On The First Obama-McCain Debate

I watched in amazement and envy today's US Presidential debate on TV. Although I like the fatherly personality of McCain more than Obama's hip yet businesslike demeanor, I still cannot make up my mind as to who among them would make a better president. McCain seems to know more about foreign policy though, having pointed out some of Obama's gaffes in the past (e.g. seating/talking directly with Iran and Nokor without pre-conditions and the too balanced early comment on Georgia/Russia scuttle). But Obama held his ground too especially on the US economy as he pointed out the defects in Bush's handling of the economy while connecting it with the conservative point of view (McCain's).

But I am not voting in the US elections. Although whoever the US President would be could surely affect the future of the entire world, we cannot do anything about there elections, could we?

But what I envy is the quality of leaders and potential Presidents they have in the US. I envy the quality of elections and debates that they have. I envy the quality of information their mass media and their electoral procedure brings to the people.

Come to think of it, had our COMELEC and mass media been doing their jobs, Erap, or PGMA (or to some, FPJ) would not have been elected. Letting Erap and PGMA sit in one debate with Roco alone will surely make the two Presidents seem like fools. Both of them will surely become the laughing stock of the country. But no, our mass media prefer to accommodate the richer of the candidates. Rather than debate, Erap even proudly says in a brusque John Wayne manner, and agreed to by mass media, that he prefers to do things for the poor rather than debate (or something to that effect).

So that is what we have, we do not know who the candidates are. Filipinos just select their president based on name recall and on who's winning. Heck, we do not even know really how many children Erap had and how many wives he sired!

Godless

I have just read House Bill 5043 (more commonly known as Reproductive Health and Population Development Bill). Basically, the proposed law:

• Calls for government funding (or taxpayers money) for dissemination of information, including multi-media campaign, and government funding (tax money) for full delivery and financial coverage of artificial birth control methods services and supplies
• Require healthcare institutions, public or private, their workers, the national government and local government units, even employers to provide access to artificial birth-control methods
• Provide penalties for neglecting or not following the above-mentioned mandates
• Provide those minors with DSWD certification direct access to artificial birth control methods even without parental consent
• Afford women the right to decide to avail of artificial birth-control methods even without spousal agreement
• Require schools to provide information on artificial birth control methods as part of curriculum at least to all levels of secondary school (all high-school students)

Obviously, HB5043 is a direct affront to the Roman Catholic Church which teaches the immorality of such artificial birth-control methods. The proposed law requires a portion of your money and mine whether you believe in the law’s immorality or not to be used for artificial contraception for the poor. The proposal also requires all government officials, all hospitals and their employees, all employers, even those that are staunch catholics to provide access to artificial contraception. Well, to those people who says that the church should not meddle with government business… Hello?

Also, the proponents of the law are basically saying that artificial birth-control methods are not immoral, that is if they care about morality at all. In questions of morality therefore, should anyone believe proponent lawmakers such as Lagman and Hontiveros-Baraquel who are leaning towards the Godless left or should we believe the church who devotes time to study and answer questions on morality?

Amazingly, with HB5043, poor people may be provided with artificial birth-control methods services and pills for free when the person is perfectly healthy, but not with other medicine when the same person is sick. HB5043 thought that your birth-control pill is essential medicine while your anti-diabetes drug is perhaps not too much essential. If one wants tubal ligation or vasectomy done, you can have it absolutely for free while you might not have your appendectomy for the same privilege. f you do not want to have babies, the government is required to provide you with all the services, supplies and equipment you need to avoid having a baby. But if you do not have a baby, would want a baby but cannot conceive, sorry the government has no mandate to help you.

Meanwhile, the bill did not care to define abortifacients. Although it says it does not change the status of abortion as an illegal act, it did not say when an act is abortion and when it is not. The issue as to when life begins, from fertilization or ovulation is not tackled. Perhaps, for the bill’s proponents, these minor details are not essential to know!?

The bill profusely contrasts itself. Perhaps, to promote responsible parenthood, the bill proposes direct access of all those minors certified by the DSWD as having been abused, to artificial post-sex birth-control. Meanwhile, perhaps to promote partnership between spouses, the wife is given the right to gain access to the same artificial methods even without spousal agreement. I heard from the radio early today one of the law’s proponents saying that this bill is designed purely for couples and their parental responsibility. Could that be the reason why schools are required to teach young children about artificial contraception?

