Earthquake news (Batanes, Catanduanes, and eastern Bicol) dominated AM radio last night; see the nifty Inquirer.net Earthquake Map.
There was an interesting observation made by Jove Francisco in his blog. He noticed that last Friday, the President held a mass oath-taking at the Palace, to which the military noticeable didn’t turn up. This helps explain, perhaps, why the President decided to sit out the Makati rally in the confines of Camp Crame. Read the whole entry, it’s a fascinating peek into what was going on in the Palace last Friday (see also his entry on the arrest of hecklers and continuing nervousness in the Palace; see the related news item, Rains abort unity walk of 77 mayors ).
Have fun with diagrams: See Romulo Neri’s cluttered booty capitalism chart. What’s interesting is his focus is on six captive industries, revolving around Alcantara, Aboitiz, Razon, Tan, and Gokongwei. The bubbles are, apperently, his view of “circles of influence.” For a detailed example, see PAL controls gateways through CAB, say experts.
On to today’s main event. Yesterday Amando Doronila pointed out that Battle arena over NBN shifts to SC. Today, the Supreme Court hears oral arguments, with one report saying it will be a Close call on Neri case. Last night, however, I ran into a former cabinet member with a formidable reputation as a lawyer, and he said that the case was really an open-and-shut one. He was confident the Supreme Court would divide along the lines shown by its decision on prior restraint. While a loyalty vote is possible, he viewed it as improbable. The reason is that everyone knows this will be a decision avidly studied in the schools, and the Justices know they’re deciding a landmark case with near-unbreakable precedents. They wouldn’t risk their reputations on this one.
Last night, the former cabinet member said the sensible path for the Justices to follow, would be to question Neri in an executive session. The news, today, is troubling: Neri a no-show as SC starts oral arguments. One has to wonder if this is of Neri’s doing or a Palace strategy, to deny the Justices information.
Read Fr. Joaquin Bernas SJ’s An E.O. 464 Catechism. He explains what the legal issues to be determined by the high court will be. Particularly relevant is the so-called “Nixon Doctrine”:
Q. Must every claim of executive privilege based on the above enumeration be honored?
A. No. The Court in Senate v. Ermita said that in determining the validity of a claim of privilege, the question that must be asked is not only whether the requested information falls within one of the traditional privileges, but also whether that privilege should be honored in a given procedural setting. Thus it is not for one claiming executive privilege “to unilaterally determine that a duly-issued Subpoena should be totally disregarded.”
Q. Who then determines whether the claimed privilege should be honored?
A. The Court. Thus, for instance, when the Nixon administration claimed privilege for certain tapes about the Watergate break-in, the Court, after looking at the claimed privilege behind closed doors, held that the tapes were not covered by privilege and should be released.
For this reason, our Court also said that “Absent then a statement of the specific basis of a claim of executive privilege, there is no way of determining whether it falls under one of the traditional privileges, or whether, given the circumstances in which it is made, it should be respected.” The lack of specificity renders an assessment of the potential harm resulting from disclosure impossible.
Speaking of E.O. 464… Let’s look at the the demands that have been made by three groups. The CBCP in its pastoral exhortation, the Simbahang Lingkod ng Bayan of the Ateneo, and the group of former government officials in their statement issued today.
Here are there demands, arranged in terms of their connection with each other:
They are, on the whole, reasonable demands, that address present problems as well as the need for institutional changes. What the demands lack, however, is a timetable (except for the ex-government officials). This is a serious problem, because, as Edilberto de Jesus points out, today, the President continues to be ambiguous if not actually dissembling:
Arroyo made the following points in the interview:
1. Corruption angered her as much as it did the people.
2. As soon as there was talk of anomalies, she immediately took a step to cancel it.
3. As soon as an informant complained to her about corruption, she looked for a way to cancel the project.
4. She only received the report about corruption the day before the signing of the supply contract.
5. She could not see her way to canceling the project the night before the signing of the supply contract because another country was involved.
What she did not say also deserves attention.
1. She did not identify the whistle-blower(s).
2. She did not explain the anomalies in the deal.
It is not clear whether the “pag-uusap na anomalya” (talk of anomalies) and the “nagsumbong” (informant) referred to the same source. But her action, contrary to what the trio of Cabinet officials tried to convey, indicated that there was more than just loose talk of anomalies from tattle-tales.
