An immoderate threat when representatives fail the people

Yesterday, the Inquirer editorial asked if People Power represents An immoderate threat in the face of unmoderated greed. Besides Fidel V. Ramos’s stinging rebuke to the President last Friday, on Saturday, GMA News broke the following story: Arroyo: I know ZTE contract tainted but can’t cancel deal (see also Arroyo admits NBN deal was flawed ), which has raised more questions than it’s answered: not least, because in one fell swoop, the President’s own statement proves her officials have been lying all along.

The question remains whether it will temper the “reply or resign” call made by people like Martin Bautista. In her blog, smoke makes a decision flow chart and, well, the best that could be said was a negligent President (but maybe enough to keep the loyalists stouthearted).

Atty. Edwin Lacierda, in an email to me, put it this way:

The difference I think between the Garci tapes and the ZTE confession is that in the Garci tapes, there was this legal grey area of the admissibility of the wiretapped tapes. And so, GMA could legally wiggle out of it even if we know that the accent and inflections were distinctly GMA. In the ZTE deal however, her admission opens up more cans of worms.

In the first place, she lied as to when she knew of the irregularities. I think the first documentary proof of her knowledge of the irregularity would have been when NEDA changed the investments that could avail of the loans from the People’s Republic [of China] when the [military] housing units and the Angat water project were removed from the list and the NBN deal was inserted. I may be wrong but [isn’t it that the] President [alone] can change the Neda policy.

Orally, the testimony of Romy Neri informing the president that Abalos offered him a Php200 million bribe would also constitute knowledge of wrongdoing. Inspite of that information, the president told Neri to approve the project. So, I think we know she lied when she admitted she knew of wrongdoing only on the eve.

But be that as it may, her admission runs counter to the many pronouncements of those who defended the ZTE deal, as pointed out in the Inquirer editorial. Laglagan na is the order of the day just to save the president. I dont know how long will the factotums continue to defend her at the risk to their own life and liberty. But this strategy will have unintended consequences and I am not sure the president’s men thought this out well. It started out with releasing the Jun-Joey conversations in YouTube. We dont know what Abalos is thinking but I am sure he was not pleased with the revelation. His credibility has been further eroded, if there is any ounce of credibility left in that man.

Her admission also puts into question the statements of Formoso who the government has constantly paraded as the point man in the ZTE deal. I would love to see him wiggle his way out of this mess.

The lies and the cover-up continue and it is getting harder and harder to put out a credible yarn.

And so, as Mon Casiple points out, it’s a case of the fortress showing cracks in its walls even as the administration recycling its old scripts:

Within the Malacañang fortress, there are rumors of the heightening suspicions among the key players — with the First Couple directly handling all tactical decisions, trusting no one. Whispers of last-ditch plans for a “palace coup” keep on leaking out as well as the opening of succession negotiations with the vice-president. The FG unscheduled trip to Hongkong is being interpreted as either a cover-up for a major palace counter-offensive this week or the preparation for the GMA exile to Spain.

GMA’s admission of knowing the ZTE-NBN contract problems is reminiscent of her famous “I’m sorry” speech. It may have been directed to the bishops but it only added more fuel to the fire of disenchantment with her regime. It may be the last argument to convince the fence-sitters.

The President’s people accelerated something most people didn’t want to think about, just yet: the post-Arroyo maneuvering that most people continued hoping would take place, as scheduled in 2010. Now the maneuvering has taken on greater urgency as the President’s own people have bungled things so badly. The scandal just keeps getting wider and wider and people have started to think the previously unthinkable.

And so, my column for today is When our representatives fail. It makes reference to some of my past pieces, including my Manifesto on the Tapes, and my columns,Redemption and ‘Half a People Power’. Also, it’s a response to Solita Monsod’s People Power IV? No, thank you! and, in a way, Randy David’s Bonfire of institutions (which reminded me of my column, Scorched-earth governance from 2005):

The damage to government institutions has been the most extensive. Far from being a neutral arbiter of disputes and a source of normative stability, the justice system has become a weapon to intimidate those who stand up to power. Far from being a pillar of public security, the military and the police have become the private army of a gangster regime. Instead of serving as an objective referee in electoral contests, the Commission on Elections has become a haven for fixers who deliver fictitious votes to the moneyed and the powerful. Instead of serving as the steady backbone of public service through successive changes in administration, the government bureaucracy has been turned into a halfway house for political lackeys, misfits and the corrupt. Instead of serving as a check on presidential power, the House of Representatives has become its hired cheering squad.

The erosion of these institutions, no doubt, has been going on for a long time. But their destruction in the last seven years under Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo’s presidency has been the most comprehensive since 1986. This is due not only to the particular gifts of Ms Arroyo as a politician – her survival instincts, her callousness, her readiness to set aside higher goals and principles for short-term personal gains. It is also due to the peculiar confluence of events that attended her rise to the presidency…

…But the damage is not confined to government; it has fanned out like a shock wave from the epicenter to the periphery. We have thus far only seen the debris of government institutions that have lost their standing in the public esteem. Now we are seeing how the tension is passed on and threatens other institutions. This happens when issues that are left unresolved by the institutions of law, politics and government spill over to other spheres of society.

