Privacy guaranteed - Your email is not shared with anyone.

Welcome to Glock Forum at

Why should YOU join our forums?

  • Reason #1
  • Reason #2
  • Reason #3

Site Description

Gov.-priest to run for President

Discussion in 'Band of Glockers' started by Poodle, Jul 17, 2009.

  1. it's not probably that he can't run his province, it's just that he against the moneyed families there that's why the propaganda can always be against him. i'm not from pampanga btw, but I've guested him in our city last year, and his sincerity to serve is profound

  2. 9MX

    9MX Rei!

    Sep 29, 2003
  3. JEZZZ


    Jun 16, 2005
    Down Under
    We have tried almost anything... artista nga pinatos natin, so why not give a chance to this guy - maybe he can infuse new blood in the system. We don't need TRAPOs (traditional politicians), we need a guy who is man enough to do what has to be done... it may not be always right but it will surely be people oriented and community focused.
  4. Kaiser Soze

    Kaiser Soze Notorious

    Jul 27, 2006
    I've met Among Ed myself, and yes he is really sincere, however, it sometimes takes more than that to run a province, and a country well. I'm a bit hesitant about this one, I mean, is someone sincere but unexperienced and possibly inept at the job the solution to the country's problems?
  5. jasonub


    Sep 28, 2003
    si erap sincere :). Education should also play a good part and experience too. But too much experience seem to corrupt them absolutely
  6. JEZZZ


    Jun 16, 2005
    Down Under
    Para sa akin, ok naman si Kuyang Ed eh. Sana lang di maging sunod sunuran sa mga nakapaligid sa kanya. He will act on behald of the people and not for the few rich individuals...

    Kung ayaw niyo kay ED, meron ako alam pwedeng pwede para maglaho ang mga bad guys sa bansa natin hehe....... si mayor Duterte.

    MAJINKONG Sr. Member

    Dec 24, 2002
    Free Flood
  8. Astra22


    May 15, 2006
    In my opinion Among Ed's victory over his opponents only shows that the poeple of Pampanga are already tired of the traditional politicians.

    Im also inspired by the decision of Rnady David to do the same, if and when needed!

    just my 2 cents. peace to all!
  9. DragonEye

    DragonEye Spits230grFMJs

    Dec 15, 2007
    Here and PinoyGuns
    One of my major standards in choosing a candidate is the lifestyle of his family: kumusta ba asal ng mga asawa at anak? Nang-aargabiyado ba ng tao nung mabababa pa ang posisyon nung kandidato? Yung anak at bodyguards ni Duterte, nambubgbog ng naka motorsiklo sa T. Morato. Yung anak ni Bro. Eddie, nakakailang panganay na sa ibat-ibang babae. Kung ang sariling pamilya at mga bodyguards ay hindi makontrol, buong Pilipinas pa kaya?!
  10. aztig

    aztig Team Lead

    Sep 21, 2004
    Sa tingin ko wala sya (Ed Panlilio) asawa at anak

  11. horge

    horge -=-=-=-=- Lifetime Member

    Jan 22, 2004
    almost home
    If you're interested in the illusion of a (dramatic) quick fix, sure.

    However, IMO...
    The problems besetting this country can only by addressed by
    broad and longterm electoral discipline on our part.

    From barangay chairmen up through senators and the President,
    we need to vote-in competent candidates, for several decades,
    to change the current culture. Nampucha, e dito pa lang sa BoG,
    how we go about firearm ownership hardly ever can claim to be
    100% free of involvement in (thus empowerment of) corruption.

    As for this particular priest/politician... I dunno.
    He appeals to a lazy sort of desire for a Messiah of change.

    People forget that Jesus didn't change the world for us.
    He changed us, so we could change the world, and we're
    still working hard at it, after so many centuries.

    No quick fixes back then, and none now, no matter what any
    would-be Messiahs (running for office) would have us believe.

    Last edited: Jul 18, 2009
  12. isuzu


    Jul 3, 2005
    North America
    We need somebody who could run the country efficiently and effectively. This election will be very crucial for the country.

    Pag pinili natin isang palpak, the country will sprial down even more. Sad to say, but it could be the end of our country if we choose incompetent people.
  13. Poodle


    Jul 4, 2006
    This is very true. No quick fixes.

    Anyway, this is the general issue but the particular issue here (encompassed by this general issue) is among Ed running for president. I give Among Ed the benefit of the doubt as regards his sincerity or honesty. I question however his competency to govern. I don't think that he has political savvy (political savvy in a good way, i.e., getting things done and inspiring others to get on the train).

    Di ba tatakbo si Ate Vi?
  14. Allegra


    Mar 16, 2003
    alin ba ang lesser evil?
    honest but incompetent o corrupt pero knows how to run a country?
  15. sandman_sy


    Nov 15, 2006
    hhmm... I like the guy, i believe the people of pampanga saw that he was the right man for the job. and who better to say that than the place where he lives in. Im just saying if he has some skeleton in his closet.. all of pampanga would know about it.. but yet he still won.

