Free Will and Family Planning (Part 4 and last)

29-071114

“The Arroyo administration, constantly buffeted by political (sic!) typhoons, has taken its pandering (SICK!) to the Church to an even lower level, abandoning any form of family planning program, including even an information campaign. Adam and Eve at least were given a choice and allowed to exercise free will when confronted with temptation. This administration, on the other hand, does not want to risk even showing people the choices open to them.”

That was the major paragraph of the Philippine Star editorial. Incidentally, the author thereof obviously considers the on-going public outrage vis-a-vis the flagrant corruption charges against GMA et al, as simply “political”, and thus supposedly bereft of serious moral and criminal transgressions. But the principal error in the paragraph however, is something else. It is its GROSSLY CONTRIVED and FALSE concept of freedom of choice and free will.

I started to smoke the Chelsea brand of nicotine some 50 years ago, right after completing my last final examinations at the University of the Philippines- College of Engineering (College of Geodetic Engineering, as my U.P. Alumni friends teasingly emphasize!). At that time, the cancer-producing effects of lung-ingested nicotine were still largely unknown.

And so if in 1956 by way of analogy, cancer/oncology experts and doctors concerned with public health would have mightily protested and lobbied against a huge government budget for the promotion of the supposed delights and urbanity of cigarette smoking, as a way of raising more taxes on more cigarettes sold. They would have persisted even if these added taxes were intended to “trickle down” for poverty alleviation purposes.

Would such a similarly situated protest and opposition by knowledgeable doctors against harmful nicotine be a violation of citizens' (cigarette smokers or not), right to information or their free will? Certainly not! And on the contrary...

The editorial writer failed to consider that our bishops, being Filipinos citizens have in fact the greater right to express themselves publicly, for or against any government policy. And as bishops, they even have a sacred religious duty to do so whenever serious moral values are at stake.

As to the editorial's Adam and Eve analogy, in effect the author approves of giving government subsidized assistance to tempters such as the ageless SNAKE. He “the father of all lies”, will surely deceive all of us once again. WOW! How unwittingly self-destructive it is for the author to have used Satan as an analogy.

Dear whoever-you-are, Free Will is NOT VIOLATED by avoidance of temptation! For in fact that is what good Christians repeatedly beg “Our Father”, for Him to “lead us not into temptation”.

AMEN!

On “Family Planning” (Part 3)

28-071114

I shall now tackle the substance of the Philippine Star's questionable advocacy for the Lower house of Congress' appropriation of P2 billion in the proposed 2008 national budget “specifically to promote family planning including the use of contraception.. meant for birth control”.

The editorial summed it all up by its ending statement: “Any government that is serious about fighting poverty has to give priority to slowing down population growth”.

In other words, the argument boils down to a) we have to limit population growth down to significantly less than the present 2.36% which it claims to be “too high for the benefits of the country's modest economic growth to trickle down to the poor; and b) supposedly, the only way and best way to do this is to promote artificial contraception for the purpose of birth control; and c) The Catholic Church is the “biggest opponent of contraception”, hence, to agree with (pandering to) the Church will allegedly result in “abandoning any form of family planning”.

Incidentally, it was an ironic coincidence, but surely providential, that Our Daily Bread section for that day, immediately followed the editorial. The commentary was so relevant: “We need both God-ordained government to care for the people (Romans 13:1-7); and people who have a proper view of God and His guidelines for life (Proverbs 14:33). These trenchant Biblical quotations were indeed also unwittingly but clearly an admonition to the Philippine Star editorial writer!

By its giving top priority to “slowing down the population growth” as the primary and immediate vehicle for “fighting poverty”, the editorial apparently (or deliberately?) attempted to dilute our people's raging protests against corruption at the highest levels of government. It also perhaps explains the frequent eyebrow-raising absence or killing of corruption-related news in this newspaper's front pages, in stark contrast to its biggest rival's usual choice of prime news.

Be that as it may, population growth control has always been the favorite and convenient vehicle for anti-Catholics, so-called “modern liberal” Christians and some nominal or even sincere Catholics too, for them to be able to portray the Catholic Church clergy and hierarchies as the primary scapegoats for the world's failure to reduce widespread abject poverty.

Let me therefore marshal and present the contrary facts and circumstances, at least here in the Philippines to start with, that point directly to REDUCTION OF CORRUPTION in government as the surest antidote to widespread abject poverty among Filipinos.

Our lowest House of Congress has approved ( for the Senate to agree or amend ), a P1,200 billion (approximately) national budget for next year. At least fifty percent (50%) of that is by present law, mandatorily allocated for debt servicing purposes, leaving only about P600 billion for the Filipino people.

Modesty aside, I have some postgraduate academic education and teaching credentials as well as executive work experience in the related fields of international finance, investment banking, in lending and borrowing too, of substantial amounts of money. I mention these personal aspects of poor me, in order to be able to say hopefully with some credibility that: there has always been and still is a lot of corruption and self dealing in the business of lending and borrowing money, abroad and more so in the Philippines, especially in the rarefied confidential levels of government officials and investment bank executives.

If my credibility in saying so is not enough, then perhaps the pages, past and present, of TIME and FORTUNE magazines, including the local newspapers' coverage of the recent ZTE scandal, should be convincing enough even for skeptics.

But I shall leave for another time, my in-depth suggestions for debt clean-up and/or relief, as another HUGE and REALISTIC source of funds for poverty alleviation.

So let's go back to where I left off on the 2008 national budget's remaining P600 Billion after providing for debt servicing.

I am quite confident that if you ask any reasonably frank and national budget-savvy Senator, Congressman or a senior Malacañang budget-officer including somebody like ZTE scandal witness Romulo Neri, as to what MINIMUM PERCENTAGE of this remaining P600 billion can easily be SAVED if we had an honest-to-goodness SYNDICATED CORRUPTION-FREE presidential, departmental (cabinet), congressional and senatorial batch of executive officials and elected politicians, their answers would range from at least TEN PERCENT to as much as THIRTY PERCENT.

And so let us start with the lowest potential SAVINGS figure of TEN PERCENT of P600 billion, which is P60 Billion.

The World Bank's most recent surveys indicate that some 11 million Filipinos now live on US$1 or less everyday. At an average of 5 members per family, that means 2.2 million families scratch out a living on the paltry amount of P215 per day.

Dividing P60 billion in savings from less corruption in government by 2.2 million families, will get us P27,272 annually per family EVERY YEAR! Nowadays, even middle income class family members flock like mobs to TV shows, just to get a 1000-to-1 chance of winning a prize worth on the average much less than P27,272, and once only in their lifetime.