The tremor spreads out and tests the strength of the remaining credible pillars of our society: the churches, the media, the universities, the business community, the family. Each one of these institutional spheres has their own unique operational system, code and medium. They are not organized, nor are they suited, for the processing of legal and political questions. Yet, they are compelled by the developing situation to address these questions from their own specific standpoints. Their members are called upon to lend their minds, their voices, and their bodies to a movement whose trajectory is still uncertain.

It is this uncertainty that needs to be addressed. And so, returning to today’s column, I’d like to start by reproducing, in full, the reflection by Bishop Francisco Claver, S.J. that I quoted in my column (sent to me by Billy Esposo):

An Infinite Series of EDSAs
(Ramblings of a retired bishop)
Is it possible to avoid firming up an extremely dangerous, if still inchoate, tradition?

EDSA I was about restoring a system which had been destroyed by the introduction of a dictatorial system of governance. That is why most of us bishops had no qualms about taking part in putting an end to President Marcos’ stolen power.

EDSA II was the momentary failure of the restored system–it carried a sense of desperation that the system wasn’t working as it should. (The dancing lady senator was a perfect metaphor of its dysfunctional operation.) The Supreme Court’s act in confirming GMA, for all its disputed constitutionality, was basically aimed at stabilizing a dangerous situation?

EDSA III, if it happens, promises to be the institutionalization of an infinite series of EDSAs. This is what is scary about the present situation and I’m wondering if a vague fear of it is behind the apparent unconcern of most of our people today about all the agitation to come up with yet another EDSA rebellion.

_______________________________________________

Is the question a “purely” political one? Or precisely because the danger is there that, with another EDSA ousting of an incumbent President, we help firm up a tradition of unstable governments, the question becomes a deeply moral one?

For bishops in regard to this development: Is it a moral duty incumbent on them to see to it that we do not go the way of institutionalized instability? Or at least to speak on the problem and show how we must be aware of the possibly deleterious implications of whatever option we make in the solution people give it? As one of Philippine society’s basic institutions, is the Church being called today to be the–or at least a–stabilizing force in our society?

In a very true sense then, our problem comes down to this: how to correct the aberration that is the present administration without destroying the stabilizing structure that is our democratic system of government? We keep the structure but correct the aberration? But if the correcting destroys the structure–or weakens it immensely–what then?
People power was born to bring back stability. I think it should be used now to protect it, not to destroy or weaken it. The way things are now, it is being invoked again in the effort to correct what I called above an aberration, but I’m afraid its repetition in the present crisis will only lead to that unwanted world-without-end-series of EDSAs.

If we do not go the way then of that infinite series, we still are left with what I call the aberration. We haven’t put our heads together yet to see how we go about correcting it without bringing the whole house crushing down on us. This is what we should be doing now?

____________________________________________

I wonder if the system of four-year terms for presidents and the possibility of another four is not after all the best for us. Suffering through six years of a bad presidency (more, if he/she comes in to fill the term of an ousted one–as we have now) is intolerable, and that is why it is easy for people to succumb to the temptation of using extra-constitutional means to end the present one. This is an argument for charter change?

In more established and mature democracies: In the United States, for instance, the Bush presidency is bad enough and highly unpopular, but somehow nobody there is thinking of doing something like an EDSA uprising.

__________________________________________

For some reason some folk proverbs keep intruding on my thoughts as I write this thing–like the one about lying on nests that one has feathered? (We tolerate corruption–and rigged elections–but we do not blame ourselves for their consequences too?) Or changing horses in mid-stream? (It’s akin to the principle in spiritual life: “In desolation, don’t change” — but that’s what we do with every EDSA?) I guess we haven’t really learnt yet what these homely proverbs mean!

Francisco Claver, S.J.

February 19, 2008

ph4-022408Esposo says the piece is an attempt to clarify what the Catholic hierarchy meant by “communal action”. It is a reflection that to my mind reflects the unease with which people view the escalation of political tensions. However at this point, it leaves a lot, perhaps everything, in the hands of the President who has gambled on the fear of the unpredictable consequences of People Power vetoing any widespread support for it as the instrument of last resort.

But the best-laid plans of mice and men… they also tend to go unexpectedly awry. The most unexpected development is how young people have decided, in increasing numbers, to get engaged.

Inday Espina-Varona tackled this development in her blog, scaRRedcat:

Dirty tricks unleashed in airports are embedded in our collective psyche. With apologies to that once great human rights champion, Joker Arroyo, there are some things you do not mess around with.

It’s a bit sad really but then all great lessons of history often come with a certain sadness. Barely a month ago, I wrote of how young Filipinos would rather roll up their sleeves to solve a problem than break out into song and prayers as is their elders’ wont. They’d still rather do that. But, as did good men and women when the Nazis were on the ascendance, Filipinos now see what they missed when they looked away as hundreds of activists were murdered or “disappeared” or when they accepted that cheating at the polls is preferable to getting another actor elected to the Presidency: Wait too long and there may be no one around to hear your cries for help. Now, Everyman is faced with the barrel of a gun…

…Ousting a corrupt and despotic leader is a right of every people as the United Nations Declaration on Human Rights underscores. Revolutions are not, in the strict sense, short cuts. They take time to wage and often come with messy results; that is why they are seen as a people’s last recourse.

