A group of golfers and doctors were engaged in a “beer talk” at a golf course and wondered why the country can’t have new faces running for Senate.
A golfer named James wondered why voters should re-elect senators who have already served their six-year term.
“Can we not give chances to deserving Pinoys who are [worthy of] serving our country?” he asked. “Enough is enough for those who have been tagged as suspects for alleged corruption or misdeeds.” A doctor named Tito replied, saying, “After six years, there is nothing much [more] a senator could [do to] serve the people.”
“Surely, [they] have no more ideas [that would] contribute to benefit the country,” he added.
“[Look at] what is happening [with] the election campaign today, these re-electionists promise a lot of things,” a golfer named Bogs pointed out. “If they [had] done good, there is [no reason] for the voters to thank them since that is their duty as senator.”
“The people do not owe them anything,” a doctor named Jun noted. “They owe the people a lot of their services [and] it is their duty to serve and not to be served.”
“Once elected you can’t go near them anymore,” a golfer named Ken added.
“Why don’t we vote for new faces?” asked a doctor named Lito. “Whatever political party, or independent candidates, this is to give our country the chance of having new faces for new ideas.” The doctor then uttered similar sentiment from a WatchMe column published earlier this week, even using the same slur, noting, “The old f*****s have nothing more to contribute.”
“There are a lot of new faces in the senatorial line-up – choose new faces,” he added.
A golfer named Greg said new faces among the local electorate will provide “better opportunities [for] new directions in community development.” A golfer named Philip added, “We do not believe that those who finished their nine years in local governance could still contribute better development for a town or city.”
A doctor named Perry also reiterated statements made in several previous WatchMe columns, asking, “Do you have an idea how they can recover their political investment?”
In the aforementioned column, a retired salesman noted, “The winners need to get back their investment in their campaign money first more than anything else;” to which a priest agreed, replying, “Their first priority is the return of their political investment.” The point was also raised in a WatchMe column from January that asked, “When will the Comelec penalize rule violators?” In that article, a priest posed the question, “How will they recover the cost of winning – or losing – an election except from money deals when they sit in power, right?” The point of the statement was also similar to another WatchMe column, entitled “How many would run for office if financial benefits were scrapped?,” where a lawyer was quoted as saying, “Why are politician candidates spending millions to win an election… How could they recover the millions spent after winning?”
***
This column greets Ronnie Lopez, Raymund Javellana, Naida Yapjoco, Karen Dinsay, Leo Victorio, Lando Dabao, Marlon Navarro, Emmanuel Tiples, Tots Vallejo, and Alfred Macabani/WDJ