«

»

Aug 08

Only eighth complaint survives

Managed to catch Committee on Justice hearing on DZBB AM radio only now (shame on the TV stations for ignoring the event!) Here’s Inq7.net’s report on what took place during the parts I missed.

3:20-3:32 pm …According to Edcel Lagman, only the eighth impeachment complaint came within the one year ban on impeachments. The rest should be “jettisoned”.

Why not consolidate? Asked Allan Peter Cayetano, giving an example of the Voltes V robot. Argues against approaching the issue from technicalities. Pleads for at least 48 hours to present evidence.

3:33 pm Rep. Simeon Datumanong: reiterates motion dismissing complaints 1-7 as filed before July 26, and thus prior to 1 year since the Lozano complaint.

In favor of dismissal: “so many,” according to radio announcer. Majority stands/raises hands. One of those voting to dismiss is Rep. Mikey Arroyo. 54 vote for dismissal.

Against dismissal: 24 against the motion. Motion is carried.

3:37 pm Rep. Roman of Batangas states his position has changed from last year; the situation, he says is very different. Last year, he objected to the prejudicial question because the complaints, then, were sent and arrived at the same time; but this year, he justifies voting to dismiss because they were filed and sent on different dates. He claims personal privilege to explain, at length, his vote today.

3:40 pm Rep. Datumanong says there can be no privileged motions other than to adjourn. Having heard the word “adjournment,” congressmen start filing out of the room although meeting hasn’t been gaveled to a close. Media coverage has shifted to chasing congressmen.

Hearing resumes tomorrow at 1pm. The majority is obviously operating according to schedule.

Someone texted me that my aunt, Mrs. Nini Quezon Avanceña, one of those who signed the first complaint, ran into Evelyn Kolayco, diehard supporter of the President, outside the committee room. I have to repeat what my aunt said in defense of impeachment: “What are you so afraid of?” Kolayko turned pale and went away.

Chiz Escudero says the tactic of filing the complaint multiple times was proven necessary after what happened.

Rep. Lagman says the House may consider holding tomorrow’s hearing in the plenary session hall.

3:48 pm Rep. Mikey Arroyo: All these things were done within the bounds of law, they were important, and impeachment is important, we respect complainants just as we expect complainants to respect us. We’re not here to railroad anything, we’re here to ensure everything is done with due process. The Hyatt 10 (they’re fewer now) called for GMA’s resignation, that’s fine, that’s part of a healthy democracy, but we’re here to follow the law.

3:49 pm Mely Nicolas reiterates that Emmy Boncodin was not asked to Petron as an independent director as part of a political deal. Reiterates, categorically, that the Hyatt 10 remains united. “We’re more than Hyatt 10, there’s so many more government officials that resigned.” Says the spirit of the complaint -citizens demanding accountability- is being ignored. But “that’s how they’re going to do it, they’ll bore us to death.” She hopes against hope that at least complaints will be aired and evidence presented.

3:52 pm Coverage on DZBB ends.

I don’t think I missed much.

Over in America, something interesting in The Washington Monthly: Republicans trying to spook voters with warnings of an attempt to impeach George W. Bush:

But here’s the larger point: Over the last 5 and a half years, the Republican Congress has broken with history by almost completely abdicating its constitutional responsibility to conduct oversight of the Bush administration, despite ample material to look into. A Democratic House, with veteran committee chairs like Conyers, John Dingell, and Henry Waxman, would provide the thorough accounting of the last 6 disastrous years — from Iraq, to Medicare, to Abramoff to Katrina — that the White House and its allies most fear.

I’ve heard often enough, that the administration has plagiarized whole pages from the Republican political playbook. Well… seems so.

