The Press Secretary yesterday urged the Senate to stop inquiring about a dead issue and instead deal with pressing matters. If it is a dead issue, why is the Fortress by the Pasig so conscious of pointing that is a dead issue? If it’s dead, it’s dead. If the others think otherwise, so what? It’s dead anyway.

Is it possible to insert an amendment – via people’s initiative – that calls for a snap elections? Would that constitute an amendment or a revision?

One letter sender in the Inquirer asked, “Who want Arroyo out?“. His answer was irritating, illogical, and purely ad hominem. Take for example his second and third paragraph:

I believe they are the non-taxpayers, power-hungry politicians, turncoats and deposed presidents and ex-presidents who have nothing better to do.

And the bulk of these non-taxpayers are being paid to go against the President with tax money or “earnings” from corrupt and greedy politicians. What a pity.

What a pity that the Inquirer had wasted paper in printing this letter (poor trees). Anyway, respect the other’s rights to express what they feel. I just wish that letter writers like these are responsible enough to write logically and backed up with evidences and without resorting to implied ad hominem, generalizing, and non sequitur arguments.

And this gets my beef:

With all the bickering and finger-pointing, it’s not surprising that people (taxpayers at that!) are leaving the country. And I did. And how glad I was that I finally did.

Aha! I had argued on this point, and I will argue again: if you choose to leave because you think the situation is not to your liking, then you lose the right to tell us – those who have decided to stay – what to do. I’m sick and tired of those who escapes the problems of the country, then gleefully points at those who were left behind (specially those who consciously decided to stick around), call them names, accuse them of grossly-unfair accusations, as if they were any better. They accuse those who left behind of finger pointing, and look who are pointing their fingers? What a pity.

On an another topic, the Comelec said it needs at least 6.5 billion pesos for the plebiscite in case the Arroyo’s people initiative holds. The answer by the Fortress by the Pasig is to use the President’s Continget Fund. Is that a technical malversation? Also, the Budget Secretary says 2.1 billion pesos ready for plebiscite. Then, it became 2.6 billion pesos.

But that’s not the big issue here. If it can find a way to fund a plebiscite, why can’t it find funds to pay the war veterans, which the government owes 42 billion pesos? Then, the Juvenile Justice Act was passed and is due to be signed by Arroyo. Will the government find funds to implement that said law?

Why do people long for power? Atty-at-Work posted a speech by a former president of the former Czechoslovakia. As far as I have read it, he thinks it’s because of idealism, pride, and greed:

In the first place, people are driven into politics by ideas about a better way to organize society, by faith in certain values or ideals, be they impeccable or dubious, and the irresistible desire to fight for those ideas and turn them into reality.

In the second place, they are probably motivated by the natural longing every human being has for self-affirmation. Is it possible to imagine a more attractive way to affirm your own existence and its importance than that offered by political power? In essence, it gives you a tremendous opportunity to leave your mark, in the broadest sense, on your surroundings, to shape the world around you in your own image, to enjoy the respect that every political office almost automatically bestows upon the one who holds it.

In the third place, many people long for political power and are so reluctant to part with it because of the wide range of perks that are a necessary part of political life — even under the most democratic of conditions.

Read it.

DJB has a very interesting take on surveys. Read it too. He said that

the audience for surveys has matured as people have developed a healthy skepticism towards the surveys, while giving the same benefit of the doubt that they give to other journalists that report, analyze and interpret the vast and ever-changing entities called Current Events and the Public Opinion. Another survey? Hohum, most people say.

I have to add my take. Since Arroyo is unfazed by the survey results, why should it matter to the people? It is not a popularity contest, the Fortress by the Pasig says. So the general public treats surveys as measurement of popularity. Which is wrong.

I thought we are a popular democracy. If she is unfazed by the dissatisfaction of the people about her performance, what does that tells us? That the people doesn’t matter to her anymore? That what the people – the very people who she claims had elected her – thinks is irrelevant?

And lastly: Ellen Tordesillas recounted the sorry incident of a Filipino-American businesswoman who complained to Arroyo about Mike and Iggy Arroyo, calling them as liabilities to Gloria. I recall a much clear recollection of this event, but I can’t recall where. Are they pertaining to Loida Nicolas-Lewis?