Now let's go to the same simple arithmetic behind the supposed material benefits of reducing population growth.

Let's assume that strictly and only because of the widespread use of contraceptives, the latest LIVE birth rate of approximately 4% as applied to our 11 million poorest Filipinos will be reduced by one-tenth, or by 0.4% . Multiplying that last percentage figure by 11 million, gets us 44,000 as the number of families who would have NO BABIES born as a result of our assumed reduction of the live birth rate.

Now let's assume further that the government's expected SAVINGS because of 44,000 less poor babies born, is equivalent to the estimated cost of subsidies for such poor families having a baby born and reared for one year. I shall give it a generous estimate of P21,000 for the first year, consisting of P15,000 for the pre-natal and government hospital cost, and P6,000 (P500/month) for milk and other miscellaneous expenses. Multiplying P21,000 by 44,000 families, gives us P924 Million.

In short, reducing the live birth rate will THEORETICALLY save the government, because I have assumed that they will have such a “trickle down” subsidy program for the poor, about P1 billion per annum altogether. Compared therefore to the minimum P60 billion worth of cold cash benefits from reducing corruption-generated THIEVERY by only one-half, that theoretical P1 billion becomes INSIGNIFICANT! And I have not even subtracted the P2 billion required to promote the use of contraceptives...

We can all play around with the arithmetic, but the empirical results will still and always bring us to the same conclusion that the undoubtedly MORALLY NECESSARY and EDIFYING option of reducing corruption in government, compared to the artificial and morally questionable program of reducing the birth rate of the poor, is FAR and AWAY a more practical and doable enterprise. It will also not put to risk the spiritual health of our materially poor brethren!

On “Family Planning” (Part 2)

27-071113

Last June 24 on the occasion of the solemnity of the birth of St. John the Baptist, Pope Benedict XVI called on the Church, its bishops, clergy and all Catholic faithful laypeople - - “to witness to the truth without compromise”!

We were exhorted not to be afraid to “denounce transgressions of God's commandments”, in the same manner that John the Baptist bore witness to the truth even at the eventual cost of his life.

Almost two years ago on January 29, 2006 at the start of Archbishop Angel N. Lagdameo's accession as President of the Catholic Bishops Conference of the Philippines, all the bishops endorsed a joint Pastoral Statement signed by Archbishop Lagdameo. Among others it said (with my emphasis added):

“As bishops, we believe that at the bottom of our political chaos is a crisis of moral values, a crisis of truth and justice....”

“Its external manifestations are deceit and dishonesty, corruption, manipulation and a deadening preoccupation with narrow political interests, perceived in practically all branches and at all levels of government. Because of the moral dimensions behind such a political and economic morass in our country, the bishops reiterated that “the Church has something to say about specific human situations”. They further quoted Papa Bene's exhortation (Truth, Peace No. 5) that “the problem of truth and untruth is the concern of every man and woman.”

Two Sundays ago, good old Papa Bene again zeroed in on the “modern hypocrisy” of false tolerance nay, even nonchalant acceptance of contemptuous anti-Catholic diatribes against the supposed ”arcane and rigid morality” of Catholicism.

The Pope even called for “martyrdom” in the ordinary lives of Catholics particularly as courageous witnesses against the “secularized societies of our own time.”

Thus I have gone to great lengths in establishing the basic premises of this piece of mine - - that we ordinary Catholic laypeople have the duty and also the explicit marching orders from the Papacy and our own Catholic Hierarchy, TO FIGHT IN DEFENSE of our CHRISTIAN VALUES. Particularly, that should therefore include those contemptuous attacks by politicians and the secular media, such as the Philippine Star editorial of last Saturday November 10.

It is with these basic premises in mind that my series of blog articles on Family Planning are being written and will be shared with my fellow Catholics of goodwill wherever they may be.

On “Planning Families” (Part 1)

26-071112

I am responding to The Philippine Star editorial last Saturday November 10.

I will not dwell much on the editorial writer's characterization of our lawmakers in Congress and our Catholic women leaders as “the same hypocrites who keep mistresses, but won't pass a divorce law, or women who profess to be decent Catholics but use contraceptives for their personal reproductive health”. As such these two groups where refered to as those who may also oppose congressional budget allocations “specifically meant for birth control”.

As to the accusation of hypocrisy, I have used similarly acerbic pejoratives against wellknown political personalities and top officials of our government, of whom I am quite morally certain as to their habitual “hypocriSHE-ties”.

But certainly the editorial writer had NO BASIS AT ALL to say much less to KNOW WITH MORAL CERTAINTY, that the Catholic women opposed to public funding “specifically meant for birth control” are closet hypocrites who secretly use contraceptives for themselves. For I know that these Catholic ladies especially the prominent public figures among them, are mostly nuns or elderly women. And so I suspect that the editorial writer must be a non-Catholic and perhaps a woman too, who has a strongly hostile and contemptuous attitude against the Catholic faith, our Catholic bishops and Catholic women leaders.

If this contemptuous and demeaning (or even if less vitriolic) public accusations were hurled against Islam, their local Imams and prominent Muslim women personalities, the entire Philippine Star editorial staff would be in fear for their lives anywhere in the world, and also face a Muslim boycott of their newspaper.

So much for that and thus as I am prone to say, “verbum sap sat”!

I have much more to say though against the editorial's snide aside that such opposition to contraceptives (which it admits is really “meant for birth control” and NOT for HEALTH reasons whether “reproductive” or unproductive), is “pandering to the Church to an even lower level!”

First of all I must stress in fairness to those who will disagree with this article,that DISAGREEMENT with the teachings and beliefs of the Catholic Church and of sincere Catholics, is their privilege. In fact it is a BASIC human and constitutional right of everyone, and more so of the press and media. And this right of free speech and press freedom I certainly recognize and respect. Nor do I approve of previous Muslim violence against perceived detractors of their Islamic faith.

But for a respectable and decent newspaper to SNEER at and DENIGRATE any of our own Christian fundamental beliefs and doctrines, particularly those of the Catholic faith vis-a-vis respect for the sacredness of human life is SOMETHING ELSE. For by referring to those who cling to these beliefs as panderers and hypocrites, they have certainly descended to the depths of DISRESPECT and thus to a MUCH LOWER LEVEL of ethics in the profession of journalism. They have, by their irresponsibility, also ABUSED the right and privilege of press freedom.

Furthermore, newspaper editors are expert wordsmiths and thus presumed to know that a “pander” is someone who exploits the weaknesses or the vices of others. And “pandering” is to supply or provide illicit or unwholesome gratification or pleasure to others of usually the same ilk.