I cannot fathom how promoting parental responsibility and financing everyone’s freedom to have sex irresponsibly could mix together. Surely, the proposed law spreads around nice words such as responsibility, healthcare, freedom, choice, development, rights, equality, couples, etc. Yet, it is nothing but an attempt to remove God from our government and society.

Shouldn't Lozada be on the Headlines?

There is news today regarding the Lozada abduction case, wherein Jun Lozada alleged that he was kidnapped by the government. Now, the court ruled that it is was not true. Jun Lozada was not in anyway forced to go with his alleged abductors while he can even send text messages freely to whomever he wants while being allegedly "abducted", the ruling said.

The following are quotes from the Phil. Daily Inquirer news (link)

Lozada wasn't abducted, says court of appeals

MANILA, Philippines--The Court of Appeals has dismissed Rodolfo “Jun” Lozada’s petition for protection, saying the whistle-blower on the scuttled $329-million National Broadband Network (NBN) deal was neither kidnapped nor threatened by government officials.

...In an 87-page decision penned by Justice Celia Librea-Leagogo and concurred in by Justices Regalado Maambong and Sixto Marella Jr., the court said it was not convinced that Lozada’s right to life, liberty or security was violated or threatened by what he had experienced on his return from Hong Kong as shown by his subsequent actions.

“It bears stressing that the instant amparo petition does not involve extralegal killings, enforced disappearances or threats thereof. This court also takes note that Rodolfo even attended an interfaith rally in Makati and has been on campus tours, not only in Metro Manila but also other parts of the country,” the court added.

...“With noon-day clarity, this court finds that the reason why Rodolfo was fetched at the airport was to help him avoid the Senate contingent. Rodolfo clearly knew this because at that time, it was still his decision not to testify before the Senate. He agreed with the plan,” it said.

The court also pointed out that Lozada did not try to resist his supposed captors, who did not hold him and were not hostile to him. He voluntarily went with them, chatted with them and freely used his cell phone and got in touch with members of his family and Atienza.

...The court also said his rights were not threatened or violated when he was brought to the La Salle Green Hills on Feb. 5—upon his request—until he decided to hold his predawn conference on Feb. 7.

Well, it is very natural to fall into this line of thinking. In fact, those should have been the first questions by the media to Jun Lozada. Instead, mass media apparently brainless as they were, dealt on the juicy details which Jun Lozada wishes to divulge regardless whether he has established his credibility or not.

And with all the juicy details that Lozada dramatically emphasized in the mass media, he was all over the headlines. In so short a time, he became the epitome of heroism, the present day Rizal.

So now, when the court ruled that Jun Lozada is a farce, the news should have been one bigger headline. But no, the Inquirer thought it is small news, still on the frontpage but without the prominence they gave Lozada in the past.

Of course, the people did not buy Lozada's exploits. One simple proof is that people did not respond to calls for another People Power. But no... many pundits would rather blame apathy - the people are tired of people power, they said. In any case, people will surely not miss too much of Lozada.

Negative Editorial on BF

The Inquirer today had an editorial chastising Bayani Fernando for early campaigning and use of the people’s money in the same early campaign. The editorial is of course referring to the tarpaulin announcements (or advertisements) by Fernando along EDSA, apparently an attempt for an early campaign veiled as a call for public order.

Nothing is wrong with the editorial, except that it is obviously not an editorial against early campaigning. Surely, the writer is against Fernando for whatever he does. And what better issue can they forward against the MMDA chief but “early campaigning”?

Consequently, the writer said that Fernando is a “pretender” and an “interloper”, and “his pretentiousness knows no bound”. He is also an “extreme egoist” has “insufferable arrogance” and his actions are "pathetic and sacrilegious". I am not sure if the editorial is just trying to use space for lack of more issues to cover for I cannot imagine how they can use pathetic and sacrilegious to describe the same action at the same time.

Fernando is already a pretender and interloper—at the expense of the public. And his pretentiousness knows no bounds. In the run-up to the Ninoy Aquino Day and National Heroes Day, the MMDA distributed stickers and other paraphernalia bearing his name, which means “hero” in English. Motorists put the stickers on their windshields and those who violated traffic rules were reportedly treated leniently by MMDA traffic enforcers. Pressed to explain the stickers, the Land Transportation Office said it’s illegal to put just any sticker on windshields and asked motorists to remove them.

The attempt at self-canonization is both pathetic and sacrilegious. Only the extreme egoist could put himself on the level of patriots and heroes, who are there in the pantheon not by self-aggrandizement but by collective acclamation. And if heroism, in the case of Aquino and others like him, is self-sacrifice and self-immolation, how can Fernando claim to be in their league? He is making martyrs of us all by his insufferable arrogance.