But if we are to revolt in the name of democracy then there is no other way but to hew as closely as possible to constitutional change, as we did at EDSA 2. The fact that Mrs. Arroyo has grievously betrayed our trust is no excuse to shortchange ourselves more by anointing leaders outside of constitutional succession terms.

I do not know Vice President Noli de Castro. But he was elected by vast numbers of our people to that post, which comes with the responsibility to take over the Presidency if and when the incumbent Chief Executive can no longer fulfill the duties of that office. Whatever we may think of De Castro’s capabilities or lack thereof, we cannot simply sweep away a mandate conferred by the people.

If we can’t stomach him then we take our lumps and just give Mrs. Arroyo hell until her term runs out or until she institutes a belated regime of reforms, whichever comes first. We cannot decry corruption and officialdom’s penchant for playing fast and loose with the laws of this land and yet do the same in the name of democracy.

Agree! By the way, see another entry, He Said, They Said, a piece of Inday’s originally published in the Philippine Graphic, for a brilliant summary of why the government’s gotten itself into so much hot water. Well done, as well, is Patricia Evangelista’s She said. Over at Placeholder, you can see the La Salle Brothers’ chronology of the Lozadas seeking sanctuary in their school.

And indeed, that was the gist of my column for today: a last-ditch effort to kick-start our institutions into functioning properly might require the threat of People Power.

But people are wracking their brains (and searching their hearts) for ways not to have to resort to it, yet. Though there are those, as reproduced by onomatopoeia, who don’t think the threat should be invoked at all. Disagree!

While the threat of revolution that makes possible a return to the way things ought to be, such a threat, once made, risks having officials call the public’s bluff.

Which means the coming days and weeks requires even more soul-searching to take place.

How far will you go? Should we go? Even Business divided on another ‘People Power’ revolt.

tatsquiblat has some useful advice on what to do: or rather, a prudent approach to take. And review the emerging consensus on concrete steps to take, and the debate on the things that remain unresolved, in Sylvia Mayuga’s Firm Steps to the Light.

One proposal that’s gained wide currency, is for the President to immediately revoke her own Executive Order 464, but as one of many conditions; however,what Joaquin Bernas, S.J. proposes is that revoking the order is enough and all he really wants:

What do I support therefore? I favor attempting a rehabilitation of the presidency. To start with, I favor the complete dismantling of EO 464, the notorious gag which the President has clamped on the mouths of executive officers who are in a position to reveal incriminating truth.

True it is that the objectionable portions of EO 464 (Sections 2b and 3) have been declared unconstitutional. But the executive department continues to behave as if Senate v. Ermita never happened. You will notice that, whenever executive officers are called to testify in an investigation, rarely do such officers claim the lame excuse of executive privilege. They simply say that they are prevented by EO 464. EO 464, although constitutionally dead, remains the biggest obstacle to the discovery of truth. Its dark spirit remains.

How dismantle EO 464? The most efficient way would be for the President and the executive secretary to forget it. Easy, no; difficult, yes. Nevertheless this is a more viable goal than trying to persuade the President to resign and effectively jump into the fire. Moreover, the total abandonment of EO 464 can be the beginning of the rehabilitation of her ailing presidency. E.g., she should now allow the exposure of those who were involved in the corruption that caused her to cancel the ZTE contract. It would be a very concrete way of substantiating her loud cries against corruption. With political will, between now and 2010, much can be achieved toward rehabilitation of the presidency.

The kinds of minds he’s molded are best exemplified by this Ateneo blog. The Arroyo Presidential Library planned for the Ateneo will definitely be a suitable monument.

But what’s at stake and why, despite attempts by the good Jesuit to focus attention on asking for rehabilitation, or even the Senate President’s trying to propose an eventual impeachment, things seem to be coming gingerly to a point of no return, is best explained by Writer’s Block:

In light of all this, we are still obliged to be vigilant. Many people would ask: why continue? The elections are two years away; like her counterpart George W. Bush, she has only this one term left. But remember that we are talking about an “Arroyo government”. How are we to know that Czarina Arroyo would not control the Philippine government from the sidelines, the same way Lee Kuan Yew did in Singapore? There are also the earnest efforts among elements of her government to push through “Charter Reform”, to ensure their continued tenure in power. The point is, two years is two years away, and a lot can still happen in that span.

That’s why the Opposition continues to resist her, and find ways to overthrow her. Not only for the sake of vindication; it is also to ensure that they could sooner dismantle the “Arroyo government” and make sure that the next elections would indeed represent the people’s voice. No one can get her to quit. She, like Hitler before her, can always claim “divine appointment”.

The D Spot worries about her kids, what happens if they decide to join rallies. But Noralyn Mustafa puts the choice in stark terms:

We fail to do this now, the wages of our apathy will be Charter change forced down our throats; we will never see an election ever again in our lives; and we will have the Arroyos and Pidals and Abaloses holding our souls in their hands to the end of our days. And even beyond.

This is the ultimate danger of trying to ease the pressure. It won’t strengthen institutions. It will give the President a second wind. Liling Briones says the economy shouldn’t be an excuse for inaction. Cielito Habito reviews economic prospects for 2008.