Where or in what form, in heaven's name, is the weakness, vice or illicitness in the 2000-year old Catholic belief in the sacredness of human life (“Thou shalt NOT KILL!”), with its immortal soul whose intrinsic and supernatural worth is more than the whole world itself ( Matthew 16:26)? The Old Testament itself tells us that for having deliberately spilled his manly seed for the pleasure of it-- seeds with POTENTIAL for the procreation of human life, Onan was struck dead on the spot!

Dear publisher and editor of the Philippine Star, you really owe us Catholics the world over a sincere public apology!

-o-

NOTE:

Directly below is a verbatim quotation of the assailed anti-Catholic editorial of the Philippine Star in its entirety.

EDITORIAL

Planning Families

Saturday, November 10, 2007

The Philippine Star

At last, funding for family planning. The House of Representatives is appropriating P2 billion in the 2008 national budget specifically to promote family planning including the use of artificial contraception. Albay Rep. Edcel Lagman, who heads the House appropriations committee, said the amount, which is higher than the original proposal of P180 million, will be included in next year’s outlay for the Department of Health, which will be increased from P12.1 billion this year to P21 billion.

The big question is whether the rest of Congress will go along with the proposal. Lawmakers have long lacked the intestinal fortitude to go against the Roman Catholic Church, which is the biggest opponent of contraception. The same hypocrites who keep mistresses but won’t pass a divorce law, or women who profess to be devout Catholics but use contraceptives for their personal reproductive health, may also oppose a budget specifically meant for birth control.

The Arroyo administration, constantly buffeted by political typhoons, has taken its pandering to the Church to an even lower level, abandoning any form of family planning program, including even an information campaign. Adam and Eve at least were given a choice and allowed to exercise free will when confronted with temptation. This administration, on the other hand, does not want to risk even showing people the choices open to them. Congress may approve the family planning outlay, but there’s still a presidential veto to hurdle.

Still, if enough lawmakers get on board, President Arroyo may decide to go along with this appropriation. Then the next question is whether the program will be implemented. The secretary of health has already announced that family planning is not a priority of his department. The government can approve the budget but sit on the program.

This would be unfortunate. Lagman cited figures from the National Statistics Office showing that the population is growing at a rate of 2.36 percent – too high for the benefits of the country’s modest economic growth to trickle down to the poor. Any government that is serious about fighting poverty has to give priority to slowing down population growth. The House of Representatives has made the first move.

MORALLY CONFUSED OR OBSTINATELY BIASED?

25-071109

Unlike retired Bishop Francisco Claver, S.J. whose Philippine Daily Inquirer opinion-piece today, entitled DISCORDANT PROPHETS and quoted in full hereafter, this piece with its title and contents are more directly suggestive and judgmental.

I am also quoting in full, opinion articles of wellknown local newspaper columnists, including its editorials of today. I do so in order to drive home the premise that together with Bishop Claver’s piece, their common and convergent factual observations and conclusions are so obvious and credible even to ordinary laypeople who are apolitical. TIME magazine’s November 12 issue echoes all these local commentaries in its GLORIA IN EXTREMIS article by Peter Ritter.

And mind you, all of these observations and comments are only about ONE RECENT INCIDENT out of many similarly outrageous and mindboggling MORAL aberrations swirling around Gloria Macapagal Arroyo. Please note that there is a common adjective or description used by these commentaries about that one incident involving the unrestrained dole-outs and subsequent denials of LARGE AMOUNTS of CASH bribery money being dispensed right there in GMA’s Malacañang office and residence. SHAMELESS!

And so if there are still some 18 or more Filipino Catholic bishops who substantially disagree with all these well-informed, non-partisan and very reasonable opinion writers, it may also be logically said that these bishops must be ILL-informed and/or biased political PARTISANS of GMA, and/or UNreasonable. In short, not just morally confused but OBSTINATELY BIASED.

If also these bishops will not be swayed to be AT LEAST PRUDENT, by their own CBCP President, Archbishop Angel Lagdameo, perhaps they will listen to the witness account of a wellknown mystic and visionary, circa World War II, whose written works were spontaneously endorsed unqualifiedly albeit unofficially, by the late Pope Pius XII some sixty years ago. Elsewhere in the catholicxybr.org website, a section will be devoted starting today or tomorrow, on MARIA VALTORTA’s Poem of the Man God and The End Times. The latter is of the same genre as the more recent “VOLUMES” from “Direction for Our Times”, whose source is an Irish woman called “Anne the Lay Apostle”.

Here are some most relevant excerpts of Valtorta’s “End Times” private revelation, with some emphasis added. Ergo, verbum sapienti satis est!

Jesus says:

“My Church has already experienced periods of obscurantism due to a number of various things. It must not be forgotten that if the Church, taken as an entity, as a work, is perfect like its Founder, when taken as a group of people it involves the shortcomings characteristic of what comes from people.”

“When the Church – and by this I am now referring to the combination of its high dignitaries – acted according to the dictates of My Law and of My Gospel, the Church experienced bright times of splendor. But woe betide it when, putting the interests of Earth above those of Heaven, it defiled itself with human passions! Woe betide it three times when it worshipped the Beast of which John speaks, namely political Power, and let itself be enslaved by it. Then the light necessarily darkened into more or less deep dusks, either due to the personal fault of the Heads risen to that throne by human cunning, or due to their weakness against human pressures.”

“Those [dusky times] are the times during which there are the ‘idol-shepherds’ of whom I already spoke, the outcome, after all, of everyone’s errors. Because if Christians were what they should be, be they powerful or humble, no abuses and intrusions would occur, and God’s chastisement would not be roused, God withdrawing His light from those who rejected it.” (Take note dear “nominally Christian” government officials!)

********************

COMMENTARY
Discordant prophets

By Bishop Francisco F. Claver, S.J.

The Philippine Daily Inquirer

Last updated 03:45am (Mla time) 11/09/2007

Three bishops repeating their call for the President to step down. Eighteen bishops from Mindanao saying no; 10 more from Northern Luzon joining them, saying no too. Such a public show of discord among Catholic bishops is quite unprecedented. There was division among us back in the ’70s on how to respond to the imposition of martial law, but the division was kept pretty much “en famille,” our differences worked out gradually and openly within the Conference, ending with near unanimity in our Statement on the Snap Elections of 1986.

So what should we make of the new development? Simple, I think. It tells us that we live in a free country -- and our Churchmen are very much part of it! Or could it be that we are an extremely politicized people and our bishops are just as politicized?

