There was a great conversation yesterday after what happened to Dr. Clinton’s blog. Here are some of my thoughts:
- On Hacking. It is hard to prove that Dr. Clinton’s blog was hacked. It is much harder to prove that it was Teddy Casino who hacked the blog. I would not know though if Dr. Clinton accused Casino of hacking the blog, or at the very least responsible for taking down the doctor’s blog. We need evidence for this, but unfortunately, this is a mere distraction from the main issue
- On conversation with Teddy. Teddy promised to write a blog post regarding this (Read here). I welcome this effort of Casino to explain itself, but I am still disappointed.
- On Teddy’s blog. I was so disappointed. The representative did not answer the question we posed. Again, the question was “Is it legal for candidates to advertise on SME products?”. Has Casino answered it? No. He, again, resorted to generalities.
- On the Casino Anti-Epal bill. In his blog Casino tells us about the subject of the bill. He says, “ I am proposing to prohibit the naming of streets, classrooms, gymnasiums, parks, other public places, and government projects or programs after an incumbent government official or their relatives.” I’ll deal with this below
No wonder why the bill did not push through. There is no sense of making a law that will prohibit what is already prohibited. I direct you to this provision of the Local Government Code:
Section 13. Naming of Local Government Units and Public Places, Streets and Structures.
(d) None of the foregoing local government units, institutions, places, or buildings shall be named after a living person…
Of course it will be impossible to name streets, classrooms, gymnasiums, parks, other public places after an incumbent official; unless, of course, the incumbent official is dead (which is funny no?). On naming them after a relative of an incumbent official, the relative must be dead first before the thing be named after. Now, should the relative be dead, then it is a matter of delicadeza, an ethical issue that is.
This is very much the same with epal. It is an ethical issue, @raggster says. I simply cannot buy Casino’s blogpost merely because it is irrelevant to the issue at hand. Well, he may or may not be an epal but it is for the public taste to determine that. Can he complain? I don’t think he is in the position to; after all, he is applying for a public office.