As for today’s commemoration, I’ll be at Baclaran, where the Comelec computer operators found refuge after their historic walkout from the PICC. Review The Road to Edsa I, and the events in The Edsa Revolution Website. And do some Reading up on Edsa. And looking back, a mere year ago, to Edsa at 21. And doing his own looking back is Lito Banayo.

And Life’s a Beach has that video that will make all the small-minded mean and sour people angry. Interesting tidbit, too, from One Hundred Eighty Degrees, on an attempt to censor the video.

Postcard Headlines says the real challenge of Edsa is sustaining public vigiliance. Philippine Commentary insists on impeachment or nothing. It will take at the very least a national strike to get that past the House. JB Baylon waxes eloquent:

As I type this while once in a while peering out of my Hong Kong hotel window to watch a gathered mass of Filipinas outside, I feel a rollercoaster of emotions as memories of Edsa 1 flash before me interspersed with images of a weeping Lozada, a grinning Estrada and a still-missing Joc Joc Bolante. I think of Francisco Tatad and how he went public with the declaration of martial law; then I think of Ignacio Bunye and how he went public with his “I have two discs” spin. I focus on how Enrile was “forgiven” his sins in recognition of his key role in Edsa 1, and wonder whether Chavit has been forgiven, too. I think of Clarissa Ocampo and remember Jun Lozada and then I think of Mike Defensor and Mawanay, Garcillano and Bedol. I think of Macapagal Avenue, and then I remember the Centennial Expo scam. I muse about Imelda’s glamor and greed, and think of FG and wonder where the glamor went. I remember Manny Villar’s maneuverings on the impeachment, then recall JDV’s maneuverings and also the maneuverings that led to his own ouster. I think of Fabian Ver and I wonder about Hermogenes Esperon; I think of Fidel Ramos and his relationship with Ver, and wonder who is the Ramos to Esperon. I recall a young and idealistic Gringo, and I imagine a new crop of young officers replacing the ideals of Trillanes and Company. And all of these come to a dead stop like a roller coaster car does when I think of the Filipinas outside my window, huddling under open umbrellas in the cold drizzle that is gripping Hong Kong, and I wonder how their lives will ever change if, at home, years go by and yet everything but the faces of power and greed stay the same?

And good news for all people who like to read: Pete Lacaba has a blog! He has an article on names derived from Martial Law, Edsa, etc. (hat tip to my lil’ red book for noticing that particular article). Another blog to check out is Republic of Pundits.

239 comments

Skip to comment form

  1. “Yes, the Filipino is patient, but there is a limit to his patience. Must we wait until that patience snaps?” Ninoy Aquino

    • Kabayan on February 26, 2008 at 9:29 am

    Hi Cat,

    It’s a great morning today, still fishing for info? Hehehe unless you join us you can’t have it.

    Of course pro-Arroyo advocates would never understand the effort of a single person; you never will because it is the effort of every single person working together that makes the difference, a principle that we take to heart. In any case explaining it to Arroyo loyalists would be an exercise in futility.

    I still remember yesterday’s events at the Liwasang Bonifacio area those Palace hired “hakot” crowd of pro-corruption loyalists. A simple rain and they ran like wet cats (no pun intended.) They scattered and went home around 4 pm instead of what they “courageously” to end planned 6 pm. Their loyalty is to their pockets that’s why they dissolved in the first sign of adversity.

    My comment to your posts, avoid armchair analysis of people and events if you were not actually there to witness and study. Even if I post photos of the reality, Gloria fans will always find an explanation to the contrary, just like that funny man in the Department of Injustice and his colleagues.

    Nice chatting with you, but there’s a schedule to keep, bye 😉

    • Mita on February 26, 2008 at 9:36 am

    hvrds,

    i’m no economist or financial wiz, just another simplistic citizen trying to make sense of all that’s happening…

    my question is, won’t it hurt the “delusion of a philippine state” even more if a new CEO is put in place at this point? Whoever that person/group is only has two years before the next elections to make a difference. not even considering their getting caught in the election fever, how much can be accomplished?

    bencard, thank you for that input. no question about atty. lacierda’s right to voice his personal opinion on anything. my point was “prudence”, for the sake of his client. after all, his high-profile client, from the time he first presented himself to the public, said he didn’t want his actions to be politicized.

    do you think the release of atty. lacierda’s personal opinion, now made public through this blog, was a prudent step? do you, as a lawyer, think it was inimical to his client’s interest?

    • hawaiianguy on February 26, 2008 at 9:44 am

    Benigno: “So if, say, a horde of Mangyan’s suddenly take it upon themselves to terrorise a bunch of foreign tourists in El Nido, we can just as easily say, ‘mga Mangyan kasi yan e’, INSTEAD of feeling a sense of collective shame for an atrocity that happened within our sovereign national territory.”

    Sorry, wrong example.

    First, the Mangyans are unlikely to go to El Nido. That’s a Tagbanua territory, another tribe in your cultural taxonomy of bitty tribes who may not allow another tribe in their turf. Second, even if they are able to, they would not terrorize tourists there. They are basically a peace-loving people. I have yet to hear such an incident in the jungles of Mindoro where they live.