Asking that question, I can’t help going back over the history of the involvement of the Catholic Bishops’ Conference of the Philippines (CBCP) in the country’s politics. From its formation in 1945, it has always been deeply involved. It had to be. The moral bankruptcy of our politics that Archbishop Angel Lagdameo had occasion to lament recently is nothing new. It might be at its worst now, one can argue. But the fact itself? It dates way back to our very beginning as an independent nation. Even earlier, to the days when petty “datus” [tribal chieftains] held sway over our (even then) heavily factionalized tribal societies. Petty datus -- bishops included? -- strutting importantly all over the political landscape, that is what we still have.

A cursory look at CBCP pastoral letters and statements between 1945 and 2005 will show how the vast majority of their pronouncements have been on political and social problems. I counted them: 138 out of a total of 198 -- almost 70 percent. And their message from year to year has been the same. That fact tells us nothing much has changed. Corruption in public life, election anomalies, unremitting bickering, mudslinging, posturing among politicians, vendettas, murders even—that was then. It still is now. As our farmers in Bukidnon province used to say of Ferdinand Marcos’ New Society and its pretensions to progress, “Mao guihapon -- it’s still the same [old society].”

But back to the recent show of episcopal discord. I would like to think that a sentiment, expressed among us bishops the other year when we were discussing the question of the impeachment of the President, is still that of the whole Conference -- including those who are talking at cross-purposes today. And that sentiment? We bishops are not kingmakers; we do not decide who is to rule the country. It’s a principle the bishops try to follow, despite strong temptations to the contrary, especially during election. But by the same token, if they are not kingmakers, neither are they “king-keepers,” or whatever we call those who prop up presidents and political leaders and help keep them in power no matter how disastrous they are for the country.

The real king-makers and -keepers, come to think of it, cannot but be the people. I guess the problem with bishops is that they are people too! So on this particular question of removing incumbent political leaders, they should be part of the people -- as at the EDSA highway in 1986 -- not acting apart from them, and most certainly not presuming to lead in all areas of their life, the political included.

Is that too simple a solution to the quandary of bishops about when or how to act as Churchmen or as simple citizens like everybody else? I don’t know what the answer to that question is, or whether there is any one, real answer, except what we tell our parishioners all the time: reflect, discern, ask yourself seriously what your faith tells you in conscience to do. I suppose we can presume our discordant bishops have done exactly that, even if the fruits of their discernment are at odds.

Still, the question nags. But however one answers it, there is something very clear about the bishops’ role in the realm of politics and that is to keep reminding people there is a moral dimension to politics. This duty, I believe, the Philippine bishops as a Conference have been quite good at, if all those statements we’ve been grinding out is any proof.

At that meeting when we reminded ourselves that it wasn’t part of our job description to be king-makers, we did what I just said. We asked in the statement we issued then that all that was found morally execrable about the impeachment process be attended to by every actor in it. And this meant not only the impeachment seekers but the target of impeachment as well. We decried what seemed to be the main motive of many of those leading the effort: to grab power for themselves. But we also asked the President herself to look seriously into her part in the causes of the turmoil that was behind the effort to impeach her.

The latest point of division among bishops has been the granting of executive clemency to Mr. Joseph Estrada. Again, as all things seem to be with the President, it was pure politics -- hence most divisive, even of bishops. But divided or not, there is one thing the bishops should all be united on: the matter of restitution of the millions stolen. I had occasion recently to remind a member of government that the pardon may be all meant to bring unity and reconciliation to the nation (I think the opposite has happened), but God himself cannot pardon a sinner if guilt is not admitted, sorrow not shown for sin, and in matters of thievery, restitution not made of stolen goods.

On the question of restitution then, there should be no discord whatsoever among our most reverend episcopal prophets.

********************

Excerpts from Volume 1 of Maria Valtorta's THE POEM OF THE MAN GOD

Jesus:

Peace to you all.

It is said: "You shall not bear false witness".

What is there more nauseating than a liar? Can we not say that he (or she) joins cruelty to impurity? Of course, we can. A liar, I am talking of a liar in grave matters, is cruel.

Fear. Many a time man slanders to excuse himself. It is the most common form of falsehood. Evil has been done. We are afraid it might be found out as our deed. Then, using and abusing the esteem in which we are still held by other people, we upset the situation, and we saddle someone else, of whose honesty only we are afraid, with the evil deed we accomplished. We also do it, because at times our neighbour has been the unintentional witness of our evil action, and we want to be secure from his eventual witness. So we accuse him to make him unpopular and thus, if he should speak, no one may believe him.

Behave properly! And you will never need such falsehood. Do you not consider, when you lie, what a heavy burden you take upon yourselves? It is made of subjection to the evil spirit, of perpetual fear of being found out, and of the necessity of remembering the lie, also after years, in all the circumstances and details in which it was told, without contradicting oneself. The labour of a galley-slave! If it only helped to gain Heaven! Instead it serves only to prepare a place in hell!! ......

Since the truth soon comes to light in a thousand ways, why does he who lies not consider that afterwards he will always be suspected? How can one believe what he says? Even if he speaks the truth, and who hears him wants to believe him, there is always a doubt: "Is he lying also now?" You may ask: "Where is the false witness?" Every lie is a false witness. Not only legal ones….

In one of the sapiential books it is said: "A scoundrel, a vicious man, he goes with a leer on his lips ... Deceit in his heart, always scheming evil, he sows dissension ... There are six things that the Lord hates, seven that His soul abhors: a haughty look, a lying tongue, hands that shed innocent blood, a heart that weaves wicked plot, feet that hurry to do evil, a false witness who lies with every breath, a man who sows dissension among brothers... His own lips are to blame when the wicked man is entrapped. A false witness is nothing but deceit. The man who digs a pit falls into it, the stone comes back on him that rolls it".

The sin of falsehood is as old as the world and the thought of the wise man concerning it is unchanged, unchanged is also the judgment of God on those who lie….

Go in peace. And may the Truth become your friend….

********************

EDITORIAL
‘Na-onse’

The Philippine Daily Inquirer

Friday, 9 November '07

The miraculous shower of cash gifts in Malacañang fell on the parched heads of our congressmen and local executives on Oct. 11 -- a date that captures the nature of that miracle: shameless deception.

As we say in Filipino, “Na-onse tayo.” The expression is sharp and streetwise. We’ve been had. Or more precisely, we’re being had.