Technorati Tags: , ,

49 comments

Skip to comment form

  1. THE OBSERVER

    BULLSHIT .. THIS IS NOT THE REAL DEMOCRACY. DEMOCRACY IS WHEN THE WILL OF THE MAJORITY OF THE PEOPLE IS REPRESENTED !!! MAJORITY OF THE CONGRESSMEN REPRESENTED THEMSELVES AND NOT THE PEOPLE >>> IT SPEAKS WHAT OUR CURRENT HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES ARE MADE OF – MGA BOBO, UTO UTO AT NABIBILI AT NASISILAW SA SALAPI !!! JUSTICE WILL PREVAIL IN THE END MIKEY ARROVO AND CO-HORTS WILL REAP WHAT THEY SOW … PURO KAYO PAGTATATAKIP !!! WHY DON’T YOU LET JUSTICE PREVAIL !!! MATATALO DIN KAYO COME ELECTION 2007 !!!! TANDAAAN ANG MGA YAN !!! MGA BWISIT LALO KA NA MIKE DEFENSOR, DATUMANONG, MACARAMBONG, NOGRALES !!!!

  2. Schumey

    Manolo,

    Your aunt said it all. And for Mikey, he just showed what values he has or lacks. At least, one complaint hurdled the first test. Also, the lower house said that media coverage will be very limited. Obviously, they would like to temper the tide of disgust. Imagine the possibilities if the “proceedings were to be televised, they are afraid that their “circus” could push the people to the limit and finally break the dam of disgust.

  3. Karl Garcia

    Listening to the explainer,and what I am hearing is the strength of the party,but I can’t get where the citizens strength come in both systems.

    as for that impeachment,I will still hope that this finally proceed to the senate….If not then I hope the elections will encourage all of us to vote and be vigilant to guard our votes and there will be a chance next year.

  4. mrabello

    well, pretty useless exercise(that is my opinion) even filing– knowing the predictable outcome.

    Administration congressmen voting the way they should–and those who reportedly benefitted from the fertilizer scam — vehemently opposed to any suggestion to inhibit themselves from the vote.

    I am not exactly sure why the “request” to inhibit was even made, it would only be sneered at by the GMA men in the lower house..and would in effect be an admission of guilt on their part if they did.

    It would be interesting to see how events play out in the campaign period leading up to May 2007.

    Mikey should keep his thoughts to himself–sheesh, even Jinggoy is beginning to sound a lot smarter…

  5. jhay

    It’s only typical of Malacañang to plagiarise the Republican playbook, GMA has been kissing Bush’ a@@ since 9/11

  6. cvj

    Let’s not forget that this disaster that is the George W Bush admin was made possible by those who voted for Ralph Nader (in Florida). Nader voters, whose positions were closer to that of the Democrats, at that time saw no difference between Bush and Gore. In other words they made their decision on the premise of ‘pare-pareho lang sila’. The rest is history.

  7. juan makabayan

    Edcel Lagman was last year’s leadman hitman; he, with his ‘pre-judicial killing’ of the impeachment complaints is on the side of the perpetrators of extra-judicial killing of militants and activists. He vehemently protested being linked to the fertilizer scam in his district. How can he be protector of the mastermmind and self-righteously insist that he’s clean and spotless? Pompous asshole isn’t he?

  8. juan makabayan

    888 – august 8, the 8th complaint;

    I wonder what ‘8’ symbolizes.

    Mr. Eight Ball Efren ‘Bata’ Reyes should have been an endorser of the 8th complaint.

    A billiard showdown between majority and minority in the plenary would bring more excitement, anyway, bastusan na talaga, why not make it more fun and entertaining? sponsored by 888.com, top-billed as a historic first, in the country of billiard champions, super championship Billyaran sa Batasan.

    Is a Plaza vs Makarambong middle-weight boxing bout in the works? I’ll bet for Plaza, Makarambong can’t fight with his shades on; but if he takes his shades off Plaza might just run away faster than a bullet, katakot talaga.

    That’s it. The 8’s, Crazy 8’s, they call it. From Congress what do we expect?

