AN EXPOSE VS. DONALD TRUMP

THE MISS UNIVERSE ORGANIZATION POST-PRODUCTION MEETING
By OverExposed (Canadian Fashion Designer and Makeup Artist)
Wardrobe Committee, Miss Universe 2009

Two days after the crowning of a new Miss Universe and a day before it finally leaves the Bahamas, the [Miss Universe Organization] called on a high level staff meeting behind closed doors in one of the Atlantis Resort's function rooms. The principal objective of the meeting: provide a post-production/post-event evaluation of the just concluded pageant. As a part of the "wardrobe crew" of this year's Miss Universe pageant, I had the privilege of joining the exclusive meeting and "in the interest of the truth," would now want to share with the public some of the things that I found out.

TRUMP AND MUO
Officers and staff of the MUO (including [President Paula Shugart]) aren't very happy with the way results are formulated year after year after year. Most of them feel really bad how pageant fans the world over react negatively to the MUO's supposed choices, especially since the final results declared on pageant night aren't exactly reflective of the real list that preliminary judges come up with. Paula even commented, "Pageant fans aren't blind. They have a good feel of who are in and who are not." She even feels for deserving contestants who get booted out by the so-called Trump ladies and has admitted to feeling very uncomfortable having to look at these ladies' supporters straight in the eye and give them an explanation for an obvious injustice. The fact that there were no Asians in this year's Final 15 made Paula shake her head in disappointment, saying, "There's just no way for us to deny that some of our results were somehow fixed. We could have at least had token spots." No matter how difficult, at the end of the day, Paula just chooses to stand by what her boss wants and be the pro that she is. Based on what I heard during the meeting, however, discontent over Trump's management of the MUO is growing.

TRUMP CARDS
No matter how hard they deny it or even cover up the existence of a Trump list, let it be said that Mr. Trump truly does a selection of his own favorites. This was thoroughly discussed during the meeting. In this year's edition of the pageant, five top 15 ladies were taken out of the list to give way to Mr. Trump's personal choices. Statuesque Ms. Vietnam Vo Hoang Yen was one of them. Even worse was the case of [Bianca Manalo of] the Philippines, [a country] which already had three delegates taken out of the semifinal list in the three editions of the Trump-organized Miss Universe pageant. India is another country that is slowly losing its steam as far as Mr. Trump is concerned. Mr. Trump once commented that Indian women are "way too smart and not very sexy."

IT'S ALL BUSINESS
While pageant fanatics may consider exclusion of their ladies as an act of racism or personal bias, the truth about the selection of Miss Universe winners under the Trump franchise is that this is all based on business. Check out the global footprint of the Trump Organization's Real Estate, Hotel, and Golf Club businesses. It will be easy to correlate their locations to the winners of his pageant. Aside from having these types of developments all over the USA, Mr. Trump has real estate projects in Cap Cana, Dominican Republic (it should no longer surprise you why Dominican Republic has been very successful in penetrating the top 5 almost yearly, with Amelia Vega as a recent winner); Toronto, Canada (of course Natalie's crown was a fitting "thank you"); Seoul, South Korea (Honey Lee's [third] runner-up finish was close); Rio Grande, Puerto Rico (okay, this is just so obvious - Puerto Rico's almost assured of a top 5 slot yearly); and Dubai, UAE (well he can't do much about this given the UAE's Muslim tradition). Other countries, which may be allotted regular spots in the Miss Universe final selection are: Panama (for Mr. Trump's projects in Panama City); Scotland (he's got developments in Aberdeen); and Turkey (to support his interests in Istanbul). Of course token spots may also be granted for Miss Universe sponsors, as in the cases of BSC (Thailand) and Mikimoto (Japan). To pageant fans, never ever forget that Mr. Trump is a businessman, A SHREWD ONE. As a business partner, I'd even say he's good. He know how to match a partner's generosity and kindness (quid pro quo) - and the easiest way for him is through the Miss Universe franchise.

I guess that's all I am allowed to share. You know how things are run in this pageant now. As for me, my job here's done - I guess. I've decided to tender my resignation after this whole thing is over. I am glad to have shared this with all of you.

~ from Missosology Miss Universe 2009 Forum

emphasis mine
- Geo R.

Let us be one. VOTE NO TO THE SR REFERENDUM

Last Friday, UP Student Regent Shahana Abdulwahid released her statement rejecting the appeal made by some councils across the UP System calling for the addition of the five crucial proposals in the ballot for the upcoming SR Referendum. Hah! Talk about REJECTION

I dare answer her.
And my answer is a resounding NO.