The latest theologian of cash politics to come forward is Deputy Speaker Amelita Villarosa, who said last Tuesday that the money the congressmen received actually came from the generous coffers of the President’s own party, Kampi. The cash gifts, Villarosa said, were a “party initiative without the knowledge of the President.”

And of the party chair too, if the party chair himself is to be believed. On Wednesday, Interior Secretary Ronaldo Puno conceded that the money for the congressmen did come from the party he chairs, but -- up Twilight Zone music and under -- he did not know anything about it. “Obviously, I was not very happy that I’m the last to know,” he said.

Neither is the public, because Puno was not only the last to know, he was the first to report. As Puno himself put it, “since I have been making public statements I feel that I should have been informed earlier so that I’m not shooting off my mouth.” Translation: I lied.

Let’s take a moment to study Puno’s latest concatenation of prefabricated phrases. If he was, in fact, out of the loop, every single thing he has said about the cash gifts was a lie, mere political spin. Which brings us to a variation on a classic problem in logic: If he lied then, why should we think he isn’t lying now?

When he says, for example, “This has nothing to do with the Palace. I personally did not know about that,” why should we accept his alleged ignorance as proof of the President’s alleged non-involvement? Even if we grant that he did not know the source of the cash gifts, how can he vouch that the President did not in fact leave instructions with someone else in Kampi?

This much is clear. When the man in charge of the country’s police forces says, “I guess if you’re seeing confusion on our part, it’s because we are [confused] ... But certainly, we here [in the Palace] do not have anything to do with any of these things,” he is, yet again, engaged in spin.

The problem with Puno’s version is that it lacks the vital element of plausible deniability. To be believable, his denial of any knowledge of the cash gifts’ provenance requires him to project the image of a hands-off official -- the exact opposite of the hands-on operator that he is.

Consider what Villarosa actually said. She said Puno, as party chair, and Rep. Luis Villafuerte, as party president, knew about the money. “He [Puno] knows the disbursement but not the details,” she said in a mix of English and Filipino.

Consider Puno’s other job. As the presidential political affairs adviser, it is his responsibility to look after the President’s political alliances. If he did not know that the two meetings the President conducted in Malacañang on Oct. 11 -- breakfast with congressmen, lunch with local executives -- involved the distribution of cash gifts, the kind of transaction that cements political relationships in this day and age, then the President needs another political adviser, immediately. But would Puno rival Executive Secretary Eduardo Ermita in influence if he were derelict in his duties?

Consider his most recent campaign success. Against the interests of Kampi’s senior leaders,

********************

Opinion

EDITORIAL – Political bankruptcy

Friday, November 9, 2007

First the administration denied that it was the source of bags containing bundles of cash, with amounts in each pile ranging from P200,000 to P500,000, which were distributed to congressmen and provincial governors during meetings at Malacañang last Oct. 11.

When the consequent public outcry did not die down, Interior Secretary Ronaldo Puno, who also heads KAMPI or the Kabalikat ng Malayang Pilipino, pointed to embattled Speaker Jose de Venecia Jr. as the source of the funds. All in all, P120 million in hard cash was reportedly distributed during the meetings.

Later, officials of the League of Provinces said the money came from a common fund to which league members gave regular contributions. Last Monday, Manila Rep. Bienvenido Abante Jr. denounced the distribution of the cash gifts and demanded to know the source.

On Tuesday another version of the story emerged. Occidental Mindoro Rep. Amelita Villarosa, whose husband is serving life at the national penitentiary for murder, claimed the money in fact came from KAMPI and was meant as gifts for both party members and other congressmen.

With so many groups admitting the crime, it is likely that the true source of the funds needs to remain anonymous. It is also likely that the source has sufficient clout for several groups to be ready to support whatever story Malacañang wants to serve up to the nation. Inevitably, suspicion remains focused on the Palace, but this is one scandal that is unlikely to be investigated thoroughly by Congress.

The bankruptcy of the political system is indicated in the refusal of both Abante and the whistle-blower in this scandal, priest-turned-Pampanga Gov. Ed Panlilio, to return their little bundles of joy worth P500,000 each. Both argued that there were no strings attached anyway to the cash gifts. Someone is lying to the public, but no one will be held to account for the deception.

********************

AS I SEE IT

Of liars, thieves and ingrates

By Neal Cruz

The Philippine Daily Inquirer

03:39am (Mla time) 11/09/2007

MANILA, Philippines -- Frankly, I don’t believe Rep. Amelita Villarosa when she said it was Kampi, President(?) Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo’s political party, which distributed cash “gifts,” “assistance,” “support” (the administration’s euphemisms for bribes) to congressmen and governors in Malacañang recently. Villarosa’s statement is just the latest in the series of lies being told to explain away the bribe-giving in Malacañan Palace, the official home of the President. Note that all of these lies have one common refrain: that Ms Arroyo did not know about the bribery.

But the administration is caught in a quicksand of lies. The more lies it tells to explain the last one, the deeper it is sucked into the muck.

First, it denied that there was any cash distribution. But when some governors and congressmen admitted that they received up to P500,000 in paper bags, and when other congressmen were seen and photographed carrying paper bags as they left the Palace, Interior Secretary Ronaldo Puno tried to pass the buck to Speaker Jose de Venecia, saying it was the usual “pabaon” [allowance] from the Speaker to congressmen when they go on recess. And he emphasized that Ms Arroyo had no knowledge of it.

But that raised a lot of other questions. Why did De Venecia distribute the cash in Malacañang and not in his turf, the House of Representatives? If it was “usual,” why were the congressmen ashamed of admitting they received it? If it was “pabaon” for congressmen, why were governors also given? And why didn’t De Venecia claim credit for the largesse when he was never shy before about giving out cash to members of his Rainbow Coalition?

So here comes the League of Provinces of the Philippines (LPP), another ally of Ms Arroyo, claiming that the money came from it. The league’s secretary general, Gov. Ben Evardone of Eastern Samar, said the money was given by the league to governors as a form of assistance; and it came from funds contributed by the other provinces. And by the way, the LPP emphasized, “GMA [Arroyo] did not know about it.”

Assistance? To Pampanga and Bulacan, which are among the country’s richest provinces? Five hundred thousand pesos is just half-a-day’s collection of quarry fees in Pampanga. Evardone’s Eastern Samar needs it more than Pampanga and Bulacan. And if it was from the LPP, why were congressmen also given cash?

Even the liars themselves could not believe this lie, so now comes Villarosa with a new tale: “The money came from Kampi” and, she emphasized, “GMA did not know about it.”