  9. Jeg

    Let’s not forget that this disaster that is the George W Bush admin was made possible by those who voted for Ralph Nader…In other words they made their decision on the premise of ‘pare-pareho lang sila’. The rest is history.

    Youre insinuating a parallel that perhaps I dont get, cvj. Are you saying that those of us who voted for Roco (or the others other than Da King) are the reason GMA is in power? Should we have voted for FPJ instead?

  10. cvj

    Jeg, please excuse the ambiguity, i did not intend any parallels with the 2004 Philippine election. I was referring specifically to how the ‘pare-pareho lang sila’ mindset worked against the advocacies of the Nader voter. Bush and Gore couldn’t have been more different, especially in matters relating to the environment.

    As i commented sometime back, over here, that mindset (which seems to be common among Roco voters) is also causing damage, but in a different way.

  11. juan makabayan

    mlq3,

    The US government could be the most analyzed institution in history that there will always be ample material to plagiarize from by either side of a debate on any issue regarding government and governance. Filipino political analysts have better access to American sources than the Philippines’. The lack of scholarly and scientific research on key issues shows that this charter change is at best an ill-conceived, ill-timed experiment.

  12. The Ca t

    again, this is what am saying. The groups that filed the seven impeachment complaints were so in hurry to unseat GMA that they did not bother to check the date whether the filing date was still in the period when the President is still immune from impeachment . Sloppy, sloppy, sloppy.
    Sometimes I suspect that these people are working for GMA.

    See cvj, what all emotions can do even for highly educated people like the complainants.

    And Allan P. Cayetano is aking for 48 hours to prepare evidences. That should have been done between the junking of the first impeachment last year and the filing of the new ones.

    48 hours, ano siya si Eddie Murphy? nyahaha

  13. tbl

    The cat said…

    “And Allan P. Cayetano is aking for 48 hours to prepare evidences. That should have been done between the junking of the first impeachment last year and the filing of the new ones.

    48 hours, ano siya si Eddie Murphy? nyahaha”

    Yes, I thought they have done their research and are ready for the showdown in this year’s impeachment.They had one year to do it. If not, they don’t really have a chance against Arroyo’s “Tongressmen”. I am still hoping that the second impeachment will not go down the drain. Good luck mga kabayang Filipino.

  14. Realistic

    Trashed on technicality! The opposition, undoubtedly, must have lawyers preparing the impeachement complaint. What’s wrong with these people?

  15. DJB

    MLQ3,
    Under a democracy there is NO guarantee of results: only the opportunity to achieve them. There was a day that this same group of people commenting may have been all praises for the Lower House and derisive of the Senate. That was just five years ago during Edsa 2! Look, the Opposition has been outfoxed so far and last year when the anti-impeachment congressmen voted on the strenght of their numbers what did some people do? They held a Kangaroo Court out of sheer frustration. PRESIDUUM my foot! How can they expect support from the people when they showed their true colors: totalitarians and communists. Call me a labeller, but that is what the vast majority of people saw in that silly exercise of the CCTA. There was simply a smarter way to handle it than that. I submit it’s one of the reasons this second impeachment bid has been fatally damaged in the eyes of the public. I further submit that those genuinely interested in making impeachment work should think twice about a second Kangaroo Court, or other moves to shoot themselves in the foot. There are three more chances to impeach her: work smart not dumb to do it. Early polling and analysis shows that the Senate will be solidly oppositionist after the 2007 elections. That means if a measly eighty Congressmen are elected who will vote for impeachment in 2007, GMA’s impeachment in the House will mean almost certain conviction in the Senate.

    It’s an historic opportunity to establish impeachment as a Constitutional method of premature Regime Change. We must not miss it or mess it up. Unlike 2001, when the Senate would’ve acquitted Erap anyway, that will not be the situation next year. By this very time next year a trial could put GMA and Erap in the same cell block. I’ll contribute the 24/7 Webcam!