Arroyo could not simply say that she heard talk about anomalies; she knew about the specific attempt to bribe CHEd Chair Romy Nery. Did she learn about other anomalies from other sources? In any case, she must have found both the whistle-blower(s) and the report credible. Despite assurances from her officials that the deal was clean, she eventually (not immediately) cancelled the project.
Let us grant that the confusion about Arroyo’s radio interview arose in part from language problems or from multiple voices interpreting what she said. She can quickly clarify the issue by explaining what she had meant to say in the interview. She knows which pieces belong to the puzzle and how to put them together.
At this point, however, what is important and what will contribute to the complete picture is no longer what she said or did not say, but what she did and did not do.
If she is as “galit sa katiwalian,” why did she not act, agad-agad, to investigate the anomalies and to punish their perpetrators?
Why has she not supported the Senate investigations? Why has she not provided the Senate with the documentation of the deal?
Why has she allowed officials who could shed light on the corruption to invoke E.O, 464?
Why has she not held to account those of her officials who continue to maintain that the ZTE-NBN deal was aboveboard?
There are appeals for the Truth, but no threat of consequences if the demands aren’t met. I respect the position of the bishops that they aren’t the ones who should be making threats, but if that’s the case, it’s incumbent among the groups pushing for a more centrist, moderate, resolution of current problems to come to a consensus on a timetable.
I understand that there are some natural dates and pressure point events that various groups are considering:
1. The decision of the Supreme Court on executive privilege, 3-4 weeks after today’s hearing of oral arguments;
2. Income Tax day in April;
3. The expiration of Gen. Esperon’s extended tour of duty as AFP Chief of Staff in May;
4. Labor Day;
5. Independence Day
6. The opening of the new session of Congress in July;
7. The expiration of the one-year ban on impeachment complaints in October (deliberations, including passing better rules, can begin in July);
8. pressure point event: if the government attempts a “same dog, different collar” tactic to achieve the same purposes as E.O. 464 while formally revoking it;
9. pressure point event: if the administration, even if faced with a S.C. decision clarifying executive privilege, continues to be uncooperative vis-a-vis the Senate;
10. pressure point event: if the administration attempts to revive Charter Change;
11. pressure point event: if members of the economic team resign from the cabinet.
The 6-7 month period from April 15 to October is more than enough time for even the most moderate groups to firm up what they will do, if the President proves more inclined to pursue dilatory tactics.
I believe, in light of the above, the urgent need is for:
1. The middle forces to consolidate and pursue a consensus;
2. And having forged that consensus to consider that while some are more focused on the President, and others on longer-lasting and more wide-spread reforms, the two are not incompatible if their goal is a Reform Constituency that can challenge the Right and the Left not just now, or 2010, but beyond. John Nery puts it this way:
The strategic value of the 2010 elections lies in that deadline; a transfer of power is already in the schedule. The more our aspiring presidential candidates prepare for the May 10, 2010 contest, the more any cancellation or postponement of the elections (say, through a manufactured people’s initiative) will be resisted. No Filipino politician, not even Ferdinand Marcos, has struck it rich by betting against the Filipino’s passion for the vote. So let Mar Roxas hawk more Tide laundry products, or Manny Villar visit more provinces, or Dick Gordon play coy with Cebu’s Gwen Garcia–their ambition serves democracy’s purpose.
At the same time, the outrage over the official impunity and immoderate greed revealed by the NBN scandal must continue to be expressed. Even if people power seems unlikely, protesters must still take to the streets, fill up the churches, organize school forums, reclaim the public square.
It’s possible that such “communal action,” in the Catholic bishops’ hopelessly ambiguous term, may provoke a confluence of events that will lead to an earlier day of reckoning for the Arroyo administration. Well and good. (We must be open to surprises.) But even if it doesn’t, what of it? The important thing is to do our part.
Father Rector Rolando de la Rosa of the University of Santo Tomas asked Lozada and former president Corazon Aquino and the others who attended the Mass for Truth at the university last Sunday to consider the best way to return integrity to government: “the best way is not through a “rigodon” of leaders who are forcibly removed through people power, but through an enlightened, educated and conscientious electoral process. We have 26 months before the next election. We have enough time to prepare ourselves so we can vote wisely. Let us use people power during election time, not only before or after.”