Who knew about it then? Apparently, only Villarosa. Secretary Puno, Kampi chair, didn’t know about it. Rep. Luis Villafuerte, Kampi president, didn’t know about it. Neither did Rep. Jose Solis, another Kampi leader. Chief Presidential Legal Adviser Sergio Apostol didn’t know about it; he said Villarosa should be prosecuted and added that her party-mates should all shut up as their different lies only contradict one another.

Villarosa is deputy speaker, so why didn’t De Venecia know about it?

This latest tale only raised more questions. If the money was from Kampi, why did Rep. Bienvenido Abante Jr. get P500,000 when he is not a Kampi member?

To explain this contradiction, Villarosa said opposition legislators were also given money. But why were governors also given cash? And why are some Kampi members complaining that they didn’t get any?

Asked where Kampi got the money, Villarosa only replied, “That is our fund.” She refused to elaborate.

Admitting that the half-million pesos was given to Abante during the Malacañang gathering, Villarosa said she gave it to him through another person because she didn’t want to hand it to him personally as “other congressmen might see it and also ask for money.” At the same time, she also said that it came from a pool of funds routinely given to Kampi members. Do you believe that?

I don’t believe the talk that Villarosa is trying to save Ms Arroyo from bribery accusations because she wants her husband, former governor Jose Villarosa of Occidental Mindoro, who is serving a life sentence in prison for the murder of the Quintos brothers, to be granted executive clemency just like Joseph Estrada. She has denied this, of course, but it really makes you think.

What all these tales -- intended to shield Ms Arroyo from the Malacañang bribery -- suggest, at best, is that the President and the leaders of her party Kampi do not know what is going on around them. So how can they govern efficiently? The truth, more likely, is that Ms Arroyo not only knew about it; she also was the mastermind behind it and that the money came from her generous confidential funds and was meant to bribe the congressmen into killing impeachment cases against her. That, they already did the other day.

The panic in Malacañang is forcing it to concoct more lies but it only gets buried deeper in them as the noose tightens around its occupant.

********************

ANALYSIS
Malacañang’s clumsy liars

By Amando Doronila

The Philippines Daily Inquirer

03:43am (Mla time) 11/09/2007

MANILA, Philippines -- Malacañang acknowledged for the first time on Wednesday that the money distributed to congressmen in the Palace last Oct. 11, after a breakfast meeting with President Macapagal-Arroyo, came from her party, Kampi.

The admission came after 28 days, during which the President maintained a glacial silence, pretending she had no knowledge about the source of the estimated P120 million handout (according to some congressmen, it ranged from P200,000 to P500,000 apiece) and staying above the fray as if to say that it is beneath the dignity of her office to dirty her hands with money distributed to party hacks to ensure her political survival.

Interior Secretary Ronaldo Puno, Kampi chair, stated in a press conference that he was informed that Kampi was the source of the fund, but he was not happy about the news because “I’m last to know about that.” But he came to the rescue of the President, saying: “I really seriously doubt whether the President had any clue.” But it was the same Puno who earlier was quick to claim the money came from Speaker Jose de Venecia, who dispatched the claim with a quick denial.

Puno’s admission was the latest smokescreen thrown around the President to shield her from being directly linked to the cash handout, widely believed as an attempt by the Palace to bribe congressmen to vote down a fresh impeachment complaint against the President, or to prevent its endorsement by the House committee on justice to the full House for a vote prior the transmission of the complaint to the Senate for trial.

Puno’s smokescreen appeared to have failed to cover up the money trail leading up to the presidential doorsteps. On the contrary, the more Palace officials lied through their teeth to throw off the track questions about the source of the fund, the more contradictions appeared and the more blatant the lies became. Palace smokescreen artists have not only turned out to be clumsy liars; they also have undermined their own credibility as well as that of the President. Puno made the admission after Deputy Speaker Amelita Villarosa, regional head of Kampi, confirmed the claim of Manila Rep. Bienvenido Abante Jr. that she was the source of the P500,000 he received in the Palace on Oct. 11. Villarosa said the cash gifts were a “party initiative (taken) without the knowledge of the President,” but she passed on the blame to Rep. Luis Villafuerte, Kampi president. She said Villafuerte and Puno knew about the disbursement but did not know it would be distributed in Malacañang.

Asked about the source of Kampi funds, Puno said, “Ask Girlie Villarosa [Kampi secretary] and Abet Garcia [Kampi treasurer].”

The admission of Kampi’s role in the payoff has pushed party officials to passing the buck among themselves in the effort to cover up the President’s involvement. It has also intensified questions about the sources of Kampi funds and how affluent the party chest is. Another Kampi executive committee member, Rep. Jose Solis of Sorsogon, cast doubt on Kampi’s financial status. He said Kampi had a relatively small budget that it could not extend generous financial support to its congressional allies. He said party funds came from the P5,000 monthly contribution of its members, and the party coffers probably held only P700,000. And yet, Villarosa admitted that Kampi (why not Lakas-CMD, the dominant and more cash affluent partner of the majority coalition in the House?), gave Representative Abante of Manila, a member of Lakas-CMD, P500,000. Her lame explanation was that Kampi provided financial assistance on a case-to-case basis regardless of party affiliation, including opposition members.

In the case of Abante, her tall tale is that she gave Abante money because he has a flock ministry and was leaving for Saudi Arabia at the time. Abante said he was surprised to receive the money from Kampi since he was a member of Lakas. From Villarosa’s revelation, Kampi appears to be a cash cow. This gives rise to more questions about whom it is milking for its funding. Villarosa said there was nothing irregular about the doles and that it couldn’t be investigated because the money was “private fund” and, therefore, not subject to audit by the Commission on Audit. She said “that is party fund” and “we’re not supposed to be audited for that.” Her claim that party funds are private funds can be challenged; political parties can also be held accountable for their sources of funds -- for the sake of transparency in their handling of funds used for public purposes, after all, political parties are also public institutions.

Villarosa angered members of the opposition when she said some opposition congressmen had sought assistance from Kampi, for a trip to China. Minority Leader Ronaldo Zamora demanded that Villarosa identify the opposition members who traveled to China recently and who received money from the deputy speaker.

If opposition members and non-Kampi members go to Kampi for money, the obvious explanation is that they know where the money is. Kampi is the President’s own party and Lakas-CMD cannot be as generous as Kampi; and Speaker Jose de Venecia has problems with the President; at this point, he would not serve as cashier in the disbursement of funds drawn on his pork barrel to subsidize Malacañang’s effort to depose him.