  16. george

    observer
    …this is precisely what elections are for.. to put somebody up there till his term expires. no short cuts. you may turn blue in anger but nothing is going to happen till as you said next election.. no tv coverage? because this is non-issue anymore.
    appreciate the hard work of this Peter Cayetano but you know his legislative output after 3 years in congress? check it out and you will realize why he needs more time to present evidences! this is what is wrong with filipinos -like crabs..

  17. gil maquimot

    impeachment must go on to find out the truth. nowadays, politicians hate the truth they just want to survive by taking side with the mighty. poor filipino people….wake up….wake up wake up!

  18. iniduro ni emilie

    ah, the consequence of edsa 2. tsk, tsk.

    see how this train of bastusan has been institutionalized? darn, had we gone through erap’s impeachment to the end. tsk, tsk. now gma has perfected the way to circumvent the law on the basis of (a) legaldygook; (b) and her legion of unggok.

  19. mlq3

    george, you forget the 1987 constitution is pretty clear that it does not view the terms of officials as sacrosanct. art. 10 sec. 3 specifically says the law shall provide for a means to recall officials. this mode of preterminating the terms of officials has been resorted to:

    http://www.chanrobles.com/cralaw1997105.htm

  20. mlq3

    cat, not even the administration congressmen had a solid consensus on when the one year period elapsed. that is because as we all know, the law and congressional rules are not only mutable, but don’t necessarily follow human logic.

    the first complaint was filed one year after the complaint was initially filed; the other complaints were filed on dates approximating the other complaints being filed and going through the process.

    i gathered that it took some vigorous debate yesterday for the congressmen to say that the one year period, to them, lapsed based on the date the speaker transmitted the various complaints to the house.

    so the strategy of multiple filings was vindicated and necessary. it’s clear the majority based on the same reasoning, could simply have chosen another arbitrary date, and justified it, with the objective of trashing this year’s complaint.

  21. Jon Mariano

    I thought the comment that counted(from a congressman) was given by Chiz Escudero. He said that the filing of many (but the same) impeachment complaints was specifically done to handle moves like this (dismissal of the first 7) by the administration. So to me, the tactic has worked so far.

    Of course, the admin will not stop at anything to throw all these complaints out of congress without discussion of its merits.

    I would personally like to see the same effect it would have with the non-openning of the 2nd envelope in Eraps impeachment process!

  22. The Ca t

    mlq3,
    human logic is not synonymous to common sense.
    The tactic may have worked but in the eyes of the observing public, they have bungled again.

    It is further aggravated by the statement of Cayetano, finding evidences after the consolidation of all the complaints.
    Even in courts, a case is not a case not until there is a solid evidence of the crime committed. Para bang sige isampa ninyo ang kaso, saka na tayo maghanap ng ebidensiya. sheeesh.

  23. cvj

    Ca T, your viewpoint is interesting. While some of us are keen on watching the actions of those who are directly involved, you choose to focus on what the ‘observing public’ thinks and then proceed to make a claim on their behalf. Maybe you’re fully capable of doing that since you have the special powers of a cat.

  24. janv

    Honestly, the junking of the impeachment complaints has something to do with the cha-cha move to prevail as almost 1/4 of the house cant run for re-election or serving their 3rd term(specifically De venecia)while rest of balimbing and pro-admin still have to secure their campaign funds(who holds the pot of jueteng?). They cant afford to spend the rest of their sessions discussing impeachment kung lahat nang sa local nasa eletion mode na. But again, the difficulty in the impeachment trial, as per our laws as practiced in the Philippines– the evidence is not enough, it is in the existence of the similar case solved. The deliberations, even in the supreme court will produce the same results because, our policies or laws are not based on our values and principles as a Filipino. Halos lahat kopya sa abroad. but as it should be, the truth, the right and the justice have nothing to do with internationally accepted standards, it has something to do with what we truly value as citizens of this country. That Our vote, our voice higher than gma’s Economic devt. Therefore, the answer is relative and contrary. What is your priority?