While the editorial is accusing Fernando as a pretender, it is easy to deduce that he is just playing with words, a usual advertising gimmickry (referring to stickers allegedly distributed by the MMDA). As supposed interloper, Fernando apparently used the timing of the national heroes day to play on his name (as in “Araw ng mga Bayani”), again a usual advertisement style. As an “egoist”, perhaps the writer is agitated by Fernando’s name. The editorial should have been content on chastising for early campaign. Instead, the writer also chastised Fernando on the marketing style. Would the same editorial label big advertisers for using public holidays and putting the name of their product in their ads? Obviously, the writer has nothing more to say and in saying more showed his blind anger towards his subject.

Note that the editorial also accuses the MMDA of “reportedly” being lenient to drivers of cars with the “BAYANI” stickers – a very serious charge. That is one thing bloggers do often, getting away with saying something without actually backing it up with facts. I just hope the Inquirer would not resort to such short cuts, for their paper also exists to actually report facts – and their opinions are supposedly based on such facts. Again, if you are angry at something, I cannot blame you for not maintaining your objectivity and professionalism, can I? Or, in the case of an Inquirer editorial, Can I, really?

If we all look closely only on the valid arguments, we can all well conclude that those are old tirades and does not hold water anymore. Those are all old arguments without solutions. It is very easy to focus anger on supposed early campaigning. However, nobody has ever thought how anyone like Fernando can win an election without resorting to such promotion. Meanwhile, the mass media (the Inquirer included) easily forget that people like Fernando who actually does something actually did many things for the country. Actually “forget” is the wrong word. It is more of "ignore" if not "deny". Fernando, and those like him should have always been given free publicity by the mass media. It is mass media’s responsibility to report to the people who among our leaders are doing good, not just those who are doing bad. Instead, Fernando, etc. can only resort to early promotional gimmicks which they did not have to do in the first place had mass media been responsible enough.

Although in the end, the editorial also included the other early campaigners in its tirade, it finally said: “At least they are not using public funds for their visibility campaign”. The writer obviously failed to see that Legarda, Escudero, Lacson, Roxas., etc are blatantly in conflict of interest (and hence engaging publicly and without doubt in graft and corruption) when they agree to use their face for advertisements for specific products. Everybody now forgot that Legarda, Escudero, Lacson and Roxas are senators representing the Filipino people and not just Lucida, Santre, Facial Care or Tide! Is there anything worse than that?

Lastly, I cannot help but note that the writer failed to mention the names of the other early campaigners in similar relation to the vivid negative descriptions he allied with Fernando’s name. People might not notice but this glaring omission is a usual corrupt pundit’s tactic aimed to avoid anyone from reading between the lines as to who the pundit is rooting for. By not mentioning everybody, the pundit conveniently does not need to mention his or her own patron.

Spreading Democracies

The USA, currently led by a Republican president, claims to be spreading democracy in the middle east and other continents. In saying that, they must mean they are toppling dictatorships and other non-democratic regimes such as what they did in Afghanistan and Iraq. Surely, they are also at least discreetly supporting rebels in other countries that they deem undemocratic. The reason they do that is because they think these dictatorships breed terrorists and therefore pose a threat to worldwide peace as if learning a lesson from 9/11.

However, in doing so, the United States is currently embroiled in endless military involvement such as in Iraq and Afghanistan and criticized worldwide as the real terrorists. Indeed, what right has the Americans to judge a leader of another country as a threat to worldwide peace and cause his/her demise? Meanwhile, there were suggestions that the USA has now spread its forces so thin which could have precipitated Russia’s boldness in its own overture in Georgia. Back in the US, the Democratic Party was able to control the Congress and threatens to take the White House with who could be the first minority President in Obama.

Another argument criticizing the United States is her selectivity. Why does she want Iraq or even Iran become a democracy, while she hardly notices her friend Saudi Arabia’s too undemocratic ways? It has been pointed out by many that the 9/11 perpetrators are mostly Saudis, including its mastermind Bin Laden himself. So why are the Saudi leaders given a free pass? Many argue that President Bush is a hypocrite: perhaps, his real mission is to get hold of those oil barrels coming from Iraq and nothing else. Worse, the argument seems supplemented by Bush’s and Cheney’s past (or present?) business involvement with big American Oil companies.