    Maybe you’re thinking of the Abu Sayyaf for kidnapping tourists from Dos Palmas, a resort in Puerto Princesa. But didn’t Erap, a guy you detest so much, call them (as “Moros”) “hindi naman sila Pilipino?” And didn’t Gloria order her military commanders to “wipe” them out (“isang bala lang kayo”)?

    So that insulates Filipinos from the collective shame you are talking about, right?

  2. (The People Singing…)
    “Oh devil woman
    Devil woman let go
    Devil woman leave us alone
    We want to MOVE ON!”

    “Devil woman, you’re evil
    Like the dark coral reef
    Like the winds that bring high tide
    You bring sorrow and grief!”

    • rego on February 26, 2008 at 10:05 am

    “The rallies in the last few days by elite schools will never attract common tao. Nandoon pa rin ang elitism. Ang labanan ng mga pangalan ng mga iskuwela.”

    =========================================================
    Hay, naku Ca T yan din ang iniisip ko. Nag research nga ako ng konti sa internet kung yung mag studyante ng Harvard, Yale, Columbia and Princeton sa US ay gumagawa ba ng mga ganitong hakbang laban kay George Bush? O kay yung Oxford laban kay Blair lalung lalo na nung kaiinit nga Iraq war. wala naman . If ever they there mas pianadera nila yung kanila personal na stand kesa sa dalhin ang pangalan ng mag school nila. Malakas talaga ang paniwala ko na eto ay kasama lang sa “elitism” sa Pinas.Why cant they just ko to the rallies na pangalan lang ang dala nila. Wag nag ipangalandakan pa na mag extudyante sila ng UP at Ateneo. In the first place most of our Presidents are products of these elite schools anyway.

    • Karl Garcia on February 26, 2008 at 10:07 am

    maganda siguro kung katulad sa tate na pwede tayo sumulat sa mg congressman at me action d ba.
    Sa tate pwede yata rumekta ang mga sundalo na di na kailangan dumaan sa presidente,dito pwede din kaya yun?

    • camry on February 26, 2008 at 10:07 am

    Until the AFP & PNP leadership change sides GMA will remain the President.

    No other group can kick out GMA from Malacanang.

    Period.

    • cvj on February 26, 2008 at 10:12 am

    hvrds, short the Peso? That means you think the current of appreciation of the Peso with respect to the dollar is unsustainable even with OFW inflows? I’ll be interested in how and when you believe the Peso will collapse (out of curiosity, not that i have any funds to short).

    • Jeg on February 26, 2008 at 10:15 am

    From Solita Monsod:

    And if a “People Power IV” takes place, so will it be [a travesty]. Because it will not be People Power, but a Quest for Power by some people who would otherwise not attain it in the constitutionally approved manner: through elections.

    If Gloria is forced to resign, Noli takes over, correct? That’s what the constitution says. What then is this “Quest for Power” Ms. Monsod is talking about? Ms. Monsod probably is probably thinking of a coup of some sort, of which we all should be wary. But this groundswell of outrage isnt a “quest for power”. Certainly not about a quest for Noli’s power, who lest we forget is the people’s elected replacement no matter what we feel about him.

    Ms. Monsod also makes the same mistake others have made: that of thinking those who want Gloria to resign are naive; that getting rid of Gloria would eliminate corruption. Gloria should resign or be impeached because she should be fighting corruption but isnt. She’s incompetent (or negligent as per smoke’s post) and an enabler. When pictures of congressmen walk out of Malacanang with bags of money, that’s incompetence right there. Or worse.

    • Bencard on February 26, 2008 at 10:23 am

    “pro-corruption apologists”? what will these “do-gooders” think of next about those who don’t agree with their politics of hate? they are believing their own version of “truth”, riding on the crest of lozada’s bubble. but you know what happens to bubbles? they burst without a trace.
    (btw, it looks like the con artist will be laughing his way to the bank, courtesy of the “patriot’s fund” set up by some very pleased patrons).

    • Jeg on February 26, 2008 at 10:30 am

    Manoy, I almost find it beneath you to impeach a person’s character based on innuendo. Youre one of the legal luminaries in this forum so your legal opinion matters, but to see you engage in innuendo, it’s disappointing. I expect that of the other in your ilk, but come on, man… youre the lawyer on GMA’s side here. Rule of law, sir. Youre a member of the bar. Leave the innuendo to C at and mang kiko.

    • Kabayan on February 26, 2008 at 10:30 am

    Tut tut somebody’s getting cranky 😀

  3. How do you know whether a child is lying?

    Inday, kinain mo ba ang tsokolate?
    Hindi po!
    Bakit meron kang dungis ng tsokolate sa iyong bibig?
    Hindi ko po kasi napunasan. Pero sasabihin ko po ke yaya na punasan mamaya.

  4. Jon Mariano: How does a lying child say “the case is closed.let’s move on!”

    • cvj on February 26, 2008 at 10:36 am

    Leave the innuendo to C at and mang kiko. – Jeg

    In fairness, that should be Mang Isko.

  5. (btw, it looks like the con artist will be laughing his way to the bank, courtesy of the “patriot’s fund” set up by some very pleased patrons).

    old geezer:you are so jaded!We are not in america!

    • Jeg on February 26, 2008 at 10:38 am

    Oops. Sorry. Mang Isko pala. Thanks, cvj.