  25. Jon Mariano

    What could have happened if there were only 7 (or 1) complaints filed?

    I think Ca T would still say the opposition bungled their job big time! Sala sa ulan sala sa init. Is the Ca T’s preference for the opposition not to have filed file the complaints at all?

    That would then be going against the Pinoy’s nature to question everything an opponent does and say!

  26. Schumey

    Additional evidences are cropping up, and they’ve been coming in trickles. What the opposition has collected could carry more weight with these new documents. I think they’ve been doing their homework since last year, but like I said, the more damning evidences are just coming out.

    jany, you hit the nail on the head.

  27. iniduro ni emilie

    what if the evidence they are awaiting is jocjoc’s confession? that would spell big trouble for the tongressmen and the scum in the palace. kaya, sige, junk junk the impeachment proceedings, before jocjoc cracks.

  28. Edwin

    This is the reason I still prefer A THEIF WHO STOLE GAMBLERS MONEY than a midget who stole my money.

    The elite and the so called middle class are the reason why we have gloria in power. they were so intense on removing a president WHO GOT THE ELECTED LEGALLY but so called bobo by these know it all people. You never expected that those who went to EDSA 2 are ACTUALLY the ONE who are the most stupid of all. I bet some of them actually danced when the spice boys danced at congress. Hello Mike Defensor.

    as I will say again and again. Compare ERAP and GLORIA. You will see a lot of difference.

    Im just venting my frustration. Pag meron natamaan sisihin mo sarili mo.

  29. Helga

    Point of clarification, please – Alan Peter asked for 48 hours, or two days, to PRESENT evidence, not prepare it. We have the evidence, and more evidence is being gathered as it is discovered.

  30. The Ca t

    “Ca T, your viewpoint is interesting. While some of us are keen on watching the actions of those who are directly involved, you choose to focus on what the ‘observing public’ thinks and then proceed to make a claim on their behalf.”

    I am not claiming on their behalf. I am trying to explain why the public are not doing anything to support the effort of the various groups in removing GMA.

    If you will review my posts/remarks since this crisis happened, tell me where did I go wrong in reading the public’s mind.

    I am not even using my crystal ball. When I used chess to explain the moves and countermoves, Mlq3 said he does not play chess.

    When I predicted that GMA will not be impeached because there is no enough number, many dismissed my claim to be remote especially with regards Imee’s decision not to sign.

    You just observe the side which you believe is right. To win a fight, you have also to watch your enemies.

  31. The Ca t

    “I think Ca T would still say the opposition bungled their job big time! Sala sa ulan sala sa init. Is the Ca T’s preference for the opposition not to have filed file the complaints at all?”

    YOu are putting words into my mouth. Never was I against impeachment. I am of the opinion that these people being lawyers, veteran legislators who have the hands in shaping the rules and guidelines for impeachment should know better how to avoid being knocked out by technicalities.

  32. The Ca t

    “Point of clarification, please – Alan Peter asked for 48 hours, or two days, to PRESENT evidence, not prepare it. We have the evidence, and more evidence is being gathered as it is discovered.”

    If he is prepared, he does not need 48 hours. You had one year, by this time, all you have to do is to organize and organization does not take 48 hours if the data are all available at the tip of the finger.

    Like Accusation number:
    1. Documents gathered.witnesses to be summoned.. etc.

    Ano yan gagawa pa ng visual aid using manila paper. nyahahaha

    Iba pa yong evidences as the impeachment is in process. Hindi pa nasisimulan eh. Yon discovery na dapat minimized na rin because this is the second time.
    Pag bumagsak ka sa panel defense alam mo na next time maupo ka kung ano ang mga aasahan. Mahirap bang intindihin yan.

  33. mlq3

    I agree partially with Ca t in some respects and disagree with others.

    With regards to those opposed to the President, the initial crisis was deflected when the bishops held their fire. This, despite initial signs that some prominent bishops had also come to the conclusion the best option for the country was the President’s resignation (one day the interesting story of Guadencio Rosales might be pieced together).

