What is it that we really want?

The Comelec recently generated another firestorm when it warned showbiz stars and other celebrities that they have to take a leave or quit their shows if they must endorse candidates. If they don't, severe sanctions could await them, the poll body said, citing the law.

The Philippines truly strikes me as a country that just cannot seem to make up its mind. If it is perfectly all right to let showbiz personalities run for public office, and even make a movie star president, why the hell is it so wrong if they merely endorse candidates?

This is no different from allowing a natural born citizen, of legal age, who only knows how to read and write, to run for public office and then disqualifying him later as a nuisance because he does not have the means to mount a credible campaign (read that as having no money).

On the other hand, if a person also has too much money, and uses that money to mount a credible campaign, he is not only restricted from spending too much, but the fact of his having too much can also be made an issue against him.

No wonder we are now lagging behind our neighbors. In addition to too much politics, we cannot seem to create regulations rigid enough to promote a stable atmosphere, making foreign investments always a nightmare, in danger of legal environments changing overnight.

Of course the Comelec is not entirely to blame for the flap about celebrities because the truth is, there is really such a provision against celebrity endorsements in the Fair Elections Act. The Comelec was perhaps only trying to preempt accusations of laxity in enforcing laws.

But now comes the real confusing part. It is not only the celebrities themselves who are reacting vehemently to the Comelec warning. Equally, if not more, vehement in their protestations are the politicians themselves, especially those who are being endorsed by the stars.

Yet aren't these politicians the very same ones who crafted these laws that would curtail their acts later on? If they did not want any restrictions in the employment of celebrities as endorsers, why then did they have to make laws banning such employment in the first place?

I just cannot understand what we Filipinos truly want. First we create certain laws. But when these laws are implemented we start complaining. My guess is that we create laws only for show, to give the impression that we are what we are not.

In other words, many of our laws are driven by hypocrisy, by a great compelling need to pretend or go through the motions. The problem arises when we try to emulate something we do not mean to. Then it goes against the grain of our being. Resistance is a consequence of pretense.

Look at this thing about media personalities similarly endorsing candidates. We always look up to America for almost everything. And yet while the American media make no bones about endorsing candidates, which is the truly democratic thing to do, we pretend to be otherwise.

 We are very selective in our hypocrisy. When it comes to other matters, such as Manny Pacquiao appearing on the cover of Time, or Fidel Peñaflorida being chosen as CNN hero of the year, we almost drop to our knees in reverence for these media institutions.

 But when venerable institutions as the New York Times and Newsweek openly endorse candidates, we protest as if we are any better guardians of democratic processes when in fact we only copied the Americans and worse, copied only those that suit our hypocritical designs.

 Of course important distinctions have to be made. When American celebrities and media endorse candidates, they do so of their own free will. They do not get paid. In the Philippines, many do so on contract, open or otherwise. In such a case, taking a leave or quitting is a must.