There’s a limit to the lies that the administration can fabricate to extricate the President from the hole she has dug for herself, not only in the payoff scandal but also in several other corruption scandals. There’s a limit to the public’s tolerance to take lies.

********************

Taking us for fools — with our own money

GOTCHA By Jarius Bondoc

The Philippine Star

Friday, November 9, 2007

It’s fantastic that a congresswoman — a deputy Speaker at that — will own up to the scandalous Malacañang cash doles one month after the fact. Nearly eclipsed was a claim of the governors’ league, two weeks late too, that it was they who handed out at the Palace huge amounts in gift bags. They’re obviously covering up for that one person with a real motive to buy the loyalty of congressmen and governors. But they have to put up publicly this insolent show. As critics decry, ginagago na tayo, we’re being taken for fools. And our taxpayers’ money is even being used for it.

Now why would a Southern Luzon regional officer of Kampi party, which is what Congresswoman is, want to give P500,000 to Manila Rep. Benny Abante of the rival Lakas? She claims it was “regular help” for first-term congressmen, but Abante never asked for it. Echoed is the line of the league that they gave “barangay aid” of P500,000 each to neophytes Govs. Ed Panlilio of Pampanga and Joselito Mendoza of Bulacan, but who never asked for it as well. Again, why would the congresswoman be distributing party money in Malacañang, instead of their offices at the Batasan? And why “admit” all this only now, a month after her beloved President Arroyo already was scorned for bribing 190 congressmen and a dozen governors?

Congresswoman’s incredible tale only implicates Arroyo deeper. In other lands public officials resign for committing much less. The head of Japan’s rising Democratic Party resigned Sunday for “causing confusion within the ranks” in failing to reject post-haste a power sharing offer from the Prime Minister. That may never happen in the Philippines. Here, the longer one stays in politics, the thicker the hide becomes.

Still it’s not wrong for voters to expect even only one of the hundred or so new, presumably idealistic, congressmen to stand up and denounce the damning of the chamber they have just joined. But will that happen? Those tyros reportedly were briefed by Budget Sec. Rolando Andaya, once a three-term congressman, on their incoming perks. On top of monthly pay of P35,000, they’d be getting P5.4 million a year for travel, office rental, staff salaries, and such. Not to forget, of course, the P70-million annual pork for which they ran for Congress in the first place. But those who rock the boat — like the opposition minority — would be starved.

So it’s up to whistleblowers Abante, Panlilio and Mendoza to ferret the truth, if they will. They can start by checking the serial numbers of the P1,000-bills they received, if sequenced. Too, if the bundling came from the same bank, which incidentally is not the depository of either Kampi or the governors’ league. There are leads. The cash gifts — bribes — were all given on the same day, Oct. 11, in Malacañang: to congressmen in the morning, governors in the afternoon, but both groups discussing the impeachment rap against Arroyo. Totaling P100 million, the money couldn’t have come from any party, but the people, in the form of kickbacks.

Congresswoman's claim of responsibility for the Palace bribes apes the line of he governors' league. First-termers are unlikely to censure them, lest they be starved. It's up to the whistleblowers to ferret the truth, if they will.

BIRDS OF THE SAME DIRTY FEATHERS

24-071107

Other than the indecent “UP_ _ URS!” there is no better caption I can think of for the picture reproduced here below than that which is the title of this article.

President Arroyo, Speaker Jose de Venecia and former President Fidel Ramos give the thumbs-up sign during the caucus of the ruling Lakas party at Malacañang last Saturday to chart the party's direction for 2010 and beyond. The meeting was attended by Executive Secretary Eduardo Ermita, Sen. Juan Miguel Zubiri, House leaders Raul del Mar, Arthur Defensor, Prospero Nograles, Neptali Gonzales II., League of Municipalities and ULAP head Ramon Guico, League of Cities president Jerry Trenas and League of Provinces president Loreto Ocampos.

Hypocrishe looks quite glum indeed despite her evidently forced half-smile in the picture. The other two machos beside her obviously appear much happier. It is not surprising because of the immediate circumstances surrounding such an incredibly hypocritical posturing for public consumption.

“I go down, you go down!” Joe de Venecia threatened GMA some two weeks ago.

“Her days are numbered!” or words to that effect, seconded the former tobacco twirling former President soon after the blunt threat was hurled against GMA by his protégé-trapo and provincemate.

“He is still the Speaker FOR NOW…” GMA’s allies kept on repeating after the picture taking, referring to old crass Joe de Venecia.

As of now GMA still has the cash and the power, but her smiling enemies have the swing-vote in the lowest house of Congress - - for the TIME BEING!

Here below are excerpts of today’s editorial of the Philippine Daily Inquirer which so accurately describes the mutually expedient yet so potentially treacherous relationships among our political TRAPOS. With this and its recent editorials and those from other major local newspapers, the moral basis for CONSCIENTIOUS OBJECTION from our citizenry against our TRAPOS’ cash-on-the-barrel power politics, is being laid out.

EDITORIAL
Posturing

Inquirer
Last updated 01:16am (Mla time) 11/07/2007

MANILA, Philippines--Over the weekend, as the nation remembered its dead, President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo attended to keeping her political prospects alive and kicking. On Nov. 1, vehicles of Pampanga province’s officials were seen parked along J.P. Laurel Street, indicating a huddle in Malacañang. It was just one of many such meetings, including the summoning of first-term congressmen on two occasions in recent weeks. On Saturday, another meeting was held at the Palace. There, former President Fidel Ramos, Speaker Jose de Venecia, the President and the usual suspects, young and old (and all so thoroughly corrupted by power), basically decided that their loyalty to their country ends where their loyalty to their party begins.

Rep. Neptali Gonzales Jr. of Mandaluyong City put it bluntly: The Speaker “should not also alienate his House allies in pushing for his moral revolution advocacy.” Translation: What are we in power for?

Two days later, her party intramurals tidied up, the President addressed foreign and local city government leaders, and distilled the party line: “We have made huge strides with our economy, including 27 quarters of growth, a surge in investments, six million new jobs, a strong peso and the best stock market in a generation. We are confident that politicians, especially the city officials here with us tonight, want to continue with the gains and not stop the progress.”

The exemplar of this progress is the increasingly institutionalized Malacañang cash bar and buffet, courtesy of the President. This Tuesday, after weeks of bumbling and confusion, the source of the half-a-million-peso cash buffet servings to congressmen was finally revealed. It was the President’s very own pet political party, Kampi, that doled out the money. Manila Rep. Bienvenido Abante Jr. claimed that Deputy Speaker Amelita Villarosa claimed in turn to have doled out the cash, and that he was surprised Kampi was giving him, a Lakas-CMD party member, money. But he said thanks for the half a million, anyway.