  6. Ate Glo, bakit po kayo pumunta sa Boao, China para mawitness ang pirmahan ng kontrata para sa sa NBN project kasama ng ZTE?

    Ano iyong description nila noon? Like a thief in the night ba siya doon? Ano na nga ang timing ng pagpunta niya sa China? Di ba overnight lang siya doon? So doon lang niya nalaman na meron problema? Ang hirap naman intindihin oo.

  7. mlq3, the reply of Arroyo is unsatisfactory. merely admitting to irregularities is insufficient. this might just be the opportunity for Raul Gonzales to redeem his honor–by launching an impartial investigation in an honest search for the truth. this whole elaborate tableau will crumble within a few days.

  8. Equalizer, it will be too much for the lying child to say “prove it in court” no?

  9. “they are believing their own version of “truth”, riding on the crest of lozada’s bubble. but you know what happens to bubbles? they burst without a trace.”

    old geezer:scary;that’s was the plan when they abducted Jun Lozada fron the airport.

    you really must know something.In the loop,eh?

    what happened to Jonas Burgos?

  10. Jon Mariano:”Nay,saan ang ebidensiya?”

  11. I found the account of Gloria’s going to China to witness the signing:

    The press release said Ms. Arroyo “came and went like a thief in the night” because she arrived in Boao “in the wee hours of Saturday,” April 21, and “left at 3:30 p.m. of the same day, but not after witnessing the signing of five landmark economic agreements…that, in her own words, would…raise the competitiveness of our country.”

    • Que Sera Sera Philippines on February 26, 2008 at 10:53 am

    Oh Dear me BryanB I should have known better! We came out to Fairview, conditioned Martial Law babies as we were, scared that the military will retaliate and invade Radio Veritas so we were asked to defend it in numbers or so I thought.

    But we were just “hanging out with friends”! I suppose we were also “hanging out with friends” when we went to what was it? GMA7 and were fired upon by Loyalist troops! Oh yes it was lots and lots of fun I tell you! And then on to EDSA, that was fun too!

    Thanks for letting me know after all these years! I should have known better. We were so conditioned to be scared as people we know from UP were being shot in earlier rallies. All those Crame and Bicutan tortures we kept hearing about, Ninoy just got killed, Students were being shot with live bullets at rallies-Fidel Nemenzo (Fidel who?) was shot but survived, all these conditioned us to be afraid!

    And I thought we were getting rid of a dictator so we can have the freedom to blog as you do now! And have democratic elections, and have an impartial judiciary etc. etc…But the most important bit was that Marcos have been there for 21 years almost all our lifetime! And there was no end in sight! And we were tired of being scared!

    Gee Thanks Bryan, now that I know that we were just “hanging out with friends” I shouldn’t feel so bitterly dissillusioned and betrayed by the results of People Power. (Come to think of it, EDSA Uno did not stop Leandro Alejandro (Leandro who?) from being killed afterwards! Did it?

    But at least Filipinos now get Elections – which needs fixing I agree! But my question is who voted those politicians in Congress in the first place?

    But as you say, why overthink about this things – just go ahead and do it. Yeah go ahead, go and “hang out with your friends” and have as many People Power Street Party as you wish (or whenever you can’t wait for another election or bother to fix the electoral process and you hate the look of the tongressman who got voted in!)

    Count me out though coz…No Salgo mucho no mas!

    Good luck!

  12. The MOST IMPORTANT JOB of a CEO is to build the moral and ethical tone of a company and cultivate a culture of transparency.

    The CEO must be the role model .He or she must ensure that the Company will NOT tolerate an employee who will cut corners and jeopardize the company’s reputation or create enormous losses such as the rogue trader at Société Générale .

    There is a difference between good CEOs who make ordinary mistakes and CEOs who commit REPEATED BLUNDERS particularly on the ETHICAL side.

    If YOU were in the Board of Directors of Philippines Inc., would you initiate the ouster of Gloria Arroyo for a long litany of “Conjugal Greed” SCANDALS in 7 years as CEO of Philippines Inc.???

    • Mita on February 26, 2008 at 11:00 am

    Impeachment. with GMA saying she learned the NBN deal was flawed on the eve of signing – isn’t that an impeachable offense? are the crowds not going for that angle in preparation for the lifting of the 1-year ban on impeachment filing?

    JDV. he’s calling for GMA to resign. he says he’s cutting his ties, but didn’t she beat him to the punch? also, there’s hardly any squeak about his own son’s involvement in the NBN deal – Joey was the son of the speakerman at the time he was going after the contract. are the crowds not going for that angle?

    Erap. he’s offering himself as caretaker president?!

    Ramos. Focus on reforms, not on an ouster. will reforms without constitutional change be enough?

    just asking…

    • Mita on February 26, 2008 at 11:06 am

    The most important job of a CEO is not for morale boosting – that’s Human Relations’ job.

    A CEO’s main job is focused on earnings. His main responsibility is the success of the company. If he fails at that, he is usually replaced.

    • rego on February 26, 2008 at 11:09 am

    “If Gloria is forced to resign, Noli takes over, correct? That’s what the constitution says. What then is this “Quest for Power” Ms. Monsod is talking about? Ms. Monsod probably is probably thinking of a coup of some sort, of which we all should be wary. But this groundswell of outrage isnt a “quest for power”. Certainly not about a quest for Noli’s power, who lest we forget is the people’s elected replacement no matter what we feel about him.”

