Luxury on the keyboards
A dispute between Sec. Carandang and Rep. Magsaysay leaves one undisputed fact. The folks in the Palace like Mac for their laptops. I don’t know about the hapless citizen who can barely afford to go to an internet café to do research, but surely public monies are better spent on generic laptops at half the price. Unfortunately, the matter is a “political question,” so it seems we have to wait for redress. It’s a tough world out there, but at least they have Macs.
PS: On public funds aspects, ABS-CBN reports.
Strained and strange logic
A broadsheet columnist, Mr. Doronila, doesn’t like the investigation of poll fraud in 2004 and 2007. He believes it is the investigation that damages the integrity of elections. Huh? If you suspect a wrong, do you damage the integrity of the right by investigating?
To add to the intellectual injury, Mr. D then writes that two officials of the Administration didn’t properly appreciate the resignation of Juan Miguel Zubiri from the Senate. Mr. D accuses Sec. de Lima of “political double talk” and “hollow platitudes,” and he writes that Palace spokesperson Lacierda “made his own contribution to official nonsense,” in re the resignation.
Apparently, the double talk is that de Lima was surprised at Zubiri’s resignation, and the platitude is “the cause of truth and electoral justice.” It seems that Mr. D would prefer that de Lima simply be happy for Koko Pimentel, as Mr. D points out that de Lima used to lawyer for Pimentel (the predicate being that if you lawyered for one before, and you become a public official, perhaps it would be better to just keep quiet). As to Lacierda, Mr. D thinks it nonsense to say that the resignation is “a way forward to healing the wounds of the past.”
The strained logic – or perhaps the constrained logic – is this. Mr. D does not or cannot explain de Lima’s surprise; nor does he explain how Zubiri’s resignation might rub the wound even more. Mr. D could have thought that it was no surprise because Zubiri paved the way for his true election in 2013. But I doubt if Mr. D can explain why the implied admission of an accessory does not help bring about closure. (Note: under the criminal laws, one who profits from a crime is an accessory.)
This leaves the reader one awkward conclusion as to why Mr. D doesn’t want the poll frauds of 2004 and 2007 investigated. As he said, it would “take a heavy toll on the integrity of the Philippine electoral system.” That’s a strange form of motherhood and bibingka pie. One antidote to corruption is sunshine; and the singing going on now brings forth the sunshine. That can only mean that corruption in the Comelec will be less in the future because of the investigation of 2004 and 2007. That is no mean feat.