To be fair, Abante shouldn’t have been surprised. Party affiliation has never been so meaningless as it is now. We should point out that no president, ever, has been so promiscuous when it comes to party affiliation, thus rendering it inconsequential. Ms Arroyo is titular head of Lakas-CMD, of the Liberal Party and of Kampi. All previous presidents were content to head one party or movement at a time. But this is part of Ms Arroyo’s claims of progress.

What the President has proven is that her idea of democracy is posturing. Ramos can complain about the President’s pardon for Joseph Estrada being a “national calamity,” but then she manages to trot him out before the cameras to preen and do his trademark thumbs-up like any other minor party functionary. The Speaker can shriek about a “moral revolution,” but he has to pipe down when his fellow congressmen point out that morality is something that shouldn’t disturb the delights of access to the President’s cash bar and buffet.

And the opposition? Posturing is welcome, too, and so long as it is within limits, you can bet the cash bar will now open up to the Estradas and their friends, too.

When Estrada announced that he supported impeachment, he did so only after renouncing calls for Ms Arroyo to step down. The sentiment was echoed by his son and political heir, Sen. Jinggoy Estrada.

How meaningless Estrada’s support for impeachment is, is betrayed by the comment of Rep. Ronaldo Zamora, lone congressman of the Estrada bailiwick, San Juan. Zamora referred to the submission of a supplement prepared by Adel Tamano (who served as spokesman of the Genuine Opposition) as “frivolous,” even though the supplement was meant to fortify the impeachment complaint filed by lawyer Roel Pulido.

In other words, money is power, the President has the money and she will subsidize everyone else’s power -- Ramos’, De Venecia’s, Estrada’s -- for so long as they keep her in power. Forget Ramos’ claims to morals. Or the accusations leveled by De Venecia’s son. Or Estrada’s claim to being more than an over-the-hill ex-con. They have all bowed before the real power in our Buffet Republic.

ON POLITICAL REFORM

23-071105

First of all I wish to state for the record that I certainly do not consider myself as a partisan activist or loyal sympathizer of the political opposition to Gloria Macapagal Arroyo.

And for the record as well, it should be emphasized that I consider it my moral duty to expose the CONSISTENTLY immoral, corrupt and hypocritical patterns of private and public behavior of the person who has been OCCUPYING the office of the President of the Philippines for more than six years now.

I'd rather, however that she be ousted strictly through an explicitly constitutional and fairly conducted process of impeachment. Considering however that the lowest house of Congress is “mosely” populated by people unworthy of their high calling, I certainly endorse genuine calls for a VOLUNTARY GLORIA resignation. Nevertheless, though I hope I am wrong, I consider the probability of that ever happening as even less than that of Nero's soulmate Robert Mugabe doing the same noble gesture in Zimbabwe. Erap Estrada, publicly and humbly confessing to having plundered the nation, might even be a little more probable!

Equally improbable is the forlorn hope that the incumbent Vice President, Senate President and Speaker of the House, will all similarly resign in order to pave the way for a “SNAP” election.

And so it looks like a dead-end for such hopes other than HOPING too, that after June 30, 2010 Gloria Macapagal Arroyo will have graciously given up on power politics or will have no choice but to do so and thus not be able to amend our Constitution and shoehorn herself as Prime Minister.

But the main point of this piece today is that the biggest reason why there are not enough people clamoring for Hypocrishe's resignation or impeachment is that most Filipinos, including those who detest Gloria Macapagal Arroyo as public official and private person, also DISTRUST almost to the same degree, those who will or might be her replacement.

We have become a nation of cynics as a result of having been disappointed in varying degrees of intensity, with practically ALL of our nation's leaders for the last fifty years.

And so, unless there will be an unexpected, unprecedented, and hopefully divinely orchestrated train of political events before the year 2010, we just have to hope that there will somehow arise from within our pitifully thin ranks of decent politicians, enough of them who may be worthy and capable of rejuvenating our people's hopes for the Philippines.

But that will never happen unless we the Catholic or Christian voters will similarly have undergone our own nationwide moral regeneration, so as to be able to discern in majority numbers, as to whom to support and vote for SOLIDLY, UNERRINGLY and UNSELFISHLY, as our candidate for the Presidency of the Philippines by May of 2010.

Otherwise all our politicians, good or bad, will again have to depend on and thereby compromise themselves all the more with the usual jueteng operators, drugdealers, greedy businessmen, crooked police and military officers, PLUS the re-invented and re-tooled new Garcis and Bedols at the COMELEC, together with the likes of catholic TRAPOS Erap/Jinggoy Estrada or Joe de Venecia.

ON MOSELY MACARAMBON

22-071103

ON MOSELY MACARAMBON

Poor Mosely! Instead of allaying the fear and outrage of the numerous critics of his sudden appointment as COMELEC commissioner, these were all the more heightened by his recent interview on the ANC TV news channel.

What came off repeatedly to increase our fears and growing outrage even further was that poor Mosely's credentials other than being a former RTC judge, were mainly on a.) his ridiculous premise and theory that it is better for a thief to catch a thief; and b.) appointments to the Commission on Elections supposedly being on a first come-first served and appointed basis. It was repeatedly emphasized that he was mosely familiar with perennial cheating during elections in Mindanao. And also, he had applied for the job almost a year ago!

Poor Mosely claimed therefore that his knowledge about such prostitution of elections especially in the Muslim dominated areas of Mindanao, placed him in a better position to minimize if not to eliminate this curse on our electoral system. And in the process, Mosely vowed to “reform the COMELEC” too! That's what our politicians have also always been promising to us. And so, it is they who are “mosely” to blame for our having had to suffer electoral ignominies foisted on our people such us a former judge surnamed Abalos, and Mindanao natives and fugitives Garcillano and Bedol, to name just a few. And yet we know that thieves and cheats catch only those other thieves and cheats that will bring them illicit profit or greater power, or to wreak vengeance on those who have previously double-crossed them.

Now we also know that appointments to the COMELEC nowadays may go to the quickest on the draw in applying for the job but with the solid backing of political birds of the same dirty feathers as the approving powers.

Given this latest display of the same old mendacities and machinations of our politicians, is there still any hope that GMA and her political lackeys will surprise us by first reforming themselves in order to jumpstart the so-called Moral Revolution so ironically yet pridefully announced by Trapo-Speaker Jose de Venecia Jr?

Lo and Behold: “HYPOCRISHE OP DA PILIFINSH !!”