Some extremely thought-provoking entries in the blogosphere: the most thought-provoking being Writer’s Block’s A Comprehensive Proposal for an EDSA Reform. I do think, though, that when it comes to politics, personalities can never, and never ought to be, separated from the issues, because it is a human activity and not a science. Also, getting rid of the Senate is extremely unwise, though the process for electing its members can stand review. I disagree that Federalism goes hand-in-hand with the parliamentery system; it is, to my mind, even better suited to a presidential and bicameral system. As for proposals for the redistribution of wealth, I’ve long advocated the manner in which Britain broke the power of the aristocracy: through Death Duties. The accumulation of wealth in one person’s lifetime, is to be commended; the destructive effects of inherited wealth is what the British looked at and solved, by making it very difficult to pass on fortunes without greatly diminishing them. This democratized Britain in a generation without stifling entrepreneurship.
The following entries look into the various constituencies that are participating, or not, in current events. New Philippine Revolution on current and future configurations (see also an interesting entry of his on the Vatican position). Mon Casiple calls it the “elite dilemma.” Scriptorium asks, is impeachment better than People Power?
pastilan! reproduces a paper that gives us an insight into how the Left view the middle class, and ongoing debates on how to engage it -or co-opt it, or neutralize it. {caffeine sparks} looks at those who proclaim that being apolitical is a virtue. The need to take a stand, but not get used and abused, is tackled by abashet.
Sonnie’s Porch, and What Do We Care?, and Bayen’s Living Room, and I’m A Baby! and Ang Kape Ni LaTtEX express the reasons behind their misgivings concerning People Power. A Simple Life takes up the cudgels for loyalists. smoke has an interesting entry on what she perceives to be a war of political attrition. Peryodistang Pinay on image-making on media.
DJB, but if i follow your logic, the election of George Washington did not cure the undemocratic character of the American revolution.
CVJ,
But I ask you, what kind of democratic principle do you discern within People Power as practiced in this century?
Maybe now we agree with People Power because we like the sorts of people practicing its moralistic powers. But I was at both Edsa Dos and Edsa Tres (living in Greenhills at the time made such attendance convenient). You know what? they were eerily indistinguishable in the darkness of those people power nights–Our KrystallNachts–the brown shirts of people power doing the ooga booga that put Gloria in power and wrecked the democratic conception with the constitutional carpentry of the Edsa Dos idols and the gang banging of the Edsa Tres ghouls.
CVJ,
You got nothing on 1776!
DJB: You know darn well that resignation is constitutional and so are calls for her to do so. I happen to support calls for her to resign, futile as they are.
Yes I do. I love your blog. Others however might miss the distinction. And I dont think it’s futile at all. It’s essential that we make our thoughts known. It’s essential that we dont trust the State’s institutions as they are now.
I think political maturity is setting in for the Filipinos, but some people just can’t accept institution building as the path to true reform…
I think the people taking back their sovereignty is part of institution building. It’s not all state institutions that need building. We need to build our institution, too, which is this one, the power of the people. They have to work in parallel. Insisting on the sovereignty of the people to check the excesses of the State is the true sign of political maturity. That’s why I encourage Carlos Celdran’s internet call for those who state that theyre willing to wait for 2010. People should really step up and not leave things to the State. It will not fix itself.
(Was it Reagan who said, “In this present crisis, government is not the solution to our problem; government is the problem.”? Now there’s a conservative if there ever was one.)
It’s not fatigue the People feel, but DISDAIN. I think political maturity is setting in for the Filipinos, but some people just can’t accept institution building as the path to true reform, because it doesn’t fit into their wider agenda or even more radical revolution.
Face it. People Power without plebiscite is the fascism of the elite moralists who are RIGHT but are UNFAIR and
therefore UNJUST.
Intelligent and patriotic Filinos should no longer accept the obscurantist muddleheadedness of those diehards who put their creativity to the rationalization of an evil means, cloaking themselves in the sanctimony of their declared ends.
The People Power culture merely plays into the continuing fantasies of the Left, whose religion of false hopes is being decisively rejected by the people.
People Power is juvenile delinquency in the teenage years of our Democracy.
No wonder they say that Youth is wasted on the YOung!
OOps.. pasted last paragraph by mistake.
cvj,that’s what you mean. I also noticed that. all of a sudden roco got voted it seemed by the majority. I posted in one of the fora tackling the issue during those time that perhaps roco shuld be the one complaining not fpj.