    =========================================================
    The thing is most people believe that this “quest for power” will not end with Gloria. Once Noli replaces her it will be the same “quest” all over again. It happened with Marcos, Cory, Erap and Gloria. Medyo nanahimik lang tayo during the term of FVR. Dont you realized it? Laging flop na yung mga attempts for people power. Because most people just wanted to quit this vicous habit!

    • rego on February 26, 2008 at 11:12 am

    “If Gloria is forced to resign, Noli takes over, correct? That’s what the constitution says. What then is this “Quest for Power” Ms. Monsod is talking about? Ms. Monsod probably is probably thinking of a coup of some sort, of which we all should be wary. But this groundswell of outrage isnt a “quest for power”. Certainly not about a quest for Noli’s power, who lest we forget is the people’s elected replacement no matter what we feel about him.”….

    =========================================================
    The thing is most people believe that this “quest for power” will not end with Gloria. Once Noli replaces her it will be the same “quest” all over again. It happened with Marcos, Cory, Erap and Gloria. Medyo nanahimik lang tayo during the term of FVR. Dont you realized it? Laging flop na yung mga attempts for people power. Because most people just wanted to quit this vicous habit!

    • Bencard on February 26, 2008 at 11:14 am

    for the slow-brain only: what i said above is that lozada’s “bubble” (not lozada himself) will burst as one usually does. if you find it incomprehensible, i give up!

    mita, speaking solely for myself, i try not to mix my personal politics with my professional practice (if i can help it). if i felt that my political belief, which i could not compromise, would get in the way of my duty to protect my client’s interest, i would seek to withdraw my representation.

    jeg, even as a lawyer, i am entitled to my own perception, am i not? like they say: “what’s good for the goose is good for the gander”. what i try not to do is misrepresent perception as fact, as a lot of gloria-haters do in this blog and elsewhere.

    • Jeg on February 26, 2008 at 1:04 pm

    Rego: Once Noli replaces her it will be the same “quest” all over again.

    Only if Noli does the same thing, rego. If the does not, if he proves to be a worthy president, then there is no reason for the same “quest”. Correct me if Im wrong but you seem to be against Noli assuming the presidency?

    jeg, even as a lawyer, i am entitled to my own perception, am i not? like they say: “what’s good for the goose is good for the gander”. what i try not to do is misrepresent perception as fact, as a lot of gloria-haters do in this blog and elsewhere.

    Yes but none of the other lawyers (Abe Margallo, Edwin Lacierda) engage in innuendo except you. If there is indeed innuendo on both sides, I would like to think they would cancel each other out, and members of the bar should be ‘above it all.’ But youre certainly free to be just one of the geese if that’s what you like.

    • BrianB on February 26, 2008 at 1:08 pm

    Mita,

    “Brian, why is the concept of an individual determining for himself what is right and wrong so alien to you”

    That’s not what you said, you said there is no “specific right and wrong” and I asked you to clarify. I’m the last person who would resort to totalitarian thinking as much of what I’ve said here is about the infantilization of Filipinos. Yun nga eh, ayaw nang malalaking tao na mag-isip ang pilipino.

    • BrianB on February 26, 2008 at 1:11 pm

    Que sera,

    “All those Crame and Bicutan tortures we kept hearing about, Ninoy just got killed, Students were being shot with live bullets at rallies-Fidel Nemenzo (Fidel who?) was shot but survived, all these conditioned us to be afraid!”

    These things are happening now. Try crossing someone with political connections and you might remember exactly how Martial Law feels like. The only difference is that today, the elite are spared this kind of treatment from the police.

    • cvj on February 26, 2008 at 1:12 pm

    A CEO’s main job is focused on earnings. His main responsibility is the success of the company. If he fails at that, he is usually replaced. – Mita

    That’s why some CEO’s resort to window dressing.

    (So i won’t be accused by anyone of innuendo, yes that means you, Gloria Arroyo!)

    • UP n student on February 26, 2008 at 1:34 pm

    His (the CEO) main responsibility is the success of the company. If he fails at that, he is usually replaced.

    Success is NOT defined by letter writers to the editor. The goals are defined by stockholders, not by the workers. Members of the board of directors wield the axe to fire (not the workers).

    —————–
    Question: So who are on the board of directors of GMA, Inc? This can’t be sole proprietorship… the run to Malacanang had cost a lot of money.

    Wwhile we are on this thought…. who are on the board of directors of Noli de Castro, inc? of Mar Roxas, Inc? Ping Lacson, Inc? Manny Villar, Inc?

    • jackast on February 26, 2008 at 2:33 pm

    Manila is not the Philippines. The Senate is not the State. If civil society cannot gel, why should the majority suffer? We are in a pluralistic democracy. Everyone can speak out, but only the 300 we elected could decide. Even if the ruler is an outlaw, the rule of law should prevail.

    • Mita on February 26, 2008 at 2:33 pm

    brian, that was in the last comment thread, not here…i don’t know what you want from me, but i answered you there.

    cvj, yes some CEO’s do, but eventually they get caught!

