. Given that we already know what's in store for us, the best thing to do is to simply ignore the whole damn thing.