The present government must be either wise or foolish, clever or dumb, audacious or simply brazen. Since its incumbency in 2001, it already began its ingrained trouble-making tendency with its unforgettable nationwide “I am sorry” spectacle – as if such a shameful admission with properly staged teary eyes, altogether cancelled its surreptitious tenure of office, definitely cancelled the obscene cheating behind its alleged election. The litany of its self-initiated one uncouth trouble after another is too long and nauseous to mention still. In effect, the government appears to be certified masochist if not suffering from a seriously disordered constitution.
Such is precisely the underlying reason why exactly the same infamous government is now practically zero in credibility and pursuant trust before the general public. In due time and for purposes of some kind of historical record for both the young to know with disgust and the old to remember with misery, it is a certainty that some authors will write about such rude and crude government circus of trouble by having its hands in many cookie jars – irreversibly emptying these of public funds and infallibly expecting the millions of tax-paying people to continue filling them up.
For the meantime, it would be enough to point out the Lozada trouble. As expected, his manifest harassment is ultimately laid at the doorstep of Malacanang for its known strong aversion to truth, and stands as but another big trouble created by the government. Except for its well paid minions and much favored allies, the loud outcry and big dissent of the general public appear to be impressive – specially those mounted by people from the Common Sense Department. And they have elementary reasons for their united outcry against the self-debasing government in favor of the helpless and persecuted Lozada who has captured public admiration for his revelation in great disfavor to certain notorious characters in or affined with the administration.
Questions: Why is it that Lozada was accused of perjury when testifying against a little guy on account of a little amount? Does that mean that he in fact told the truth when his other testimonies were directed against the proverbial big fishes engaged in big corruption in government? Why is it that not a single criminal and/or civil cases is/are filed against anyone of those formally accused by Lozada for their respective despicable betrayal of public trust? It is but another demonstration of the proverbial thesis that before this government, the high and the mighty are immune to the rule law and above the postulates of justice and truth – yet subservient to the reign of lies and the domain of deceit? Even if only for the sake of argument, if Malacanang will see to it that Lozada is eventually convicted for whatever cause, it is still the present devious government that will merit more ire and bigger condemnation from the public in general. There is the settled public perception that this long ruling government is incapacitated for doing anything right!
May 6, 2009