I posted in one of the fora tackling the issue during those time that perhaps roco shuld be the one complaining not fpj.
I figure a lot of the votes that were shaved to benefit you-know-who were shaved from the also-rans — Roco, Lacson, Villanueva, etc. Not just FPJ. Mas pulido pag ganun. Kasi polls showed an FPJ-GMA contest. They wouldnt shave FPJ votes in a brazen manner.
alas ka dora (at 6:07 pm), 😀
DJB, as per Dryzek*, the extent of democratization can be measured along the following three dimensions:
People Power (its civilian component) embodies the democratic principle of authenticity but has an uneven franchise (especially if centered in one locality like Metro Manila). Representative democracy is supposed to have franchise (assuming honest elections) but in reality, our current one lacks authenticity because of Hello Garci and the fact that Congress can be bought.
I do think your idea of having snap elections (or a plebiscite) to validate the ‘franchise’ component of democracy after a successful People Power exercise is a good one.
As for your characterization of the people power exercises (EDSA Dos and Tres), democracy is not just for genteel aristocrats. We are no longer in ancient Greece.
It’s not good form to weasel out if there is a written trail.
That’s the point of the rallies. If by “calls for her to resign,” you mean a few letters to the editor, then indeed, they are futile. But several hundred thousand people in the streets shouting for her to resign, well, maybe that’s harder to resist. And if they get her to resign–well, that’s constitutional, isn’t it?
Whatever you think PP is, we must purge it of the military component. Laws should be enacted to make it illegal for the military to be used against Filipinos unless Martial Law is approved by Congress and under the strictures imposed on Martial Law by our constitution. A president that orders a military operation against Filipinos under this proposal would be giving an illegal order.
Jeg:
but what about the suppression of lawless violence and all those other things a military is supposed to do? like fight commies and such?
i’m not disagreeing with you though, in times like these, the Army is best deployed if it stays in its barracks and refuses to debase itself by stopping students on the highway or beating up hecklers. (i may be wrong here, who picked up those hecklers and where are they now?)
but what about the suppression of lawless violence and all those other things a military is supposed to do? like fight commies and such?
You mean fighting crime? That’s a job for the cops, not the military. The PNP has paramilitary forces like the SAF for that.
i may be wrong here, who picked up those hecklers and where are they now?
The PSG did (another miltary branch under the army, if Im not mistaken). I dont think we have the equivalent of the secret service here.
They were turned over to the local cops, then released.
Jeg:
ah well, that’s good then.
on another note, Zubiri’s come out calling for the junking of EO 464. oooooh. tough guy.
Yeah, the PSG is Army. At least that’s what my friend told me back when his dad headed it.
In all honesty, whenever i see Erap, Binay and the rest of the trapos in rallies i’m turned off. at the back of my mind i see these people piggy backing their own selfish agenda with people’s genuine concern for at least a good government institution.
Edsa 2 may have had a regrettable result with Gloria, but people power, when institutions have failed, remains a formidable recourse to send a strong message to the government that they owe it to the people to be forthright in conducting their duties/business.
I agree. The furthest the military component should go is to arrest Esperon and the other corrupt generals (and officers).
Great episode on The Explainer today, Manolo. Just finished watching it, and featuring Team RP helped provide a more complete picture of what I’ve been documenting these past couple of weeks. Indeed, there’s a new and growing consciousness, which is founded on the need for more lasting solutions to our problems. Also, the recent events have created a sense of urgency, and have woken us up from our collective slumber, and it is a great thing…
Am looking forward to join similar group efforts in the future. If the Black and White Movement will hold a general assembly or a forum, will surely attend it. 😉
Mga pwedeng maging presidente na pwedeng manalo sa totoong buhay.
Pwede na ang yung si Zobel. Respetado sa business community, me pera na at siguro naman hindi mag iinteres magnakaw. Kung kakayanin nyang gawin ang process ng mga agencies na tulad ng process ng mga negosyo nya mas maganda.
Pwede na din kahit paano si Villanueva ang problema nga lang I pa pray over nya lagi ang mga problema ng bayan.
Pwede din si Manny Villar para maging slogan natin e ST!!!!
Patola wala na akong maisip na me chance pang maging presidente na acceptable sa mga panlasa nyo.
Pa share naman ng mga presidentiables na nakikinikita nyong me chance na manalo at sakto sa panlasa nyo.