    • TheColdKing on February 26, 2008 at 2:50 pm

    BenCarding, Utak Ebak ka talaga, umamin na ang Reyna Demonyita na kunsitadora siya pero pinipilit mo pa na sinungalin si Lozada? Isa ka talagang gago at kalahati, para kang mga alagad ng Malacanang na napahiya dahil naperjure na sila ng kagagawan ng amo nila mismo, mantakin mo, halos mapaos na sa katatanggi na kahit isang anomalya wala doon sa kontrata ng NBN, tapos heto na si GMA, nagsasabi na alam niya ANG MGA ANOMALYA roon sa kontrata kaya nga niya kinansala. Ha ha ha, ang nararapat sa mga katulad mo ay pugutin ang ulo at iflush ito sa inidoro, wala kasing laman ang bungo mo kundi puro tae, kadiri ka talaga ha ha ha …

    • TheColdKing on February 26, 2008 at 2:51 pm

    BenCarding, Utak Ebak ka talaga, umamin na ang Reyna Demonyita na kunsitadora siya pero pinipilit mo pa na sinungaling si Lozada? Na-vindicate na nga si JDV III eh. Walang duda, isa ka talagang gago at kalahati, para kang mga alagad ng Malacanang na napahiya dahil naperjure na sila ng kagagawan ng amo nila mismo, mantakin mo, halos mapaos na sa katatanggi na kahit isang anomalya wala doon sa kontrata ng NBN, tapos heto na si GMA, nagsasabi na alam niya ANG MGA ANOMALYA roon sa kontrata kaya nga niya kinansala. Ha ha ha, ang nararapat sa mga katulad mo ay pugutin ang ulo at iflush ito sa inidoro, wala kasing laman ang bungo mo kundi puro tae, kadiri ka talaga ha ha ha …

    • Que Sera Sera Philippines on February 26, 2008 at 3:19 pm

    BrianB wrote:

    “These things are happening now. Try crossing someone with political connections and you might remember exactly how Martial Law feels like. The only difference is that today, the elite are spared this kind of treatment from the police”

    So what made you think People Power 5 or 6 or 7 or 99th (by the middle class and military again and again and again) will stop the military tortures from happening since People Power 1 did not manage to stop it as you said?

  13. Leave the innuendo to C at and mang kiko. – Jeg

    Wow. Did you forget to rewind your clock? It seems it is affecting your brain. Slowing down a bit. mwehehe

    • cvj on February 26, 2008 at 3:49 pm

    Yeah Mita, but some CEO’s just put on a thick face. (Yeah, that means you, GMA!)

  14. A CEO’s main job is focused on earnings. His main responsibility is the success of the company. If he fails at that, he is usually replaced.

    Right. The stockholders may not even care how he does it as long as they see that the value of their stock keeps going up or their divindends keep on coming.

  15. BenCarding, Utak Ebak ka talaga, umamin na ang Reyna Demonyita na kunsitadora siya pero pinipilit mo pa na sinungaling si Lozada? Na-vindicate na nga si JDV III eh. Walang duda, isa ka talagang gago at kalahati,

    O di ba warning ko before the EDSA anniversary, walang pikunan pag walang nangyari sa sinasabi ninnyong people power IV.

    Pikon, talo.

  16. Yeah Mita, but some CEO’s just put on a thick face. (Yeah, that means you, GMA!)

    The CEOs who got caught are put into trial.Then they are convicted.

    Where’s the trial? by publicity?

    Besides, the comparison of the Philippines to a corporation is flawed.

    It shows that someone does not understand the corporate organization.

    • TheColdKing on February 26, 2008 at 4:16 pm

    Ang bagong People Power ay sa paghanap ng katotohanan, bingi ka ba at hindi mo nadirig ang pari sa baclaran kahapon? 😛 At bakit ako mapipikon? Wala naman akong sinabi kahit kailan na magkakaroon ng PP4, nagdedeliryo ka na ba? Pero ikaw naman, pinapatunayan mo na kampon ka talaga ng kasamaan dahil natutuwa ka pa na kahit nagsinungaling ng lantaran, garapalan, at harap-harap si GMA, pinapanigan mo pa ang putang iyon, tarantado ka. Dapat sa iyo, gawing siopao ng angkan ni lozada, you fucking pussy…

    • Mita on February 26, 2008 at 4:18 pm

    cvj, thick or thin-faced, the dilemna is this: how to catch the CEO accused of window-dressing.

    • jackast on February 26, 2008 at 4:30 pm

    I must agree that a State is not similar to a corporation. The president is the sovereign (a king if in a monarchy). He/she does not just preside or manage. He/she governs and rules over the people and territory. How: through a social contract (as mentioned by HVDRS) with the ruled. In exchange for giving up certain rights, including being taxed, the people are provided safety and security. How to take back the mandate? Through constitional processes of impeachement, non-payment of taxes, or in extreme case, upheaval by civil society.

  17. just a note to madonna, manolo filters all things related to the froggies’ r-e-v-ol-u-t-i-o-n before allowing it to be posted. i should know, i’m the one here with a lot of posts abt the subject. i must’ve experience being moderated dozens of times.
    so dnt fret, your posts will eventually get posted once it clears moderation.

Load more

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.