    True that he is unexperienced in politics.. but i'd give him a try if he ran. Tired of the "politiking" of this country of ours. So many of our contrymen has left the Philippines because of "walang pag-asa" nadaw ang pinas :( I pray that i won't be one of them :shocked:
  16. saki1611

    saki1611 BOG's #1611

    Sep 16, 2006
    IMHO, an honest man can be competent and improve his understandings, but a corrupt man, though there's a little chance of change to be good and unless he do what Horge suggested, is more likely to be drawn to the benefits of being corrupt...
    Last edited: Jul 18, 2009
  17. Poodle


    Jul 4, 2006
    If those were the ONLY TWO CHOICES, then I would choose an honest but incompetent candidate. But there might be a THIRD CHOICE, i.e., an honest and competent candidate. Good intentions are sadly not enough.
  18. horge

    horge -=-=-=-=- Lifetime Member

    Jan 22, 2004
    almost home


    Simplification aids theoretical discussion, but...
    I doubt any of those choices exist in nature.

    In ANYONE, we can find degrees of incompetence and corruption.
    If there are tolerable levels of incompetence (since no one is
    perfectly talented), there are also tolerable levels of corruption.

    Politics is, in bulk, about horsetrading.
    I'll scratch your back if you scratch mine.

    In more relevant terms: "I'll do something I normally wouldn't do,
    for your sake, if you'll do something you otherwise wouldn't do,
    for mine"

    If all that one "normally does" is governed by good morals, then
    what one has left to 'trade' is one's immoral choice, albeit one
    of varying degrees of severity. This horsetrading can be grossly
    simplified to indict all politics as corrupting, or it can be treated
    as a symptom of different necessities meeting a common moral

    Real necessities and a moral absolutism are an uneasy mix.
    Our faith tells us not to kill, but AFP chaplains bless LMG's.
    Indeed, the Bible itself contains material that can be cited as
    excusing just wars.

    Nevertheless, religious leaders are supposed to provide a moral
    reference point, which politicians (among a great many others)
    can use to gauge if they have strayed too far afield.

    Now, when a religious leader indulges in politics, it is dificult
    to avoid one of two pitfalls: his office fails, for a moral rigidity
    that excludes necessary politicking; or his religion is debased by
    said politcking. Once again, there are relative degrees of
    compromise, but the absolute image of morality provided
    by the Church is vital to society and must be saved harmless.

    You send in a white lamb among voracious pigs, it'll get dirty
    at the very least, or be eaten outright. I'd prefer a champion
    with actual fighting skills, but to each his own choice.

    My message was, in essence, this:
    If you want to vote for "Among Ed" because you feel he is
    technically competent enough and honest enough, then fine.
    If your choice is, however, made on the belief that he is the
    "key" to ending corruption in this country... you're bound to
    be disappointed: he's not the key, you are.

    Changing present politics into something less corrupt is, by
    law and by nature, up to the electorate. It is possible through
    constant vigilance and aggressive participation throughout
    one's lifetime, and several generations.

    No quick fixes.

    I am thus lowering peoples expectations for "Among Ed", and
    raising them: he won't come out as clean as you want, and
    he'd better have more real talent than just projecting a clean
    public image.

    Last edited: Jul 19, 2009
  19. Poodle


    Jul 4, 2006
    True. Competence and Honesty are not mutually esclusive and limiting choices to either [a] honest but incompetent or dishonest but capable would lead to an inchoate assessment of the reality of politics. And there are degrees of competence and honesty because this is not a perfect world of perfect men.

    Politics involve horsetrading and pacts with the devil at times. Speaking as a priest, I would be in a real quandary if I am forced into compromising situations where I would be forced to give up certain moral convictions for the sake of expediency. Religious leaders have to present a moral compass that is uncompromising and absolute. If I don't involve myself in "necessary" politicking, I don't get things done. That's why Canon Law prohibits priests from participating in partisan politics, i.e., running for public office to say the least. It's incompatible with our priestly nature.

    Here are some Church guidelines on the Church and Politics.

    "The Church, by reason of her role and competence, is not identified with any political community nor is she tied to any political system. She is at once the sign and the safeguard of the transcendental dimension of the human person" and ""The political community and the Church are autonomous and independent of each other in their own fields. They are both at the service of the personal and social vocation of the same individuals, though under different titles. Their service will be more efficient and beneficial to all if both institutions develop better cooperation according to the circumstances of place and time" (Gaudium et Spes 76)

    "The Church cannot and must not take upon herself the political battle to bring about the most just society possible. She cannot and must not replace the State. Yet at the same time she cannot and must not remain on the sidelines in the fight for justice. She has to play her part through rational argument and she has to reawaken the spiritual energy without which justice, which always demands sacrifice, cannot prevail and prosper. A just society must be the achievement of politics, not of the Church. Yet the promotion of justice through efforts to bring about openness of mind and will to the demands of the common good is something which concerns the Church deeply" Deus Caritas Est No. 28

    A lesson from Exodus might be in order. When Israel was liberated from Egypt through Moses, they thought that their problems were solved, a quick fix. In a way, this was how things were with us after EDSA I. later on the Israelites were confronted with the reality that was the desert, and there were hard lessons taught by the desert experience. The problem was not limited to the the Pharaoh and their enforced slavery. The problem was within themselves, they had the spirit of slaves and they were not free. An internal slavery is more difficult to conquer. EDSA II did not live up to our expectations when we went after a second quick fix. The problem is within ourselves, and it will take determination, vigilance, above all education and generations before we can arrive at the Promised Land. The generation that came out of Egypt all died in the desert. It is going to take a lot of determination and will to root out corruption that has infected the system in such a way that there is now a structure of corruption, and everybody has to be involved, the president down to the lowest citizen.
    Last edited: Jul 19, 2009