Whatever the arguments are, which validity we have no way of knowing, I believe that violence breeds violence, that war breeds war. Military action couldn’t stop terrorists. On the contrary, it could breed them further and make them more sophisticated. If you kill a terrorist, would you now kill his children, who most probably will become terrorists, too? Where and when will this violence end? Indeed, it could be foolish to bring war and expect democracy to flourish.

I myself do not judge the US’s actions in Iraq or in Afghanistan. I agree that one cannot negotiate with terrorists while I do not have the information that the American president has to decide which countries to engage militarily in. What I have is the following observation and suggestion on how to spread democracy to other countries.

One important ingredient of democracy is freedom of the press. I contend that a democracy without a responsible and free media is not a democracy. If we closely observe the main characteristic of a democratic country, we can immediately say that it is that their mass media is truly free – that their journalists feel safe doing their jobs and that they even profit handsomely in their profession. Some may argue that it may be the result rather than the cause of democracy, but it is beside the point. The point is: if there is free expression, say in the mass media in Iraq, Saddam would not have survived a day in office. Meanwhile, if by some stroke of lightning the mass media was controlled in the USA in favor of that country’s leaders, then Bush or anybody at the helm will become a dictator. It would then be only up to the heavens or the whims of the President what the American future would look like.

I therefore argue that instead of sending men and weapons in support of war, America and its allies should focus on exporting the idea of the freedom of expression. Instead of supporting rebels, they should support journalists and media entities. When small fledgling democracies ask for help, they must help in exchange for an assurance that mass media will be made free. They can even open their trade (their biggest bargaining chip) only to countries who support the freedom of the press. The US can then send media observers perhaps through the UN to report whether countries are following their side of the bargain.

When mass media is free and responsible, all leaders of all countries will be kept in check. Ideas, not terrorism, will flourish and countries would then be able to tackle problems better and on their own.

An Appeal to the Philippine Daily Inquirer to lead us in the Search for our Future Leaders

July 12, 2008

Ms. Sandie Prieto Romualdez
President/CEO
Philippine Daily Inquirer

Dear Ms. Romualdez,

The Philippines is in need of true leaders for our future. We need a leader who will lift us from the evils of graft and corruption and bring us to economic prosperity and political stability. However, we know that our elections do not produce credible results while many well-meaning and qualified leaders do not get enough exposure in our mass media.

In India, a similar problem, although on a different plane, was acted upon by one of their leading newspaper, the Times of India. A very unique and fresh idea, the Times of India launched a national search for leaders, the Lead India campaign. Much like a search for an Idol or the next Star, prospective leaders where auditioned, interviewed, questioned, tested, debated with, as true future leaders should be (see the following youtube video).

I am not sure what the final results will be for the future of India, but surely the same idea is desperately needed to be implemented in our beloved country. Surely, we can make good use of our being the “Text Messaging Capital of the World” to search/screen nationwide, through text messaging, real future leaders.

And to successfully launch a similar campaign, is there any other newspaper more dominant and credible enough than the Philippine Daily Inquirer to lead us? I am sure you feel your paper have done many good things for the country just by being there. I am also sure you feel the same as many of us about how low our country has become through the years. Imagine what could the Philippines be in a few years if we continue in this downward spiral. Perhaps, just being there is not enough. We need leaders and we need them now.

I, and all those who approved of this letter (by adding their name or signature here), therefore, appeal to you to lead a similar campaign. Lead us in the search for our Future Leaders. Lead us in Saving the Country. We ask you to lead us, because we know you can.

Sincerely,

Sef Dudeo

Misery by Sulpicio Lines

Filipinos are now used to disasters happening around the country. Every typhoon that arrives seems to always result in deaths, if not by landslides, by sinking of sea vessels. So, no one is surprised anymore of the recent sinking of Sulpicio Lines' Princess of the Stars. People even easily joke about it.

EVeryone believe that we must be on the top of the list worldwide in maritime disasters. Indeed, Reuters listed today some Philippine sea disasters in recent memory:

June 23 (Reuters) - Around 800 people are missing on Monday after a ferry sank in a typhoon off Sibuyan island in the central Philippines in what could be one of the island nation's worst maritime disasters in more than 20 years. Here is a list of some of the deadliest shipping disasters in the archipelago over the past two decades.

* Dec 1987 - A total of 4,386 die in world's worst peacetime shipping disaster, as ferry Dona Paz, owned by Sulpicio Lines, and an oil tanker collide off Mindoro Island.

* Oct 1988 - Dona Marilyn, sister ship of Dona Paz, sinks off Leyte province, killing around 300.