CVJ,
People Power appears to score very low along all three of Dryzek’s dimensions. Lookit:
1. FRANCHISE: whether it is Joma’s one hundred thousand or even a million (in his wildest dreams, just before the Dutch police came knocking), we are talking of a score of about one percent of the people being present when the decision was made by Davide at E2. (That’s what I mean by no one man one vote principle within PP).
2. SCOPE: PP seems always limited to the Presidency. You can’t really people power poverty or crime or terrorism can you. People Power is an overthrow mechanism with just a prayer and hope that the fire is better than the frying pan!
3. As for authenticity, I’m not sure how we measure “reflection without coercion.” But I do know several Ateneo college students who didn’t exactly like being coerced to go with the herd.
But let me grant this point: that PP is full of good intentions, and they sure do enough communication and honest reflection.
Still, good intentions are not enough, no matter how authentic.
I think Dryzek proves my point: People Power is anti democratic liberal fascism.
Thanks!
@djb
incidentally isn’t “liberal fascism” an oxymoron 😀
There’s no denying that our democracy is still young compared to the US and the UK. But we have to feel sorry for ourselves as well because we’ve had democracy way before developed countries like Australia, Norway, Finland, Japan, Singapore, South Korea.
They’ve had more progress than us. Why? I tend to agree with those who would argue that what we have in the Philippines is not real democracy but democratic oligarchy.
Let’s join Chikoy Pura of the Jerks in singing, “EDSA ng pagbabago, Saan, kailan, kanino?”
At ang sagot natin, “Dito! Ngayon! Para sa lahat ng mamamayang Pilipino!”
kamote,
President – Villar
Anti-crime Czar – Lacson
CHED Chairman – DJBRizalist
kamote, si manolo pwede?!
Re: “Yeah, the PSG is Army.” — Tonio
Clarification: PSG has members not just from the (Philippine) Army but is a mixture — all major service commands including from the police.
Re: “Whatever you think PP is, we must purge it of the military component.” – Jeg
Agree!
Re: “Whatever you think PP is, we must purge it of the military component.†– Jeg
Agree…
Anna,
Can you imagine DJB as CHED chairman? Now that would be a sight eh?
Check out the street “revolution” scorecard so far. Note the key common denominator — none other than the Lady-in-Yellow herself! 😀
http://www.getrealphilippines.com/agr-disagr/edsa_collection.html
Hall of shame: Philippine street “revolutions”!
Under siege mentality gaining ground in Malacanang?
Jove Francisco reports:
THE FORTRESS, AGAIN
And for the nth time since she assumed office… Malacanang once again became a virtual fortress. All roads that led to the complex were secured by the Presidential Security Group, augmented with forces from the Manila Police District and police contingents from Region 3. Mendiola, was closed to traffic by a wall of container vans and barbed wire.
Who does she think she is, Bush?
@lester
Actually, Norway is a constitutional monarchy, but good for mentioning them because it is our country which looks like a monarchy…with an evil and incompetent queen
MBW,
How can you lead, when you are so afraid of you own constituents?
andito nanaman si Benign-zero, nag-aadvertise ng blog niya.
kaya nga kami andito sa blog ni manolo at hindi sa blog mo eh. obvious ba?
Ramrod,
Oh I’m sure Dean’s qualified to be that but believe me, if he becomes CHED chair, we’ll be back to the 60s era “The Russians are coming, the Russians are coming…”
But I think Quezon here will be a more suitable candidate for the post though.
Re: “How can you lead, when you are so afraid of you own constituents?” — Ramrod
That’s probably why she is failing miserably to lead.
DJB, before enlisting him as an ally, read first what Dryzek has to say:
As you suggested, the validity (i.e. which corresponds to franchise in Dryzek’s terms) of a people power exercise can be verified by a plebiscite afterwards.
MBW,
I think so too.
Re: ” I tend to agree with those who would argue that what we have in the Philippines is not real democracy but democratic oligarchy.” — Lester Cavestany
Ah, that is absolutely true aka as political dynasties and inbreeding!
People power is not a Philippine invention. It’s been a common practice in various societies, this throughout history. They’ve come in many forms, demonstrations, rallies, counter rallies, nationwide music/cultural festivals, etc.
