Grace Poe-Llamanzares’ declares that questions about her citizenship are just dirty political black propaganda. Dean of Ateneo School of Government Tony La Vina has this to say (and, always with the same tone whenever Llamanzares’ citizenship is questioned):
Definitely this is the dirtiest political campaign I am seeing and we have just started. It’s already overtaken in my view the 2004 campaign when FPJ was attacked with everything at the people’s expense. Looks like that is happening again. If this succeeds, we will repeat the GMA years again and have a president that is not considered legitimate. This is specially true if on top of all of this, there is a perception that the election results are manipulated to favor the ruling party.
It always looks dirty for people like Dean Tony La Vina who favors Poe-Llamanzares. But how about those of us who wants to know the truth? Remember that this is about being governed by a president that potentially did not meet the constitutional requirement of citizenship. Should we just rest and abide by the insinuation that everything is just political black propaganda and stop pursuing the truth?
Common people like us would have appreciated people of the law like Dean La Vina if they will say that the constitution should be upheld instead of just assuming that everything is just politics.
Dirty or not, this is a question of the law. Let her answer it and be done with it once and for all.
So, the new generation nowadays are saying “Buti pa nung panahon ni Marcos, _____________”. Mas tahimik. Mas mayaman ang Pilipinas. Mas maraming services.
Here’s a 6-minute video to help you know the facts. It’ll be worth your time.
Sorry sa mga kamag-anak at kaibigan kong Marcos loyalists. Pero nakakainit ng ulo dito si Bongbong Marcos, in so many counts:
1. He enumerates his father’s accomplishments. Roads built, rice sufficiency, etc. But he never said that his father was in power for 20 LONG YEARS! Pag wala ka pa naman nagawa ng 20 years, ewan ko nalang.
2. He enumerated his father’s accomplishments, but never mentioned about the rest of the story. Bilions of dollars in debts. Kanino nanggaling yon? No. 1 corrupt nation, kaninong panahong nangyari yon? The human rights violations? The cronies? Need to go on and on?
3. He was so proud that the youth who have never seen his father’s presidency are saying “Buti pa nung panahon ni Marcos…” Precisely the point! They were not there to experience it. I was a Marcos baby and was not able to experience what people older than me are saying. But history is more accessible now than ever. So, for the young, know your history.
Ayos naman sana na sabihin nalang na hindi nya kasalanan yon, kasalanan ng tatay nya yon. He technically doesn’t need to say sorry. But he tried. However, his ‘sorry’ wasn’t at all. He wasn’t sorry. He was proud and arrogant. And loving it.
A few days ago, I wrote what I thought should be a pre-requisite for those who wants to become president of my country, the Philippines. I asked, “Why can’t we place a higher standard of nationalism on them, too? Like expecting a candidate to must have never thought about dropping their being a Filipino, even on paper, just because it’s admittedly more convenient (or inconvenient, for those who have the means to choose it to be that way for them) elsewhere?”
It looks like Prof. Randy David agrees with this line of thought, as he wrote in his recent piece at the Inquirer:
Citizenship is a legal issue, but also an emotional one. I am not a lawyer, but I think Sen. Grace Poe’s eligibility for an elective position in the legislature or the presidency is arguable using RA 9225. That law permitted her to regain her status as a natural-born citizen of this country. But those who oppose her on citizenship grounds will likely ask whether someone who renounced and later reacquired Philippine citizenship can still be considered a natural-born citizen as defined by the 1987 Constitution. Here’s what Article IV, Section 2, says: “Natural-born citizens are those who are citizens of the Philippines from birth without having to perform any act to acquire or perfect their Philippine citizenship.”
Questions: If you renounced and lost your citizenship—and later reacquired it after applying and taking an oath—wouldn’t the latter be regarded as performing an “act to acquire or perfect” one’s citizenship? Doesn’t renouncing your citizenship mean canceling your allegiance to your mother country? And isn’t that the reason for taking the oath of allegiance when you apply to regain it?
… I nonetheless find it reasonable that the Constitution requires more from those aspiring for the highest offices of the republic. They must be free of the stain of dual allegiance. Grace has to find a convincing way to respond, for example, to the late Supreme Court Justice Isagani Cruz’s contention that “Philippine citizenship previously disowned is not that cheaply recovered.”
Read more: http://opinion.inquirer.net/87575/natural-born-citizen#ixzz3ifh07tF8
It’s not a question whether Grace Poe deserves to be president even if she’s a fondling. To me, being fondling is not an issue. It’s her abandoning her Filipino citizenship at one point in her life that should be a real issue.
As Prof. Randy David eloquently puts it: citizenship is a legal issue, but also an emotional one.
Do you really want a former US Citizen as a Philippine president? Seriously.
Some might say that I’m insulting those who chose to be a US Citizens. That I’m questioning their nationalism.
A shot at Grace Poe’s citizenship history is not a shot against Filipinos who chose to be citizens of the United States of America or elsewhere. I personally know of people, even close friends and relatives, that are already US citizens but are very much still a Filipino, loves the Philippines and very much involved in the affairs of the country.
However, to be US Citizen (even if she dropped it because of a government position) AND aspire to be the Philippine president is another thing. It’s an oxymoron.
Do you really want to have a former US Citizen to lead our country? A first family who’s half of its members pledged allegiance to a country other than our own?
We put a higher standard to our Presidents. We want them to be incorruptible. Someone with integrity. We want them to be highly competent. Sincere beyond doubt.
Why can’t we place a higher standard of nationalism on them, too? Like expecting a candidate to must have never thought about dropping their being a Filipino, even on paper, just because it’s admittedly more convenient (or inconvenient, for those who have the means to choose it to be that way for them) elsewhere?
Do you really want a former US Citizen as a Philippine president? Really?