    Then the weaknesses of those opposed began to work in the President’s favor:
    1. Dislike within Civil Society on the part of those already skeptical of the President, towards those who had supported her even beyond the elections, then changed their minds;
    2. The manner in which the discredited rushed to denounce the incumbent: the dilemma of whether to march with the Estradas, Maceda, etc. has never been solved and harmed opposition to the President;
    3. Some of the old divisions in the opposition to the President from the days of the election didn’t go away: Lacson vs. the Poe camp, some in the Poe camp vs. the Estrada camp;
    4. The Left put some from the middle on edge;

    Then the President invoked the lessons of Edsa Tres:
    1. Never allow protesters to gather together too long and without interference;
    2. Don’t bother with agonizing over how to handle crowds or any potential opposition group -disperse everyone, threaten everyone, concentrate on dividing those already showing signs of division;

    And the President’s team realized:
    1. Never allow a legal process to develop a momentum of its own;
    2. Make any potentially harmful witnesses disappear so circumstancial evidence can’t be backed up by anything more solid;
    3. Attack, attack, confuse, turn white to black and the reverse if necessary;
    4. Play the class conflict card but in a different way: preach the virtues of appearances versus substance.

    In the impeachment, round 1, I agree with Teddy Locsin’s criticism that instead of focusing on making an iron-clad legal case, the opposition was disorganized, more interested in grabbing the microphone, and less capable of doing solid lawyering -and that they were more interested in manufacturing a “people power moment,” when an essential lesson of people power is that it only comes after all other avenues have clearly been exhausted. Combined with again, the intolerable irony, to many, of people powering with the likes of Aimee Marcos, and it simply wouldn’t be a credible option.

    Hence something I expressed early on in the crisis: those who benefited from people power can’t properly deny it to others; but those who were on the losing end of people power in the past are in no position to want to invoke it.

    Still, the situation did not improve substantially for the President until:
    1. Opposition, on the whole, concentrated on Metro Manila and failed to engage the provinces;
    2. Whether deservedly or not, there developed an impression that too many in the opposition had a brittle devotion to democracy and were too willing to flirt with more extreme options such as transition councils, etc. that the public was not prepared to embrace; the specter of coups became a force not to frighten the administration, but for more and more people simply to tolerate the status quo than risk things spinning out of control;
    3. The President proved the Communist bogey can rally the middle, upper, and even a significant portion of the lower, classes.
    4. The Vice-President came to represent a Catch-22: not willing to go against the President, and so, not an ally in opposition to her; yet opposing him too, when he was, after all, being loyal to the person he ran with, came to underline (again, whether fairly or not) that the divided opposition would simply insist on a scorched-earth policy to eliminate the President (that she was doing the same thing, obviously, helped her: if both were playing at scorched earth, then why pick sides?).

    And the continued divisions in the opposition also led to the “no alternative” card trumping all other arguments.

    So it’s not all the fault of the opposition, but also the practical decision on the part of the administration to ignore the past 20 years and whatever national consensus had emerged towards handling dissent and crises situations. In the end, the administration resorted to the most tied and tested of rules: whoever has the gold, makes the rules; and power does indeed flow out of the barrel of a gun.

  34. tbl

    agree with mlq3. there will be no true and effective peoples power with the participation of the morcos clan, erap’s group and most important, the reds!

    the opposition should be more pro-active and not reactive to arroyo’s galamays.

  35. george

    again, check Peter Cayetano’s record after 3 years in congress. and he’s just in his second year as complainant in the impeachment…maybe next year he’ll be ready with his evidences..maybe..

  36. Jon Mariano

    I can see where the Ca T is coming from. But you can’t really fault the opposition for trying, can you? Saying that something is going to happen or not going to happen is different than asking yourself what you’re going to do or what you’re supposed to do.

