Redundant, because they have been in the political scene for years and years. In major events they were seen quiet or quarrelsome depending on the group they happened to be. Some of them have waxed eloquent over an issue casting barbed words here and there, posing as champion of this or that cause or just posing for the camera. If choice is to depend on who raked the biggest pile of junks, these barking honchos would get the mandate hands down. But good leaders cannot rise from the ruins of other leaders. Good leaders are cast from good persons whose reputation is not founded on the art of nay saying nor mudslinging. So the better minded have nothing but scorn for their antics.
Unfortunately, there are only few discerning voters who cannot be fooled by the gimmickries of trapos. Hence, this species of politician thrive and are able to perpetuate their kind. But oftentimes they are unable to perpetuate their convictions. Today they may sound like crusaders of good government, but tomorrow they would quiet down and became docile members of the club - that gathering of percenters and influence merchants whose main obsession is to fatten their bankbooks.
The other collection of senatoriables is touted as a unity team. Forged by the ruling powers, they are less sanguine in their discontent. Some are team players picked for their vaunted loyalty to Pasig's Iron Lady, but the others are rejects from the opposite camp. In the past these people were seen in the frontlines of anti-government street actions mouthing half-truths and half-lies. But now they are locking elbows with the very people they scorned. What has happened to their principles - if any?
Aping the opposition, this klatch of power seekers has taken in two entertainers as bedfellows. Seen with the more seasoned cohorts in this group, these two are like maverick entities. But difference in genus is not as incongruous as poverty of competence. Trained to entertain they can do no more in the Senate than entertain. Before the camera they may look primed for intellectual interaction. The truth, however, is that they have only a trifle to say if asked what they would do once elected. Chances are they will be elected. The masa will see to that. Unable to sort out reality from fancy, these movie habitués look at them as super-heroes who are invincible or as shinning exemplars who can't do wrong. These new faces will then join their counterparts in that House and together they will form a committee of silent listeners.
A sad spectacle, really. But perhaps the masa find them better than their cohorts in that body who, except for one or two, are big names in business and industry and are searching reelection to protect their interests; better and less menacing than those who once lorded gambling syndicates or who those who actually fired shots to dismantle democracy hereabout. Questionable in character, they think they can again fool the people. Can they?
In front of the camera or in fora, these old and new faces will mouth high sounding plans that sound pro-poor and pro-development. But what they will be saying has been said a hundred times in the past also by senatoriables. Yet the plight of the poor has remained unchanged, and in fact, in some areas, has become worse. Millions are still underfed. Millions are still un-literate. And more millions are fleeing this country in search of jobs.
These new and old faces - can they do something for these hapless millions? As always, the answer is as uncertain as the weather. But they will get elected, the trapos and the actors, especially the actors. And the circus will go on.