* July 1993 - 279 pilgrims drown when an overloaded wooden temple, mounted on three boats, collapses during a religious festival as it is being towed along the Bocaue river, 20 km (12 miles) north of Manila.

* Dec 1994 - Ferry Cebu City collides with Singapore oil tanker, killing more than 140.

* Sept 1998 - Almost 200 die when ferry MV Princess of the Orient, sister ship of Dona Paz and Dona Marilyn, sinks in stormy seas near Cavite and Batangas.

* April 2000 - At least 138 drown after the ML Annahada sinks off Jolo island in the southern Philippines.

* Feb. 2004 - Superferry 14 catches fire near Manila Bay, killing 116 people. Abu Sayyaf claims responsibility, saying a suicide bomber sabotaged the boat to protest ill treatment of Muslim communities.

* June 2008: MV Princess of Stars sinks 3 km (2 miles) from Sibuyan island in central Philippines in typhoon-lashed seas, leaving around 800 people missing.

Source: Reuters

Sad to say, with goverment and businesses so corrupt and inept, these kinds of disasters are bound to happen again.

P20M ransom

The PNP said that to secure the release of Ces Drilon from the hands of her abductors, her family paid a total of P20M ransom. The amount seems logical. It is easy to believe that the family would have that amount. But it is more logical to imagine that ABS-CBN contributed to the pot although they would never admit it.

And if it is indeed P20M paid, then we can only conclude that the Ces' et. al. abduction is true.

The PNP also said the it was Sulu Mayor Isnaji who facilitated the negotiations with the Abu Sayyaf. Isnaji was alleged to have pocketed part of the ransom payment and is now being charged as part of the kidnappers. The only proof offered so far to the media is the photo of Isnaji counting the money. Surely and sadly, we wouldn't know the truth.

Meanwhile, another journalist who was said to have been also kidnapped some years back by the same group (of which no one can be sure if true), Arlyn Dela Cruz of the Inquirer maintains the that Loren Legarda was able to help secure the release of Drilon and company. If ransom payment was made, then what could be Legarda's role? The only role left her is that of a decoy story. One that can be released as an official story of the abduction... yes that one for the press release.

With all these incongruent information floating around us, it seems that world media yet again dismisses the news as another joke coming from the Philippines. There were no coverage by the CNN (I did not monitor CNN 24 hours daily but at I can easily say no prominence was given), nor was there a headline on Yahoo news. Perhaps the world did not believe Drilon was abducted in the first place.

P20M may be enough to secure the release of Ces from the Abu, but no amount of money will ever have the country recover its credibility in the eyes of the world. Whatever the truth is, we shall remain to be a joke.

All's Well

Yesterday, Ces Drilon and others was freed by her abductors, apparently without ransom nor any preconditions. So, all is well that ends well. However, many people still do not believe that she indeed is kidnapped. There are many things going against the story:

1. Fresh from a horrifying experience, Ces is ready to make a press conference. Being kidnapped is a horrendous experience and her being in the limelight is not a very natural thing to do.

2. During the press conference, Loren Legarda was portrayed to be the person behind the release of Drilon and others. Asked how she did it, Legarda said she communicated with her contacts in the region, talked to Drilon herself (presumably on the cellphone, but whose phone is not clear), talked to the kidnappers either to plead with or rebuke them directly on their actions. Loren said she worked to release Ces without preconditions and she did it. Isn’t it just too amazing how a beautiful Lucida endorser and a presidential wannabe also a successful kidnap negotiator? To top it, Loren insisted that there were no ransom paid. (of course there is another Loren coverage which is more of a press release and they now have a better story here).

3. When asked if Ces knows her contacts, she said that “they are (the contacts) careful”. She did not answered directly (translation: evaded) but hinted that she doesn’t know the names. The question is obviously referring to the contacts that had her going to the area for whatever purpose and should be more than just Dimampo and Biyaw as referred to in the Inquirer news (here). Obviously, Ces closed the door on the full story of her going there.

....Drilon and her crew were in Sulu province purportedly to interview a leading member of the Abu Sayyaf when they were kidnapped by armed men on June 8. Dinampo, a professor of Mindanao State University who has access to the bandit group, served as their guide, as did Juamil Biyaw...

4. Ces said it more than twice, the experience let her open her eyes to the plight of the Abus, as in why they are there, in the jungle. She said she doesn’t want to justify their (Abu Sayyaf) actions (more than twice too) but she poses the angle the Abu Sayyaf would love. And believe me when I say this is no Stockholm Syndrome, and it looks more like a “press release” granted.