Frankly, I’m not enamoured of people power practices; based on what I’ve witnessed several times over from where I sit not because they are wrong but because they — affect my comfort zone; they cause horrendous traffic jams, noise, they run the risk of getting out hand, etc, etc. 🙂
That said, the exercise of ‘people power’ is in itself enshrined in the Universal Declaration of human rights, freedom of assembly and freedom of speech and it is absolutely within their democratic rights for people to assemble, air their grievances against republican institutions – or for that matter, air their contentment and discontentment.
To take this power away from the people, their prerogative to assail a government that is morally bankrupt, is to violate one of their most basic democratic rights. That cannot be so because if you do that, you end up having a fascistic state that DJB abhors so.
Obviously, there are varying degrees in people power practices and as can be gleaned in history, there were excesses; worthy of note were the French Revolution and the Bolshevik Revolution as well as Mao’s great march.
What fascinates me is how DJB can be so vehemently opposed to people power when it was the same people power than enabled him to come home, i.e., when Marcos was deposed. I’d like to think that this is not another one of his volte face tendencies, left instantly veering to the right and right veering to extreme right (there’s only one way to go if you keep doing that, as in clockwork, from the extreme right, you go back to the left!)
“kaya nga kami andito sa blog ni manolo at hindi sa blog mo eh. obvious ba?” — Nash (wink, wink, wink)
Why didn’t the icon register! Damn — and I was so happy I finally registered my first emoticon and then none! (‘wink’)
Ok, I give up!
“kaya nga kami andito sa blog ni manolo at hindi sa blog mo eh. obvious ba?† Nash
Will go back to old fashion but tried and true — HAHAHAH!
I visited benign0’s blog and it had nice pictures of Cory. Why this apparent hard__ for people power?
What would rather have, PEOPLE POWERless?
CVJ:
There was no plebiscite after Edsa Dos because the Supreme Court called it “Constitutional throughout.” It is whether you still believe them which makes someone a people power diehard! And of course, no people power process can ever contemplate my “test” of a plebiscite because it is precisely the limited franchise nature of PP that makes the shortcut possible.
As for Dryzek you’ve only driven home the point that People Power is not deliberative democracy with a broad franchise at all but is strictly limited to guess who? The same people who put Gloria in power. What they did to Erap and the Filipino people was fascism pure and simple. Why should the people heed their call?
The Church is hardly capable of fostering democratic debate, even if the Philippine Daily Innuendo has practically declared a Second First Quarter Storm in the universities. Their religious training only abets political correctness at a time like this. What’s more there is something really fishy about their Pastoral Letter. It sounds like they were blackmailed and they gave in. Whatever happened to courage? To heroism for the sake of the truth? They should’ve called for resignation.
So bah humbug on their watch-pray-act orders now being carried out by nuns who are members of the CPP Central Committee. Before you know it we could again be under the rule of the the Catholic Taliban.
The Church must not forget that it owes its very life to Democracy. Let them not act with ungrateful hubris. GMA is as much their creation as they are of God’s!
MBW,
Actually, I thank President Ronald Reagan for 1986. Suppose he said to Marcos “Do whatever you want it’s your country.” instead of “Cut and cut cleanly” do you think we would be celebrating a peaceful Edsa People Power REvolution at all. Would the People Power concept ever have gotten going if there’d been a bloodbath instead. Or if Reagan brought Marcos to Paoay instead of Hawaii? Marcos would’ve died soon enough anyway without any people power at all. Truth is, even George Schultz called the Philippines a country of forty million cowards and one sonofabitch. What did the Filipinos do in 1986 they could not have done in 1976?
lozada is really a byword name nowadays, even in the subconcious. tonio himself, the very impartial commenter in this blog thinks lozada of lozano (see at 4:12pm), heheh.
Then your beef is with the Supreme Court. I don’t believe them either so i guess i’m not a people power diehard after all. To me, the issue has less to do with People Power’s Constitutionality that whether or not it is a democratic exercise. Against an illegitimate administration that has lacked democratic franchise since 2004 (or earlier), the answer is not hard to come by.
I did say your suggestion of a plebiscite is a good idea. Doesn’t that count as ‘contemplating’? Why don’t you try it out on other people power advocates before concluding that your ‘test’ will not be accepted?
I think you have the sequence backwards. The masa never wanted Gloria Arroyo in the first place. It’s the EDSA Dos crowd who are belatedly coming to their senses.
subconscious pala, damn keyboard.