    Predicting correctly that GMA was not going to be impeached is fine (congratulations!, I wish I could have done the same, but it doesn’t really matter), but what was the alternative last year and this year? Doing something (putting in the impeachment complaints) is better than nothing, IMHO.

  37. Jon Mariano

    George, what’s your beef against Cayetano? So what if he’s done nothing? If his constituents believe the same as you do, they’re not going to vote for him again. What he’s done in the past has little value to what he’s doing right now.

  38. The Ca t

    JM.
    Last year, that alternative was also taken but they wanted the short cut method by duplicating the two EDSAS. They did not give so much thought about the impeachment so that it was initiated by people with
    questinable motives.

    This year, they decided to do it the legitimate way. They set their hearts on it that as you claimed, the multiple filings were done to cover technicality issues.

    But not enough. Not enough to know that some of the endorsers of the eight complaint are alleged to be among the list of beneficiaries of the alleged fertilizer fund scam. That one of the signatories of the complaint is the husband?

  39. The Ca t

    Jm wrote:
    “George, what’s your beef against Cayetano? So what if he’s done nothing? If his constituents believe the same as you do, they’re not going to vote for him again. What he’s done in the past has little value to what he’s doing right now.”

    What’s wrong? Plenty. If he is elected then his performance matters as an elective official.

    Do you think he can win without his father’s name and political machinery?

  40. cvj

    Ca T, other than being an ad-hominem attack on that Congressman, what are you driving at?

  41. cvj

    Ca T, my question is with reference to the one who endorsed the impeachment.

  42. Jon Mariano

    Ca T, if knowing the details including who signed the complaints is important and will have a bearing on the issue, I don’t know and I don’t really care. What matters now (at least to me) is that there is one complaint that is still alive. Whatever comes of it, we don’t know. Most probably (as said and believed by many) it will not go anywhere. My point is, at least these people did something, and they probably believed that it has a chance. I happen to think the same way. If it doesn’t work, fine, but at least they did something. As you’re a chess player, you understand that doing nothing is equivalent to resigning which gives victory to the opponent outright. Since this is not a chess game, resigning (or doing nothing), is not a very good option. I rest my case.

  43. indiuro ni emilie

    exactly the point of randy david. win or lose, number or none, the hell, do something!!!!!!! certainly better than just betting or forecasting on the outcome.

  44. The Ca t

    JM,
    Being a chess player, I would not come to that point because I will be ahead of my opponent by several moves.

  45. The Ca t

    CVJ what ad hominem?

    I said alleged recepients of the fertilizer fund. Even if it is not true, the administration has already scored on this issue with regards image assasinatiion.

  46. george

    JM
    Ca t has said it well enough. that is why the work is sloppy and it is going nowhere.
    If for instance you are to submit yourself to an emergency surgery would you choose a surgeon who have done the procedure once or twice in the past or a surgeon who have been doing the procedure 4 or 5 times a week? So? which one JM? Nevermind the past?

  47. Jon Mariano

    Ca T, life is not always as you plan them. I read about your recent personal problems from your blog, I have my share of them as we all do. Even in chess, the best in the world lose some games eventhough planning is done so many steps ahead. I respect your stand, although I don’t share where your priorities are.

    George, the analogy with the surgeon is fine. But all analogies have limitations. For example, what if you don’t have a choice because there’s only one surgeon? The choice is then to die without surgery or choose this inexperienced surgeon. That’s for you to choose. As regards Cayetano, what if his record is bad? Does that make him not qualified to sign the impeachment complaint? (To answer your surgeon analogy, I would choose the experienced one. There’s no contest over that.). In the current issue of impeachment, whom would you choose over Cayetano?

  48. cvj

    Ca T, ‘Ad hominem’ is attacking the person instead of the argument. You’re right to point out that the administration is resorting to ‘image assasination’ instead of addressing the issues. They are trying to change the subject.

  49. george

    JM
    your’re right he is a lot better than dinky. but he should really be ready next year.

Leave a Reply