5. Ces mentioned that 4 of them shared one pack of noodles. She said they (the Abus more than her) sleep on hammocks or sacks on the ground. She said you’d sleep wet when in rains. However, it seems she is more of telling us about the miseries of life in the jungle for the Abu Sayyaf, and not the difficulties she faced. Also, she didn’t mention if they were on an Abu camp.

6. When asked if Ces would file a case against her kidnappers, again she evaded the question and said that she is cooperating with the authorities.

7. They (Ces and her staff) still have their cameras intact. Now, we wouldn’t be surprised if they had everything covered, wouldn’t we?

8. They announced that they are going to the Medical City for checkup. After a kidnapping, would anyone want everyone know where you are going to be?

Meanwhile, the Inquirer is notably soft on Ces with their version on the same issues …

…But Drilon refused to elaborate on how she, her cameramen Angelo Valderama and Jimmy Encarnacion, and peace advocate Octavio Dinampo were betrayed.

“We’ll get there. We are cooperating with the investigation and we condemn [the kidnappers] for what they did,” said the 46-year-old mother of four…

…As she did in Zamboanga City, Drilon said she and her crew would continue coordinating with authorities to pursue their captors.

She said their captors were “careful not to give their real names.”…

Of course Ces cannot expect to ask her captors their real name. Obviously, the question was addressing her contacts prior she got there...

…She said there was no toilet to speak of, that meals consisted of a platito (saucer) of instant noodles, and that they slept on hammocks or sacks laid on the ground.

“Then it will rain and you’ll sleep with your clothes wet. It was really bad,” said Drilon, looking refreshed now in a white button-down shirt, jeans, black rubber shoes and polka-dotted socks…

…Eye-opener

Besides the trauma of captivity, a discovery in the jungle has left another lasting mark on Drilon.

“I don’t want to justify what they’re doing—they are bandits and we’re cooperating with authorities so they’d be caught—but I think we must also understand why they are doing that. There were bandits who were 12 years old, 17, 15, and they were holding guns,” she said, adding:

“Your eyes will be opened. You’d think, why are these children holding guns instead of holding notebooks and studying?”

Asked by a fellow ABS-CBN reporter if she would ever return to Sulu, Drilon said with a quip to her boss, Ressa: “The office will not allow me anymore... But Mindanao is vast, right, Maria?”…

On the other hand, there are a few things going for the story.

1. Ces had mosquito bites on her face and had no (or little) makeup.

2. Ces cried when she talked about her family, and the family of her staff.

3. Ces said she was at fault and her employers are not to be blamed (or something like that).

Note: all quotes and the photo from the inquirer.net .

Tim Russert, 58

Today, I heard the news that NBC's Tim Russert died of heart attack while at work. Many would not have known him but I have seen and liked his show "Meet the Press". I have watched the show for about a dozen times (I only see it intermittently on cable as it is not regularly shown), and I am amazed at how much research Russert make for his political interviews.

What Russert usually do on his interview are quoting the things a politician said years ago, contrasting that with what the same politician is saying now, and giving the same politician chance to clarify his position. He just do not quote some sound bites but he really make extensive research of many instances when and where a politician said what and how. Clearly, if this Russert guy is even just a radio anchor in our country, all Pinoy Politicos would have been exposed as double-faced fakes.

If Tim Russert was a DZMM or a DZBB anchor for example, a politician with dozens of wives and hordes of children like Erap, etc. would not even be a candidate for Barangay Captain. Anyone who cannot speak straight, like De Venecia or even PGMA will never make it to the top. The verbose style of Mirriam Santiago may even falter. Only persons who speak fluently such as Ninoy Aquino or Raul Roco would have made it.

But this kind of Russert Journalism would not survive in our country. Our mass media are controlled only either by corrupt or incompetent hands. I think that even the Catholic controlled Veritas will not play host to any Russert type anchor. Veritas seem to me to be too busy talking and not able to listen and realize what the people actually needs. No media player in the country today is bold enough to employ or encourage a Russert-type journalist to host anything. They prefer to play with the politicians and profit from the absence of reality.

Meanwhile, well-meaning groups such as the AngKap political party are also too busy (being used) trying to oust PGMA, that everyone forgot that without a working mass media, the country will never rise from the dump.

I know I am not but I hope I can be a Russert kind of guy. But I do not speak too well and I easily get distracted by many things and forget what was being said right in front of me at many given moments. So being a Russert is out of my league. Sadly, I know that we need this Russert Journalism started here but I am out of ideas how to do it.