FPJ=Fallacy Per Judgement

Katie: Ahmad and I... we both must have seen that supposed-to-be presidential debate (ABC-5) where all the supposed participants were, again, nowhere to be found. From the said show, the only interesting part was that exchange of arguments by the representative of FPJ (not FPJ himself? why am I not surprised?) and the not-so-famous vice-presidential candidate of the Alyansa ng Pag-asa. Well, to simply put it, FPJ, again and again, proved to the world how fragile his stand is on every social/political issue he faces. (Come to think of it, he doesn't FACE these issues at all, di ba?!) Disgusted, I never made it to the end part of the debate.

Ahmad, on the other hand, has EVERYTHING to say about FPJ's argument, again, via his representative who always seem to resolve to FPJ's self-pity whenever confronted with the issue of him being not qualified because of his lack of skill/educational attainment- a veeeeery effective in captivating the emotion of the telenovela-trained Masa. Those horrible TV moments made me think of what FPJ could stand for... Yes, all together now: Fallacy per Judgement.

Ahmad: "If you have seen those FPJ ads, what do they tell us about FPJ? Nothing! not his qualifications, not his track record, not even a plan of action! Not a Goddamn thing! For the longest time, I (and the rest of us) have been looking for a concrete explanation and essence in his qualification, but how did FPJ's allies have responded? We are accused of being intellectual Snobs, that we only concern our own elitist interest, and do not care for the welfare of our masses! God this reasoning makes me sick! We are only asking what is fair! why should we vote FPJ for president? and please substabtiate the answers with concrete facts about him! Fact is he has no track record in public service, if ever he did some charity work we would not know how true or false it is, because he kept a very private life. Election is less than a month away but he never gave us a concrete explanation of what his plan of action.

Lets examine some of this so-called reason why he should be president.

1.) He is influential, he can influence his people to stand united and work for a common good.

The word "Influential" here is clearly being substituted (and often mistaken) for "Popularity", these are two very different things. In order for someone to be influential someone actualy has to influence someone to do a tangible action, not just appeal to his emotion to get him to listen to him. Moreover the question is what excatly will you influence them to do when you manage to make them stand united? to make it clearer where will you lead them? It is not enough to get people to listen, a leader must also know what task he should give to his subordiantes. But has he given us a clue of what this tasks are? I also said in the past that if he is so influential then how come the opposition is not united? If he can't console one man (Lacson) to be on this side then somebody please explain to me how he is going to unite 80 million filipinos.


2.) He is less talk and more action that is why he does not want to participate in debates, because he prefers action than argumentation.

I agree than any public servant should do more action than talking. But in FPJ's case he is overdoing it. Besides what makes them actually say that he is more of action rather than talk? No tract record of Public service in the past can substantiate this, In fact no substance to this argument has been presented at all! So they are clearly assuming without prooving. More than that action can only be done if you get elected, and in order to be elected people have to vote for you, Ideally people should vote for a candidate whom they believe has the best plan of action. I mean FPJ has a plan right? if not then why is he wasting his time?

3.) We need a leader not only with intellegence but determination and heart to actually do service.

Again what substance can proove that FPJ is really determined in helping his people other than word of mouth? Is determination enough to actually be an effective leader? Lets put an analogy to it, what would be the best solider, one with courage but no amunition, one with amunition but an absolute coward, one with neither ammunition nor courage, or one who has both courage and ammunition. Platforms are both means and ends. He said that FPJ will improve our agriculture, education, discipline our law enforcers, and bring back trust to the government yada yada yada (hell he can even say that he intends to send a filipino in pluto if he wants). Yeah but how in God's name does he intend to do so? his answer? "Baka pag pinaliwanag ko abutin pa tayo dito ng mag-hapon". Right!

So why the hell is it that if an explanation has to be given about his programs someone else has to answer for him? Why? Can't he explain it himself? afterall its his program right? (yeah right).

I would like to imagine that I am one of those basketball players in FPJ's campaign add, and at the end of it I would go "ah tulong tulong sama sama..... O sige po, Ano ang gagawin NATIN para umasenso and Pilipinas? What do you think will be his answer?"

FPJ: uhhh... bago yan. Di pa namin napag-uusapan namin yan. Pag-aaralan namin yan. Yada yada yada yan...

Lee Kuan Yew: (grin.)