Why? Because:

1. The current CRSRS does not protect the genuine interests and welfare of the students by not imposing a minimum academic requirement, thus allowing students not academically good to hold such office of high esteem, giving probability that student representation would be compromised (remember SR Ferdinand Zafranco?)
2. The current CRSRS does not guarantee transparency because the role and responsibilities of the student regent is not defined. In any guiding rules for election or selection, the responsibilities of the position being selected should be well-defined so that the panel that shall elect or select will be guided accordingly.
   
3. The current CRSRS allows for power monopolization by the inclusion of KASAMA sa UP in the selection process. As I quote Mr. Ernest Calayag: "The existence of the KASAMA sa UP which takes the secretariat seat on default breaks the essence of a democratic selection. We acknowledge the alliance’s contribution to the SR history but giving it a major participation without any process is like stealing from the students their right to democratically select who they truly want to represent them."
4. The current CRSRS does not call for maximum student participation by limiting the voting process to 2 votes for all autonomous units and 1 vote for all regional units. The selection of the student regent is a truly student affair and the students should have the final say in the selection of THEIR student regent. Giving voice to local councils is tantamount to giving voice to the students who democratically elected them and submitted themselves to be represented by the local councils.
   
5. The current CRSRS and its contents did not pass through genuine student consultation.

The Office of the Student Regent is an office very precious and crucial to us students. Only by allowing it to be democratized will it be a truly representative institution. However, the current system does not allow it to be truly representative. It only serves the interests of the few, and not the genuine interests of the student body.

WE CALL FOR A GENUINELY DEMOCRATIC STUDENT REGENT SELECTION PROCESS.

NO TO UNPROTECTED STUDENT INTERESTS!
NO TO POWER MONOPOLIZATION!
NO TO UNGUARANTEED TRANSPARENCY!
NO TO UNDEMOCRATIC VOTING PROCESS!
NO TO THE FLAWED CRSRS!


VOTE NO TO THE SR REFERENDUM!

Remove the Atmosphere of Deception

"The councils belonging to the Defend the OSR Alliance have created an atmosphere of deception in the whole UP System."
~an anonymous UPLB student

This may be a glaring statement from an anonymous source, but it is true. What has transpired these past days in the University of the Philippines' political arena is nothing but a big DECEPTION. Yes, DECEPTION with the capitals D-E-C-E-P-T-I-O-N.

In whatever angle you look at the issue regarding the Office of the Student Regent, the members of the Defend the OSR Alliance have misinformed, misguided, and mislead the whole student community of the University, especially by claiming that a negative vote to the Student Regent Referendum is affirming the abolition of the Office of the Student Regent.

(excuse me for the term) BULLSHIT!

The only way to abolish an office mandated by law is to repeal the law that created it.

They are just afraid that the selection process will become a genuinely democratic one, henceforth lessening or even eliminating their chances to monopolize the Office of the Student Regent.

Why? Because there are five genuine reforms that the truly progressive student councils are pushing for:

1. The addition of a minimum grade requirement as one of the qualifications of the student regent nominee(s);
2. The inclusion of an express enumeration of the roles and responsibilities of the student regent;
3. The removal of the Kasama sa UP in the selection process;
4. The widening and democratization of the voting process; and
5. The rationalization of the rules by extending its effectivity to a set period (at least three years or as set by the GASC).

The members of the Defend the OSR Alliance reject these proposals.

The people who support an educated vote, those people calling for a halt to the MISINFORMATION CAMPAIGN being launched by the members of the Defend the OSR Alliance are being called anti-student.

The question is: Is pushing for a genuinely democratic student regent selection process anti-student?

in glaring capital words again:
I DON'T THINK SO!

Logic would in fact tell us that pushing for a genuinely democratic selection process is the pro-student one. Rejecting such is the anti-student one.

Pro-student because it protects the office of the student regent, henceforth protecting the representation of the student community and its genuine interests.

Pro-student because it calls for transparency and proper delineation of responsibility.

Pro-student because it removes power monopolization by the few.

Pro-student because it calls for wider and more representative participation.

Of course as UP students, we want our representation to the Board of Regents, the highest policy making body in the University. But we want our representative to be TRULY REPRESENTATIVE - democratically selected and will carry the true interests of the students.

STOP GUESSING. START KNOWING.
DEFEND THE OFFICE OF THE STUDENT REGENT BY AN EDUCATED VOTE.

REMOVE THE ATMOSPHERE OF DECEPTION.